For example, he talks about iPhone sales this year as though everything is fine. It's not. Last quarters' iPhones sales fell by 16%. No matter how it's spun, that's just not ok. Sales were expected to be flat, not significantly down. He talks as thought they were, in fact, flat. Whether we like it or not, the new features of the 6S and 6S+ weren't considered to be all that interesting by the general buying public, and that includes many iPhone owners.
The mistake that you're making here, and in some other points, is drawing the conclusion that a sales drop is primarily due to the features/innovation. You don't actually know that. Nobody knows that. In fact, if you look at the flagship smartphone market as a whole, it's unlikely that's the case. Samsung has basically resorted to 2 for 1 deals to increase S7 sales volume. That doesn't exactly show confidence from Samsung in regards to any new hardware/software features they might include vs. the iPhone.
Apple's been running a BOGO offer as well. How's that for confidence?
The mistake that you're making here, and in some other points, is drawing the conclusion that a sales drop is primarily due to the features/innovation. You don't actually know that. Nobody knows that. In fact, if you look at the flagship smartphone market as a whole, it's unlikely that's the case. Samsung has basically resorted to 2 for 1 deals to increase S7 sales volume. That doesn't exactly show confidence from Samsung in regards to any new hardware/software features they might include vs. the iPhone.
Apple's been running a BOGO offer as well. How's that for confidence?
Not on a phone that's been out only two months. Context is everything.
Apple's been running a BOGO offer as well. How's that for confidence?
Not on a phone that's been out only two months. Context is everything.
Just to be fair. And I love Apple.
It's not Apple that is selling you the Buy One Get One Free deal. It's AT&T and Sprint that have the offers and there are caveats (like buying a second line, keeping a plan for at least 30 months, etc). AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. were the ones selling the BOGO for Galaxy S7 also. It's not directly from Samsung.
I thought the same thing while watching a commercial for Galaxy S7: "Oh how cheap, they have to resort to giving them away through BOGO". Until I saw the same commercial for iPhone and was humbled. Whoops.
---
For AT&T (which is extending the BOGO deal it launched in February), customers will need to buy the iPhone 6s (or iPhone 6s Plus) on any Next installment plan. You’ll then need to buy another iPhone (again, the 6s or 6s Plus) to be eligible for the BOGO deal, and at least one of those lines needs to be a new line. In addition, the second Next installment plan has to be a 30-month Next option.
AT&T will be offering up bill credits for the second device every month, with the first credit appearing within three billing cycles. AT&T will credit a device up to $695 over the course of 30 months.
For Sprint, the deal is somewhat similar. The Now Network will allow customers to pick either a monthly installment, which includes payments up to 24 months, or a leasing option with 18 monthly payments. Customers will be able to either lease one and pay the other off with the monthly installment plan, if the want to shake things up a bit.
---
And in December 2015, AT&T was apparently offering BOGO on iPhone 6s. Three months after its release.
So I think it's a moot point to talk about BOGO offers, much to my surprise as well. I wanted really bad to believe it was only for "crappy" phones with "crappy" sales.
Plain and Simple the iPhone just lasts longer. In the time I've owned my 6 Plus my son has retired two new android phones, and my wife has just retired hers. These android phones just died or got screen problems that made it useless. I'll stick with Apple. My Macbook is another story, it's only a 2011 and it's obsoleted from using the latest OS's. The mac line used to last forever and the OS's didn't slow 3 or 4 year old models to a crawl. My iMac also crashes all the time but it is a 2010 model, but that's still a lot less duration of new OS compatibility. Old Macs like when they were beige and even after the iMac would last a lot longer and would be upgradeable each year for at least 6 or 7 years or more.
Well, another interesting, but flawed, article by one of our most interesting, but one sided, authors.
While much in the article is right, there is much that is wrong as well. Often, I feel that he doesn't understand some of what he's writing about, because the spin he puts on things is often out of sync with reality.
For example, he talks about iPhone sales this year as though everything is fine. It's not. Last quarters' iPhones sales fell by 16%. No matter how it's spun, that's just not ok. Sales were expected to be flat, not significantly down. He talks as thought they were, in fact, flat. Whether we like it or not, the new features of the 6S and 6S+ weren't considered to be all that interesting by the general buying public, and that includes many iPhone owners.
The problem is that Apple isn't looked at as the innovative company it has been looked at as being. So 3D Touch is shrugged off because there wasn't all that much software that used it well, including g Apple's' it has been pointed out that it's a little better than a double tap, but maybe not that much better. True? Maybe, maybe not.
Apple plans several years in advance, and often, a first generation feature really doesn't do that much. But then, Siri hasn't done much more years after it was first released. Maybe this year, with the opening to third parties, it will change. But frankly, it's been a disappointment.
The camera, which Apple touts so strongly, has no real advantage anymore. Samsung, and others, have caught up, and are even a bit better in some areas. Though, the iPhone still takes pictures, that on average, are more accurate in exposure and color. Where are RAW files? That makes a big difference in quality, and a number of Android phones have had that for years now. It's just software, so there's no real good reason for not having it. I was surely hoping to see it this year.
The SoC is definitely ahead of everyone else. But no, Apple doesn't double performance every year. Some years, yes, but most years it about 50% for the CPU and 75% for the GPU. That's not putting it down, but just for some real world accuracy.
As far as styling goes, there is no doubt that Apple is no longer the leader there. While I like my 6+, and we will be upgrading this year, according to our two year phone cycle plans, I have to say, that while it's nice, and feels good, it's nothing to look at and admire, as I did with my 4+, and even my 5 (we switched carriers that year, so we got new phones after only one year). When we got our original 3Gs', while they weren't incredible designs, they were far ahead of the usual smartphone, and so stood out. But now that every manufacturer has the same concept of a keyboard less phone, the differences are smaller. Frankly, the new Samsung S models are more interesting looking. We'll have to see if any of the rumors about 2017 are correct.
Tablets. Well, what's to say here? The tablet revolution has waned, it seems, and Apple's tablet sales along with everybodiy else's. I was expecting more from Apple here too. I've bought every model except for the iPad 4. Nice evolution. But the truth is that we need more than expected evolution at this point. We need Apple to come up with something markedly superior. Yes, the Pencil is great. Having color management is significant, and hopefully, this year, we will see those new screens the 27" iMac and the 9.7" iPad Pro feature.
But that's not enough to stop the fall in sales, much less to reverse it. While I hate to admit it. The only place where we're seeing growth in the computer industry now is the 2:1 market. Somehow, Apple is going to have to acknowledge that, and product a product in that area. I hope they do so sooner than later.
Then, last but not least, there is the question of macOS vs iOS. Where are these going? While Apple has consistently stated that the two will never merge, the continued merger of features, both user facing, and at the lower OS levels, makes me think that just maybe Apple isn't as steadfast in this as they say they are. Never say never, as the saying goes. The bringing over of the full color management software is certainly a major step there. What they need to do there is open it with APIs as they have in macOS.
But why stop there? Considering the Origen of Apple's various OSs, there is no reason to think that they can't be merged. With APFS coming soon, for all the versions, Apple is showing that they don't want any of them, from WatchOS to macOS, to diverge. If they are so concerned that they don't diverge, and with feature parity coming closer as time goes on, can they eventually do anything other than merge?
I certainly don't expect to see a full macOS on the watch, but there is no reason it couldn't be a subset. As the watch gains in performance over the years, it will be more of a possibility.
In fact, if Apple can double performance of their "A" series chips in the next two years, with some changes that I've mentioned several times in the last, there is no reason why they couldn't power a notebook. The biggest problem is the one of x86 vs ARM instruction sets. It's fantasy to believe that every developer would run to move their software from x86 to ARM if apple announced a macOS notebook. And despite what a few think, and ARM SoC could, in no way support x86 software at anywhere neare required performance levels.
Apple has, no doubt, been running MacOS on ARM for at least a couple of years, and possibly some of their software as well. So I would expect that if they did do this, they would have much, but not all, of their stuff ready. But that's not enough. So I would express my idea again. There are no patents or copyrights on individual instructions from CPUs. Big Endian, Little Endian, as well as other expressions of algorithms to process chip information is open to everyone. It turns out that the 80% slowdown experiences when making an emulator from one chip family to another is caused by just a relatively few instructions that are done differently. There is no reasons why these instructions couldn't be included in an ARM SoC, and referred to when an x86 app needs them. That would close the performance difference significantly.
If Apple chose to do this, then x86 software could be run directly on an ARM SoC with relatively little slowdown. If the SoC is fast enough on its own, they it could work. Apple could save a bundle, as even slow x86 chips, and chipsets, cost much more than does an Apple SoC. Just a thought!
i think that running iOS and macOS apps would work well. I have no doubt that Apple software people could figure out how to manage that well.
This is a brilliant post. I agree 100%.
At this point, the **singular** competitive advantage that Apple still retains over competition is its ecosystem. The clear advantage there, in turn, has been the software, and increasingly, services. In the past year or two, S&S has been my biggest source of worry. The quality of leadership in S&S, the increasingly bloated pieces of the S&S like iTunes and Photo (how exactly are these significant improvements over the previous version of iTunes, or iPhoto?!), acquisitions such as Beats, AppleMusic, that Chinese taxicab company (and possibly Tidal?) -- which are fine, mind you, in the sense of price paid -- that don't really seem to move the needle all that much in terms of its ecosystem strategy, the failure to wow with the new AppleTV-related S&S, many updates that have been less-than-successfully rolled out (I can personally vouch for a few), cloud services that are pretty mediocre, a WatchOS that so far is definitely lacking full potential, are all the reasons for my worry. The leadership part is particularly worrisome.
Also, I am beginning to think that companies like Google and Samsung are yesterday's competition in terms of the ecosystem. They're from the past decade. I wouldn't be surprised if the next ten years is dominated by Facebook, -- yes, Facebook, -- Amazon, and a newly resurgent Microsoft. (I would have added Tesla to the list, but Musk has pretty much lost it with the proposed acquisition of SolarCity, which, I predict, will be a disaster for the car company). Mind you, Apple still has a significant lead and these companies will have a lot to do to catch up, but they're hungry, they have resources, and they have talent.
The big question for Apple has to be, "what's next in the ecosystem that can us to the next level?"
For example, he talks about iPhone sales this year as though everything is fine. It's not. Last quarters' iPhones sales fell by 16%. No matter how it's spun, that's just not ok. Sales were expected to be flat, not significantly down. He talks as thought they were, in fact, flat. Whether we like it or not, the new features of the 6S and 6S+ weren't considered to be all that interesting by the general buying public, and that includes many iPhone owners.
The mistake that you're making here, and in some other points, is drawing the conclusion that a sales drop is primarily due to the features/innovation. You don't actually know that. Nobody knows that. In fact, if you look at the flagship smartphone market as a whole, it's unlikely that's the case. Samsung has basically resorted to 2 for 1 deals to increase S7 sales volume. That doesn't exactly show confidence from Samsung in regards to any new hardware/software features they might include vs. the iPhone.
You really can't go by Samsung these days. The last time they had a sales increase in their "S" series line was with the S4. It's been downhill every since.
Smartphones sales have been flat this year. But Apple's was down 16% last quarter YoY. That's more than just from a flat market. So it's not that difficult to see that with Apple coming off a major change with the original 6 series that the 6S series failed to excite. While the feature set for the S series is nice, certainly, it's just not exciting, as going to bigger screens, and a new case, was.
This year, with a minor case change, will the rest of the feature set change that ho hum thinking? I don't particularly care, because as I said, we're on a two year upgrade plan. So we'll buy anyway. That's a whole three phones, but not enough to to move the needle.
If it's true that Apple will be making major changes next year, that will be exciting, assuming that what we are reading is mostly true. Major new case, OLED screen. Those alone can up sales more than a bit. And we'll see other upgrades as well, of course. Will we buy? Probably not, as we'll wait until the next year.
There are really two things I miss much more in my 5s and 6s than more speed or a better camera.
The battery time is an outrage, and I detest the "thinnest phone ever" competition based on one of Steve's two most stupid statements regarding the iPhone: "look how thin it is" and the one about the original iPone having the only useful size.
Please dont once again hammer me with opinions about battery time (and I do have auxiliary power!). I have/have had 7 iPhones, and my employer have a few thousand users; the common number one grievance is the lack of battery time. After we got used to decent battery time with our last versions of dumb-phones before the iPhone, this has been a constant loss, fortunately not challenged by iPhone's competitors, in what case I probably would have been forced to use Android of some kind.
Regarding size, I much prefer the size of my 6s to my 5s, and my wife is extremely happy with the size of her 6+. So am I because it saved me upgrading her iPad, and to her size is less important carrying a purse. The current size range is in my opinion perfect, and should have been in place long ago, but waiting obviously was a great business decision.
The other one is the lack of water proofing, once unlucky, this becomes important.
Well, another interesting, but flawed, article by one of our most interesting, but one sided, authors.
While much in the article is right, there is much that is wrong as well. Often, I feel that he doesn't understand some of what he's writing about, because the spin he puts on things is often out of sync with reality.
For example, he talks about iPhone sales this year as though everything is fine. It's not. Last quarters' iPhones sales fell by 16%. No matter how it's spun, that's just not ok. Sales were expected to be flat, not significantly down. He talks as thought they were, in fact, flat. Whether we like it or not, the new features of the 6S and 6S+ weren't considered to be all that interesting by the general buying public, and that includes many iPhone owners.
The problem is that Apple isn't looked at as the innovative company it has been looked at as being. So 3D Touch is shrugged off because there wasn't all that much software that used it well, including g Apple's' it has been pointed out that it's a little better than a double tap, but maybe not that much better. True? Maybe, maybe not.
Apple plans several years in advance, and often, a first generation feature really doesn't do that much. But then, Siri hasn't done much more years after it was first released. Maybe this year, with the opening to third parties, it will change. But frankly, it's been a disappointment.
The camera, which Apple touts so strongly, has no real advantage anymore. Samsung, and others, have caught up, and are even a bit better in some areas. Though, the iPhone still takes pictures, that on average, are more accurate in exposure and color. Where are RAW files? That makes a big difference in quality, and a number of Android phones have had that for years now. It's just software, so there's no real good reason for not having it. I was surely hoping to see it this year.
The SoC is definitely ahead of everyone else. But no, Apple doesn't double performance every year. Some years, yes, but most years it about 50% for the CPU and 75% for the GPU. That's not putting it down, but just for some real world accuracy.
As far as styling goes, there is no doubt that Apple is no longer the leader there. While I like my 6+, and we will be upgrading this year, according to our two year phone cycle plans, I have to say, that while it's nice, and feels good, it's nothing to look at and admire, as I did with my 4+, and even my 5 (we switched carriers that year, so we got new phones after only one year). When we got our original 3Gs', while they weren't incredible designs, they were far ahead of the usual smartphone, and so stood out. But now that every manufacturer has the same concept of a keyboard less phone, the differences are smaller. Frankly, the new Samsung S models are more interesting looking. We'll have to see if any of the rumors about 2017 are correct.
Tablets. Well, what's to say here? The tablet revolution has waned, it seems, and Apple's tablet sales along with everybodiy else's. I was expecting more from Apple here too. I've bought every model except for the iPad 4. Nice evolution. But the truth is that we need more than expected evolution at this point. We need Apple to come up with something markedly superior. Yes, the Pencil is great. Having color management is significant, and hopefully, this year, we will see those new screens the 27" iMac and the 9.7" iPad Pro feature.
But that's not enough to stop the fall in sales, much less to reverse it. While I hate to admit it. The only place where we're seeing growth in the computer industry now is the 2:1 market. Somehow, Apple is going to have to acknowledge that, and product a product in that area. I hope they do so sooner than later.
Then, last but not least, there is the question of macOS vs iOS. Where are these going? While Apple has consistently stated that the two will never merge, the continued merger of features, both user facing, and at the lower OS levels, makes me think that just maybe Apple isn't as steadfast in this as they say they are. Never say never, as the saying goes. The bringing over of the full color management software is certainly a major step there. What they need to do there is open it with APIs as they have in macOS.
But why stop there? Considering the Origen of Apple's various OSs, there is no reason to think that they can't be merged. With APFS coming soon, for all the versions, Apple is showing that they don't want any of them, from WatchOS to macOS, to diverge. If they are so concerned that they don't diverge, and with feature parity coming closer as time goes on, can they eventually do anything other than merge?
I certainly don't expect to see a full macOS on the watch, but there is no reason it couldn't be a subset. As the watch gains in performance over the years, it will be more of a possibility.
In fact, if Apple can double performance of their "A" series chips in the next two years, with some changes that I've mentioned several times in the last, there is no reason why they couldn't power a notebook. The biggest problem is the one of x86 vs ARM instruction sets. It's fantasy to believe that every developer would run to move their software from x86 to ARM if apple announced a macOS notebook. And despite what a few think, and ARM SoC could, in no way support x86 software at anywhere neare required performance levels.
Apple has, no doubt, been running MacOS on ARM for at least a couple of years, and possibly some of their software as well. So I would expect that if they did do this, they would have much, but not all, of their stuff ready. But that's not enough. So I would express my idea again. There are no patents or copyrights on individual instructions from CPUs. Big Endian, Little Endian, as well as other expressions of algorithms to process chip information is open to everyone. It turns out that the 80% slowdown experiences when making an emulator from one chip family to another is caused by just a relatively few instructions that are done differently. There is no reasons why these instructions couldn't be included in an ARM SoC, and referred to when an x86 app needs them. That would close the performance difference significantly.
If Apple chose to do this, then x86 software could be run directly on an ARM SoC with relatively little slowdown. If the SoC is fast enough on its own, they it could work. Apple could save a bundle, as even slow x86 chips, and chipsets, cost much more than does an Apple SoC. Just a thought!
i think that running iOS and macOS apps would work well. I have no doubt that Apple software people could figure out how to manage that well.
This is a brilliant post. I agree 100%.
At this point, the **singular** competitive advantage that Apple still retains over competition is its ecosystem. The clear advantage there, in turn, has been the software, and increasingly, services. In the past year or two, S&S has been my biggest source of worry. The quality of leadership in S&S, the increasingly bloated pieces of the S&S like iTunes and Photo (how exactly are these significant improvements over the previous version of iTunes, or iPhoto?!), acquisitions such as Beats, AppleMusic, that Chinese taxicab company (and possibly Tidal?) -- which are fine, mind you, in the sense of price paid -- that don't really seem to move the needle all that much in terms of its ecosystem strategy, the failure to wow with the new AppleTV-related S&S, many updates that have been less-than-successfully rolled out (I can personally vouch for a few), cloud services that are pretty mediocre, a WatchOS that so far is definitely lacking full potential, are all the reasons for my worry. The leadership part is particularly worrisome.
Also, I am beginning to think that companies like Google and Samsung are yesterday's competition in terms of the ecosystem. They're from the past decade. I wouldn't be surprised if the next ten years is dominated by Facebook, -- yes, Facebook, -- Amazon, and a newly resurgent Microsoft. (I would have added Tesla to the list, but Musk has pretty much lost it with the proposed acquisition of SolarCity, which, I predict, will be a disaster for the car company). Mind you, Apple still has a significant lead and these companies will have a lot to do to catch up, but they're hungry, they have resources, and they have talent.
The big question for Apple has to be, "what's next in the ecosystem that can us to the next level?"
Thanks!
These are problems. I think that Apple, these days, is reluctantly entering areas they would rather not be in. So we have half hearted iCloud. Their reliance in security has made it more difficult to compete in digital assistants. I'm not saying that they should give up on their security push, but it circumscribes just how far they can go. Maybe they can work around that, and I see them trying with their new initiatives. We'll have to see how it goes.
of course, we can see how their security work can be thwarted. China and Russia are now demanding major concessions from foreign companies in security for their citizens. They are now going to demand that Apple, and other companies track developers and users of software. Russia is demanding other information. Apple is going to have some very hard choices to make. We can see how China is pushing Apple recently.
I don't know how Apple can compete with Facebook. Apple has had a miserable history with anything to do with social media. They just don't seem to understand it.
And talking about Google. Before Google went public, they put themselves on sale for about $5 billion. Apple had a chance to buy it. Of course, they weren't rich back then, but they could have afforded it. Naturally, Apple doesn't do big deals (though they may be forced to soon). So they lost the chance. What would have happened if Apple had bought google? No Android for one. How would that have changed things?
Enjoyed the whole article... but I especially thought the commentary on the headphone jack was spot on.
That part should be taken out and printed as its own article. It feels like the world has gone crazy over this whole headphone jack business... when it's really just the same incremental improvement that's always been happening in computing...
Exactly. I'm used to Apple axing old outdated tech, and introducing new standards. Granted it is annoying for a period with having to use adapters etc, but in the end it usually makes sense. Nothing wrong with pushing the envelope of tech. Just wait a few yrs between upgrades if you can manage it, but that's just my opinion if your device doesn't break beforehand or whatever. I picked up the 6S last fall when it was released, traded in my 5 for it at Best Buy. Won't be upgrading anytime soon. Maybe by the time the 8 comes out perhaps...
The mistake that you're making here, and in some other points, is drawing the conclusion that a sales drop is primarily due to the features/innovation. You don't actually know that. Nobody knows that. In fact, if you look at the flagship smartphone market as a whole, it's unlikely that's the case. Samsung has basically resorted to 2 for 1 deals to increase S7 sales volume. That doesn't exactly show confidence from Samsung in regards to any new hardware/software features they might include vs. the iPhone.
You really can't go by Samsung these days. The last time they had a sales increase in their "S" series line was with the S4. It's been downhill every since.
Smartphones sales have been flat this year. But Apple's was down 16% last quarter YoY. That's more than just from a flat market. So it's not that difficult to see that with Apple coming off a major change with the original 6 series that the 6S series failed to excite. While the feature set for the S series is nice, certainly, it's just not exciting, as going to bigger screens, and a new case, was.
This year, with a minor case change, will the rest of the feature set change that ho hum thinking? I don't particularly care, because as I said, we're on a two year upgrade plan. So we'll buy anyway. That's a whole three phones, but not enough to to move the needle.
If it's true that Apple will be making major changes next year, that will be exciting, assuming that what we are reading is mostly true. Major new case, OLED screen. Those alone can up sales more than a bit. And we'll see other upgrades as well, of course. Will we buy? Probably not, as we'll wait until the next year.
You are saying we can't come to any conclusions based on the decrease in Samsung sales, but we can based on iPhone sales. How does the saying go and I paraphrase Future returns cannot be based on past results. I am going to be bold here and predict that iPhone sales will break all previous records while at the same time saying they will not. While that is a contradictory statement it is a true statement. One or the other will happen. I don't know which and nobody else does either. I may be remembering things wrong, but it seemed to me that in the past an Apple keynote always revealed the "one more thing" that nobody saw coming. Now everything announced at the keynotes have all been hashed and rehashed ad infinitum in the rumors blogs. How can anybody get excited about the new features when the irrational emotional response has worn off before one can actually buy the new whatever? Yawn!
There are really two things I miss much more in my 5s and 6s than more speed or a better camera.
The battery time is an outrage, and I detest the "thinnest phone ever" competition based on one of Steve's two most stupid statements regarding the iPhone: "look how thin it is" and the one about the original iPone having the only useful size.
Please dont once again hammer me with opinions about battery time (and I do have auxiliary power!). I have/have had 7 iPhones, and my employer have a few thousand users; the common number one grievance is the lack of battery time. After we got used to decent battery time with our last versions of dumb-phones before the iPhone, this has been a constant loss, fortunately not challenged by iPhone's competitors, in what case I probably would have been forced to use Android of some kind.
Regarding size, I much prefer the size of my 6s to my 5s, and my wife is extremely happy with the size of her 6+. So am I because it saved me upgrading her iPad, and to her size is less important carrying a purse. The current size range is in my opinion perfect, and should have been in place long ago, but waiting obviously was a great business decision.
The other one is the lack of water proofing, once unlucky, this becomes important.
Maybe if you have auxiliary power and you don't have enough battery life to get through the day, have you considered that the problem is not battery life but how much time you spend with your phone? Do you spend more time looking at your phone than your family? While that may not be a problem if they are also mesmerized by their little screens at the same time. But you remain outraged while spending all you non phone time detesting thinness. Just an observation. To each his own. Hey if your phone is dead, just pick up that iPad your wife no longer uses. Between the two maybe you can be assured of another day without having to sleep.
Well, another interesting, but flawed, article by one of our most interesting, but one sided, authors.
While much in the article is right, there is much that is wrong as well. Often, I feel that he doesn't understand some of what he's writing about, because the spin he puts on things is often out of sync with reality.
For example, he talks about iPhone sales this year as though everything is fine. It's not. Last quarters' iPhones sales fell by 16%. No matter how it's spun, that's just not ok. Sales were expected to be flat, not significantly down. He talks as thought they were, in fact, flat. Whether we like it or not, the new features of the 6S and 6S+ weren't considered to be all that interesting by the general buying public, and that includes many iPhone owners.
If you read Apple's 10Q, its spelled out plainly that over the last six months ending in March (the first six months of iPhone 6s sales), iPhone revenues were down 8% Y0Y and unit sales were down 7%. You can cherry pick a specific 3 month period to make things look worse and claim that the problem is that people don't like the 6s and think it isn't new enough, but that's not accurate or honest.
Apple itself explained that its sales were down globally due to economic conditions and in particular currency shifts.
If we compare Apple's theory to yours, Apple's wins because when looking at Apple's other products, Mac units were also down 7% and iPads were down 23% across that same period. If Apple's primary problem was iPhone 6s not being exciting enough, it shouldn't be experiencing the same sales decline evident across the company's other hardware.
The problem is that Apple isn't looked at as the innovative company it has been looked at as being. So 3D Touch is shrugged off because there wasn't all that much software that used it well, including g Apple's' it has been pointed out that it's a little better than a double tap, but maybe not that much better. True? Maybe, maybe not. As noted above, your entire premise is wrong.
Apple plans several years in advance, and often, a first generation feature really doesn't do that much. But then, Siri hasn't done much more years after it was first released. Maybe this year, with the opening to third parties, it will change. But frankly, it's been a disappointment.
That's what columnists like to say, particularly when comparing against a fixed voice appliance like the Echo. But it's not true. Siri has improved significantly every year, including a focus on supporting 30+ languages, and being able to accommodate all those languages in the Intents mechanism to support third party apps globally. Amazon can't understand other languages, in large part because Amazon doesn't have significant business outside the U.S. like Apple does.
Be careful when you repeat talking points to make sure that you're not just repeating the BS of fools.
The camera, which Apple touts so strongly, has no real advantage anymore. Samsung, and others, have caught up, and are even a bit better in some areas. Though, the iPhone still takes pictures, that on average, are more accurate in exposure and color. Where are RAW files? That makes a big difference in quality, and a number of Android phones have had that for years now. It's just software, so there's no real good reason for not having it. I was surely hoping to see it this year.
iOS 10 introduces RAW support, along with Wide Color and advanced color management to support things like True Tone displays. It looks like it will be a lot harder for Android vendors to coordinate with Google to develop a comprehensive color management system that works with existing software.
Also, while some high end Androids may be able to take acceptable photos, Android is notorious for taking blurry, poorly exposed garbage photos. I see this among all my friends who post Android groups pics. They are atrocious. Not because of hardware sensors as much as poor camera logic. They're using the cheapest chips available.
The majority of Android phones are low end and take terrible photos. You can cherry pick the 10% that have better camera features than most, but that is a niche market within Android that's much smaller than iOS as a platform.
The SoC is definitely ahead of everyone else. But no, Apple doesn't double performance every year. Some years, yes, but most years it about 50% for the CPU and 75% for the GPU. That's not putting it down, but just for some real world accuracy.
If you're going to fact check, you can't just make up facts and call it "accuracy." Apple has actually about doubled performance every year, not just a "50% gain."
As far as styling goes, there is no doubt that Apple is no longer the leader there. While I like my 6+, and we will be upgrading this year, according to our two year phone cycle plans, I have to say, that while it's nice, and feels good, it's nothing to look at and admire, as I did with my 4+, and even my 5 (we switched carriers that year, so we got new phones after only one year). When we got our original 3Gs', while they weren't incredible designs, they were far ahead of the usual smartphone, and so stood out. But now that every manufacturer has the same concept of a keyboard less phone, the differences are smaller. Frankly, the new Samsung S models are more interesting looking. We'll have to see if any of the rumors about 2017 are correct.
CNET did point out that the "beautiful" Galaxy S7 was also an "annoyingly reflective smudge magnet."
There weren't really any other comments about "styling," and given how subjective that would be, the article stayed on a factual course looking at reality, not forwarding an opinion about supposedly what looks nicer. It was about what's new in iPhone 7, not an opinion about who makes phones the author thinks looks nice.
Nobody should care about that opinion, nor needs to be told what they should like.
Tablets. Well, what's to say here? The tablet revolution has waned, it seems, and Apple's tablet sales along with everybodiy else's. I was expecting more from Apple here too. I've bought every model except for the iPad 4. Nice evolution. But the truth is that we need more than expected evolution at this point. We need Apple to come up with something markedly superior. Yes, the Pencil is great. Having color management is significant, and hopefully, this year, we will see those new screens the 27" iMac and the 9.7" iPad Pro feature.
Apple is and has remained the world's largest tablet vendor, even despite the rest of the industry dumping cheap products into the channel for years. Apple continues to make virtually all of the revenues from tablet sales.
But that's not enough to stop the fall in sales, much less to reverse it. While I hate to admit it. The only place where we're seeing growth in the computer industry now is the 2:1 market. Somehow, Apple is going to have to acknowledge that, and product a product in that area. I hope they do so sooner than later.
The "2-in-1" market is a BS fallacy invented by IDC to aggrandize Microsoft by comparing everything it is selling with a subset of what Apple is selling. Don't be fooled. Apple doesn't sell a 2-in-1 iPad. It sells iPads and two premium iPad Pro models. It sells MacBooks. Why should some losing competitor define the market? Remember when Zune tried to compare itself against only one model of iPod? Think about why that happened.
Then, last but not least, there is the question of macOS vs iOS. Where are these going? While Apple has consistently stated that the two will never merge, the continued merger of features, both user facing, and at the lower OS levels, makes me think that just maybe Apple isn't as steadfast in this as they say they are. Never say never, as the saying goes. The bringing over of the full color management software is certainly a major step there. What they need to do there is open it with APIs as they have in macOS.
Apple now sells 4 platforms, with obvious technology crossovers. It brings new ideas to all of them as broadly as possible. The idea that Apple went from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 on accident when it really meant to converge to 1 is pretty alarming.
But why stop there? Considering the Origen of Apple's various OSs, there is no reason to think that they can't be merged. With APFS coming soon, for all the versions, Apple is showing that they don't want any of them, from WatchOS to macOS, to diverge. If they are so concerned that they don't diverge, and with feature parity coming closer as time goes on, can they eventually do anything other than merge?
Apple is not trying to merge iOS and macOS, no matter how many times you think about how they "can."
I certainly don't expect to see a full macOS on the watch, but there is no reason it couldn't be a subset. As the watch gains in performance over the years, it will be more of a possibility.
This comment is now approaching pure lunacy.
In fact, if Apple can double performance of their "A" series chips in the next two years, with some changes that I've mentioned several times in the last, there is no reason why they couldn't power a notebook. The biggest problem is the one of x86 vs ARM instruction sets. It's fantasy to believe that every developer would run to move their software from x86 to ARM if apple announced a macOS notebook. And despite what a few think, and ARM SoC could, in no way support x86 software at anywhere neare required performance levels.
Glad you've come around to the "doubling" CPU power already. There could be an ARM MacBook at some point, but all signs point to Apple focusing its Ax development on iOS and related devices, while keeping Macs Intel. There are currently not enough reasons for Apple to refocus its Ax development from being customized to sell 150M iPhones and 60M iPads to instead devote massive resources to duplicate Intel's work just to ship 20M Macs, some of which will have ARM chips.
There are at least four major classes of Mac CPUs (MacBook, MBP, desktops, Mac Pro) that Apple would have to build to replace Intel. Plus, it would also have to develop desktop class GPUs, all for 20M units of sales. Maybe, but doesn't seem a priority when Apple can currently buy Intel chips and Nvidia/AMD GPUs.
Apple has, no doubt, been running MacOS on ARM for at least a couple of years, and possibly some of their software as well. So I would expect that if they did do this, they would have much, but not all, of their stuff ready. But that's not enough. So I would express my idea again. There are no patents or copyrights on individual instructions from CPUs. Big Endian, Little Endian, as well as other expressions of algorithms to process chip information is open to everyone. It turns out that the 80% slowdown experiences when making an emulator from one chip family to another is caused by just a relatively few instructions that are done differently. There is no reasons why these instructions couldn't be included in an ARM SoC, and referred to when an x86 app needs them. That would close the performance difference significantly.
If Apple chose to do this, then x86 software could be run directly on an ARM SoC with relatively little slowdown. If the SoC is fast enough on its own, they it could work. Apple could save a bundle, as even slow x86 chips, and chipsets, cost much more than does an Apple SoC. Just a thought!
Pretty huge logical leap, but even if it were possible, it would be a massive investment in what is now about tied for Apple's 3rd largest business segment (iPhone, Services, iPad). Seems like there is more potential in building iPads, in selling more powerful iPhones, and in selling apps than in replicating the conventional PC chip business. Particularly as PC prices fall and chip makers face desperation.
Maybe Apple will eventually buy Nvidia or AMD and wean itself off third party Mac chips, but that doesn't seem very important in the short term given far more lucrative opportunities elsewhere.
i think that running iOS and macOS apps would work well. I have no doubt that Apple software people could figure out how to manage that well.
Confusing "can" with "should" is a problem Google typifies in its hardware decisions. It has been spectacularly expensive and resulted in a series of massive failures. Apple can do a lot of things. It's very good at saying no to things it could do.
Apple has, no doubt, been running MacOS on ARM for at least a couple of years, and possibly some of their software as well. So I would expect that if they did do this, they would have much, but not all, of their stuff ready. But that's not enough. So I would express my idea again. There are no patents or copyrights on individual instructions from CPUs. Big Endian, Little Endian, as well as other expressions of algorithms to process chip information is open to everyone. It turns out that the 80% slowdown experiences when making an emulator from one chip family to another is caused by just a relatively few instructions that are done differently. There is no reasons why these instructions couldn't be included in an ARM SoC, and referred to when an x86 app needs them. That would close the performance difference significantly.
If Apple chose to do this, then x86 software could be run directly on an ARM SoC with relatively little slowdown. If the SoC is fast enough on its own, they it could work. Apple could save a bundle, as even slow x86 chips, and chipsets, cost much more than does an Apple SoC. Just a thought!
i think that running iOS and macOS apps would work well. I have no doubt that Apple software people could figure out how to manage that well.
I must have missed that, if you posted it before. Interesting idea, that sounds doable. They could up the capability by including 2 (or more) A10/86 SOCs for a Laptop -- and still beat the cost of Intel chips. Another option would be to build a really badass variant (the A10/86z?) designed for power users and servers.
Plain and Simple the iPhone just lasts longer. In the time I've owned my 6 Plus my son has retired two new android phones, and my wife has just retired hers. These android phones just died or got screen problems that made it useless. I'll stick with Apple. My Macbook is another story, it's only a 2011 and it's obsoleted from using the latest OS's. The mac line used to last forever and the OS's didn't slow 3 or 4 year old models to a crawl. My iMac also crashes all the time but it is a 2010 model, but that's still a lot less duration of new OS compatibility. Old Macs like when they were beige and even after the iMac would last a lot longer and would be upgradeable each year for at least 6 or 7 years or more.
My 2009 MacBook Pro started with Leopard and now has the latest OS. It is slower, but the CPU is a core 2 duo so I expected that. Outside of heavy duty video editing, it is still pretty quick with a memory upgrade and SSD.
I wouldn't say he does, as he's looking at it like it's something bad. It's stupid to expect immediate results from it, let's wait a couple of years, because the opposition will do everything to make it look evil in public.. _______
That article right here reflects the opinion of the writer and he has the right to think so. He thinks Apple's always right, no matter what they do because his main argument is "apple gets the biggest profits". Yeah, but do they really offer the best value for costumers? Depends on the experience of one, I certainly don't think so. I sold my HTC ONE M8 in 2014 to buy a big iPhone, am I satisfied with it? Kinda, but it actually does nothing better than the S6 last year. Will I buy the iPhone 7? Hell no. I'm waiting for my contract to end and I'm buying the Note 7. Why? Just look at how much Android has advanced. Apple likes to brag about their camera, design, software, speed, innovation. Those 'facts' are old now and they are not valid anymore. Apple is popular because it has that biten apple logo on the back, shallow as it sounds. But if you are looking for real quality than you have other options as well.
I guess it depends on what you call value. I like to get the latest iOS software automatically and not hope that my phone is on a list for upgrade as with Android. I like the fact that Apple doesn't just try a bunch of different unproven technologies just to see what sticks.
Dan, this is the most brutally hilarious and incisive article you've ever done (that I've seen anyway). I'm loving your new "pull no punches" sarcasm onslaught, especially at the fawning sycophantic Android phone apologists in the press.
Best critical article dealing with Talking Heads and preconceptions founded in wishes and whines - I've seen in a long while.
My family uses Apple products pretty much throughout the available range. For my limited resources - a retired cranky old geek - Apple is one of the few firms where I maintain price targets based upon the manipulated range I see from hedge funds and the even-more-devious. In fact, with the recent crash-an-burn over the vote from a British public as delusional and ignorant as the average Trump supporter, Apple was one of the two firms I was ready to pull the trigger on going into the predictable furor.
The other firm was a better deal. I bought in twice on the way down and sit looking at a current price sufficiently higher than both buys. That doesn't take away Apple's value in the trading marketplace. Anyone listening to the few analysts who actually know about tech - and sales - instead of satisfying editors with blunt axes, makes money investing in Apple.
I chuckled the other day in an email discussion with a few blogging peers when I went back to see what I bought re-entering the market after Bush's Great Crash and Recession. I got back in 3 months before the official bottom in March 2009. The first 2 stocks I bought were Apple and Baidu. Between splits and improved value, I couldn't have done better.
* i think that running iOS and macOS apps would work well. I have no doubt that Apple software people could figure out how to manage that well.
This is a brilliant post. I agree 100%.
At this point, the **singular** competitive advantage that Apple still retains over competition is its ecosystem. The clear advantage there, in turn, has been the software, and increasingly, services. In the past year or two, S&S has been my biggest source of worry. The quality of leadership in S&S, the increasingly bloated pieces of the S&S like iTunes and Photo (how exactly are these significant improvements over the previous version of iTunes, or iPhoto?!), acquisitions such as Beats, AppleMusic, that Chinese taxicab company (and possibly Tidal?) -- which are fine, mind you, in the sense of price paid -- that don't really seem to move the needle all that much in terms of its ecosystem strategy, the failure to wow with the new AppleTV-related S&S, many updates that have been less-than-successfully rolled out (I can personally vouch for a few), cloud services that are pretty mediocre, a WatchOS that so far is definitely lacking full potential, are all the reasons for my worry. The leadership part is particularly worrisome.
Also, I am beginning to think that companies like Google and Samsung are yesterday's competition in terms of the ecosystem. They're from the past decade. I wouldn't be surprised if the next ten years is dominated by Facebook, -- yes, Facebook, -- Amazon, and a newly resurgent Microsoft. (I would have added Tesla to the list, but Musk has pretty much lost it with the proposed acquisition of SolarCity, which, I predict, will be a disaster for the car company). Mind you, Apple still has a significant lead and these companies will have a lot to do to catch up, but they're hungry, they have resources, and they have talent.
The big question for Apple has to be, "what's next in the ecosystem that can us to the next level?"
Thanks!
These are problems. I think that Apple, these days, is reluctantly entering areas they would rather not be in. So we have half hearted iCloud. Their reliance in security has made it more difficult to compete in digital assistants. I'm not saying that they should give up on their security push, but it circumscribes just how far they can go. Maybe they can work around that, and I see them trying with their new initiatives. We'll have to see how it goes.
of course, we can see how their security work can be thwarted. China and Russia are now demanding major concessions from foreign companies in security for their citizens. They are now going to demand that Apple, and other companies track developers and users of software. Russia is demanding other information. Apple is going to have some very hard choices to make. We can see how China is pushing Apple recently.
I don't know how Apple can compete with Facebook. Apple has had a miserable history with anything to do with social media. They just don't seem to understand it.
And talking about Google. Before Google went public, they put themselves on sale for about $5 billion. Apple had a chance to buy it. Of course, they weren't rich back then, but they could have afforded it. Naturally, Apple doesn't do big deals (though they may be forced to soon). So they lost the chance. What would have happened if Apple had bought google? No Android for one. How would that have changed things?
Didn't repeat Mel's first post because its been included in several straight posts.
I suspect that the next big Apple disruption will be in S&S -- more specifically cloud services that are:
available across multiple platforms, e.g Android, Chrome, Windows, Linux
superior on current Apple platforms -- Mac, iPad, iPhone, Watch -- because of the Apple infrastructure/ecosystem
best exploited by new Apple offerings -- because of new hardware/software with new capabilities
IMO, this will have social implications to both personal and business users of all sizes
From what's in the tea leaves, Apple would roll this out with 2016-2017 devices starting with the next iPhone and it would be [initially] available in the US only.
And, if Apple has done due diligence, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft will take years to catch up.
Well, another interesting, but flawed, article by one of our most interesting, but one sided, authors.
While much in the article is right, there is much that is wrong as well. Often, I feel that he doesn't understand some of what he's writing about, because the spin he puts on things is often out of sync with reality.
I just don't think that the display technology improvements are going to really drive iPhone sales . (lets hear some number on how the iPad Pros are selling compared to the iPad Air and Air 2 when they came out to see if it increase; probably not ; probably decreased because of the price increate).
Getting rid of the audio jack will just make things worse (unless they both give you lightning ear buds and a lightning to 3.5 mm adapter in case you have your own headphones). They probably should have come out with the lightning buds last year to convince people that lightning based audit is better and is the future.
DED wrote a similar article back on June 9, 2016, "WWDC 2016: Apple's Siri and the future of voice vs. Amazon's Alexa Echo, Google Now, Microsoft Cortana" talking about how SIRI is better than the rest and just wait, just wait for WWDC to be wowed by the SIRI announcements where Apple will soar to the top. I wasn't in any way impressed. In this article DED doesn't herald coming SIRI improvements as the next big thing which is both disappointing probably painfully prophetic that no signification improvements to SIRI will come a part of iPhone 7.
Voice AI interfaces to computing is the next big thing because it has the potential to sweep away any legacy UI - its not writing on an iPad with a stylus/pencil, its not pressing harder on a screen to popup a menus, its not drawing characters on a watch, and its not a brighter, sharper, better screen than the year before.
Of course the can probably score some big sales in 2017Q1 (Jan 2017-Mar 2017) if they release an iPhone 7 the thickness of the 5S with a bigger battery and correspondingly battery life of 2 days. iPhone 7XL. And there would be room to return the headphone jack too.
Comments
It's not Apple that is selling you the Buy One Get One Free deal. It's AT&T and Sprint that have the offers and there are caveats (like buying a second line, keeping a plan for at least 30 months, etc).
AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. were the ones selling the BOGO for Galaxy S7 also. It's not directly from Samsung.
I thought the same thing while watching a commercial for Galaxy S7: "Oh how cheap, they have to resort to giving them away through BOGO". Until I saw the same commercial for iPhone and was humbled. Whoops.
---
For AT&T (which is extending the BOGO deal it launched in February), customers will need to buy the iPhone 6s (or iPhone 6s Plus) on any Next installment plan. You’ll then need to buy another iPhone (again, the 6s or 6s Plus) to be eligible for the BOGO deal, and at least one of those lines needs to be a new line. In addition, the second Next installment plan has to be a 30-month Next option.
AT&T will be offering up bill credits for the second device every month, with the first credit appearing within three billing cycles. AT&T will credit a device up to $695 over the course of 30 months.
For Sprint, the deal is somewhat similar. The Now Network will allow customers to pick either a monthly installment, which includes payments up to 24 months, or a leasing option with 18 monthly payments. Customers will be able to either lease one and pay the other off with the monthly installment plan, if the want to shake things up a bit.
---
And in December 2015, AT&T was apparently offering BOGO on iPhone 6s. Three months after its release.
http://9to5mac.com/2015/12/11/att-iphone-6s-buy-one-get-one-free/
So I think it's a moot point to talk about BOGO offers, much to my surprise as well. I wanted really bad to believe it was only for "crappy" phones with "crappy" sales.
At this point, the **singular** competitive advantage that Apple still retains over competition is its ecosystem. The clear advantage there, in turn, has been the software, and increasingly, services. In the past year or two, S&S has been my biggest source of worry. The quality of leadership in S&S, the increasingly bloated pieces of the S&S like iTunes and Photo (how exactly are these significant improvements over the previous version of iTunes, or iPhoto?!), acquisitions such as Beats, AppleMusic, that Chinese taxicab company (and possibly Tidal?) -- which are fine, mind you, in the sense of price paid -- that don't really seem to move the needle all that much in terms of its ecosystem strategy, the failure to wow with the new AppleTV-related S&S, many updates that have been less-than-successfully rolled out (I can personally vouch for a few), cloud services that are pretty mediocre, a WatchOS that so far is definitely lacking full potential, are all the reasons for my worry. The leadership part is particularly worrisome.
Also, I am beginning to think that companies like Google and Samsung are yesterday's competition in terms of the ecosystem. They're from the past decade. I wouldn't be surprised if the next ten years is dominated by Facebook, -- yes, Facebook, -- Amazon, and a newly resurgent Microsoft. (I would have added Tesla to the list, but Musk has pretty much lost it with the proposed acquisition of SolarCity, which, I predict, will be a disaster for the car company). Mind you, Apple still has a significant lead and these companies will have a lot to do to catch up, but they're hungry, they have resources, and they have talent.
The big question for Apple has to be, "what's next in the ecosystem that can us to the next level?"
Smartphones sales have been flat this year. But Apple's was down 16% last quarter YoY. That's more than just from a flat market. So it's not that difficult to see that with Apple coming off a major change with the original 6 series that the 6S series failed to excite. While the feature set for the S series is nice, certainly, it's just not exciting, as going to bigger screens, and a new case, was.
This year, with a minor case change, will the rest of the feature set change that ho hum thinking? I don't particularly care, because as I said, we're on a two year upgrade plan. So we'll buy anyway. That's a whole three phones, but not enough to to move the needle.
If it's true that Apple will be making major changes next year, that will be exciting, assuming that what we are reading is mostly true. Major new case, OLED screen. Those alone can up sales more than a bit. And we'll see other upgrades as well, of course. Will we buy? Probably not, as we'll wait until the next year.
The battery time is an outrage, and I detest the "thinnest phone ever" competition based on one of Steve's two most stupid statements regarding the iPhone: "look how thin it is" and the one about the original iPone having the only useful size.
Please dont once again hammer me with opinions about battery time (and I do have auxiliary power!). I have/have had 7 iPhones, and my employer have a few thousand users; the common number one grievance is the lack of battery time. After we got used to decent battery time with our last versions of dumb-phones before the iPhone, this has been a constant loss, fortunately not challenged by iPhone's competitors, in what case I probably would have been forced to use Android of some kind.
Regarding size, I much prefer the size of my 6s to my 5s, and my wife is extremely happy with the size of her 6+. So am I because it saved me upgrading her iPad, and to her size is less important carrying a purse. The current size range is in my opinion perfect, and should have been in place long ago, but waiting obviously was a great business decision.
The other one is the lack of water proofing, once unlucky, this becomes important.
These are problems. I think that Apple, these days, is reluctantly entering areas they would rather not be in. So we have half hearted iCloud. Their reliance in security has made it more difficult to compete in digital assistants. I'm not saying that they should give up on their security push, but it circumscribes just how far they can go. Maybe they can work around that, and I see them trying with their new initiatives. We'll have to see how it goes.
of course, we can see how their security work can be thwarted. China and Russia are now demanding major concessions from foreign companies in security for their citizens. They are now going to demand that Apple, and other companies track developers and users of software. Russia is demanding other information. Apple is going to have some very hard choices to make. We can see how China is pushing Apple recently.
I don't know how Apple can compete with Facebook. Apple has had a miserable history with anything to do with social media. They just don't seem to understand it.
And talking about Google. Before Google went public, they put themselves on sale for about $5 billion. Apple had a chance to buy it. Of course, they weren't rich back then, but they could have afforded it. Naturally, Apple doesn't do big deals (though they may be forced to soon). So they lost the chance. What would have happened if Apple had bought google? No Android for one. How would that have changed things?
Maybe if you have auxiliary power and you don't have enough battery life to get through the day, have you considered that the problem is not battery life but how much time you spend with your phone? Do you spend more time looking at your phone than your family? While that may not be a problem if they are also mesmerized by their little screens at the same time. But you remain outraged while spending all you non phone time detesting thinness. Just an observation. To each his own. Hey if your phone is dead, just pick up that iPad your wife no longer uses. Between the two maybe you can be assured of another day without having to sleep.
I must have missed that, if you posted it before. Interesting idea, that sounds doable. They could up the capability by including 2 (or more) A10/86 SOCs for a Laptop -- and still beat the cost of Intel chips. Another option would be to build a really badass variant (the A10/86z?) designed for power users and servers.
My family uses Apple products pretty much throughout the available range. For my limited resources - a retired cranky old geek - Apple is one of the few firms where I maintain price targets based upon the manipulated range I see from hedge funds and the even-more-devious. In fact, with the recent crash-an-burn over the vote from a British public as delusional and ignorant as the average Trump supporter, Apple was one of the two firms I was ready to pull the trigger on going into the predictable furor.
The other firm was a better deal. I bought in twice on the way down and sit looking at a current price sufficiently higher than both buys. That doesn't take away Apple's value in the trading marketplace. Anyone listening to the few analysts who actually know about tech - and sales - instead of satisfying editors with blunt axes, makes money investing in Apple.
I chuckled the other day in an email discussion with a few blogging peers when I went back to see what I bought re-entering the market after Bush's Great Crash and Recession. I got back in 3 months before the official bottom in March 2009. The first 2 stocks I bought were Apple and Baidu. Between splits and improved value, I couldn't have done better.
I suspect that the next big Apple disruption will be in S&S -- more specifically cloud services that are:
- available across multiple platforms, e.g Android, Chrome, Windows, Linux
- superior on current Apple platforms -- Mac, iPad, iPhone, Watch -- because of the Apple infrastructure/ecosystem
- best exploited by new Apple offerings -- because of new hardware/software with new capabilities
IMO, this will have social implications to both personal and business users of all sizesFrom what's in the tea leaves, Apple would roll this out with 2016-2017 devices starting with the next iPhone and it would be [initially] available in the US only.
And, if Apple has done due diligence, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft will take years to catch up.
I just don't think that the display technology improvements are going to really drive iPhone sales . (lets hear some number on how the iPad Pros are selling compared to the iPad Air and Air 2 when they came out to see if it increase; probably not ; probably decreased because of the price increate).
Getting rid of the audio jack will just make things worse (unless they both give you lightning ear buds and a lightning to 3.5 mm adapter in case you have your own headphones). They probably should have come out with the lightning buds last year to convince people that lightning based audit is better and is the future.
DED wrote a similar article back on June 9, 2016, "WWDC 2016: Apple's Siri and the future of voice vs. Amazon's Alexa Echo, Google Now, Microsoft Cortana"
talking about how SIRI is better than the rest and just wait, just wait for WWDC to be wowed by the SIRI announcements where Apple will soar to the top.
I wasn't in any way impressed. In this article DED doesn't herald coming SIRI improvements as the next big thing which is both disappointing probably painfully prophetic that no signification improvements to SIRI will come a part of iPhone 7.
Voice AI interfaces to computing is the next big thing because it has the potential to sweep away any legacy UI - its not writing on an iPad with a stylus/pencil, its not pressing harder on a screen to popup a menus, its not drawing characters on a watch, and its not a brighter, sharper, better screen than the year before.
Of course the can probably score some big sales in 2017Q1 (Jan 2017-Mar 2017) if they release an iPhone 7 the thickness of the 5S with a bigger battery and correspondingly battery life of 2 days. iPhone 7XL. And there would be room to return the headphone jack too.