“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC [Apple] guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” - Palm CEO
Be careful about assuming that something happening once means it'll definitely happen again. Apple have had a few failures too.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC [Apple] guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” - Palm CEO
Be careful about assuming that something happening once means it'll definitely happen again. Apple have had a few failures too.
Their failures have been for services and products where they've attempted to gauge consumer interest (like Ping) or guessed incorrectly about HW trends where they didn't control the stack (like with GPUs in the trashcan Mac Pro). I don't know of any failure Apple has had by building upon it's core expertise to make a product category, faster and use less power with more control of a CPU architecture they're designing.
But you're right, maybe it will fail miserably for them, but that "darkest timeline" seems like a very unlikely scenario with their decade of effort in design ing their own scalable chips to building a foundation for OS X code-base and Xcode to allow for a relatively easy transition. If you see a scenario where Apple will fail I'd like to hear it.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC [Apple] guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” - Palm CEO
Be careful about assuming that something happening once means it'll definitely happen again. Apple have had a few failures too.
Their failures have been for services and products where they've attempted to gauge consumer interest (like Ping) or guessed incorrectly about HW trends where they didn't control the stack (like with GPUs in the trashcan Mac Pro). I don't know of any failure Apple has had by building upon it's core expertise to make a product category, faster and use less power with more control of a CPU architecture they're designing.
But you're right, maybe it will fail miserably for them, but that "darkest timeline" seems like a very unlikely scenario with their decade of effort in design ing their own scalable chips to building a foundation for OS X code-base and Xcode to allow for a relatively easy transition. If you see a scenario where Apple will fail I'd like to hear it.
I don't necessarily disagree, but a lot of people trot that Ed Colligan quote out as if one person's past hubris is an inverse proof that Apple can replicate the iPhone's success in any sector that it chooses. I think Apple executives would be the first to admit that the iPhone was the rarest lightning in a bottle product, and would be more conservative in estimating usccess in other areas.
Will Apple Silicon succeed? Possibly, tilting towards probably, as Apple are good at what they do, and now have a fine record with silicon engineering. Will it definitely be a runaway success that will disrupt the industry for years to come? I think that's more questionable and I'll wait and see.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC [Apple] guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” - Palm CEO
Be careful about assuming that something happening once means it'll definitely happen again. Apple have had a few failures too.
There were literally hundreds if not thousands of predictions like this that have been wrong since 1997.
If you look at the smartphone and tablet market Apple's success has been in "profit-share". Sure Android is 90% of the smartphone marketshare but Apple is 90% of the profit-share and we see something similar in the tablet and PC market to a lesser degree, because Apple swallows up the high-end of the market where the profits are the greatest instead of fighting over a few pennies on the volume sales of budget devices.
So I think the premise of the argument is simply wrong. To win Apple doesn't have to sell the most of anything, they simply have to the capture the most profitable portion of the market for its devices and then use those resources to out innovate its competitors, which it has successfully done in the smartphone and tablet markets.
Some of you are too focused on how things worked in the past. The paradigm has changed.
Interesting discussions and yes, I believe PC market will continue to be Windows market, with Intel or a minimum part of ARM Win.
Apple doubling market share on PCs? I do not believe it can happen, even if they go to 2005-2008 price levels against competitors their total earnings will probably be less than current and usually Apple is not your “price war company”. They compete on quality and there is no way (as far as I can see it now) that they can sell a “better windows experience than windows itself”.
Just my 2c.
They could easily be more price competitive once they are not pay INTEL and AMD hefty margins. Plus without INTEL they can move everything onto the SOC which will further reduce cost and boost speed. Just look inside an iPad. Not a lot going on in there. They can easily drop the prices and maintain their margins.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC [Apple] guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” - Palm CEO
Be careful about assuming that something happening once means it'll definitely happen again. Apple have had a few failures too.
Their failures have been for services and products where they've attempted to gauge consumer interest (like Ping) or guessed incorrectly about HW trends where they didn't control the stack (like with GPUs in the trashcan Mac Pro). I don't know of any failure Apple has had by building upon it's core expertise to make a product category, faster and use less power with more control of a CPU architecture they're designing.
But you're right, maybe it will fail miserably for them, but that "darkest timeline" seems like a very unlikely scenario with their decade of effort in design ing their own scalable chips to building a foundation for OS X code-base and Xcode to allow for a relatively easy transition. If you see a scenario where Apple will fail I'd like to hear it.
I don't necessarily disagree, but a lot of people trot that Ed Colligan quote out as if one person's past hubris is an inverse proof that Apple can replicate the iPhone's success in any sector that it chooses. I think Apple executives would be the first to admit that the iPhone was the rarest lightning in a bottle product, and would be more conservative in estimating usccess in other areas.
Will Apple Silicon succeed? Possibly, tilting towards probably, as Apple are good at what they do, and now have a fine record with silicon engineering. Will it definitely be a runaway success that will disrupt the industry for years to come? I think that's more questionable and I'll wait and see.
I think you're understating their successes since the iPhone which have been pretty significant. Does anyone compete with the iPad really? How about the Watch sucking the air out of the room in not just the smartwatch category, but the overall watch category itself?
I don't think anyone is predicting they replicate the iPhone's success in any way, that comparison doesn't even make any sense considering this is a modification of an existing product line and not something that's going to multiply Mac sales in any markedly significant way. I mean really you can already call their silicon in their existing iOS/iPad devices a success. Not sure these Macs need to "disrupt the industry for years to come" to be a success, they just need to be great which I think is going to be a given. I wouldn't bet against them.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC [Apple] guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” - Palm CEO
Be careful about assuming that something happening once means it'll definitely happen again. Apple have had a few failures too.
Their failures have been for services and products where they've attempted to gauge consumer interest (like Ping) or guessed incorrectly about HW trends where they didn't control the stack (like with GPUs in the trashcan Mac Pro). I don't know of any failure Apple has had by building upon it's core expertise to make a product category, faster and use less power with more control of a CPU architecture they're designing.
But you're right, maybe it will fail miserably for them, but that "darkest timeline" seems like a very unlikely scenario with their decade of effort in design ing their own scalable chips to building a foundation for OS X code-base and Xcode to allow for a relatively easy transition. If you see a scenario where Apple will fail I'd like to hear it.
I don't necessarily disagree, but a lot of people trot that Ed Colligan quote out as if one person's past hubris is an inverse proof that Apple can replicate the iPhone's success in any sector that it chooses. I think Apple executives would be the first to admit that the iPhone was the rarest lightning in a bottle product, and would be more conservative in estimating usccess in other areas.
Will Apple Silicon succeed? Possibly, tilting towards probably, as Apple are good at what they do, and now have a fine record with silicon engineering. Will it definitely be a runaway success that will disrupt the industry for years to come? I think that's more questionable and I'll wait and see.
I think you're understating their successes since the iPhone which have been pretty significant. Does anyone compete with the iPad really? How about the Watch sucking the air out of the room in not just the smartwatch category, but the overall watch category itself?
I don't think anyone is predicting they replicate the iPhone's success in any way, that comparison doesn't even make any sense considering this is a modification of an existing product line and not something that's going to multiply Mac sales in any markedly significant way. I mean really you can already call their silicon in their existing iOS/iPad devices a success. Not sure these Macs need to "disrupt the industry for years to come" to be a success, they just need to be great which I think is going to be a given. I wouldn't bet against them.
Again, don't necessarily disagree, but I'm not the person that brought up the iPhone comparison. I think Apple Silicon will probably be a success.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC [Apple] guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” - Palm CEO
Be careful about assuming that something happening once means it'll definitely happen again. Apple have had a few failures too.
Their failures have been for services and products where they've attempted to gauge consumer interest (like Ping) or guessed incorrectly about HW trends where they didn't control the stack (like with GPUs in the trashcan Mac Pro). I don't know of any failure Apple has had by building upon it's core expertise to make a product category, faster and use less power with more control of a CPU architecture they're designing.
But you're right, maybe it will fail miserably for them, but that "darkest timeline" seems like a very unlikely scenario with their decade of effort in design ing their own scalable chips to building a foundation for OS X code-base and Xcode to allow for a relatively easy transition. If you see a scenario where Apple will fail I'd like to hear it.
I don't necessarily disagree, but a lot of people trot that Ed Colligan quote out as if one person's past hubris is an inverse proof that Apple can replicate the iPhone's success in any sector that it chooses. I think Apple executives would be the first to admit that the iPhone was the rarest lightning in a bottle product, and would be more conservative in estimating usccess in other areas.
Will Apple Silicon succeed? Possibly, tilting towards probably, as Apple are good at what they do, and now have a fine record with silicon engineering. Will it definitely be a runaway success that will disrupt the industry for years to come? I think that's more questionable and I'll wait and see.
I think you're understating their successes since the iPhone which have been pretty significant. Does anyone compete with the iPad really? How about the Watch sucking the air out of the room in not just the smartwatch category, but the overall watch category itself?
I don't think anyone is predicting they replicate the iPhone's success in any way, that comparison doesn't even make any sense considering this is a modification of an existing product line and not something that's going to multiply Mac sales in any markedly significant way. I mean really you can already call their silicon in their existing iOS/iPad devices a success. Not sure these Macs need to "disrupt the industry for years to come" to be a success, they just need to be great which I think is going to be a given. I wouldn't bet against them.
Again, don't necessarily disagree, but I'm not the person that brought up the iPhone comparison. I think Apple Silicon will probably be a success.
It's impossible not to bring up the iPhone. Apple generates more profit from its iPhone sales than INTEL's entire business. When Apple and Android are taken into account it becomes clear that INTEL lost a massive share of the microprocessor industry in volume and profit (smartphones, tablets, watches, etc). This doesn't even include embedded devices such as including GPS navigation devices, digital cameras, digital televisions, printers, network devices and storage. It's pretty much an ARM / RISC monopoly at that level.
If given the choice, 59% of enterprise employees would use a Mac. (Wipro).
When looking for a job, 66% of workers would select a company that offered choice over one that doesn’t. (Wipro)
71% of employees say they are more productive when using the computer they select. (Wipro)
97% of Mac users say they feel more productive when switching from Windows.(Jamf).
79% of users say they wouldn’t be as efficient when using anything other than a Mac. (Jamf).
At IBM, there are 22% more macOS users who exceeded expectations in performance reviews, compared to Windows users. (IBM)
78% of millennials believe having access to the tech they like at work makes them more effective (PwC).
Bank of America purchased tens of thousands of iOS devices to help the organization survive the pandemic. (Computerworld).
Deloitte has more than 100,000 Apple devices internally. (Apple).
GE has over 300,000 – you’ll find lots of major brands with Apple deployments.
73% of employees are more loyal to a company that offers choice. (Wipro)
Mac OS users at IBM are 17% less likely to leave the company (IBM).
iOS dominates the mobile enterprise with 79% of mobile business. (Egnyte)
55% of businesses now use or permit use of Macs. (Parallels).
Enterprise IT decision-makers already expect to replace 13% of their Windows 7 PCs with Macs. (IDC).
Apple’s iOS is the platform of choice for businesses choosing mobile devices. (Piper Jaffray). “Apple is the primary BYOD choice,” the analysts said.
There are more than 235,000 business apps available at the App Store (Strategy Analytics).
Every Fortune 500 company now use Apple products. (Apple).
At SAP, the number of workers choosing a Mac has doubled in 15 months. (SAP).
The Windows 10 program at IBM has a net promoter score of 15, while the Mac program scores 47.5. (Bigger is better, IBM).
90% of Mac users upgrade to a new software release within two months. (IBM).
Windows users are 5 times more likely to need on-site help than Mac users. (IBM).
IBM needs one engineer for every 10,000 Windows 10 devices, but just one engineer can support 30,000 Macs. (IBM).
IBM has previously claimed it saves more than $543 (per employee) in total cost of ownership when workers choose Macs. (IBM).
79% of all enterprise activity on a mobile device happens on iOS. (Egnyte).
Apple claims a 92% customer satisfaction rating among business users on iPads. (Apple).
Apple is a top three vendor in the enterprise space (Changewave).
Apple’s upcoming iOS and macOS releases support devices up to seven years old, meaning enterprises can get a great deal of useful life from their fleets.
Many enterprise customers manage tens of thousands of Apple devices every day. (Apple).
Apple’s enterprise business is now worth over $40 billion annually. (Atherton Research) (This is an estimate, given CEO Tim Cook said the enterprise market generated around $25 billion in sales for Apple way back in 2015.)
All Macs will have better performance, better battery life, and cheaper. they will surpass Mac Pro xeon Processor in a performance sector by using a server chips like 64 cores A15Z chips MacBook Air will not have fan, will be thinner and lighter and yet have geekbench score of more than 5000 in mulitscore and more than 1600 in single score
Comments
But you're right, maybe it will fail miserably for them, but that "darkest timeline" seems like a very unlikely scenario with their decade of effort in design ing their own scalable chips to building a foundation for OS X code-base and Xcode to allow for a relatively easy transition. If you see a scenario where Apple will fail I'd like to hear it.
Will Apple Silicon succeed? Possibly, tilting towards probably, as Apple are good at what they do, and now have a fine record with silicon engineering.
Will it definitely be a runaway success that will disrupt the industry for years to come? I think that's more questionable and I'll wait and see.
If you look at the smartphone and tablet market Apple's success has been in "profit-share". Sure Android is 90% of the smartphone marketshare but Apple is 90% of the profit-share and we see something similar in the tablet and PC market to a lesser degree, because Apple swallows up the high-end of the market where the profits are the greatest instead of fighting over a few pennies on the volume sales of budget devices.
So I think the premise of the argument is simply wrong. To win Apple doesn't have to sell the most of anything, they simply have to the capture the most profitable portion of the market for its devices and then use those resources to out innovate its competitors, which it has successfully done in the smartphone and tablet markets.
Some of you are too focused on how things worked in the past. The paradigm has changed.
I don't think anyone is predicting they replicate the iPhone's success in any way, that comparison doesn't even make any sense considering this is a modification of an existing product line and not something that's going to multiply Mac sales in any markedly significant way. I mean really you can already call their silicon in their existing iOS/iPad devices a success. Not sure these Macs need to "disrupt the industry for years to come" to be a success, they just need to be great which I think is going to be a given. I wouldn't bet against them.
30+ essential Apple in the enterprise facts
they will surpass Mac Pro xeon Processor in a performance sector by using a server chips like 64 cores A15Z chips
MacBook Air will not have fan, will be thinner and lighter and yet have geekbench score of more than 5000 in mulitscore and more than 1600 in single score