Apple shatters its own holiday financial record, hitting $123.9 billion in revenue on the ...

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 55
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,085member
    There was once a time in the past when we would read "Apple is DOOMED" news, and that always pissed me off because I had faith the company would find a way to survive.  It did.  Bringing Steve Jobs back was a part of that.  But that ground-breaking act was as much a decision by the "Apple without Steve" as it was Steve actually helping the company return to glory.  So Apple helped itself tremendously without Steve by choosing to bring him back.  My faith in Apple was unshaken.  And then after 2011, we have Tim Cook who, despite all the naysayers who say Apple isn't the same without Jobs, has led Apple to a level never thought possible in terms of stock price.  Sure, he will never replace Jobs on stage, but man, AAPL pricing can really make up for that -- at least for those of us smart enough to own it and hold it. 

    All said, let's kick the DOOMED sarcasm into the trash bin of history, shall we?  That obnoxious word "DOOMED" (even when written as a joke) appears in almost every thread about Apple where the news is good. It is used as attempt to take a potshot at overly negative journalists of the past who are now long gone (or who have gotten wealthy from AAPL stock).  It's no longer a matter of Apple being DOOMED.  Not even close.  It's a matter of how to keep the momentum going.  If you are infatuated with the word DOOM, rather than post that silly word it in a thread like this, just go play the game! :-) 

    Keep it going strong, Tim!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 42 of 55
    entropysentropys Posts: 3,610member
    Beleaguered was the adjective of choice back in the day.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 43 of 55
    Overall an incredibly impressive quarter.

    Clearly the flywheel is accelerating for them as gross margins are increasing and for me there are a couple of things that really stand out.

    The M1 MacBook Pro range is now a talent acquisition tool for companies. You know you are winning when leading tech companies actively market your products as an incentive for people to work there. M1 is a game changer for developers, data scientists etc and thus I see Macs becoming even more entrenched and integral to the Digital transformation story of society than they already are. This is a huge deal for high margin sales and I feel that the Mac is in the early stages of a massive ramp in sales and user base.

    Services is growing at an admirably consistent rate and is now at almost $20B/quarter which happens to be almost the same as Microsofts revenue from their cloud services. Microsoft's share price has benefited immensely from their transition to SaaS and cloud services revenue. I feel that the stock market has yet to give the same level of boost to Apple's share price. 

    Homekit - clearly the HomePod mini is selling better with a doubled market share from before. This combined with the Thread and Matter protocols for interoperability with the other smart home standards will enable Apple to benefit from a much larger and cheaper eco system of partners and products. Apple is the one that has the most to gain from interoperability and it seems like their home automation story is starting to fall into place. This will drive even more services sales and I wish they would double down on home automation as a priority.

    China - For a while it seemed that Apple would have problems in China due to anti-American sentiment and low cost local competitors with reasonable product offerings. This seems to have completely changed and Apple seems to be in vogue again.  Impressive growth and if a 5G version of iPhone SE surfaces then odds are Apple will be supply blocked rather than demand blocked for growth.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 44 of 55
    badmonk said:
    This huge tech and AAPL sell-off was the result of the big boys of Wall Street thinking they know more than us individual shareholders and granted their concerns about financial tightening and inflation fears but AAPL once again shows us that people love their Apple products and services and they will be the last thing people stop spending money on.  It is impossible to function without a smart phone in today’s society and it is mire important than your physical keys and wallet.

    Every time AAPL has a huge downward correction it is usually due to their over reaction, truly the so-called financial wizards have no clothes.  I still relish the times my financial advisors looked at me like I had a third eye when I told them AAPL was my primary personal holding and told me AAPL was a bad choice because it was a single product company (iPhone) and had no service lines.

    Somehow Exxon never had the same accusation leveled at it, etc etc.

    Honestly, I think some of it is this weird irrational “Apple-hatred” that manifests itself as trolling on this site.
    The tech sell off was/is about many things.. much of it had also to do with end of year/beginning of year portfolio mix adjustments and profit taking. Many adhere to weighted portfolios and Apple's increase in value likely made many portfolios very unbalanced. Inflation and financial tightening has been on everyone's radar for a long time.

    Like you I keep getting the same comments from financial advisors and bankers. They talk their own book and are only after the Assets under management %-fee. 
    I view the current pull back of AAPL as a great breather for the market, adjustments for some that have rules to reduce exposure and a great moment for AAPL to accelerate their share buybacks. EPS booster here we come.

    I am however disappointed that the dividend was held at 22c. Their increasing profits leave plenty of room for an increase in dividends. 25c would not have been a bad adjustment.

  • Reply 45 of 55
    davidwdavidw Posts: 1,651member
    badmonk said:
    This huge tech and AAPL sell-off was the result of the big boys of Wall Street thinking they know more than us individual shareholders and granted their concerns about financial tightening and inflation fears but AAPL once again shows us that people love their Apple products and services and they will be the last thing people stop spending money on.  It is impossible to function without a smart phone in today’s society and it is mire important than your physical keys and wallet.

    Every time AAPL has a huge downward correction it is usually due to their over reaction, truly the so-called financial wizards have no clothes.  I still relish the times my financial advisors looked at me like I had a third eye when I told them AAPL was my primary personal holding and told me AAPL was a bad choice because it was a single product company (iPhone) and had no service lines.

    Somehow Exxon never had the same accusation leveled at it, etc etc.

    Honestly, I think some of it is this weird irrational “Apple-hatred” that manifests itself as trolling on this site.
    The tech sell off was/is about many things.. much of it had also to do with end of year/beginning of year portfolio mix adjustments and profit taking. Many adhere to weighted portfolios and Apple's increase in value likely made many portfolios very unbalanced. Inflation and financial tightening has been on everyone's radar for a long time.

    Like you I keep getting the same comments from financial advisors and bankers. They talk their own book and are only after the Assets under management %-fee. 
    I view the current pull back of AAPL as a great breather for the market, adjustments for some that have rules to reduce exposure and a great moment for AAPL to accelerate their share buybacks. EPS booster here we come.

    I am however disappointed that the dividend was held at 22c. Their increasing profits leave plenty of room for an increase in dividends. 25c would not have been a bad adjustment.

    Apple only report their dividend payout annually, during the 2Q earnings report in April. It's reported as an annual dividend, then they divide the payout into 4 quarters. Right now it's reported as $.88 per share per year.  I'm always hoping that Apple would surprise shareholders by saying ... we did so good this quarter that we will pay an extra $$$ for a one time dividend increase on the next quarterly payout. But it hasn't happened yet.  At least there haven't been a ... we did so bad this quarter that the next quarterly dividend payout will be decreased or suspended.  

    My guess this is because the money used to pay the annual dividend payout has already been accounted for, when they announced it. Money for the next annual dividend pay out might not be determined yet. The money used to pay the quarterly dividend is not determined from quarter to quarter.

    I know some stocks quarterly dividend payout depends on how good the earnings were for the quarter. My Wells Fargo stock does that.  I never know how much I will earn in dividend each quarter. But I do with AAPL.    
  • Reply 46 of 55
    ...emoji sure seem profitable...
    ...the bigger question to me is do mac users really want reinventing (and paying for) workflow changes and the debugging annually to contribute to such numbers...?
    Vertical apps I license have narrowed sanctioned functionality to single versions of macOS (monterey remains unsupported), and if apps don't align what then...?
    Are some now better off shareholders than mac professionals day to day...?
    Huh? Are you capable of forming a coherent sentence in English?
    watto_cobrafastasleep
  • Reply 47 of 55
    I wish I'd bought AAPL back in the mid-90s when they were on life-support.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 55
    robabarobaba Posts: 226member
    $200 here we come

    On October 6, 1997 Michael Dell said of Apple, "I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders," before a crowd of several thousand IT executives.

    https://www.cnet.com/news/dell-apple-should-close-shop/

    On that day, AAPL was worth $0.18 per share. AAPL closed at $159.22 or merely 88,355% higher at today's close, just prior to the Q1 '22 earnings report.

    If you'd bought both a crystal ball and AAPL on 10/6/97 and sold around three weeks ago at the stock's all-time high of $182.94, the return would have been 101,533.33%.

    #gloating
    And remember—those are unadjusted shares.  IIRC, they have split shares 3 or 4 times now.  If only I had a few hundred dollars to spare back in the day, I knew they were criminally undervalued at the time.  Of course I had no idea what was to come.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 49 of 55
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 55
    davidwdavidw Posts: 1,651member
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  

    Plus Apple DNA is in hardware, not software. Apple own software is mainly use as a means to make more profit by attracting more consumers to buy Apple hardware. Not as a means to make more profit by selling the software itself. Games should only be another way to attract consumers to buy Apple hardware and Apple can do that more efficiently by making their platform attractive to as many game developers as possible. Apple is/was doing just fine with getting 30% of Fortnite revenue, by just hosting the game on their platform.  So far no courts have ruled that Apple is not entitled to their commission. 

    Only about 12% of gamers play on a mobile platform. Over 75% (and the most serious of them) are playing on a game console. About 50% of Epic Fortnite revenue are from a Playstation and 30% from the Xbox. Apple iOS only accounted for 7% of Epic Fortnite revenue and about 80% of iOS players had access to Fornite on another platform. It's no wonder that Epic didn't even think of pulling their silly stunt that got them kicked out of Apple App Store, on Sony. Sweeney may be dumb but he ain't stupid. And another thing is that most gamers are in the 18 to 34 year old age group and Apple iPhone is already the most popular smartphone in the group. 

    The only way Apple should get seriously into gaming is if they have their own dedicated game console. Like Sony and Microsoft. Not with an Apple TV. And it's probably already too late for Apple to come out with their own game console. Apple have already been cursed with being classified as a "gatekeeper". Which means that they are not allow to compete in any market because the competition and anti-big tech politicians will always perceived them as having an "unfair" advantage and whatever way Apple uses to promote their own game console, would be seem as "anti-competitive". Even if a dedicated Apple game console in the game console platform market might be a good thing for consumers.        
  • Reply 51 of 55
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 6,149member
    davidw said:
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    techconc
  • Reply 52 of 55
    davidwdavidw Posts: 1,651member
    davidw said:
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    davidw said:
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    Gaming platforms are not considered "core platform services" under EU DMA criteria to be a "gatekeeper", but an OS is. Thus Apple is already designated a "gatekeeper" with their iOS and MacOS platform.  If they use their OS platforms as a gaming platform and promote their own games on it, then the EU would have reasons to look into it as violation of rules set up for to keep "gatekeepers" from unfairly competing.  

    Sony is not considered a "gatekeeper" with their PlayStation platform. Microsoft is a "gatekeeper" because of their OS and cloud service, but not because of their Xbox gaming platform. Their Xbox gaming platform is separate from their OS. 

    https://www.kirkland.com/publications/kirkland-alert/2020/12/eu-proposes-rules-for-big-tech-gatekeepers

    The rules are not final and can be modified or new ones added, as needed, even after the DMA passes. Which will be soon.  

    https://www.natlawreview.com/article/eu-parliament-gives-green-light-to-digital-markets-act

    >Do’s

    • Interoperability: Gatekeepers need to allow third parties to interoperate with the gatekeeper’s services (e.g., through allowing third party apps and app stores to be installed)

    Don'ts

    • No self-preferencing: Gatekeepers cannot give preference to their own products and services in search result rankings <
    You don't think Epic will have a better chance of getting their Epic Game Store into iOS, if Apple were to use iOS as a gaming platform?  Spotify is crying about how Apple is competing unfairly because they are using their iOS platform to promote their Apple Music streaming platform. Developers are already crying foul, about how searches in the Apple App Store seems to favor Apple own apps, thus claiming there is a bias in the search result. 
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 53 of 55
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 6,149member
    davidw said:
    davidw said:
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    davidw said:
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    Gaming platforms are not considered "core platform services" under EU DMA criteria to be a "gatekeeper", but an OS is. Thus Apple is already designated a "gatekeeper" with their iOS and MacOS platform.  If they use their OS platforms as a gaming platform and promote their own games on it, then the EU would have reasons to look into it as violation of rules set up for to keep "gatekeepers" from unfairly competing.  

    Sony is not considered a "gatekeeper" with their PlayStation platform. Microsoft is a "gatekeeper" because of their OS and cloud service, but not because of their Xbox gaming platform. Their Xbox gaming platform is separate from their OS. 

    https://www.kirkland.com/publications/kirkland-alert/2020/12/eu-proposes-rules-for-big-tech-gatekeepers

    The rules are not final and can be modified or new ones added, as needed, even after the DMA passes. Which will be soon.  

    https://www.natlawreview.com/article/eu-parliament-gives-green-light-to-digital-markets-act

    >Do’s

    • Interoperability: Gatekeepers need to allow third parties to interoperate with the gatekeeper’s services (e.g., through allowing third party apps and app stores to be installed)

    Don'ts

    • No self-preferencing: Gatekeepers cannot give preference to their own products and services in search result rankings <
    You don't think Epic will have a better chance of getting their Epic Game Store into iOS, if Apple were to use iOS as a gaming platform?  Spotify is crying about how Apple is competing unfairly because they are using their iOS platform to promote their Apple Music streaming platform. Developers are already crying foul, about how searches in the Apple App Store seems to favor Apple own apps, thus claiming there is a bias in the search result. 
    Admittedly much of this proposed legislation makes little sense to me. How is iOS not a gaming platform? And Sony and MS aren't gatekeepers? Imagine building an entire platform and being prohibited from promoting your own goods on it. Or being forced to allow third party app stores to bypass your own security and rules. Do the people writing this stuff understand the technology at all? I guess if it's anything like the US's Congress, probably not. :D
    tht
  • Reply 54 of 55
    davidwdavidw Posts: 1,651member
    davidw said:
    davidw said:
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    davidw said:
    techconc said:
    AppleZulu said:
    To your point, the Mac platform was never great for gamers, but it was at least tenable for many that were interested in games as a secondary function for their machine.  Apple has a gaming problem on the Mac platform that needs to be addressed. 
    Or - now hear me out - they don’t. 

    There are a lot of people out there who buy and use computers but yet have zero to very marginal interest in playing video games. For those folks, Apple’s Arcade platform is more than ample to meet their needs. 

    As always, Apple does just fine as a business that does not try to be all things to all people. The numbers reported atop this forum thread are example enough of that. 
    I get your point that Apple can't be all things to all people.  However, as a platform owner, it is in Apple's best interests to address shortcomings of their platforms.  Apple has never understood the gaming market and likely never will.  In the past, they had 3rd parties that were able to fill the gap.  That doesn't seem to exist anymore.  Further, when Apple is pulling in $30+ billion profit in a quarter, its pretty hard to give them a pass for not setting up a first party game studio at this point.  It's not like the dark days where Apple was on life support and really had to choose how to invest in order to save the company.  Expectations are a bit different now. 
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games? And the EU with knives out, at more opportunities to get in on the action and fining Apple for what they surely would rule as, anti-trust behavior. All the games developers would demand that their games be on Apple's platform, without having to pay Apple a commission on sales.  
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    Gaming platforms are not considered "core platform services" under EU DMA criteria to be a "gatekeeper", but an OS is. Thus Apple is already designated a "gatekeeper" with their iOS and MacOS platform.  If they use their OS platforms as a gaming platform and promote their own games on it, then the EU would have reasons to look into it as violation of rules set up for to keep "gatekeepers" from unfairly competing.  

    Sony is not considered a "gatekeeper" with their PlayStation platform. Microsoft is a "gatekeeper" because of their OS and cloud service, but not because of their Xbox gaming platform. Their Xbox gaming platform is separate from their OS. 

    https://www.kirkland.com/publications/kirkland-alert/2020/12/eu-proposes-rules-for-big-tech-gatekeepers

    The rules are not final and can be modified or new ones added, as needed, even after the DMA passes. Which will be soon.  

    https://www.natlawreview.com/article/eu-parliament-gives-green-light-to-digital-markets-act

    >Do’s

    • Interoperability: Gatekeepers need to allow third parties to interoperate with the gatekeeper’s services (e.g., through allowing third party apps and app stores to be installed)

    Don'ts

    • No self-preferencing: Gatekeepers cannot give preference to their own products and services in search result rankings <
    You don't think Epic will have a better chance of getting their Epic Game Store into iOS, if Apple were to use iOS as a gaming platform?  Spotify is crying about how Apple is competing unfairly because they are using their iOS platform to promote their Apple Music streaming platform. Developers are already crying foul, about how searches in the Apple App Store seems to favor Apple own apps, thus claiming there is a bias in the search result. 
    Admittedly much of this proposed legislation makes little sense to me. How is iOS not a gaming platform? And Sony and MS aren't gatekeepers? Imagine building an entire platform and being prohibited from promoting your own goods on it. Or being forced to allow third party app stores to bypass your own security and rules. Do the people writing this stuff understand the technology at all? I guess if it's anything like the US's Congress, probably not. :D
    The EU DMA only makes sense when one factor in that the conditions needed to be a "gatekeeper", was tailored to only include the 5 big US tech.  

    The EU could have just as easily stated that "gatekeepers" are US companies, with a market cap of over $500B, whose main products or services are digital in nature, will be subject to any rules the EU want to make up, when the EU think they are unfairly competing with EU companies. This would only include the same 5 US big tech. 

    https://www.uschamber.com/technology/under-the-microscope-the-european-union-s-digital-markets-act


    tht
  • Reply 55 of 55
    davidw said:
    Can you imagine all the crybaby Spotify CEO like game developers, that will be crying that Apple is unfairly competing on their own platform, by promoting their own games?
    No.  That's just the point.  The Mac platform does not have healthy competition for games right now.  The reason for Apple getting more involved should be very clear.  In fact, the areas where Apple does get involved with software are exactly because they want their platform to be a strong contender for that specific use case.  
    ... Games should only be another way to attract consumers to buy Apple hardware and Apple can do that more efficiently by making their platform attractive to as many game developers as possible.
    Agreed. That's precisely why Apple needs to step in and address this poor gaming on Mac platform situation.
    ...Only about 12% of gamers play on a mobile platform. Over 75% (and the most serious of them) are playing on a game console. About 50% of Epic Fortnite revenue are from a Playstation and 30% from the Xbox. Apple iOS only accounted for 7% of Epic Fortnite revenue and about 80% of iOS players had access to Fornite on another platform.
    Interesting statistics, but irrelevant.  Apple doesn't need to do this for more money.  They need to do this for overall platform viability.  Despite what you may think, PC gaming is a major industry it's a major reason why PCs are popular with teens and quite frankly anyone who's into gaming.  Apple is losing this market simply because they don't understand this dynamic.  I'm sure they honestly think Apple Arcade is a great solution to this problem.  It's not. 

    ...The only way Apple should get seriously into gaming is if they have their own dedicated game console. Like Sony and Microsoft. Not with an Apple TV. And it's probably already too late for Apple to come out with their own game console. Apple have already been cursed with being classified as a "gatekeeper". Which means that they are not allow to compete in any market because the competition and anti-big tech politicians will always perceived them as having an "unfair" advantage and whatever way Apple uses to promote their own game console, would be seem as "anti-competitive". Even if a dedicated Apple game console in the game console platform market might be a good thing for consumers.        
    The only market they really need to address is the Mac gaming market.  The iOS / iPad OS are served sufficiently through 3rd parties.  The Mac is not.  The AppleTV has great potential to be a great gaming console.  Not in its current incarnation, but with an M1 or higher chip, they have the basis for making a great console.  I've always looked at that product as a missed opportunity.  Again, because Apple doesn't understand or have interest in the gaming market.  As for being a gatekeeper, Microsoft and Sony are much more so with their console platforms.  That's why Epic's rant about Apple rang so hollow.  Epic gladly accepts such terms from Microsoft and Sony, but they reject doing so for Apple which effectively has the same gate keeper control of their platform. 

    fastasleep said:
    Nonsense. All the platforms have first party exclusive games at no detriment to third party developers.
    Exactly!


    muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.