- avon b7
- Last Active
"Why is it so important that Apple is not selling more devices than the rest of the world combined? Actually, it's quite clearly not important"
AFAIK, Apple has never sold more 'devices' than the rest of the world combined and you yourself have written articles on Apple being the top seller in some shape or fashion of some models. Handset sales remain a key metric in Apple's business. That is undeniable in spite of your sarcasm.
The wobble Apple took at the start of the year was largely caused by lower than expected iPhone sales.
Actually sales are clearly very important and have been the key driver for Apple for years. That's why they actually do matter and are important. Even today.
While revenue from iPhones, for the first time in a long while, made up less than 50% of the total recently (and might even become a trend), that percentage is likely to jump back over 50% after Apple's blowout Christmas quarter and that will happen largely through increasing handset sales.
After a profit warning and three years of flat unit sales, you are now picking up something new to downplay problematic handset unit sales. Sales that would have been seen in even poorer light if it weren't for DT trying to crush Huawei.
Less than a year ago, sales (or analysts hitting on them) were important enough for you to pen this piece:
You even wrote a piece claiming Apple in China was doing fine in the very same 24 hours that Apple issued a profit warning. Speculation swings both ways and can be wrong. No news there.
Why wasn't this piece written back then if unit sales aren't actually important? Why waste so much energy focussing on pure speculation by different analysts/journalists? Analysts and journalists will speculate but they also report the official numbers too. Just like they report on Apple Card.
In fact, the current situation is partly because Apple has lagged behind competitors for a few years now in a broad range of handset technologies. Price is clearly another factor. If people talk about Huawei and Samsung it is because of what they have delivered. If people largely stopped talking about the latest iPhone series shortly after release it is because the release was not worthy of more attention. Apple really didn't deliver with the 2018 iPhone refresh. The Apple Watch was far more newsworthy.
If Huawei and Samsung have delivered and left Apple to catch-up in key areas it is because they are competing and as a result of that competition, Apple is apparently trying to move things up a gear. At last! But all indicators (read rumours) point to another relatively 'light' iPhone refresh. We'll see what actually gets presented but, unlike sales forecasts, rumours on upcoming iPhones have historically not been that bad.
'Competency' seems to be your way of writing Samsung and Huawei off in some way. I have no idea why you want to tread there.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Fold was a PR disaster but the rest of the handset division has been on a roll. Far better than the S9 Series.
Huawei hasn't put a foot wrong so far in spite of U.S attempts to literally kill the company.
In fact, Huawei moved into the handset business and broke the Apple/Samsung duolpoly. No mean feat. It has key technology literally at every step of the way from the top right down into wearables and everything in between.
If you want to talk about competency, where was Apple while all this was happening? Why wasn't Apple developing 5G in 2009 like Huawei? If Huawei managed to outdo Apple on handset hardware in just a few short years, why hasn't Apple done the same in the other direction? Was it really so hard not to see 5G in terms of another industrial revolution and make a strategic move?
No Apple hoarded it's cash and is still focussing on consumer facing earnings. Only now is it trying to pick up the pieces of not seeing the strategic moves its competitors saw long ago and make its own 5G modem (buying in IP and know how).
Now, AI is another prospective big money earner for the next six years both at enterprise and consumer levels.
On Friday, Huawei released Ascend which will be included in earbuds and rise up through watches, handsets, IoT, TVs, cars, servers and entire data centers. Alongside that, it released MindSpore. That is competency and Mindspore will go open source like HiAI has been for three years now.
Apple 'miscalculated' in Tim Cook's own words. As a result it looks like it had to reimburse Samsung for not achieving planned shipments of oled displays and issue a profit warning.
If Huawei has reached the point where it has the U.S senate running scared and trying to chop it down by any means possible you can be sure that competency was the underlying reason.
Apple Card was announced in March 2019 and went live on the 20th of August so it is a little premature to count any eggs on that one.
"telling us as loudly as possible that Apple's market share of units sold is dangerously flat or even shrinking. Often, it's "waning" or "collapsing," or some other dramatic term suggesting immediate demise for a company..."
You are mixing things up here. Firstly, Apple's unit sales have been flat. That is reality. However, where did you get 'dangerously' from? Secondly, unit sales did shrink. That is reality. However, where did you get "suggesting the immediate demise" from?
iPhone sales are still key to the company's coffers but they have enough non-iPhone business and cash to avoid its demise. You are throwing these things in for dramatic effect but they are false. You might find some unbalanced fool out there making those claims but it simply isn't representative of what is being said.
"The physical Apple Card wears out, but not the digital experience that's driving consumer attention"
I feel confident in pointing out that if this had been a Samsung/Google/Huawei card 'wearing out' it would have got far more than half a sentence dedicated to it.
The 'digital experience that is driving consumer attention' is so low that I, nor anyone I know, even has an interest in it. Many iPhone users included. Being limited to Apple Pay obviously reduces consumer attention to less than 15% of the world's smartphone base. This is supposing that I have my facts right because it hasn't really drawn my attention at all.
Now, if it wasn't less than 15%, consumer attention would probably be higher but that conflicts with the idea of marketshare not being relevant in the first place. Marketshare is important. Tim Cook even hinted during the last earnings call that less services would be tethered to the iPhone and they would see how that worked out. That was interesting for a few reasons and time will tell if it has an impact on the 'ecosystem'.
"the reality remains that Apple is selling the most premium devices to the valuable end of the market. "
The most, but less than before. That is also reality. Huawei and Samsung have better flagships in the 'valuable end' of the market and, whichever way you look at it, the pie that makes up the 'valuable end' has more non-Apple takers than before.
"This minority of the market is driving the development of the majority of the tech that is having a real impact. That, in turn, is driving commercial interest in Apple as a brand".
Can you name some of those technologies? Because for the last three years most of them have come from Huawei and Samsung (NOT Apple) and yes, they are driving commercial interest but NOT in Apple. That's why everyone has been raving about NON-Apple phones (and I'll include One Plus and others in that group). It's why the latest iPhone hasn't drawn much interest at all since launch and any buzz died down very early on.
"Interest in Apple is why the vast volumes of phones from Huawei and Samsung are desperately trying to look like an iPhone. Yet those companies have not attracted significant proprietary app development despite their efforts to do this. Neither has successfully launched new companion wearables like Apple Watch or AirPods, and neither has competently introduced new Services fueling the extraordinary growth Apple has seen from its App Store, iCloud, and other new Services offerings-- including the new Apple Card attracting an unusual level of attention, given that it is merely a credit card with some clever new app features."
No. Huawei and Samsung are not trying to look like the iPhone. Much less 'desperately'.
'Not attracted significant propietary app development'? They run Android. Perhaps I am missing something here.
No successful companion wearables? They have released successful companion wearables. Lots of them! And growing!
I mentioned Ascend further up. What do you think Ascend Nano was designed for? DaVinci cores are already present in the Kirin 810. The Kirin 990 will have an NPU based around Ascend Tiny (or perhaps Ascend Lite). You can expect its already successful wearables business to grow along with IoT.
Both have 'Services' and both will also grow. Even for Apple, Services is a relatively new leg to the earnings table but you are no doubt looking at 'Services' from short sighted CE perspective. Both Samsung and Huawei offer services outside the CE realm too. Huawei offers cloud services to industry as well as end users. Does Apple? Does Apple have an equivalent to the Ascend 910 Cluster?
That will have services attached to it.
"Large volumes of low and middle-tier phones are establishing their brands as basic and cheap".
Utter nonsense! Think about a Samsung or Huawei handset and the first, and only, thing that springs to mind is anything but 'basic and cheap'. It is completely the opposite! You think premium flagship with a price to match. Stop anyone in the street and ask them to name a Huawei phone. I guarantee you it won't be a Y Series phone. That is the power of the brand and is why Huawei is (or was, until Trump threw a tantrum) selling more and more premium phones. The same applies to Honor. Not only that but tech savvy users will even put the phones ahead of Apple in many areas.
"While both brands currently hold a lead in certain areas over Apple, ranging from 5G modems to screen size variants, the reality is that the largest Android licensees have always held various inconsequential leads over Apple at various times over the last decade, including 4G and 3G before it."
Certain areas? "Really, George?" Come on.
"Yet this has never mattered before."
It has but you just haven't seen it and it still matters and you still don't see it. Three years of flat sales, a profit warning and YoY contraction make those leads consequential (Competition, in a word) but let's not forget Apple's role in this. If people aren't seeing value (and I'd argue that many aren't) for the asking price, then Apple should be doing more. By the time Apple releases a tri-camera phone, it will be 18 months late to market in competitive terms. So late in fact that tri-cameras aren't even newsworthy in the wider industry anymore and only the top of the line iPhone is rumoured to carry that setup. I hope prices come down if these phones turn out to be another marginal improvement over the last generation. Low light improvements? Another 18 months late. More than x2 optical zoom. Another 18 months. Fast charging? Ten years late!
No. Those leads haven't been inconsequential in the slightest.
I only got the XR after a big increase in the trade-in discounting. Without that it was a no sale because IMO the value wasn't there.
"The two ultra premium-class products making the most original feature leap in smartphones this year were the foldable phone-tablets introduced by Samsung and Huawei. Yet they were both delayed for months, squandering their potential to captivate any real interest among consumers during the sleepy period between iPhone launches. Both represented a lot of work for nothing in 2019."
'Most original' is subjective. Folding phones may be original (or not) but the first generation models were never brought to market with anything other than a tiny niche in mind. None of their 'potential' has been squandered at all. Until they arrive there is no market and the potential is exactly the same as it was when they were announced. The quiet period for these phones (in unit sales terms) doesn't exist and there is no sleepy period between iPhones. P30 Series, S10 Series, Note 10 series, Magic II, Honor 20 Series, One Plus 7 series... . No sleep til Hammersmith!
On the other hand, when they do reach the market, they will definitely absorb attention from the iPhone. People will be rushing to publish reviews and see how quickly they break! LOL! Seriously, iPhone is going to have a harder time getting airtime this year (as if the Mate 30 Series wasn't already enough). To make matters worse, the Mate X has been seriously upgraded and might even have a 5G modem on the Kirin 990 SoC.
The most original feature IMO was the x10 periscope lens on the P30 Pro.
I won't continue as time doesn't permit.
StrangeDays said:avon b7 said:melgross said:The indications from Huawei, from what they said about the delay, was that they were relieved that Samsung delayed theirs for technical reasons. That gave Huawei the excuse to delay theirs as well. No doubt, both have serious problems. If Huawei is waiting until after Samsung releases theirs, then it appears that they still have some problems, don’t feel confident in the product and they want to see how much Samsung’s fixes worked. if it’s still not really working as well as it should (and reports say that it seems better, but not good) then that could give Huawei cover for their own, not quite ready for prime time, product.
a problem for Huawei’s product is that design decisions made to overcome the tight bend have resulted in a product that is even thicker than Samsung’s, and with a totally unprotectable screen. Even if all other problems get solved, such as screen fold lifetime, that, in itself, is going to result in a device that will be easily damaged.
the problem of trying to be first when there are competitors knowing what you’re doing, and the approximate delivery date, means that products are usually inferior. When people wonder why Apple is so secretive about new designs, this is why. Samsung heard that Apple was interested in watches, from an interview Cook gave at a RECODE conference, and rushed one out, to be first. They then claimed that they sold more than 5 million, though it turned out they sold less than 800,000 of the poorly reviewed product. They would have been better off waiting.
The phone was ready. The networks weren't.
The quote I provided says:
"Currently with 4G, we can sell it, and allow everyone to use it. But with 5G, we need more time to guarantee the 5G networks are in calibration."
That's because the Mate X is a folding phone - but - it is also a 5G phone.
While they dealt with carriers and calibration, they took advantage to double down on other aspects (mainly software related). Then the geopolitical stuff blew up and as of today we still don't know for sure if it will ship with Android.
At every step if the way they have provided details on their moves. They have even confirmed plans for the second generation of the Mate X. The hope is that within two years prices will come down to premium levels but that can only happen after a few generations of ridiculously high priced iterations.
I have seven TP-Link smart plugs and three of their smart bulbs. So far the setup and app (Android and iOS) have been fairly stable. Without a Google Home device however, Google Assistant set-up can be really troublesome. Almost as if Google deliberately hides the option hoping you will opt for a Google Home product. They are also Alexa certified but I don't have any Echo devices.
They are only 2.4Ghz and for some reason, the option for 'remote' control was dropped from the app so I think that feature is permanently 'on' now.
Overall, they have worked well but I have had to re-pair a couple of the plugs.
Of course, the real issue is how long they will be supported because without the app the whole set-up will fail and if they get hacked or suffer some kind of major outage it might be a major inconvenience.
gatorguy said:Rayz2016 said:Soli said:Let's be clear that this "hack" still needs the face of the person who is already keyed for the device. This only allows a person who wears glasses to allow someone to use their phone on their face to unlock Face ID without their consent if they happen to be unconscious after making a pair of augmented glasses, assuming that their picking up the iPhone doesn't trigger Face ID and the subsequently disabling of Face ID before they can execute this "hack".
i wasn’t worried about someone unlocking my phone with TouchID while I was asleep, so I’m certainly not going to worry about this.
How many law enforcement agents does it take to implement this technique?