mjtomlin

GeorgeBMac said:

I always wondered about the logic of purchasing and then lugging around 2 separate computer systems that do essentially the same functions and the only real difference being screen size?
...   Carrying an Apple Watch and an IPhone -- that's ok and it's not what I'm talking about.

But carrying an IPhone and an IPad and a MacBook are just totally, absolutely redundant. Almost a crazy kind of stupid.  They each are supporting:  systems board, batteries, memory and processors that are each capable of doing what the other formfactor is doing.   The only real difference is screen size and external keyboard & touchpad.  

So, OK!  Let's Do This!  It's time to leave the 20th century!

But, there is another, more important reason:  Apple is getting killed by the Chromebook.   Parents, schools and kids simply don't want to shell out $2,000 when $200 gives them what they need.   But, they all carry IPhones.   By plugging them into a light, thin, dumb terminal that supplies a large screen and professional quality keyboard you have everything you need at less than the cost of a Chromebook -- and Apple preserves its youth market.

First of all, Apple is not getting killed by the Chromebook. Apple is losing some iPad sales to Chromebooks in education. Chromebooks by and large have failed just as miserably as netbooks did (Apple sells more iPads then all other's chromebook sales combined and many companies have stopped selling them except to education). They have found a niche in K-6 classrooms, because they're cheap and fairly indestructible compared to a tablet. Outside of that, Some people might consider getting one instead of a cheap Windows computer.

Second, why would anyone carry all those things with them? It's not about having everything with you all the time, it's about having the right device when you need it.

I have an iPhone SE, a 9.7" iPad Pro, and a 27" iMac. The iMac stays where it sits 24/7. The iPad moves with me around the house; couch, porch, kitchen, bathroom, etc. and sometimes I take it with me when I leave the house (when I need something more than an my iPhone). The iPhone sits on the table by the door and goes with me whenever I leave, but I rarely use it at home, except to occasional (rarely) make or answer a phone call, because I can also do that from my iPad and iMac.

grangerfx said:

Here is an idea: Why doesn't Apple just build touchscreens into their computers?

Umm, because they don't want to.

Do you seriously think Apple hasn't designed, built and tested such a device? Of course they have, probably many, many, many years ago and decided the experience sucked. And in case you haven't noticed, Apple is more inclined to build devices THEY want, not what YOU want.

This is why Apple makes so much profit. They make a single device that sells 10's of millions, instead of making a million different devices that sell 100's of units. 

The article forgot to mention the satellite company they unloaded as well.

I'm amazed how everyone always goes gaga over everything Google announces and uses that to show how Apple is falling behind. Time and time again Google has proven that they cannot follow through on just about everything they attempt to do. And yet, time and time again, people praise Google whenever they announce something new. You'd think people would learn? What's next? Dissolve "Alphabet" and just go back to being Google?

I could care less about the current state of wireless charging. It's dumb and pointless. If you have to keep your device in a specific location for charging, then it's no better than having to plug it in. And even worse you can't really hold and use the device while it's charging, it has to lay right against the charging "station".

A friend of mine was bragging about his Samsung Galaxy with its wireless charging. It was one extra step for me to plug my iPhone in and set it down, than it did for him to just his down. But then I picked mine up and started using it while it was charging... he couldn't do that without also picking up the charging station leaving him tethered to the wall by a wire anyway.

Also, OLED screens aren't an "innovation" - they're just another type of display technology that so far offer nothing superior to Apple's continued innovations in LCD technology. OLED display have worse color accuracy and ONLY save energy when the interface is mainly black.

smaffei said:

regurgitatedcoprolite said:

The royalties Apple collects through its Made for iPhone program are but a tiny drop in the bucket in comparison to other revenue streams. I don't believe Apple would keep Lightning just because of that. For Apple to move from Lightning to USB-C, there'd have to be major advantages regarding usability, etc. 

You're kidding, right? Apple makes a ton off of selling cables and chargers. If fact, they recommend you use only Apple charging / synch cables. Using cheap 3rd part cables / chargers could possibly invalidate your warranty if the phone gets damaged from charging (and Apple can prove it), The profit margin on their cables is HUGE!

Umm that's not true... Apple recommends using any accessories certified through their MFi program, they do not specifically recommend, "Apple only". And yes the profit margin is huge on Apple's accessories, but as the other poster said, it's still a tiny drop in the bucket of overall sales.

Apple charges more for two reasons...
1. They pretty much use the highest quality components.
2. Leaving space at a lower price tier allows 3rd parties to come in and offer an alternative - this is how you build viable markets around your products. 

Apple could almost certainly offer anything and everything any 3rd party vendor could, but they choose not to. Instead they offer a platform by which others can build on top of. This is how you create, build and maintain a thriving ecosystem. Offering it all yourself, leaves little room for others to invest in your platform/ecosystem. This is why, even though there are 4-5 times more Android devices in the world, the iOS ecosystem is by far much, much larger and desirable.