chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,425
|
Post by chinacat on Jul 2, 2016 10:13:39 GMT -8
The Brexit dip and recovery has left AAPL just about where it was two weeks ago, up $.09.
So I guess it's as close to a done deal as can be without formal confirmation from Apple, and the "already disappointing before even being released" iPhone 7 will not be followed by a 7S. I am sure that we will soon begin to see stories that the 10th Anniversary iPhone 8 will also fail to live up to the hype. For myself, processing power and connectivity strength will always be more important than curved screens, all-glass bodies, or the integration of the home button into the display. While Apple has done an astounding job on the evolution of the iPhone hardware, there can be no doubt that the creation of the App Store and the iOS development environment was the strategic home run of the iPhone product strategy. My expectation is that this will be proven once again in India, and that Apple's share of profits will far exceed its share of users.
This weekend is the official kickoff of Summer, so let's get out there and enjoy yourselves. Bliss already reigns in our house due to the arrival of grandson #2 last week.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Jul 2, 2016 11:08:20 GMT -8
The Brexit dip and recovery has left AAPL just about where it was two weeks ago, up $.09. So I guess it's as close to a done deal as can be without formal confirmation from Apple, and the "already disappointing before even being released" iPhone 7 will not be followed by a 7S. I am sure that we will soon begin to see stories that the 10th Anniversary iPhone 8 will also fail to live up to the hype. For myself, processing power and connectivity strength will always be more important than curved screens, all-glass bodies, or the integration of the home button into the display. While Apple has done an astounding job on the evolution of the iPhone hardware, there can be no doubt that the creation of the App Store and the iOS development environment was the strategic home run of the iPhone product strategy. My expectation is that this will be proven once again in India, and that Apple's share of profits will far exceed its share of users. This weekend is the official kickoff of Summer, so let's get out there and enjoy yourselves. Bliss already reigns in our house due to the arrival of grandson #2 last week. Thanks for getting the weekend thread started, chinacat and congratulations on grandson #2! Regarding your comment, I find it interesting that the app store, that most people would agree is an important part of the iPhone's and the iPad's success, was originally resisted quite strongly by Steve Jobs. Steve's deteriorating health and passing was a dark time for any person who valued the company and his leadership but I get tired of constantly hearing slams against Tim Cook, as if Steve got everything right. He didn't. ================ Jobs told developers back in 2007 that they could build software for the iPhone if they wanted, they should just do it inside the web browser. “You’ve got everything you need if you know how to write apps using the most modern web standards to write amazing apps for the iPhone today,” he said. ”We think we’ve got a very sweet story for you. You can begin building your iPhone apps today.”"I called him a half dozen times to lobby for the potential of the apps," says Levinson (Apple board member), while Schiller adds that "I couldn't imagine that we would create something as powerful as the iPhone and not empower developers to make lots of apps. I knew customers would love them."
"Every time the conversation happened, Steve seemed a little more open," says Levinson, who goes on to describe Apple's approvals policy on the App Store as "an absolutely magical solution that hit the sweet spot. It gave us the benefits of openness while retaining end-to-end control."
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jul 2, 2016 11:20:32 GMT -8
Luckychoices
Yes, Steve Jobs was opposed to apps,on the iPhone and several first hand accounts corroborate the fact. But I haven't heard or read any reasons Steve gave, I am just curious.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Jul 2, 2016 12:52:10 GMT -8
Luckychoices Yes, Steve Jobs was opposed to apps,on the iPhone and several first hand accounts corroborate the fact. But I haven't heard or read any reasons Steve gave, I am just curious. rickag, Apparently one of his concerns was the risk of viruses or other malicious activity. To his credit, he was persuaded by Phil Schiller and others rather quickly and I'd like to think he would have also changed his mind with regards to a larger iPhone, dividends, etc. "When it first came out in early 2007, there were no apps you could buy from outside developers, and Jobs initially resisted allowing them," writes Isaacson. "He didn't want outsiders to create applications for the iPhone that could mess it up, infect it with viruses, or pollute its integrity."
Those web apps, though, had limitations in terms of performance and functionality. But they were the only game in town so many went ahead and built them, including Facebook and Google. Still, the frustration set in almost immediately and it didn’t take Jobs long to realize he’d been wrong. Maybe he’d even known it all along. As Walter Isaacson’s biography tells the story, recounted on Huffington Post, Jobs may just have been too busy getting the iPhone finished to worry about true third-party apps as well. “Apple board member Art Levinson told Isaacson that he phoned Jobs ‘half a dozen times to lobby for the potential of the apps,’ but, according to Isaacson, ‘Jobs at first quashed the discussion, partly because he felt his team did not have the bandwidth to figure out all the complexities that would be involved in policing third-party app developers.’ ”
Whether Jobs was resistant because he felt the idea wasn’t good or because he truly was concerned about how Apple would manage things, the company reversed course within months. In October of 2007, it announced it would be building a software development kit (SDK) that would allow for “native apps” that could run with better performance than those browser-based apps Jobs had touted earlier in the year. Developers would need patience though:
|
|
bud777
fire starter
Posts: 1,352
|
Post by bud777 on Jul 2, 2016 15:09:24 GMT -8
Congratulations on grandson #2. It is important to keep things in perspective, isn't it?
I for one am delighted with the imminent failure of the ill-fated iPhone 7. Due to the prescience of the technical press, Apple will save billions in material and production costs by not producing phones that it cannot sell. I addition, I expect that marketing expense and even R&D will be greatly reduced thereby helping the bottom line. Those in the know have compiled a compelling and overwhelming case that we have reached peak Apple and it's all over now, baby blue. Of course there are a few loose ends like the fact that the iPhone SE is STILL not available despite the fact that no new tooling was needed, but we shouldn't let that cloud our judgement and ,of course, China Mobile is still growing, but that cannot be mentioned until a week before earnings.
Having dismissed the iPhone 7 and already hearing reports on the failures of the iPhone 8, perhaps it is a good time to look at the nature of innovation and what made Apple great in the first place. We tend to think of innovation as a constantly rising linear slope. New inventions lead to more new inventions at a steady rate. We may even get more sophisticated and see an exponential curve here or there, but generally the consensus is that since the stone age, things have just gotten better every year. Unfortunately, the data doesn't support this idea. In fact, innovation, as measured by something tangible like patents or published papers, follows something called a Rayleigh curve. This curve looks something like a normal distribution, bit the peak is skewed toward the left. So the number of innovations rises sharply, reaches a peak and then tails off more gradually that it rose. One possible reason for this is that when someone solves an initial problem, it leads to a host of new questions. These questions inspire more research and the process repeats until the phenomenon is understood. After that, it is a process os refinement and solving the remaining questions.
IMHO, Apple has ridden two of these curves. The first was the GUI interface. Sure XEROX PARC was the inventor, but Apple made it successful product. If you don't believe that his was a monumental effort, I would refer you to any version of Windows prior to Windows NT. But then we saw a decade of incremental improvements and refinement. Don't get me wrong, I think the refinement is every bit as important as the initial innovation. Actually, Apple's ability to refine may be its greatest strength.
The second curve again had nothing to do with Apple as the initial innovator. Back in the early 90's one of the most significant breakthroughs in human history occurred and I still don't think it gets the recognition it deserves. It is slighted because it didn't really have a well defined start. Rather it was the small incremental contribution of hundreds of coders, grad students and who knows who else who slowly created the expansion of ARPANET into a world wide connected system. At first we could just connect, then we could read directories, then soon we could transfer files. Library catalogs became available and shortly after the idea of hypertext let to the World Wide Web. That in itself is miraculous to me, but things were just getting started. Suddenly, and against al odds, millions of people, all over the world said,"I think I will take some time, learn this new HTML stuff and contribute something I know to the good of humanity. Think about that. In an age of everyone trying to monetize every idea, people just sat down and gave it away. I remember sitting at a remote terminal in the wilds of Alaska trying to re-invent Chebyshev’s inequality and to my amazement, finding the explanation I need on the web, courtesy of an instructor in New Zealand. This happened. The people of the world each brought their knowledge and contributed it for the common good. I cannot think of another time that something like this happened in history. Maybe the printing press. So what does this have to do with Apple? Everything.
The iPod didn't save Apple, there were other MP3 players that worked as well. iTunes didn't do it either. Napster and Limewire provided all the free music anyone could want. The iPhone as a phone didn't do anything new and was in fact less user friendly, IMHO, than the flip phones that it replaced. What made all the difference was that the iPhone provided access to this vast accumulation of knowledge. All of a sudden, you had the combined knowledge of the world in your pocket. And was created spontaneously by the entire world. If people aren't talking about this in 1000 years, they should be. That kind of information was not optional, it was essential. If your competitor had it, you better have it too. Once again, this sudden innovative explosion lead, inevitably, to successive refinement. That is were we are now. Bigger sizes, improved performance, faster, lighter, all of these will bring people to replace existing devices, but whether you put it on your desk, or your lap, or your wrist it is the information what drives the basic need.
Some view this as the end of Apple. If all there is to do is to sell to existing customers with improved versions of the same device, how can we really grow? Thus the mantra that Apple is DOOMED.
Oddly enough, I think that Apple may indeed be doomed, but not in the sense most people think. Another explosive growth spurt in hardware needs a new paradigm to drive it. Just like the internet replaced books and magazines and papers, something needs to replace our current way of interacting with the information that has become available. One potential idea had been lying dormant since the mid 90's. Come back to how the internet works right now. You select a URL that sends a file transfer request to a remote computer. The remote computer sends you the file in packets and your browser constructs the file and interprets it giving you text and pictures and video and everything else we know and love. Suppose tat the file that is transmitted instead gives you the information to construct a 3D environment. Instead of looking at a list, you walk through an aisle. Instead of looking at a sports car, you drive it. This is exactly what happened back in the 90's when (you guessed it) DOOM allowed users to create extensions to their game maps. Of course it was primitive and we didn't have VR, but all the basic technology is in place.
Now imagine how far this can go. No. Further than that. Yes, a virtual world that duplicates and enhances our own. One of infinite possibilities. What city would not create an online version of itself to allow virtual visits? What better way to promote commerce? Maybe we don't even go. Maybe we just strap on the headsets and live virtually everywhere. The success depends on people being willing to all contribute and construct their part but it certainly has happened before.
By the way, did I forget to mention that I am still on drugs recovering from the operation?
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Jul 2, 2016 17:21:00 GMT -8
Congratulations on grandson #2. It is important to keep things in perspective, isn't it? I for one am delighted with the imminent failure of the ill-fated iPhone 7. Due to the prescience of the technical press, Apple will save billions in material and production costs by not producing phones that it cannot sell. I addition, I expect that marketing expense and even R&D will be greatly reduced thereby helping the bottom line. Those in the know have compiled a compelling and overwhelming case that we have reached peak Apple and it's all over now, baby blue. Of course there are a few loose ends like the fact that the iPhone SE is STILL not available despite the fact that no new tooling was needed, but we shouldn't let that cloud our judgement and ,of course, China Mobile is still growing, but that cannot be mentioned until a week before earnings. Having dismissed the iPhone 7 and already hearing reports on the failures of the iPhone 8, perhaps it is a good time to look at the nature of innovation and what made Apple great in the first place. We tend to think of innovation as a constantly rising linear slope. New inventions lead to more new inventions at a steady rate. We may even get more sophisticated and see an exponential curve here or there, but generally the consensus is that since the stone age, things have just gotten better every year. Unfortunately, the data doesn't support this idea. In fact, innovation, as measured by something tangible like patents or published papers, follows something called a Rayleigh curve. This curve looks something like a normal distribution, bit the peak is skewed toward the left. So the number of innovations rises sharply, reaches a peak and then tails off more gradually that it rose. One possible reason for this is that when someone solves an initial problem, it leads to a host of new questions. These questions inspire more research and the process repeats until the phenomenon is understood. After that, it is a process os refinement and solving the remaining questions. IMHO, Apple has ridden two of these curves. The first was the GUI interface. Sure XEROX PARC was the inventor, but Apple made it successful product. If you don't believe that his was a monumental effort, I would refer you to any version of Windows prior to Windows NT. But then we saw a decade of incremental improvements and refinement. Don't get me wrong, I think the refinement is every bit as important as the initial innovation. Actually, Apple's ability to refine may be its greatest strength. The second curve again had nothing to do with Apple as the initial innovator. Back in the early 90's one of the most significant breakthroughs in human history occurred and I still don't think it gets the recognition it deserves. It is slighted because it didn't really have a well defined start. Rather it was the small incremental contribution of hundreds of coders, grad students and who knows who else who slowly created the expansion of ARPANET into a world wide connected system. At first we could just connect, then we could read directories, then soon we could transfer files. Library catalogs became available and shortly after the idea of hypertext let to the World Wide Web. That in itself is miraculous to me, but things were just getting started. Suddenly, and against al odds, millions of people, all over the world said,"I think I will take some time, learn this new HTML stuff and contribute something I know to the good of humanity. Think about that. In an age of everyone trying to monetize every idea, people just sat down and gave it away. I remember sitting at a remote terminal in the wilds of Alaska trying to re-invent Chebyshev’s inequality and to my amazement, finding the explanation I need on the web, courtesy of an instructor in New Zealand. This happened. The people of the world each brought their knowledge and contributed it for the common good. I cannot think of another time that something like this happened in history. Maybe the printing press. So what does this have to do with Apple? Everything. The iPod didn't save Apple, there were other MP3 players that worked as well. iTunes didn't do it either. Napster and Limewire provided all the free music anyone could want. The iPhone as a phone didn't do anything new and was in fact less user friendly, IMHO, than the flip phones that it replaced. What made all the difference was that the iPhone provided access to this vast accumulation of knowledge. All of a sudden, you had the combined knowledge of the world in your pocket. And was created spontaneously by the entire world. If people aren't talking about this in 1000 years, they should be. That kind of information was not optional, it was essential. If your competitor had it, you better have it too. Once again, this sudden innovative explosion lead, inevitably, to successive refinement. That is were we are now. Bigger sizes, improved performance, faster, lighter, all of these will bring people to replace existing devices, but whether you put it on your desk, or your lap, or your wrist it is the information what drives the basic need. Some view this as the end of Apple. If all there is to do is to sell to existing customers with improved versions of the same device, how can we really grow? Thus the mantra that Apple is DOOMED. Oddly enough, I think that Apple may indeed be doomed, but not in the sense most people think. Another explosive growth spurt in hardware needs a new paradigm to drive it. Just like the internet replaced books and magazines and papers, something needs to replace our current way of interacting with the information that has become available. One potential idea had been lying dormant since the mid 90's. Come back to how the internet works right now. You select a URL that sends a file transfer request to a remote computer. The remote computer sends you the file in packets and your browser constructs the file and interprets it giving you text and pictures and video and everything else we know and love. Suppose tat the file that is transmitted instead gives you the information to construct a 3D environment. Instead of looking at a list, you walk through an aisle. Instead of looking at a sports car, you drive it. This is exactly what happened back in the 90's when (you guessed it) DOOM allowed users to create extensions to their game maps. Of course it was primitive and we didn't have VR, but all the basic technology is in place. Now imagine how far this can go. No. Further than that. Yes, a virtual world that duplicates and enhances our own. One of infinite possibilities. What city would not create an online version of itself to allow virtual visits? What better way to promote commerce? Maybe we don't even go. Maybe we just strap on the headsets and live virtually everywhere. The success depends on people being willing to all contribute and construct their part but it certainly has happened before. By the way, did I forget to mention that I am still on drugs recovering from the operation? I've bolded what I'd consider the PERFECT parts, the rest of it is just excellent!!
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jul 2, 2016 19:27:47 GMT -8
Luckychoices
Thank you for the background information on Steve Jobs and the development of the App Store.
|
|
|
Post by macwire on Jul 3, 2016 5:08:01 GMT -8
No one is saying apple is doomed. At worse (which is playing out honestly) AAPL is transforming into a giant utility company with little to no growth. Still huge. Still yielding. But stagnant. IE MSFT post dot com bust.
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jul 3, 2016 6:25:47 GMT -8
No one is saying apple is doomed. At worse (which is playing out honestly) AAPL is transforming into a giant utility company with little to no growth. Still huge. Still yielding. But stagnant. IE MSFT post dot com bust. I agree as it stands now. The iPhone as Apple introduced it is a once in a generation product. It is amazing how one product can materially change the lives of billions of people in such a short time. What the future holds for increasing Apple's revenue will be fascinating to follow. An Apple car could materially increase revenue. Expanding into enterprise could also up revenue. AppleTV has the potential to add revenue, but seems to be in limbo. It seems to me at the moment Apple Music, Siri/AI, Maps, iMessage, HealthKit and HomeKit are defensive moves to ensure an excellent ecosystem around Apples OSs. I included Apple Music since music sales declined Apple needed to maintain revenue by adding streaming.
|
|
Ted
fire starter
Posts: 881
|
Post by Ted on Jul 3, 2016 8:20:18 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Jul 3, 2016 8:22:35 GMT -8
I think the most important thing going forward for AAPL investors is a decision on repatriation tax. Nothing will affect AAPL as much as this over the next few years. If we can get a temporary or permanent tax break it frees up an absolutely massive amount of cash to be used for shareholder return. I'm starting to get uncomfortable with the amount of debt Apple is raising - it needs to start slowing down. The dividend is safe, but for the buybacks to continue I would like to see Apple start to use its existing cash, and that depends on factors outside its control. I think this is a big reason why the stock is where it is, along with the company's poor performance in major product lines.
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jul 3, 2016 8:25:11 GMT -8
I think the most important thing going forward for AAPL investors is a decision on repatriation tax. Nothing will affect AAPL as much as this over the next few years. If we can get a temporary or permanent tax break it frees up an absolutely massive amount of cash to be used for shareholder return. I'm starting to get uncomfortable with the amount of debt Apple is raising - it needs to start slowing down. The dividend is safe, but for the buybacks to continue I would like to see Apple start to use its existing cash, and that depends on factors outside its control. I think this is a big reason why the stock is where it is, along with the company's poor performance in major product lines. Absolutely!
|
|
Ted
fire starter
Posts: 881
|
Post by Ted on Jul 3, 2016 8:34:15 GMT -8
This is worth a read too. www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2016/07/the-vision-of-artificial-intelligence-according-to-the-gospel-of-google.html" While Google's PR blitz currently has a rosy exterior to it, remember that their home-automation leader Tony Fadell – who had also taken on the task of reviving their Google Glass project – was basically shown the door just weeks after Google Home was introduced at their annual developer conference in May. Obviously their Home Automation project wasn't sailing along as smoothly as Pichai would like us all to think.
And have you noticed that Google always seems to be on the cusp of major breakthroughs of one sort of another with one PR blitz after another every year to capture the imagination of Wall Street and consumers. And yet we're still waiting for their next great thing from them that never seems to materialize.
Is Google's dream of executing on Artificial Intelligence really going to deliver post-mobile devices? Will it overtake Apple's post-PC device revolution? While only time will tell, I think not – at least in the near term."
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,425
|
Post by chinacat on Jul 3, 2016 9:23:01 GMT -8
Thanks, Ted, for the pointer to one of the most cogent Apple articles that I have read in years. The discussion of the leverage Apple gets in several areas by having developed its own silicon design strength in house was for me the most revelatory section, perhaps because it generally gets glossed over in the press as just part of Apple's secrecy/security bent, rather than highlighted as the enabler for advances in a number of different areas while freeing design teams from the limitations of working with external suppliers. For anyone who didn't click through on the Johnny Srouji link, I would recommend that you do.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,425
|
Post by chinacat on Jul 3, 2016 9:28:31 GMT -8
By the way, did I forget to mention that I am still on drugs recovering from the operation? After reading your post, all I can say is "Where can I get me some of those?" ;)
|
|
|
Post by mace on Jul 3, 2016 12:49:14 GMT -8
“Chebyshev's Inequality”? Why is this even a theorem? Isn't this a corollary derived from the definition of the standard deviation?
|
|
|
Post by firestorm on Jul 3, 2016 17:30:57 GMT -8
Bloomberg Businessweek had an article about Blackberry this week, in which it spoke about the passion some people still feel for the physical keyboard. It also spoke of how President Obama finally gave up his Blackberry, and purportedly now owns a SAMSUNG phone.
|
|
macster
Member
Posts: 2,633
Member is Online
|
Post by macster on Jul 3, 2016 18:39:32 GMT -8
Bloomberg Businessweek had an article about Blackberry this week, in which it spoke about the passion some people still feel for the physical keyboard. It also spoke of how President Obama finally gave up his Blackberry, and purportedly now owns a SAMSUNG phone. Its no wonder with Eric Schmidt and Google’s lobbying efforts pay off with nearly-weekly meetings at the White House. No wonder Tim Cook became unbiased enough or tolerant enough to hold a fundraiser for Republican Speaker Ryan. Govt is corrupt. If you vote for the status quo, shame on you. venturebeat.com/2015/03/24/googles-lobbying-efforts-pay-off-with-nearly-weekly-meetings-at-the-white-house/
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jul 3, 2016 19:10:02 GMT -8
Bloomberg Businessweek had an article about Blackberry this week, in which it spoke about the passion some people still feel for the physical keyboard. It also spoke of how President Obama finally gave up his Blackberry, and purportedly now owns a SAMSUNG phone. Its no wonder with Eric Schmidt and Google’s lobbying efforts pay off with nearly-weekly meetings at the White House. No wonder Tim Cook became unbiased enough or tolerant enough to hold a fundraiser for Republican Speaker Ryan. Govt is corrupt. If you vote for the status quo, shame on you. venturebeat.com/2015/03/24/googles-lobbying-efforts-pay-off-with-nearly-weekly-meetings-at-the-white-house/the more I read the more pissed off I got.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Jul 4, 2016 5:26:47 GMT -8
I got bored before he even began to address the subject of his article. I admire anybody with the patience to sit through that drivel.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Jul 4, 2016 8:34:21 GMT -8
I got bored before he even began to address the subject of his article. I admire anybody with the patience to sit through that drivel. Well, at least 4 members of the board thought the editorial was NOT boring and appreciated the content. So perhaps it would help further define the wide differences in attitudes between board members, concerning Apple and AAPL, if you would comment on the parts you found particularly boring and why you consider the content drivel.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Jul 4, 2016 9:05:30 GMT -8
I got bored before he even began to address the subject of his article. I admire anybody with the patience to sit through that drivel. Well, at least 4 members of the board thought the editorial was NOT boring and appreciated the content. So perhaps it would help further define the wide differences in attitudes between board members, concerning Apple and AAPL, if you would comment on the parts you found particularly boring and why you consider the content drivel. When I have to read 1000+ words (with a message that has been repeated ad nauseum by DED - I've heard it all before) before even starting to address the headline, it is annoying and not of much use to me. I don't need to be reminded about Google's poor purchase of Motorola in an article about the features of the iPhone 7, thanks. It's useless in the context of the article. He takes going off on a tangent to unbelievable levels. Aside from that, he misses the point about what a lot of consumers are looking for. Logical or not, a redesign is a big deal. The iPhone 6 is a great phone, and not many people are going to upgrade because of the A10 chip, however fast it may be. Whatever the potential benefits, lack of a headphone jack is an absolute negative for the majority of people. People are resistant to change, and this will be another reason to hold off a year. Also, when you consider the fact that global smartphone install base is increasing, and Android switchers to iOS are at all-time highs, how is Apple reporting declining iPhone sales? A combination of two reasons: 1) Extreme slowdown of upgrade cycles - because it is less compelling to upgrade these days (no matter how hard DED argues otherwise) and because of the elimination of carrier subsidies. 2) iOS switchers to Android - a convenient item that Apple management has chosen to ignore. I have no idea what this number is or how it compares to switchers the other way, but it is certainly non-zero and significant. DED acting as if every Android sale is simply a future iPhone sale is extremely misguided and arrogant. Going forward, the question will be is the install base growing fast enough to offset the increase in upgrade cycle. Of course though, DED acts like the iPhone has never been stronger when in fact the hard facts show otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Jul 4, 2016 9:42:24 GMT -8
Well, at least 4 members of the board thought the editorial was NOT boring and appreciated the content. So perhaps it would help further define the wide differences in attitudes between board members, concerning Apple and AAPL, if you would comment on the parts you found particularly boring and why you consider the content drivel. When I have to read 1000+ words (with a message that has been repeated ad nauseum by DED - I've heard it all before) before even starting to address the headline, it is annoying and not of much use to me. I don't need to be reminded about Google's poor purchase of Motorola in an article about the features of the iPhone 7, thanks. It's useless in the context of the article. He takes going off on a tangent to unbelievable levels. Aside from that, he misses the point about what a lot of consumers are looking for. Logical or not, a redesign is a big deal. The iPhone 6 is a great phone, and not many people are going to upgrade because of the A10 chip, however fast it may be. Whatever the potential benefits, lack of a headphone jack is an absolute negative for the majority of people. People are resistant to change, and this will be another reason to hold off a year. Also, when you consider the fact that global smartphone install base is increasing, and Android switchers to iOS are at all-time highs, how is Apple reporting declining iPhone sales? A combination of two reasons: 1) Extreme slowdown of upgrade cycles - because it is less compelling to upgrade these days (no matter how hard DED argues otherwise) and because of the elimination of carrier subsidies. 2) iOS switchers to Android - a convenient item that Apple management has chosen to ignore. I have no idea what this number is or how it compares to switchers the other way, but it is certainly non-zero and significant. DED acting as if every Android sale is simply a future iPhone sale is extremely misguided and arrogant. Going forward, the question will be is the install base growing fast enough to offset the increase in upgrade cycle. Of course though, DED acts like the iPhone has never been stronger when in fact the hard facts show otherwise. I agree.
|
|