Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:10:51 GMT -8
iPhone 5C = A6 platform or else there's massive customer confusion. 5C also means Ming-Chi Kuo was right where it counted yet again. A remarkable, months-early call that was a big hint of Apple's strategy shift. Of course Apple has to actually make it official first. Doubt Dalrymple will yep a product name by itself.
Can you see Apple have a 5C, 5 and 5S? Three kinds of 5s? I can see two at MOST, with the 5 simply selling until existing stock is gone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:14:24 GMT -8
AAPL up over $6.xx (>1.4%), yet it does not appear on the Selling on Strength list. Finviz (late to the party) is now showing Institutional ownership at 64.10%. I'll be doing some calculating to determine how much of that bump from 60.90% was the result of the buyback.
edit No time like the present. 63.75% of the increase from 60.90% to 64.10% is due to the buyback. The good news is that Institutional investing in AAPL IS increasing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:16:01 GMT -8
iPhone 5C = A6 platform or else there's massive customer confusion. 5C also means Ming-Chi Kuo was right where it counted yet again. A remarkable, months-early call that was a big hint of Apple's strategy shift. Of course Apple has to actually make it official first. Doubt Dalrymple will yep a product name by itself. Can you see Apple have a 5C, 5 and 5S? Three kinds of 5s? I can see two at MOST, with the 5 simply selling until existing stock is gone. Two models are my bet: A 5C and 5S. KISS = Apple's DNA.
|
|
|
Post by jdubuc on Jul 29, 2013 8:17:18 GMT -8
iPhone 5C = A6 platform or else there's massive customer confusion. Can you see Apple have a 5C, 5 and 5S? Three kinds of 5s? I can see two at MOST, with the 5 simply selling until existing stock is gone. You really think 5C needs to have A6? I'm not so sure that it matters in practice. iPad is shipping with A6X, while iPad Mini uses A5 so I think there's precedent here. Agreed on the two models -- my money is on "iPhone 5S" and "iPhone 5C", both with Lightning connector and perhaps 4" screens. No idea what these will actually end up being called.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:20:37 GMT -8
Jdubuc: I felt the silent upgrade to the new A5 SoC was a dry run for mass production that could be used in iWatch with both its smaller size and low power (1W) requirements.
Will this be enough for an iPhone running iOS7 and new apps from developers for the next few years?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:22:15 GMT -8
iPhone 5C = A6 platform or else there's massive customer confusion. Can you see Apple have a 5C, 5 and 5S? Three kinds of 5s? I can see two at MOST, with the 5 simply selling until existing stock is gone. You really think 5C needs to have A6? I'm not so sure that it matters in practice. iPad is shipping with A6X, while iPad Mini uses A5 so I think there's precedent here. Agreed on the two models -- my money is on "iPhone 5S" and "iPhone 5C", both with Lightning connector and perhaps 4" screens. No idea what these will actually end up being called. I don't think customers at large make any connection between 5C and the A6, unless this was Mav's subtlety in play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:23:17 GMT -8
There is also a case to be made for this rumored "iPhone 5C" from a bill-of-materials / gross margin perspective. I hypothesized in a previous post that the cost curve on the iPhone 4 & 4S has hit a floor resulting from the glass/aluminum construction as well as the 45nm fab process related to the A4/A5 SoC. iPhone 5C has the potential to punch down through this floor by using a polycarb casing, and an A5 chip manufactured via 32nm fab process. This means that the 5C could eventually achieve greater gross margin than continuing to sell iPhone 4S. Here's a post I made about 4 months ago regarding this -- I should warn, it's a bit technical Food for thought: Have you incorporated this into you FQ4/2013 and FQ1/2014 Revenue and Earnings estimates? I don't recall seeing that you posted one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:23:19 GMT -8
iPhone 5C = A6 platform or else there's massive customer confusion. 5C also means Ming-Chi Kuo was right where it counted yet again. A remarkable, months-early call that was a big hint of Apple's strategy shift. Of course Apple has to actually make it official first. Doubt Dalrymple will yep a product name by itself. Can you see Apple have a 5C, 5 and 5S? Three kinds of 5s? I can see two at MOST, with the 5 simply selling until existing stock is gone. Interesting Mav, the SOC was the first thing I thought of when I heard the 5C name. But then again the "4/4S" are the same product family, but have different SoCs, and likewise its highly probable a iPhone 5S will have an A7 SoC compared to the iPhone 5 A6. So in the end I think the identifier of an iPhone belonging to the 5 family may be based on screen and device dimensions: 4" screen and same width & height (which matches the supposed leaked parts). This would make even more sense if next years iPhone model had a bigger screen and was the first of the iPhone 6 family.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:24:41 GMT -8
Yes it does. iPhone 5 has association with next-gen hardware. It has since the 4S!
Also, if A5, where's the A6 go? This is where Ming-Chi Kuo may have been far ahead of the curve. Maybe it's the _A5_ being booted off the iPhone lineup.
It's technically possible for A5 to run both the 1136x640 Retina Display and iOS 7. But if the 5C is a full-support iOS 7 device? An iPhone 5 in a more colorful, "durable" shell? Never mind price, it'll do very well as long as it's not too high.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:27:49 GMT -8
What's wrong with Apple product discussion? You don't see any edge in discussing the early exit of the 4S? It's tremendously relevant to Apple's GM for the entirety of next fiscal year. No. What is relevant is what Apple is actually shipping. Everything else is barbecue chatter that takes our attention away from the things that count: Apple's 10Qs and conference call statements. I think you confuse relevancy with more fun.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:28:33 GMT -8
I am more than happy to kick my iPhone go pet name to the curb if Apple makes an aggressive play like the 5C. The A6 is a performance monster. Make it a touch more energy efficient and keep LTE, and you have the world's best $0/99 phone hands down.
|
|
|
Post by jdubuc on Jul 29, 2013 8:29:23 GMT -8
Jdubuc: I felt the silent upgrade to the new A5 SoC was a dry run for mass production that could be used in iWatch with both its smaller size and low power (1W) requirements. Will this be enough for an iPhone running iOS7 and new apps from developers for the next few years? That's an excellent point -- the A5 found in the 2013 Apple TV is single-core, so it's unlikely to be powerful enough to drive iOS 7 with all the effects enabled, etc. It would be behind both iPad Mini and the latest iPod Touch generation in terms of compute power. Could make it a poor candidate for use in a phone, but perfect for the watch.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:29:35 GMT -8
What's wrong with Apple product discussion? You don't see any edge in discussing the early exit of the 4S? It's tremendously relevant to Apple's GM for the entirety of next fiscal year. No. What is relevant is what Apple is actually shipping. Everything else is barbecue chatter that takes our attention away from the things that count: Apple's 10Qs and conference call statements. I think you confuse relevancy with more fun. I think you missed my fiscal q4 thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:30:05 GMT -8
Jdubuc: I felt the silent upgrade to the new A5 SoC was a dry run for mass production that could be used in iWatch with both its smaller size and low power (1W) requirements. Will this be enough for an iPhone running iOS7 and new apps from developers for the next few years? There is already a dual core A5 SoC 32nm in the ipod touch & revised iPad 2 (the silent minor refresh which extended its battery life). The Apple TV A5 single core SoC may be a little underpowered for a iPhone?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:30:47 GMT -8
Yes it does. iPhone 5 has association with next-gen hardware. It has since the 4S! Also, if A5, where's the A6 go? This is where Ming-Chi Kuo may have been far ahead of the curve. Maybe it's the _A5_ being booted off the iPhone lineup. It's technically possible for A5 to run both the 1136x640 Retina Display and iOS 7. But if the 5C is a full-support iOS 7 device? An iPhone 5 in a more colorful, "durable" shell? Never mind price, it'll do very well as long as it's not too high. You really think customers connect the chip with the iPhone? I don't, not for 90% of them. That's my point. I believe the iPhone 5 gets booted after supplies run out. Two iPhones, the 5c and 5s.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:31:49 GMT -8
Doesn't necessarily have to be an Apple A5. If an iWatch is more of a nano plus on its own, Apple can easily make derivatives or work with Cortex-A7 tech or something. Power consumption would be a huge deal; performance should be fine. I never hear people say their nano is too slow.
|
|
|
Post by jdubuc on Jul 29, 2013 8:34:05 GMT -8
Food for thought: Have you incorporated this into you FQ4/2013 and FQ1/2014 Revenue and Earnings estimates? I don't recall seeing that you posted one. No, I'm the first to admit that's far, far beyond my competency. It would be futile for me to try to extrapolate the financial impact of such things. I can only speculate on what the hardware engineering minds inside Apple might be thinking about (from my own industry experience) and how that might map into future product line decisions.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:34:20 GMT -8
Mercel, fine I'm a pseudo-tech snob (the same way you care about your car's engine), but again - if A5, what about A6?
5C could have two processor choices, but when was the last time that happened.
Also, if you have the margin headroom and can be more aggressive, would you choose the slower or faster chip to show off with all else but the SoC being equal?
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:37:06 GMT -8
Intraday checkup: AAPL hanging around 447. Above the green line, IIRC!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:38:11 GMT -8
The new APIs enabled for iOS7 developers suggest they'll need more power. This is a Pats question, oh, wrong board. One processor for the 5C. I think it may need to be an A6 but at a minimum A5 dual core.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:38:59 GMT -8
What's wrong with Apple product discussion? You don't see any edge in discussing the early exit of the 4S? It's tremendously relevant to Apple's GM for the entirety of next fiscal year. No. What is relevant is what Apple is actually shipping. Everything else is barbecue chatter that takes our attention away from the things that count: Apple's 10Qs and conference call statements. I think you confuse relevancy with more fun. The rumored (at the time) iPad mini had far more effect on Apples Gross margin percentage falling for FY2013 than anything you could have gleamed from apples 10Qs at this time last year. Rumored future products, whether coming this quarter or next year, are far more important to apples future performance than anything you will find in apples 10Q, which is mostly a reflection of things that have already happened. I'm not saying that apples financial reports aren't worth reading (on the contrary, I agree that every investor should read them) - but dismissing future product discussion as useless is incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by macwire on Jul 29, 2013 8:40:28 GMT -8
There is also a case to be made for this rumored "iPhone 5C" from a bill-of-materials / gross margin perspective. I hypothesized in a previous post that the cost curve on the iPhone 4 & 4S has hit a floor resulting from the glass/aluminum construction as well as the 45nm fab process related to the A4/A5 SoC. iPhone 5C has the potential to punch down through this floor by using a polycarb casing, and an A5 chip manufactured via 32nm fab process. This means that the 5C could eventually achieve greater gross margin than continuing to sell iPhone 4S. Here's a post I made about 4 months ago regarding this -- I should warn, it's a bit technical Great post then. And great post now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2013 8:40:46 GMT -8
I am more than happy to kick my iPhone go pet name to the curb if Apple makes an aggressive play like the 5C. The A6 is a performance monster. Make it a touch more energy efficient and keep LTE, and you have the world's best $0/99 phone hands down. Mercedes could cut the price of its latest/greatest in half and they'd outsell Fiat. So?
|
|
|
Post by jdubuc on Jul 29, 2013 8:41:05 GMT -8
The rumored (at the time) iPad mini had far more effect on Apples Gross margin percentage falling for FY2013 than anything you could have gleamed from apples 10Qs at this time last year. Yep! /Dalrymple
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:43:03 GMT -8
The new APIs enabled for iOS7 developers suggest they'll need more power. This is a Pats question, oh, wrong board. One processor for the 5C. I think it may need to be an A6 but at a minimum A5 dual core. See what I mean? If two iPhone SKUs, then iPhone 5S SoC and the next newest. The last thing I want is for A6 to be left out of any 2013-2014 iPhones. And Apple knows that it can't do some A6X stopgap for the 5S, because Samsung (and Qualcomm) already proved meaningful speed increases are still possible. A6X is "meaningless" anyway since pixel count isn't likely to change. So if 5S/5C only, then A7/A6 only. Apple sacrifices a bit of margin on the SoCs, makes it up in volume.
|
|
|
Post by jdubuc on Jul 29, 2013 8:43:08 GMT -8
Great post then. And great post now. Don't overlook Mercel's theory that this may have actually been intended to power "iWatch". That may make more sense, now that we've seen what's coming with iOS 7.
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jul 29, 2013 8:48:01 GMT -8
There is also a case to be made for this rumored "iPhone 5C" from a bill-of-materials / gross margin perspective. I hypothesized in a previous post that the cost curve on the iPhone 4 & 4S has hit a floor resulting from the glass/aluminum construction as well as the 45nm fab process related to the A4/A5 SoC. iPhone 5C has the potential to punch down through this floor by using a polycarb casing, and an A5 chip manufactured via 32nm fab process. This means that the 5C could eventually achieve greater gross margin than continuing to sell iPhone 4S. Here's a post I made about 4 months ago regarding this -- I should warn, it's a bit technical Yes, it will be about gross margins.
|
|
|
Post by jdubuc on Jul 29, 2013 8:50:45 GMT -8
See what I mean? If two iPhone SKUs, then iPhone 5S SoC and the next newest. The last thing I want is for A6 to be left out of any 2013-2014 iPhones. And Apple knows that it can't do some A6X stopgap for the 5S, because Samsung (and Qualcomm) has already proven meaningful speed increases are still possible. A6X is "meaningless" anyway since pixel count isn't likely to change. Do you think iPhone 5S could ship with an A7 in 2013? Lots of rumors (grain of salt -type stuff) either way -- but sounds like it may not be ready in time.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jul 29, 2013 8:56:29 GMT -8
Why not? Remember, the A4 was ready in early 2010 than shrunk by June.
A5, ready in early 2011, the events surrounding iOS 5 and Steve probably delayed the A5's debut on iPhone.
There has to be a next-gen chip in the 5S. Without a redesign, performance (includes CPU) becomes a key feature. And while A6 is great, the competition has stepped up, iPhone 5 can still bog down, and iOS 7 may be more resource intensive.
|
|
|
Post by jdubuc on Jul 29, 2013 9:02:24 GMT -8
Why not? Remember, the A4 was ready in early 2010 than shrunk by June. A5, ready in early 2011, the events surrounding iOS 5 and Steve probably delayed the A5's debut on iPhone. There has to be a next-gen chip in the 5S. Without a redesign, performance (includes CPU) becomes a key feature. And while A6 is great, the competition has stepped up, iPhone 5 can still bog down, and iOS 7 may be more resource intensive. True. So perhaps the flagship 5S ships with A7, while the 5C sticks with a (modified? die shrunk?) A6? Likely futile to speculate at that level of detail I suppose. iOS 7 certainly is more resource-intensive. It's beta software still, so there's plenty of perf optimization left to do, but it's clear that it's stressing the A6. Also, as has been mentioned, the new APIs (i.e. where the entire UI can effectively be a physics simulation) mean that even simple apps will require more horsepower (and make the cheap Android phones look even more antiquated).
|
|