PDA

View Full Version : iPhone 5 Cutbacks Simply Due to Initial Shipment Rate Being Too Large to Maintain?




MacRumors
Jan 16, 2013, 09:08 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/16/iphone-5-cutbacks-simply-due-to-initial-shipment-rate-being-too-large-to-maintain/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/11/iphone_5_black_white-150x170.jpgWhile questions remain about claims from earlier this week that Apple has slashed iPhone 5 component orders (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/13/apple-slashes-iphone-5-part-orders-due-to-weak-demand/), CNET is now reporting (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57564139-37/iphone-5s-initial-ramp-too-big-to-sustain-says-displaysearch/) on market research firm DisplaySearch senior vice president Paul Semenza's comments on how the iPhone 5's initial shipment ramp was simply too large to maintain."It was a very quick ramp up. The Q4 [estimate] was about 61 million [for the iPhone 5]...that may be dialed back a bit, but anything near that number is still huge," he said, referring to an estimate of display shipments for the iPhone 5.

"That would support the theory that the ramp was too much to sustain."CNET mentions that the first quarter of sales for the iPhone 4S registered far below that for the iPhone 5, providing little reason for such a strong decline in iPhone 5 interest. Yesterday, Semenza told (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/technology/worry-over-sales-spurs-talk-of-cheaper-iphones.html) The New York Times that Apple had cut its display order from 19 million to 11-to-14 million for January, noting that demand from Apple had been "corrected significantly." But he also mentioned to CNET that he'd heard of changes to orders before the new year.

Theories abound as to the just how much Apple has cut component orders and the reasons for those cuts, but many believe that improving yields and aggressive ramping during the holiday quarter may simply have left Apple with an oversupply of parts heading into the new year. Combining that excess inventory with a natural slowdown following the strong launch quarter for the device could lead to substantial reductions in part production. Still, it seems unlikely that Apple would have miscalculated component demand for the current quarter by the nearly 50% number originally cited by Nikkei and The Wall Street Journal.

Recently, it's been reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/15/iphone-5s-reportedly-slated-for-march-production-with-junejuly-launch/) that Apple is prepping iPhone 5S production for March ahead of a release in June or July, a rapid update cycle that could also be forcing adjustments in Apple's component orders.

Article Link: iPhone 5 Cutbacks Simply Due to Initial Shipment Rate Being Too Large to Maintain? (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/16/iphone-5-cutbacks-simply-due-to-initial-shipment-rate-being-too-large-to-maintain/)



kjs862
Jan 16, 2013, 09:10 AM
I don't think so. Sounds off with supply chain guru Cook in the driver seat.

needfx
Jan 16, 2013, 09:13 AM
I don't think so. Sounds off with supply chain guru Cook in the driver seat.

Maybe he didn't factor-in the higher price when calculating demand estimates

r2shyyou
Jan 16, 2013, 09:15 AM
Here's a good piece to consider:

Via Forbes: Why The WSJ Got The 'iPhone Demand Is Crashing' Story All Wrong (http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/01/15/did-the-wsj-get-punkd-on-apple-or-is-it-rotten-to-the-core/)

Bathplug
Jan 16, 2013, 09:18 AM
Nice spin lol

arcite
Jan 16, 2013, 09:28 AM
The iphone 5 is still selling BIG by any metric, just not quite as big as a couple analysts predicted. Pile in on cheap apple stock I say!

ThatsMeRight
Jan 16, 2013, 09:30 AM
iPhone sales were, without doubt, still extremely high during the holiday season, but I actually hope that sales are lower than expected.

Why? It sends Apple a message that bigger upgrades are needed. A few years ago, I remember Apple as the company that had the best software combined with great hardware.

The iPhone 5 isn't a bad phone. In fact, it's a really good phone. When you asked me in 2010 which phone was the best smartphone? iPhone 4. It had hardware similar or better than that of top competitors and it had just received a huge software upgrade (iOS 4, which brought stuff like multitasking).

Last year, I'd probably still say the iPhone 4S. While Android (and Windows Phone) was gaining terrain, the iPhone 4S still had the best over-all package.

This year, I'd say you can't go wrong with any high-end smartphone: Nokia Lumia 920, HTC One X, Samsung Galaxy S III, iPhone 5. Why? Because of the software: Android has made huge jumps compared to iOS - and Microsoft has brought a refreshing mobile OS to the market.

And look what is coming this year!
Android is getting more refined and more refined, basically, by the day. iOS 7 needs to be big. It needs to change, even if it is only for change's sake. People like new, fresh, shiny things. Apple has been playing it safe with iOS 5 and iOS 6.

And look what is coming on the hardware side: quad-core Cortex A15 CPUs and even more powerful GPUs. Bigger batteries which will probably give us much better battery life. Drastically improved cameras (Nokia PureView, anyone?).

Again: Apple has been playing it safe. They change things, but not too much. iOS 6 is really, really similar to iOS 5. And iOS 5 is quite similar to iOS 4. And being careful with changing things is okay, but once in a while you need to take a risk: you need to throw things overboard and start with a fresh design. Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.

Same on the hardware side: Apple is playing it safe. They gave the iPhone 5 a bigger display: big enough to attract users who want a bigger display, but small enough to make sure they won't lose any customers who preferred the 3.5" display.

Apple in 2008/2009/2010 would have taken more risks. More drastic changes to iOS. Back in 2010, they gave us multitasking while - as it is reported - they weren't willing to give it to us at first. It would make things too complicated. Looking back, giving us multitasking was a great idea because there are now so many great new apps which make great use of it (like Spotify).

Back in 2008, Apple gave us the App Store. According to the news articles I read, Apple - at the time - wasn't really willing to do this (they were 'all-in' on web apps) but if we look back this was a great choice. They took the risk and it paid off.

In 2010 they gave us a 960 x 640 3.5" display. 326 pixels per inch. Such a high pixel density: unheard of.

Apple needs to take risks. Give iOS a redesign so it looks drastically different, but - hopefully - still works quite the same. Add drasticly better internals: push camera technology. Push battery technology. Push CPU and GPU technology. And more importantly: try out new technologies (like Senseg's tactile feedback technology (http://senseg.com/technology/senseg-technology)).

Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

Kwill
Jan 16, 2013, 09:35 AM
Before Samsung became a contender, Apple could leisurely release iPhones on a yearly cycle. Now for every one iPhone model, competitors release two. If the annual cycle continues, Apple will be (and arguably has been) left behind.

Ramp down the spaghetti iPhone. Bolster the features before September. Last year Apple demonstrated this propensity with the iPad.

rmwebs
Jan 16, 2013, 09:44 AM
<snipity snip>

Spot on.

Apple invented a fantastic device, and kept improving it up to the iPhone 4. However since then its stagnated, with very little in the way of improvements.

Over the last 2 years their competitors (namely Samsung) have upped their game, and now have a product that many now consider to be better, or at very least on par.

Apple needs to go back to the drawing board and re-re-invent the iPhone again. There are a slew of features that could be improved/added to the iPhone. Wasting time on things like maps is just reducing the amount of great developers that could be working on more useful apps and features.

I'd hope that the next iPhone looses the trademark dull 'slab of glass, bit of aluminium and a button' image as its getting to be very tired. That and an overhaul of iOS. They cant treat it like Mac OS X and just redesign it once every 12-14 years.

Putting this aside. Even the biggest fanboy has to admit this simple little fact:

Samsung is the best thing that could have happened to the iPhone and Apple. It's forcing them to develop the iPhone instead of doing a slow release cycle (ala iPod). Without Samsung pushing like hell, the iPhone would not be what it is today.

Obviously they cant take all the credit, Google has been doing a bloody fantastic job with Android, and the other big players such as HTC have been releasing some pretty popular products.

OldSchoolMacGuy
Jan 16, 2013, 09:51 AM
No one bothered looking at the numbers here. The numbers in the initial report didn't add up at all. Forget reading into it though, just repost it on Macrumors.

No one also bothered to realize that the report was talking about the screens used which are also used in iPod Touchs and could be related to a cut back of those rather than iPhones.

Northgrove
Jan 16, 2013, 09:55 AM
Nice spin lol
This one or the one in the WSJ report?

I find it hard to judge whether the WSJ report was worded so that it'd work well as simple clickbait, and what's spun or not. There are so many different interests at play here. I'll just watch this unfold without forming an opinion one way or the other for now. We'll know more in just about a week anyway, with the earnings release.

Mr-Kerrse
Jan 16, 2013, 09:58 AM
I dont understand the constant moaning about the iphone 5, i like my iphone 5 & yes it is different to the 4s as it is much faster & i like the screen being longer not wider as i don't want a huge phone.

Stop worrying about the iphone keeping up with the competition & enjoy it for what it is, if you don't like Apple products then buy a different make !

:rolleyes:

blackcrayon
Jan 16, 2013, 10:08 AM
Push CPU and GPU technology. And more importantly: try out new technologies (like Senseg's tactile feedback technology (http://senseg.com/technology/senseg-technology)).

Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

Apple could hardly push CPU and GPU technology any harder, they bought their own chip design companies in house, made a hand laid out exceptional SoC in the A6, and they clearly haven't been messing around when it comes to the GPUs they've been using.

adildacoolset
Jan 16, 2013, 10:08 AM
If Apple get millions of sales of iPhones, it's because of blind followers. But if an android device sells well, it's because "openness wins".

If an iPhone has an unconfirmed, unproven report that it's extremely gigantic order is reduced to just a gigantic order, Apple are sinking (Hust like they always have been in the past, but magically just became the biggest company)

usasalazar
Jan 16, 2013, 10:14 AM
CNET is a joke. A very bad joke.

sulpfiction
Jan 16, 2013, 10:50 AM
Forget the past. Apple is going in a whole new direction in the post-jobs era. More risks will be taken. Some will work, others won't. But be prepared to be surprised more then ever before.

gatearray
Jan 16, 2013, 11:02 AM
... you need to throw things overboard and start with a fresh design. Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.

Ask MS how taking that "risk" is working out for them! Throwing things overboard and starting with a fresh design is what you do when you're desperate, sitting on a failing product line and/or strategy, and generally behind the eight ball, present-day RIM is another example.

Apple sees tremendous growth every quarter, with each new iPhone iteration has sold more units that the previous gens combined. I don't think they'll be adopting your proposed strategy anytime soon. :)

... they weren't willing to give it to us at first. It would make things too complicated. Looking back, giving us multitasking was a great idea because there are now so many great new apps which make great use of it (like Spotify).

Again, your specious reasoning is showing! :)

You say they weren't willing to "give it to us", and even suggest that it turned out to be a "good idea" in the end, as if those mean old jerks at Apple got it wrong.

I say that until iOS4 and the A4 chip, Apple couldn't achieve the desired level of user experience, and only added this functionality in iOS 4 when it was ready for Primetime, as they say.

Honestly, which explanation is more plausible?

applesith
Jan 16, 2013, 11:06 AM
Who cares. The doom and gloom news already dragged my AAPL. Media loves to pick favorites. Where was the reporting that FB search graph is crap and should have been included in FB years ago? No, instead we have to hear about every anecdotal potential hiccup at apple as 100% true facts.

KPOM
Jan 16, 2013, 11:21 AM
Unfortunately, after the whole Dish Hopper fiasco, CNet has some credibility issues.:(

SeniorGato1
Jan 16, 2013, 12:07 PM
I wonder if this has anything to do with the ipod touch as they share the same panels with the iphone 5.

When comparing the ipod touch to an ipad mini, the ipad mini is $30 more and would seem to be the far better deal if I had to choose between the two.

----------

iPhone sales were, without doubt, still extremely high during the holiday season, but I actually hope that sales are lower than expected.

Why? It sends Apple a message that bigger upgrades are needed. A few years ago, I remember Apple as the company that had the best software combined with great hardware..

I can't help but feel that Apple got the message by allowing $127 Walmart deals and low cost carriers selling their flagship phone. The pool of users on premium US networks is exhausted and there's stiffer competition now more than ever.

There's no doubt in my mind Apple had an "incredible" Q4.

However Apple's earnings call will be particularly interesting as to their outlook for Q1 and beyond.

kaldezar
Jan 16, 2013, 12:23 PM
iPhone sales were, without doubt, still extremely high during the holiday season, but I actually hope that sales are lower than expected.

Why? It sends Apple a message that bigger upgrades are needed. A few years ago, I remember Apple as the company that had the best software combined with great hardware.

The iPhone 5 isn't a bad phone. In fact, it's a really good phone. When you asked me in 2010 which phone was the best smartphone? iPhone 4. It had hardware similar or better than that of top competitors and it had just received a huge software upgrade (iOS 4, which brought stuff like multitasking).

Last year, I'd probably still say the iPhone 4S. While Android (and Windows Phone) was gaining terrain, the iPhone 4S still had the best over-all package.

This year, I'd say you can't go wrong with any high-end smartphone: Nokia Lumia 920, HTC One X, Samsung Galaxy S III, iPhone 5. Why? Because of the software: Android has made huge jumps compared to iOS - and Microsoft has brought a refreshing mobile OS to the market.

And look what is coming this year!
Android is getting more refined and more refined, basically, by the day. iOS 7 needs to be big. It needs to change, even if it is only for change's sake. People like new, fresh, shiny things. Apple has been playing it safe with iOS 5 and iOS 6.

And look what is coming on the hardware side: quad-core Cortex A15 CPUs and even more powerful GPUs. Bigger batteries which will probably give us much better battery life. Drastically improved cameras (Nokia PureView, anyone?).

Again: Apple has been playing it safe. They change things, but not too much. iOS 6 is really, really similar to iOS 5. And iOS 5 is quite similar to iOS 4. And being careful with changing things is okay, but once in a while you need to take a risk: you need to throw things overboard and start with a fresh design. Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.

Same on the hardware side: Apple is playing it safe. They gave the iPhone 5 a bigger display: big enough to attract users who want a bigger display, but small enough to make sure they won't lose any customers who preferred the 3.5" display.

Apple in 2008/2009/2010 would have taken more risks. More drastic changes to iOS. Back in 2010, they gave us multitasking while - as it is reported - they weren't willing to give it to us at first. It would make things too complicated. Looking back, giving us multitasking was a great idea because there are now so many great new apps which make great use of it (like Spotify).

Back in 2008, Apple gave us the App Store. According to the news articles I read, Apple - at the time - wasn't really willing to do this (they were 'all-in' on web apps) but if we look back this was a great choice. They took the risk and it paid off.

In 2010 they gave us a 960 x 640 3.5" display. 326 pixels per inch. Such a high pixel density: unheard of.

Apple needs to take risks. Give iOS a redesign so it looks drastically different, but - hopefully - still works quite the same. Add drasticly better internals: push camera technology. Push battery technology. Push CPU and GPU technology. And more importantly: try out new technologies (like Senseg's tactile feedback technology (http://senseg.com/technology/senseg-technology)).

Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

Some very interesting comments here but I must disagree with your comments on Windows 8 which so far seems to be pretty disastrous for MS, the great thing about it is that it is relatively easy to use the Windows 7 parts which work fairly well rather than the new fangled interface which seems to be designed for touch screen pc's which either don't exist or if they did would be an ergonomic nightmare. It's not for nothing that Steve Bulmer is known as the worst CEO in North America

Rogifan
Jan 16, 2013, 12:33 PM
The original thread on MacRumors that has over 1,000 posts was click bait. :rolleyes:

bushido
Jan 16, 2013, 12:37 PM
iPhone sales were, without doubt, still extremely high during the holiday season, but I actually hope that sales are lower than expected.

Why? It sends Apple a message that bigger upgrades are needed. A few years ago, I remember Apple as the company that had the best software combined with great hardware.

The iPhone 5 isn't a bad phone. In fact, it's a really good phone. When you asked me in 2010 which phone was the best smartphone? iPhone 4. It had hardware similar or better than that of top competitors and it had just received a huge software upgrade (iOS 4, which brought stuff like multitasking).

Last year, I'd probably still say the iPhone 4S. While Android (and Windows Phone) was gaining terrain, the iPhone 4S still had the best over-all package.

This year, I'd say you can't go wrong with any high-end smartphone: Nokia Lumia 920, HTC One X, Samsung Galaxy S III, iPhone 5. Why? Because of the software: Android has made huge jumps compared to iOS - and Microsoft has brought a refreshing mobile OS to the market.

And look what is coming this year!
Android is getting more refined and more refined, basically, by the day. iOS 7 needs to be big. It needs to change, even if it is only for change's sake. People like new, fresh, shiny things. Apple has been playing it safe with iOS 5 and iOS 6.

And look what is coming on the hardware side: quad-core Cortex A15 CPUs and even more powerful GPUs. Bigger batteries which will probably give us much better battery life. Drastically improved cameras (Nokia PureView, anyone?).

Again: Apple has been playing it safe. They change things, but not too much. iOS 6 is really, really similar to iOS 5. And iOS 5 is quite similar to iOS 4. And being careful with changing things is okay, but once in a while you need to take a risk: you need to throw things overboard and start with a fresh design. Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.

Same on the hardware side: Apple is playing it safe. They gave the iPhone 5 a bigger display: big enough to attract users who want a bigger display, but small enough to make sure they won't lose any customers who preferred the 3.5" display.

Apple in 2008/2009/2010 would have taken more risks. More drastic changes to iOS. Back in 2010, they gave us multitasking while - as it is reported - they weren't willing to give it to us at first. It would make things too complicated. Looking back, giving us multitasking was a great idea because there are now so many great new apps which make great use of it (like Spotify).

Back in 2008, Apple gave us the App Store. According to the news articles I read, Apple - at the time - wasn't really willing to do this (they were 'all-in' on web apps) but if we look back this was a great choice. They took the risk and it paid off.

In 2010 they gave us a 960 x 640 3.5" display. 326 pixels per inch. Such a high pixel density: unheard of.

Apple needs to take risks. Give iOS a redesign so it looks drastically different, but - hopefully - still works quite the same. Add drasticly better internals: push camera technology. Push battery technology. Push CPU and GPU technology. And more importantly: try out new technologies (like Senseg's tactile feedback technology (http://senseg.com/technology/senseg-technology)).

Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

i kinda agree, every company seems to get "lazy" once they get very popular but it'll bite them in the ass at some point. just ask rim, nokia or even the stuck-in-the90s-music business

every company has its life cycle

nep61
Jan 16, 2013, 12:43 PM
iPhone sales were, without doubt, still extremely high during the holiday season, but I actually hope that sales are lower than expected.

Why? It sends Apple a message that bigger upgrades are needed. A few years ago, I remember Apple as the company that had the best software combined with great hardware.

The iPhone 5 isn't a bad phone. In fact, it's a really good phone. When you asked me in 2010 which phone was the best smartphone? iPhone 4. It had hardware similar or better than that of top competitors and it had just received a huge software upgrade (iOS 4, which brought stuff like multitasking).

Last year, I'd probably still say the iPhone 4S. While Android (and Windows Phone) was gaining terrain, the iPhone 4S still had the best over-all package.

This year, I'd say you can't go wrong with any high-end smartphone: Nokia Lumia 920, HTC One X, Samsung Galaxy S III, iPhone 5. Why? Because of the software: Android has made huge jumps compared to iOS - and Microsoft has brought a refreshing mobile OS to the market.

And look what is coming this year!
Android is getting more refined and more refined, basically, by the day. iOS 7 needs to be big. It needs to change, even if it is only for change's sake. People like new, fresh, shiny things. Apple has been playing it safe with iOS 5 and iOS 6.

And look what is coming on the hardware side: quad-core Cortex A15 CPUs and even more powerful GPUs. Bigger batteries which will probably give us much better battery life. Drastically improved cameras (Nokia PureView, anyone?).

Again: Apple has been playing it safe. They change things, but not too much. iOS 6 is really, really similar to iOS 5. And iOS 5 is quite similar to iOS 4. And being careful with changing things is okay, but once in a while you need to take a risk: you need to throw things overboard and start with a fresh design. Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.

Same on the hardware side: Apple is playing it safe. They gave the iPhone 5 a bigger display: big enough to attract users who want a bigger display, but small enough to make sure they won't lose any customers who preferred the 3.5" display.

Apple in 2008/2009/2010 would have taken more risks. More drastic changes to iOS. Back in 2010, they gave us multitasking while - as it is reported - they weren't willing to give it to us at first. It would make things too complicated. Looking back, giving us multitasking was a great idea because there are now so many great new apps which make great use of it (like Spotify).

Back in 2008, Apple gave us the App Store. According to the news articles I read, Apple - at the time - wasn't really willing to do this (they were 'all-in' on web apps) but if we look back this was a great choice. They took the risk and it paid off.

In 2010 they gave us a 960 x 640 3.5" display. 326 pixels per inch. Such a high pixel density: unheard of.

Apple needs to take risks. Give iOS a redesign so it looks drastically different, but - hopefully - still works quite the same. Add drasticly better internals: push camera technology. Push battery technology. Push CPU and GPU technology. And more importantly: try out new technologies (like Senseg's tactile feedback technology (http://senseg.com/technology/senseg-technology)).

Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

While I agree with nearly everything you mention-----Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.--- as far as I'm concerned, Windows 8 has been a bit of a flop... unless I've been looking in the wrong places for their sales numbers and / or positive reviews....

And didn't both Verizon and AT&T say that iPhone 5 sales were off the charts when first released

nep61
Jan 16, 2013, 01:04 PM
No one bothered looking at the numbers here. The numbers in the initial report didn't add up at all. Forget reading into it though, just repost it on Macrumors.

No one also bothered to realize that the report was talking about the screens used which are also used in iPod Touchs and could be related to a cut back of those rather than iPhones.

You're right....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/01/15/did-the-wsj-get-punkd-on-apple-or-is-it-rotten-to-the-core/

jclardy
Jan 16, 2013, 01:07 PM
I don't think so. Sounds off with supply chain guru Cook in the driver seat.

Does it though? Maybe he purchased the huge order to get lower prices. Now they cut it in half since they have all the devices they need.

Lower per-device cost + meeting holiday demand sounds like a good plan to me.

darkplanets
Jan 16, 2013, 01:19 PM
We don't know the reasons, and probably won't. Whether it's this or inaccuracies in use for displays, or other factors, it was wholly irresponsible for media outlets (even Forbes and WSJ) to publish the drivel with the notion of causality without fact checking. Same goes for MR. Shame on you for posting drivel in the name of clicks without substantiating if it is a possibility. Unless the causality is verified, don't display it as fact.

What is apparent, and was from the start, was that these media outlets were probably unwittingly playing into someone's scheme to short the stock. This hasn't been the first time it's happened to Apple, and is pretty common with most high-value stocks.

firewood
Jan 16, 2013, 01:24 PM
Apple needed to order components ahead and produce iPhones and iPod Touches faster than they could sell them in order to stock up inventory for the holiday buying rush. Now that the holiday rush is over, sales may still be decent, but Apple no longer needs to build inventory ahead of a new rush. Sales normally taper for all vendors after the holidays. Joe consumer is spent out and looking at some just arriving scary credit card bills (but rinse-and-repeat next year).

However the stock price swings are likely mostly due to market manipulation combined with investor psychosis.

OldSchoolMacGuy
Jan 16, 2013, 01:25 PM
We don't know the reasons, and probably won't. Whether it's this or inaccuracies in use for displays, or other factors, it was wholly irresponsible for media outlets (even Forbes and WSJ) to publish the drivel with the notion of causality without fact checking. Same goes for MR. Shame on you for posting drivel in the name of clicks without substantiating if it is a possibility. Unless the causality is verified, don't display it as fact.

What is apparent, and was from the start, was that these media outlets were probably unwittingly playing into someone's scheme to short the stock. This hasn't been the first time it's happened to Apple, and is pretty common with most high-value stocks.

Fact checking? HA! The news media does nothing of the sort these days. There is no accountability and the whole idea is to be the first to break the story.

Look at Sandy Hook. One media outlet says the shooter is the real shooter's brother. Everyone else reports it too without bothering to check a thing. Facebook pages go up calling for the kid's death. He gets death threats and hundreds of messages from people that all believe he's the killer. Hours later, the media finds out they're wrong when the police correct them. Anyone issue an apology? Hell no. They aren't accountable for their actions.

SockRolid
Jan 16, 2013, 01:31 PM
[...] and the other big players such as HTC have been releasing some pretty popular products.

Popular? Compared to what, exactly? Are you talking about HTC smartphones?
HTC's Q3 2012 smartphone shipments were down more than 42% from Q3 2011.

From The Next Web:
Q3 research figures from IDC give HTC a 4 percent share of quarterly shipments with 7.3 million smartphone units shipped. That’s a 42.5 percent drop on the 12.7 million devices a year previous, when it held a 10.3 percent share of overall shipments.

Full story: http://thenextweb.com/asia/2012/10/26/htc-q4-2012-forecast/

Oh, and HTC's overall income dropped 79% year-over-year in Q3 2012.

From Android Community:
It is quite easy to see where this substantial drop is a serious problem for HTC. Even though HTC predicted decreased numbers, seeing them finalized on paper is a scary thing.

Full Story: http://androidcommunity.com/htc-q3-income-down-79-year-on-year-20121008/

Peace
Jan 16, 2013, 01:41 PM
Here's a good piece to consider:

Via Forbes: Why The WSJ Got The 'iPhone Demand Is Crashing' Story All Wrong (http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/01/15/did-the-wsj-get-punkd-on-apple-or-is-it-rotten-to-the-core/)

And it's perpetuated by bloggers that want to drive the price of Apple down in order to make money on the stock's rise due to stories like this.

Why isn't this story front page ?

TallManNY
Jan 16, 2013, 01:55 PM
While I agree with nearly everything you mention-----Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.--- as far as I'm concerned, Windows 8 has been a bit of a flop... unless I've been looking in the wrong places for their sales numbers and / or positive reviews....

And didn't both Verizon and AT&T say that iPhone 5 sales were off the charts when first released

Apple can't really take those types of risks with the iPhone. To even hope to meet initial launch demands, they have to order 30 million or more iPhones. They can't both order that amount and take a risk in the same product. To do so would be to bet the company if the next iPhone didn't sell.

Samsung gets to make a million of sixteen different form factors and test to see if it will sell. They didn't have to make 30 million Notes and then hope there was a market. So Samsung, while large, is actually more nimble.

If Apple wants to get nimble like that, they are going to have to increase their product lines.

r2shyyou
Jan 16, 2013, 02:11 PM
And it's perpetuated by bloggers that want to drive the price of Apple down in order to make money on the stock's rise due to stories like this.

Why isn't this story front page ?

I suppose it's because it hasn't been proven. But I agree.

EDIT: Hmm...

So here is our logic to being patient. It is threefold:


Apple had an enormous amount of call options speculation related to its Summer surge
A huge share of this was calls with a strike of around the current price of $550 and higher that expire January 19 2013
The institutional money managers that wrote those call options and bought common stock to cover will make a lot of money if a) those options expire worthless, and then b) Apple runs after that expiration date

What kind of money are we talking? Let's use the more than 60,000 calls with a $600 strike price. If Apple goes to $700 before January 19, then those options have an intrinsic value of:

60,000 (call options) X 100 (shares per option) X $100 (intrinsic value per share) = $600,000,000

Six hundred million dollars not in the institutional call writers' pockets. Whereas, if Apple stays put, then runs to $700 after the expiration date, the call writers get the capital gain from the common stock they covered with, AND the entire amount for which they sold the option. And this is only one strike price we calculated - together this is billions of dollars for a two month delay in an Apple surge.
Source: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1002601-buy-apple-on-january-18

KdParker
Jan 16, 2013, 02:14 PM
Forget the past. Apple is going in a whole new direction in the post-jobs era. More risks will be taken. Some will work, others won't. But be prepared to be surprised more then ever before.

Lets hope so, I want the phone of the future now. (at least sometime within the next year)

needfx
Jan 16, 2013, 02:22 PM
Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

great lump of text, nice rhythm & pace, valid points, one objection.

they took risks on the software side with maps & passbook. they flopped.

baryon
Jan 16, 2013, 02:26 PM
I would be surprised if the iPhone 5 didn't sell well enough, I just see so many people with them in their hands on the street.

I think that it's normal that newer iPhones don't have as many revolutionary features as older ones: it was the same with computers and operating systems. You always first think of the bigger, more obvious things, and then you refine them. You can't keep finding bigger, obvious things all the time, since there aren't that many.

I think that a smartphone today does pretty much everything you need, and that it needs to be made more portable, longer-lasting and higher quality. But other than that, feature-wise, there's not much that's really needed (such as multi tasking, a camera, GPS, etc…).

Rogifan
Jan 16, 2013, 03:14 PM
CNBC had an article on their site asking if there's anyone left to buy iPhones. The premise is the smartphone market is becoming saturated. But why just ask this question of Apple? If the smartphone market is saturated then wouldn't that impact Samsung's Galaxy line of phones too? And other higher end phones? Samsung has stated that their surge in profits is due in large part to sales of Galaxy phones. Why does the market saturation concern only seem to center around Apple?

FireFish
Jan 16, 2013, 03:31 PM
:apple:

iMikeT
Jan 16, 2013, 03:47 PM
I was thinking something along the lines of this article that the cutbacks were due to either Apple all ready meeting a certain level of demand or just ordering too much to begin with.


No one bothered looking at the numbers here. The numbers in the initial report didn't add up at all. Forget reading into it though, just repost it on Macrumors.

No one also bothered to realize that the report was talking about the screens used which are also used in iPod Touchs and could be related to a cut back of those rather than iPhones.


Exactly. It's the sad state of journalism in the modern day. Put out an eye catching headline that gets clicks instead of reporting the facts. What's worse is something like this gives the Apple haters more fuel for their hate.


Ask MS how taking that "risk" is working out for them! Throwing things overboard and starting with a fresh design is what you do when you're desperate, sitting on a failing product line and/or strategy, and generally behind the eight ball, present-day RIM is another example.

Apple sees tremendous growth every quarter, with each new iPhone iteration has sold more units that the previous gens combined. I don't think they'll be adopting your proposed strategy anytime soon. :)



Again, your specious reasoning is showing! :)

You say they weren't willing to "give it to us", and even suggest that it turned out to be a "good idea" in the end, as if those mean old jerks at Apple got it wrong.

I say that until iOS4 and the A4 chip, Apple couldn't achieve the desired level of user experience, and only added this functionality in iOS 4 when it was ready for Primetime, as they say.

Honestly, which explanation is more plausible?


I agree with everything you said. And as I usually say, it's easy to criticize something in hindsight long AFTER a product has been on the market and after the implementations are mainstream and seem "obvious". Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Apple as I am equally critical of them as I am of Microsoft or Google, but I find Apple to be the low-hanging fruit that people pick (yes every pun intended) simply because they came out with products that standardized the industry and the competition simply copies and builds on.

I think the people who make the most criticism do so from their armchair and are merely consumers with very narrow minds and fail to see the much larger picture. It's easy to criticize the work of others, how about these critics put their ideas out there for a change?

firewood
Jan 16, 2013, 04:02 PM
Question: If big institutional investors who wrote all those soon-expiring call options are trying to manipulate the AAPL price down to render those options worthless, why aren't the investors who bought all those options trying to drive the price up and thus profit?

swagi
Jan 16, 2013, 04:56 PM
Question: If big institutional investors who wrote all those soon-expiring call options are trying to manipulate the AAPL price down to render those options worthless, why aren't the investors who bought all those options trying to drive the price up and thus profit?

Because there are thousands of small investors that tried to make a fast buck on the "the only way is up"-talk.

That's why people like me prefer the term "bubble" for AAPL. Look at the environment, look at the competition - iPhones won't perform bad in the future as they are not bad phones.

But they won't dominate the market, as the competitors are outpacing them in innovation. Next year this time we'll be talking octo-core and FullHD displays for the sheet fanatics - you know, those uninformed guys shelling out the bucks for beige boxes about a decade ago. Not that I'd prefer a phone over sheet talk - I prefer my Galaxy for giving me freedom to use services at will and not being 'locked'. Is there anything like AirDroid on iOS?

nep61
Jan 16, 2013, 06:10 PM
CNBC had an article on their site asking if there's anyone left to buy iPhones. The premise is the smartphone market is becoming saturated. But why just ask this question of Apple? If the smartphone market is saturated then wouldn't that impact Samsung's Galaxy line of phones too? And other higher end phones? Samsung has stated that their surge in profits is due in large part to sales of Galaxy phones. Why does the market saturation concern only seem to center around Apple?

Because Apple puts out 1 phone at a time.... Samsung probably has over 15 on the market at any one time.... The refresh rate on new products is probably something like every 3 or 4 weeks. Just a guess....
The people who don't want a smartphone or who are intimidated by one have a choice. That choice takes Apple out of the equation. The choice, is a Samsung of some sort....

Then you have the Mac haters... Who think Apple is a mind controlling BIG BROTHER type company.... Maybe, but I'll buy the 5S when it arrives.

darkplanets
Jan 16, 2013, 07:38 PM
I suppose it's because it hasn't been proven. But I agree.

EDIT: Hmm...

Source: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1002601-buy-apple-on-january-18

As I said before, shorting the stock.

All part of the game.

The thing that concerns me was how no one even questioned the motives when the original story broke. The sliding stock price was a red flag.

Glideslope
Jan 16, 2013, 08:02 PM
As I said before, shorting the stock.

All part of the game.

The thing that concerns me was how no one even questioned the motives when the original story broke. The sliding stock price was a red flag.

Yup.

Buy now. The rise has started. +20 today.
It's going to go up fast on the 23rd. :apple:

somethingelsefl
Jan 16, 2013, 09:25 PM
Look at Sandy Hook. One media outlet says the shooter is the real shooter's brother. Everyone else reports it too without bothering to check a thing. Facebook pages go up calling for the kid's death. He gets death threats and hundreds of messages from people that all believe he's the killer. Hours later, the media finds out they're wrong when the police correct them. Anyone issue an apology? Hell no. They aren't accountable for their actions.


This is way off-topic and unrelated to the post. You should really start a separate thread to talk about stuff like this.

----------

Ask MS how taking that "risk" is working out for them! Throwing things overboard and starting with a fresh design is what you do when you're desperate, sitting on a failing product line and/or strategy, and generally behind the eight ball, present-day RIM is another example.

Well said. There are a lot of people in here that are applying 20/20 hindsight to future events and don't have a realistic of view of Apple's implementation.

Ryth
Jan 17, 2013, 12:25 AM
Apple needs to take risks. Give iOS a redesign so it looks drastically different, but - hopefully - still works quite the same. Add drasticly better internals: push camera technology. Push battery technology. Push CPU and GPU technology. And more importantly: try out new technologies (like Senseg's tactile feedback technology (http://senseg.com/technology/senseg-technology)).

Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

Um...I guess you missed that whole Jony Ive thing and how he's taking over as head of Human Interface at Apple.

----------


But they won't dominate the market, as the competitors are outpacing them in innovation.

Still waiting to see this 'innovation' everyone is talking about that the competitors are outpacing them on.

Fist bumping two phones together is not innovation. Nor is making commercials that show a guy getting injected by 'droid' blood innovation.

Notice how this 'innovation' from the competition never really shows...what's the word I'm looking for...oh yah...innovation.

Doesn't matter if they have better specs. Specs don't mean anything when the software is crap and is bloated and slow.

----------

While I agree with nearly everything you mention-----Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.--- as far as I'm concerned, Windows 8 has been a bit of a flop... unless I've been looking in the wrong places for their sales numbers and / or positive reviews....

Windows 8 and Windows Phone are great. The issue is again, the education of the user for both of these just isn't there.

swagi
Jan 17, 2013, 02:25 AM
Still waiting to see this 'innovation' everyone is talking about that the competitors are outpacing them on.


Ever checked out GoogleNow? - Yeah, thought so.

Ignorance is a bliss...

SILen(e
Jan 17, 2013, 05:38 AM
The iPhone 5 isn't a bad phone. In fact, it's a really good phone. When you asked me in 2010 which phone was the best smartphone? iPhone 4. It had hardware similar or better than that of top competitors and it had just received a huge software upgrade (iOS 4, which brought stuff like multitasking).

Last year, I'd probably still say the iPhone 4S. While Android (and Windows Phone) was gaining terrain, the iPhone 4S still had the best over-all package.

This year, I'd say you can't go wrong with any high-end smartphone: Nokia Lumia 920, HTC One X, Samsung Galaxy S III, iPhone 5. Why? Because of the software: Android has made huge jumps compared to iOS - and Microsoft has brought a refreshing mobile OS to the market.

But this is nothing that Apple could change. The first generations of the iPhone have been so much better than the competition, because the competition sucked! Android was ugly and half-baked before Android 4.0 and 4.1, they had some features that every Android fanboy used as a club to bash Apple with, but many other features were not very good implemented (Copy&Paste before they let them inspire^^ by the implementation of that feature in iOS).

Apple can't just go and build an Octacore iPhone and let it run the real OS X to have superior hardware and software in the iPhone 6, they are bound by the same limitations that every other company is bound by - physics, economics etc...

Completely revamping iOS would alienate the whole customerbase they have aquired with the iPhone, just like everybody hates Windows 8 because it is so un-Windows7-y.

And look what is coming this year!
Android is getting more refined and more refined, basically, by the day. iOS 7 needs to be big. It needs to change, even if it is only for change's sake. People like new, fresh, shiny things. Apple has been playing it safe with iOS 5 and iOS 6.

Apple added a cloud-storage solution that is unrivalled in its ease of use, a personal assistant that is almost unrivalled in its usefullness, because Google Now runs on only 10% of all Android devices. And iOS 6 also has some great features that are often overlooked when bashing Mapgate.

And look what is coming on the hardware side: quad-core Cortex A15 CPUs and even more powerful GPUs. Bigger batteries which will probably give us much better battery life. Drastically improved cameras (Nokia PureView, anyone?).

So, how many games on Android look better than the best iPhone games? All that power in those Android devices isn't used, because no developer wants to limit their possible customerbase to the few guys who bought device X. The iPhone 5 has one of the fastest CPUs and its GPU is also only rivalled by the Adreno 320. The bigger batteries in Android devices are used to power the bigger screen, improved battery life is something you only get when you use one of these devices to phone someone. Actually, the iPhone 5 has one of the longest battery lifes of recent smartphones, easily beating the Galaxy S 3.

Again: Apple has been playing it safe. They change things, but not too much. iOS 6 is really, really similar to iOS 5. And iOS 5 is quite similar to iOS 4. And being careful with changing things is okay, but once in a while you need to take a risk: you need to throw things overboard and start with a fresh design. Start with drastically new features. You need to take a risk like Microsoft did with Windows 8.

And Windows 8 is such an extraordinary success that... oh, it isn't...

If you change too much stuff, people will not buy it. They will still go to McDonald's even if there's another fast food restaurant next to it - because they know what to expect at McDonald's and thats something people like.

Same on the hardware side: Apple is playing it safe. They gave the iPhone 5 a bigger display: big enough to attract users who want a bigger display, but small enough to make sure they won't lose any customers who preferred the 3.5" display.

Apple in 2008/2009/2010 would have taken more risks. More drastic changes to iOS. Back in 2010, they gave us multitasking while - as it is reported - they weren't willing to give it to us at first. It would make things too complicated. Looking back, giving us multitasking was a great idea because there are now so many great new apps which make great use of it (like Spotify).

Before iOS 4, everybody was laughing at Apple because iOS lacked multitasking, so they HAD to implement it. Adding it wasn't a risk, it was a necessity.

Back in 2008, Apple gave us the App Store. According to the news articles I read, Apple - at the time - wasn't really willing to do this (they were 'all-in' on web apps) but if we look back this was a great choice. They took the risk and it paid off.

And without an App Store, the usefullness of the iPhone was lacking, because web apps were just not that great. The App Store had to be added!

In 2010 they gave us a 960 x 640 3.5" display. 326 pixels per inch. Such a high pixel density: unheard of.

Because the iPhone 3GS has been laughed at due to the lower resolution display - the new display had to be added, it wasn't a risk. And it is something that can't be achieved another time for quite a while, because there are no 652 dpi displays available at the moment and using the ~ 440 dpi display that will be used in the 2013 Android devices would require lots of changes to iOS and scaling the apps.

Apple needs to take risks. Give iOS a redesign so it looks drastically different, but - hopefully - still works quite the same. Add drasticly better internals: push camera technology. Push battery technology. Push CPU and GPU technology. And more importantly: try out new technologies (like Senseg's tactile feedback technology (http://senseg.com/technology/senseg-technology)).

They are pushing CPU and GPU technology, they got one of the best smartphone cameras on the market, only rivalled by "let's shoot our PureView commercials with a DSLR" Nokia, you can't push battery technology, because you can't just invent a device that teleports eletrons directly from the powerplant to the battery of a smartphone - the laws of physics exist and even Apple has to play by their rules.

Come on, Apple. Take some risks. Up the game.

My commentary in red.

Samsung is the best thing that could have happened to the iPhone and Apple. It's forcing them to develop the iPhone instead of doing a slow release cycle (ala iPod). Without Samsung pushing like hell, the iPhone would not be what it is today.

We got the iPhone 3G without Android even existing, we got the iPhone 3GS with only the Google G1 (and some other unimportant devices) existing and when the iPhone 4 was released the only important device for Android was the Motorola Droid (which was only available in the US and arrived in the EU much later). HTC Desire, the first truly great Android device and the Galaxy S have been just available for a few months (the SGS only a few weeks!), so the iPhone 4 has been developed without their influence.

And there have been lots of improvements from the iPhone 2G to the iPhone 4.


I prefer my Galaxy for giving me freedom to use services at will and not being 'locked'. Is there anything like AirDroid on iOS?

Wireless File Transfer: iTunes
Desktop SMS Management: Messages for OS X
Organize music, photos, videos etc.. : iTunes + Photostream

Ever checked out GoogleNow? - Yeah, thought so.

Ignorance is a bliss...

Great, so 10% of all Android users will be able to use it, because it requires Android 4.1 or higher.


Innovation is not only creating something new but also bringing this new feature to the masses!

This is something where Apple excels!

By this moment, there should be about a hundred million devices that feature Siri out there, i'd bet the number is even higher (iPhone 4S, iPad 3, iPhone 5, iPad Mini, iPad 4 - i'd say 150 million devices)

loybond
Jan 17, 2013, 10:36 AM
I think sales are slowing down. Seeing price cuts for the first time has got to mean something... Best Buy (Canada) now has the 32GB iPhone 5 for $199.

ABG
Jan 18, 2013, 06:35 AM
Great, so 10% of all Android users will be able to use it, because it requires Android 4.1 or higher.


Innovation is not only creating something new but also bringing this new feature to the masses!

This is something where Apple excels!

By this moment, there should be about a hundred million devices that feature Siri out there, i'd bet the number is even higher (iPhone 4S, iPad 3, iPhone 5, iPad Mini, iPad 4 - i'd say 150 million devices)

When Siri was launched and only worked on the 4S and not the 12 month old iPhone 4 how is that different from your point about new GoogleNow only working on Android 4.1 and higher?

Also - I assume Siri is awesome in the US but in the UK (and I'm guessing the rest of the world) it both sucks and blows. So your 150 million devices point isn't really valid as Siri's usefulness varies in different countries. IMO.

SILen(e
Jan 18, 2013, 12:30 PM
1. Google Now is also only fully funtional in a limited number of countries, just like Siri.
2. Android 4.1 is now 6 months old and there are no more than 40 million devices featuring Google Now (If we calculate with 400 million Android devices. I doubt that most people with older devices will still use the marketplace/Play anymore regularly, so 400 million devices would be a very high number, i would say it's smaller)
In the last quarter of 2011, Apple sold 37 million iPhones, most of them iPhone 4S.
In the following quarter, Apple sold 35 million iPhones, again, most of them iPhone 4S.

6 months after the release of Siri, 55-60 million devices capable of it.

And of course, there's a reason that the iPhone 4 didn't get Siri, because it lacked the Audience voice recognition technology, which would have made Siri much less usable on an iPhone 4.

The small number of devices with Google Now is not because of technical limitations but because Samsung and other companies are to lazy/cheap to port Android 4.1 to their only a year old devices.

JacquesP
Jan 19, 2013, 05:13 AM
Android/Google must not become the new Windows a-like copy on cheap monopoly, we, customers, users really do not need that again.

The only thing I don't like bout the 5 is the soft aluminum: Despite careful handling and cases it got so many scratches already :-/ The stainless steel and glass combination of the 4's was really much less scratch sensitive, ... :mad:

loybond
Jan 19, 2013, 02:10 PM
Yeah, why couldn't they have made a stronger alloy, have Lian-Li provide their aluminum (they have cool anodization that goes under the surface) or just used steel, like the 4/4S band?

Android/Google must not become the new Windows a-like copy on cheap monopoly, we, customers, users really do not need that again.

The only thing I don't like bout the 5 is the soft aluminum: Despite careful handling and cases it got so many scratches already :-/ The stainless steel and glass combination of the 4's was really much less scratch sensitive, ... :mad:

syd430
Jan 19, 2013, 06:55 PM
The iphone 5 is still selling BIG by any metric, just not quite as big as a couple analysts predicted. Pile in on cheap apple stock I say!

Actually it is the expectations of future cash flows that determines the stock price, not what you think is a reasonable profit. A relatively low P/E =/= cheap stock if earnings aren't in line with expectations.

osaga
Jan 20, 2013, 01:37 PM
If Apple get millions of sales of iPhones, it's because of blind followers. But if an android device sells well, it's because "openness wins".


If an android device sells well, its because 50% of the population hates apple, not because they know android to be better.

If apple wants to win, they need to control the ecosystem. No one wants to change their email address, loose their contacts, loose they're documents, photos, bookmarks, calenders, notes, passbook, apps, or music. They need to suck people in, and get them stuck there.

I think apple should buy mail.com. I wouldn't mind a mail.com email address.

On a side note:
They also need to partner with verizon, and provide funding for them to roll out more fiber optic internet connections to homes. Very high speed internet is the only way for us to have a pleasurable television experience. And the rest of the world already has very high speed internet.