Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Terrible news. It will just reinforce Cook's strategy and result in fewer computer products that Apple fans actually want to buy. I just want a new Mac Pro. Is that too much to ask of the richest company in the world? Windows here I come... (sadly)

Did you hear the Gruber/Ben Thompson podcast recently? Thompson has a hypothesis that the Mac Pro may have had some major design flaw or something, and was a commercial failure. However, it costs millions and millions to develop a replacement. In either case, the Mac Pro is a fraction of the Mac market, which is a fraction of the Apple market. He thinks it makes very little financial sense to RE-develop the Mac Pro, and that in Cook's Apple, that'll likely be the last Mac Pro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: citysnaps
Crappier products. More Money. Go figure. I guess they are all smarter than we think we are.
Yup.
No matter what moans and grumbles we have on here, they continue to be the world's most proftable company.
So what do we know?!
 
The attitude of many here is a direct reflection of the short-term time orientation of the US and many European countries.

You do all realize that John Sculley also had record profits while he was steering the company into a snow bank. As did Steve Balmer at Microsoft. So no, record revenue and profit do not mean that the company is being positioned for the future.

Also, the majority of complaints are being made about a small portion of their product line; Macs. It is possible for the company to be doing just fine with some products and totally screwing other products.

I know that it is just anecdotal, but I'm sitting on a wad of cash ($3K-4K) that I have ready to buy a new computer, and there is literally nothing that they make right now that I want. Instead, I am figuring out how to extend the life of my Mac Pros and being forced to buy monitors from another company.

All that money could be Apple's. And I know I'm not the only one. Once I start to pull out of the ecosystem, I'm gone. And I won't be alone. But I will be sad that a company that was poised to do "magical" and "incredible" things pissed it all away so that they could increase the money in the bank.

I know that business exist to be profitable, but people remember Steve Jobs, not because of how profitable he made Apple, but because of the things he gave us. Is that how you think people will remember Tim Cook?
 
Yes, but we aren't taking about soaring now are we? Biggest earnings would be part of the burners still going strong. Nice attempt though.

A company can still have strong sales after they've begun to stagnate.

The point that eluded you is that quite often, companies think they're safe on top and stagnate. By the time sales start to go down, it becomes very difficult to reverse and they plummet.

The more people who leave the Apple ecosystem, the more quickly additional people leave it too.

Not saying it will happen, but it certainly can. I already don't see nearly as many MacBooks on campus as I did just a few years ago.
 
This is the ONLY reason Tim Cook still has a job. He is no Steve Jobs. Tim Cook plus Johnny Ive is still no Steve Jobs.

Of course not. Steve Jobs has died. But believe it or not, it is possible to have a successful, high tech, innovative company which doesn't have Steve Jobs as CEO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: citysnaps
Who writes this crap right before an earnings report? Really? You know this for a fact? We shall see. I won't be surprised when we learn that Samsung and other mobile device competition has taken a huge bite out of APPL.

Let's face it. When Jobs was there, the stock soared. Without Jobs, not so much. Good luck with your hype and hypothesis - I really do hope your right. If not, we'll all know who cried wolf.
 
Did you hear the Gruber/Ben Thompson podcast recently? Thompson has a hypothesis that the Mac Pro may have had some major design flaw or something, and was a commercial failure. However, it costs millions and millions to develop a replacement. In either case, the Mac Pro is a fraction of the Mac market, which is a fraction of the Apple market. He thinks it makes very little financial sense to RE-develop the Mac Pro, and that in Cook's Apple, that'll likely be the last Mac Pro.

So a bunch of hacks (Yes, I said it) theorizing some 1/2 baked theory?. If Apple re-designed the MacPro to be 3/4 of the cheese graters they would sell really well to the target professional market. It's not that hard to design a tower server, which is what the Mac Pro essentially is.

The Mac Pro failed precisely because it had no expansion - no way to put those professional cards in it and was not what it's target market wanted. They had expensive PCI cards and other equipment from their old computers. They were not throwing that away for some external stuff or some external enclosure eating up more real estate!
[doublepost=1485895852][/doublepost]
Of course not. Steve Jobs has died. But believe it or not, it is possible to have a successful, high tech, innovative company which doesn't have Steve Jobs as CEO.

Yes but Tim Cook isn't that CEO. Heck, as much as it pains me to say it, Microsoft is doing some innovative thigs as of late under Nadella....
 
  • Like
Reactions: skinned66
So a bunch of hacks (Yes, I said it) theorizing some 1/2 baked theory?. If Apple re-designed the MacPro to be 3/4 of the cheese graters they would sell really well to the target professional market. It's not that hard to design a tower server, which is what the Mac Pro essentially is.

The Mac Pro failed precisely because it had no expansion - no way to put those professional cards in it and was not what it's target market wanted. They had expensive PCI cards and other equipment from their old computers. They were not throwing that away for some external stuff or some external enclosure eating up more real estate!
[doublepost=1485895852][/doublepost]

Yes but Tim Cook isn't that CEO. Heck, as much as it pains me to say it, Microsoft is doing some innovative thigs as of late under Nadella....

I disagree.

Plus, in regards to the Mac Pro thread, it's worth listening to the Talk Show yourself and hearing John Gruber's theory first hand. He doesn't pretend to know, but he does have sources within Apple and makes a living writing about tech, so if anyone could hazard a guess, I'd say he could. Plus he seems neither totally anti Apple under Cook (like some on this forum) nor totally for Apple (he says Siri sucks and AirPod delay was troubling).
 
What you're missing is the piece of the puzzle called "Value". We're not talking just monetary value, although that plays a part of it.

Value is a personal thing. It's something that every individual does when purchasing. Deciding if the price one is being asked to pay for something, offers suitable reward for that person.

Where Mercedez benz is considered a premium car manufacturer, they have gotten that by not only being more expensive, but by also offering sufficient reward for that purchase price. When you pay more for a Mercedes than a Honda, you're getting something more than just a badge name. You're getting better build quality. Better materials. Better parts and equipment. (yeah some of this could be subjective), but at the end of the day, people generally consider that you get more for your money with that mercedes purchase over the Honda purchase, thus offering sufficient reward for the price and justifying the Value.

what we're seeing more and more (at least in online communities, not just MR), is that Apple's prices continue to raise and are demanding that premium and high end price point. But the products they are offering themselves do not stand above and beyond other products in the same categories. Apple is asking for premium price, while offering mostly standard offerings. For many, This is not sufficient reward for price and therefore they do not feel like there's sufficient value in the Apple products to warrant such a premium price.

Should Mercedez come along and release a car that's at the same levels as that honda, but still charge premium price for it, you'd likely hear similar complaints against Mercedez. Why pay more for the same?

Apple Used to be able to command that premium because they had things others' couldn't match. Now that there's parity in the industries Apple runs in, the same premium just makes apple look like they're trying to maximize profit over actually providing that premium product.

Value, or quality is a based on perception. I believe that the iPhone 7 Plus is the best phone in the world supported by a professional-level ecosystem based on American technological prowess. There is no equivalent Apple Store support system out there. I am willing to pay up for all that. I am willing to suffer for an iPad Pro. I demand quality and I believe I get it in an Apple product. You may disagree and I'm fine with that. You may prefer an Android smartphone or a Windows 10 laptop. Great. Competition is essential to create great products. Yes, often the competition explores an outlier technology which can be superior to what Apple products feature. Yes, there can be a sudden push of innovative technologies from competitors that may be superior to what Apple offers. It's part of the extreme competitive environment and I'm understanding about all that.
 
Yup. This article totally omits a mention of earnings and EPS, which are the numbers investors actually care about, in favor of the flashier revenue numbers that matter very little. Thanks for adding to the general confusion, MR.

The original headline actually referred to biggest earnings ever. That's why I made that earlier post, to make it clear that it was revenues that were expected to set a record and not earnings. The headline has since been changed to arguably be more accurate.
 
Did you hear the Gruber/Ben Thompson podcast recently? Thompson has a hypothesis that the Mac Pro may have had some major design flaw or something, and was a commercial failure. However, it costs millions and millions to develop a replacement. In either case, the Mac Pro is a fraction of the Mac market, which is a fraction of the Apple market. He thinks it makes very little financial sense to RE-develop the Mac Pro, and that in Cook's Apple, that'll likely be the last Mac Pro.

I heard that - really interesting stuff. I actually had no idea what Apple were playing at with the Mac Pro (if I had to guess I probably would have said it just didn't sell enough for them to bother updating it) but their idea about a huge balls-up seems convincing.

I guess we'll see soon. When the iMac is refreshed, I think the high end options there might be a telling sign. If there's a high-end, maxed out iMac which will suit the needs of most developers, maybe the Mac Pro has come to the end of its life.
 
What you're missing is the piece of the puzzle called "Value". We're not talking just monetary value, although that plays a part of it.

Value is a personal thing. It's something that every individual does when purchasing. Deciding if the price one is being asked to pay for something, offers suitable reward for that person.

Where Mercedez benz is considered a premium car manufacturer, they have gotten that by not only being more expensive, but by also offering sufficient reward for that purchase price. When you pay more for a Mercedes than a Honda, you're getting something more than just a badge name. You're getting better build quality. Better materials. Better parts and equipment. (yeah some of this could be subjective), but at the end of the day, people generally consider that you get more for your money with that mercedes purchase over the Honda purchase, thus offering sufficient reward for the price and justifying the Value.

what we're seeing more and more (at least in online communities, not just MR), is that Apple's prices continue to raise and are demanding that premium and high end price point. But the products they are offering themselves do not stand above and beyond other products in the same categories. Apple is asking for premium price, while offering mostly standard offerings. For many, This is not sufficient reward for price and therefore they do not feel like there's sufficient value in the Apple products to warrant such a premium price.

Should Mercedez come along and release a car that's at the same levels as that honda, but still charge premium price for it, you'd likely hear similar complaints against Mercedez. Why pay more for the same?

Apple Used to be able to command that premium because they had things others' couldn't match. Now that there's parity in the industries Apple runs in, the same premium just makes apple look like they're trying to maximize profit over actually providing that premium product.

My Apple products cost more upfront, but they have more than paid for themselves in the form of fewer problems and greater productivity overall.

That's all the value i need, and Apple continues to provide that for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chiamac
Don't abuse the term "Innovation".

While these products contain innovative uses of technology, they themselves are not innovative. They are "just another product" in the sea of products in those categories. the Apple watch came long time after other smartwatches, and while it's a great smartwatch doesn't fundamentally do anything that others weren't already doing. Similar with the pencil and yes, even Airpods.

As I said, they might have innovative small features, but the products on a whole aren't innovative.

we on Mac Rumours have gotten so attached to the word Innovative that we constantly throw it around without really understanding what it means. And once you abuse a word long enough in the english language it loses it's impact and meaning.

Those products you listed don't represent innovation. They represent apple entering into markets with parody products, that have one or two innovative features.

EG: The Apple pencil added tilt sensors. The tilt sensors were innovative. However, the idea of providing a active stylus for a touch based computer device is not innovative and has been around for a while.

The Airpods added teh W1 chip. But they are just another bluetooth headset to provide standard audio. A great feature for pairing, and the W1 chip is absolutely innovative, But the idea of bluetooth headsets is not innovative and have been aroudn for a while

Apple watch is a well built piece of smartwatch. But what exactly is innovative about it? there's nothing actually in it that hasn't been done before and isn't already available when it launched. There was very little innovative in the watch even at launch. The screentech, battery tech, smartwatch guts and even functionality isn't anything that wasn't available in some option elsewhere.

/rant over

listen, I'm not a doom sayer here. But I also can't sit here and believe Apple is constantly always innovating on everything. Just because it has an Apple logo on it, doesn't suddenly make it innovative. Heck, not everything needs to be innovative. But we need to stop abusing the heck out of that word.

To me, the Apple Pencil, Airpods and Apple Watch look great and work great and I am getting excellent mileage out of them every day. Moreso than any other product out there.

Maybe that's not enough to qualify as being innovative to you, but it's innovative enough for me.

Like I said - they do things for me that no other alternative can. If that isn't innovation, nothing else is.
 
Blackberry had it's highest earnings, profits, and stock price ever in 2007.

It didn't mean that they were doing well.

https://www.google.ca/finance?chdnp...=NASDAQ:BBRY&ntsp=1&ei=tfSQWImbBI7kjAHjhLKgCQ

Whoa, now Apple is being compared to one of the biggest disasters in the history of high technology! This is a bogus argument. While Apple incrementally built itself into a mobile company RIMM was stuck in a mind-dead rut unable to innovate like Apple and unable to change their antiquated push-button Blackberries. Only Nokia has seen so much shareholder value dissipated by incompetence and inability to adapt to new technologies. To compare Apple, which initiated the touch smartphone revolution, to a company that fought the iPhone revolution is a total misunderstanding of the facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chiamac
Wow! Beat on revenue, EPS, and iPhone units.

Have to wait a few minutes to see what the share basis is for the EPS number, but it looks like net earnings were just a little below last year's first quarter.


EDIT: Yeah, net earnings were down about a half billion dollars YoY. The EPS basis was 5.33 billion shares.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MasterControl
Wow! Beat on revenue, EPS, and iPhone units.

Have to wait a few minutes to see what the share basis is for the EPS number, but it looks net earnings were just a little below last year's first quarter.


Booya Apple!


-Apple "Services" growth is 18% year-over-year!

-246 Billion cash now

At a glance it looks great.

iPad sales down 22% - so all those who are negative ninnies can focus on that and point it out I guess :)


I think the guidance coming on the conference call should be paid attention to. I think they always give good guidance, so it's not going to be a mystery. All doubting Thomases can go somewhere else I hope. I'm headed to get some champagne!
 
Last edited:
Explain what innovation is in the Apple Watch, that wasn't already on the market..

Well, the Apple Watch is awesome in many ways. The other guys design to make bucks. Apple made the Apple Watch to be good, and as a result, it makes bucks. Compare any aspect of your Garmin "smart watch" honestly. I used to really like Garmin for my fitness tracking, but gave it up in favour of Apple Watch, and hey, I do not regret doing that. Maybe other companies can "innovate" and make a better product???? Why don't they do that?

If you think saving $50 bucks is important or you think something out there is actually truly better, please let me know about it because I am easy to please - just give me the best!
 
Explain what innovation is in the Apple Watch, that wasn't already on the market..

It does things no other smart watch can. Granted, part of this is because Apple doesn't allow other companies that much access to iOS, but here's what I am currently doing on my Apple Watch.

1) Apple Pay.

2) Interacting with notifications. I love being able to triage incoming email and dictate short replies to messages from my wrist, especially when my phone is not on me. My previous pebble couldn't do this.

3) Siri on the wrist can be handy. I am using it to calculate discounted prices of products in shopping malls (e.g. "What is 70% of $139”)

4) Use the workout app to track my runs. Loving the heart rate sensor as well (not sure how accurate it is though).

5) Have apps like 1Password and Authy saved to my dock. I can now retrieve passwords and 2FA codes directly from my wrist.

6) It's just an nice watch all round (albeit one I have to charge every 1-2 days).

What other smartwatch does all of the above and more for iOS?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 44267547
The original headline actually referred to biggest earnings ever. That's why I made that earlier post, to make it clear that it was revenues that were expected to set a record and not earnings. The headline has since been changed to arguably be more accurate.

I don't recall what it said before but now it says "best financial results ever," so that still isn't a statement supported by the article. In general discussion the concepts of revenue and earnings are often confused so it does not help when an article is written in such a way that encourages confusion.
 
Booya Apple!


-Apple "Services" growth is 18% year-over-year!

-246 Billion cash now

At a glance it looks great.

iPad sales down 22% - so all those who are negative ninnies can focus on that and point it out I guess :)


I think the guidance coming on the conference call should be paid attention to. I think they always give good guidance, so it's not going to be a mystery. All doubting Thomases can go somewhere else I hope. I'm headed to get some champagne!

Services growth was even more impressive than that when you consider that last year's number included about $550 million accounted for from the Samsung judgment
[doublepost=1485901240][/doublepost]
I don't recall what it said before but now it says "best financial results ever," so that still isn't a statement supported by the article. In general discussion the concepts of revenue and earnings are often confused so it does not help when an article is written in such a way that encourages confusion.

Yeah, that's why I added the arguably qualification. In some ways the financial results were expected to be better, in other ways they weren't expected to be.
 
It's not slave laber, it's just ubiquitous factory working conditions in East Asia. All the mahor smart phone makers use the same factories, so there's nothing special about Apple using them too. It's just fashionable—at least to people who don't know any better—to hate on Apple these days.
Apple has huge margins. If it doesn't bother you that Apple uses slave labor AND still charges as if they are paying real wages than so be it.
 
The point I am making is, they surely have the resources to easily be able to make iThings AND new Mac hardware. You talk like they need to make a decision on what to manufacture like they are a fledgling company with no resources. They are not.

Anyway. It's all moot. Only Apple knows what it's doing but I remain convinced it's on the road to failure ultimately. I am sure Apple had plenty of good years between Jobs leaving and the wheels starting to come off the first time around. No company is invincible.

And I don't say that as someone who wants to watch them crash and burn. Well, maybe just a little bit. It might temper the arrogance a little bit.
Apple has enough resources to tackle many product markets at once yet they have a smaller number of products than every single company they compete against - most of those companies a fraction of their size. They could easily release 30 different Macs per year but choose not to. Jobs put a stop to that when he came back to Apple and they haven't really veered from that course since. I think the writing is on the wall for Macs and any other products that Apple seems to neglect. They can't come out and say they see no future for the Mac but it's fairly obvious that they want mobile devices like iPad pro to completely cannibalize Mac sales in 5-10 years. It's also fairly obvious that the entire PC market will follow suit.
[doublepost=1485902677][/doublepost]
Apple has huge margins. If it doesn't bother you that Apple uses slave labor AND still charges as if they are paying real wages than so be it.
No one is going to respond to your hyperbole. They pay hundreds of thousands of employees in the U.S. and internationally. Those employees are paid real wages and when they leave Apple, they are replaced by others happy to be paid real wages. Supply and demand.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.