Apple Says 'You're Only as Good as the Last Thing You Did' Amid Sales Slowdown

[Solomani]

Actions speak louder than words...

R&D spent was over $10 billion this year. Compared to $3 billion four years ago.

R&D takes time, and patience. Just like Google, who has spent tons of money researching dozens of things, all those billions that Apple is throwing into research will eventually yield a few successful products…. in the near future.

 

[DevNull0]

Feeling the pain. I decided a little back on a $500 HP business desktop. I thought business would mean NO TRASHWARE but was wrong.
STEP 1 download a better browser

STEP 2 download Steam

STEP 3 run steam

STEP 4 realize from funky Steam ads that I had a virus PREINSTALLED on my machine

STEP 5 wish I had put the $500 toward a new Mac

STEP 6 check performance benchmarks on new Macs (thanks www.barefeats.com)

STEP 7 realize that even $1200 new Macs hardly outperform my 6 year old mac for what I do

STEP 8 realize the wasted $500 was better than a wasted $700

STEP 9 be glad I didn't get a Mac

STEP 10 feel guilty for feeling feeling glad

Tim Cook could use a lobotomy. After suffering through lack of product updates I may be better off with one too.

STEP 1 really should be don't buy anything from HP

STEP 2 with any pre-installed windows is format the the hard drive and install a clean windows (I believe with windows 10, MS has an online tool to make this step very easy).

Other than that, if you want quality, stay in the Mac price range. Macs really aren't overpriced, they just under-deliver. For a sleek business machine, the Dell XPS line is humiliating Timmy in every way. Personally, I prefer gaming optimized machines, the MSI/Razer/Alienware machines in the price range of a low end mac are amazing machines. The Razers even follow Apples thin sleek machine philosophy but with serious power and performance.

 

[manu chao]

This is the sort of stupidity that is killing Apple. Every other computer company in the world updates their machines with modern hardware as it comes out. They don't except anyone to upgrade to every version, but the people to are buying "today" are buying the latest.

Funny how Apple has survived for so long while its annual upgrade cycles have been killing the company for almost the last two decades. There is value in the simplicity of having only annual product updates, part of it even plays a role without people being aware of it (ie, it works subconsciously). It has the downside of not all parts of the product being as good as they could be. Apple has played that game for many years and the vast majority of them it has come out on top.

 

[smacrumon]

The message from MacRumors is loud and clear on Apple products:

​

 

[theluggage]

"Some critics believe that Apple...wrongly placing its focus on areas like Apple Watch bands"

Or watches. Or cars.

Thing is, with all Apple's resources, they should be perfectly capable of developing watches & cars etc. without starving their established product lines of development. Samsung make washing machines, but their new phones are still more exiting-looking than the iPhone 7.

Computers and phones might not be the booming markets they once were, but I'm pretty sure they'll still be selling in 3 years time - and Apple should be in a good position to end up with the lion's share of the computer market provided they don't drop the ball.

As for tablets: I suspect the dedicated "tablet" market is in the process of being squashed between large-screen phones on one side and "convertibles" running desktop OSs on the other. Tablets have their niche, but for some things you need a proper computer. One of the reasons that the iPad is still so successful is that it has very little competition - c.f. phones where the iPhone faces a serious run for its money. Is that because the iPad is so brilliant - or is it because the market is too limited to support much competition and the iPad is a big fish in a shrinking pond and what people actually want is convertibles that can run real software?

Dear Tim: marketing the iPad as making regular computers obsolete when you're a major manufacturer of regular computers may not be the smartest move. Personally, if I wanted to dump my laptop for a tablet, I'd choose a convertible - and Apple don't make those.

 

[DevNull0]

R&D spent was over $10 billion this year. Compared to $3 billion four years ago.

R&D takes time, and patience. Just like Google, who has spent tons of money researching dozens of things, all those billions that Apple is throwing into research will eventually yield a few successful products…. in the near future.

How much time and R&D budget does it cost to put a modern high-res AMOLED screen into a cell phone? How much time and R&D budget does it take to take a macbook pro and add an intel reference design Skylake architecture, complete with plenty of modern ports (USB 3.1, TB3, USB-C connectors, etc).

In 5 years, we've seen them piss away those billions on so-called R&D while their old products just keep rotting on the shelf year after year after year after year after year.

Bigger and smaller versions of the same old stale products, and macs that are slower today than they were in 2012. Wow. Awesome.

This is becoming more and more appropriate:

 

[44267547]

Part of me wants to be on the defensive for Apple being I am heavily invested in them financially and in their hardware line, but I also realize Apple needs to beat up by the consumer to realize they HAVE to meet the demands and needs of the current market, in which they are extremely tardy in doing so.

 

[gkarris]

In a new Fast Company interview alongside CEO Tim Cook, Apple services chief Eddy Cue acknowledged that technology companies are "only as good as the last thing" they did.

Apple's last thing:

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/09/a...-live-blog-follow-all-the-news-as-it-happens/

"They're demonstrating Crossy Road on the new Apple TV, with an exclusive multiplayer mode. These guys rule."

Microsoft's "last thing" they did:

Big console fan here - just saying...

LOLOLOLOLOL....

 

[DevNull0]

Funny how Apple has survived for so long while its annual upgrade cycles have been killing the company for almost the last two decades. There is value in the simplicity of having only annual product updates, part of it even plays a role without people being aware of it (ie, it works subconsciously). It has the downside of not all parts of the product being as good as they could be. Apple has played that game for many years and the vast majority of them it has come out on top.

Annual upgrade cycle for almost 2 decades huh? Trying to rewrite history to help you troll? Macs have never been on an annual upgrade cycle, and even macOS only has been since Timmy.

 

[shk718]

The difference is that Steve was a marketing guy. He had good design aesthetics, and an innate sense of what people wanted.

Tim however, is a logistics guy. He hedged his bets on the Apple watch, a product he could call his own. While not a complete failure, it hasn't caught on with the masses. The reasons have been discussed ad naseum here. But resources that could have gone to shoring up other product lines were spent on the watch. Perhaps he's come to his senses, but now it's playing catch-up on so many fronts.

You mean generation 1 hasn't "caught on with the masses". Apple, nor most companies, has never had a generation 1 "catch on with the masses". Health is a giant business that continues to grow - their investment in the watch has the potential to pay off huge rewards. Hardly a waste of resources. You say they are "Playing catch-up on so many fronts" - oh please do enlighten us on all these "fronts" Apple is playing catch up on? Chips - no - hardware - no software - no (each platform has its +'s and -'s) AI - no - AI has not yet "caught on with the masses". Let's look at the numbers: $50.6 billion in sales, you need to combine Alphabet ($20.3 billion) and Amazon ($29.1 billion). $10.5 billion in profits you'd need to combine Alphabet ($4.2 billion), Amazon ($513 million), Facebook ($1.5 billion) and Microsoft ($3.8 billion). Who's playing catch-up?

 

[DevNull0]

Part of me wants to be on the defensive for Apple being I am heavily invested in them financially and in their hardware line, but I also realize Apple needs to beat up by the consumer to realize they HAVE to meet the demands and needs of the current market, in which they are extremely tardy in doing so.

But that's exactly what me and others are saying. I wouldn't be on Macrumours if I didn't love macs. But being blindly defensive only leads to what we have now. Pretending Timmy isn't a problem only makes the problem worse.

Apple still sells so much now on inertia. But it works both ways, if Apple gets a reputation for warmed over obsolete junk and empty promises then even if they do produce amazing new products people won't be around to buy them. They need to fix the problem now when they still have brand value and reputation.

 

[Osxguy]

Ok here is my issues with public testing. I might be wrong here and don't be mean if I am... But Apple used to offer in house testing at apple corporate with normal joe smo off the street. Mr I don't use computer I don't understand it and this made their software and hardware amazing. Now there is beta testing. in which nerds like me and you download the software and can understand how it works. I am probably wrong here but I think apple needs to get back to the in house testing of the software with grandma from down the corner to make their software user friendly again.

 

[kdarling]

Thing is, with all Apple's resources, they should be perfectly capable of developing watches & cars etc. without starving their established product lines of development. Samsung make washing machines, but their new phones are still more exciting-looking than the iPhone 7.

One difference is, Samsung has separate divisions and employees for their appliances and smartphones.

Apple, on the other hand, has bragged about how they're "still run like a startup", and we know from past years that there are times that they have pushed all their OSX engineers onto an iOS update, and vice versa.

 

[pat500000]

I don't think the iMac line should be listed as "don't buy" - how often do want updates? It was only updated in October - it has Skylake and Intel hasn't released anything in the same spec that is better than it - so what exact update do you think will happen?

It makes me laugh that Apple by the average consumer was mocked for bring stuff out too fast (and in fact still are..."oh don't buy anything from Apple the new one will be out next week" they say) and yet here you are requesting they update 27" iMacs in less than 8 months since the last release.

The Mac Pro NEEDS an update - the MacBook Air either needs an update or binning and the Mac Mini needs an update. I think the MacBook Pro's will be kept around when the new MacBook Pro is released as some people will find all USB-C a bit too "far" for them and many average users will continue to buy the older retina models they're more familiar with (at least for another 12 months)

IF imac was fully upgradeable...maybe yes...imac wouldn't need upgrade annual.

 

[DevNull0]

The difference is, Samsung has separate divisions and employees for their appliances and smartphones.

Apple, on the other hand, has bragged about how they're "still run like a startup", and we know from recent past years that there are times that they have pushed all their OSX engineers onto an iOS update, and vice versa.

That's still making excuses. It is still a major problem that Apple products are years behind everyone else. Between things like screens and memory, there is more Samsung R&D money in an iPhone 6s than there is Apple. Apple doesn't even spend the money to buy Samsung's latest and best the old junk is good enough for Apple customers and keeps Samsung happy because they can keep profiting off an old production line instead of having to retool it. And the SSDs that Samsung actually manufactures themselves are far superior to the stuff Apple buys to put in their macs.

 

[44267547]

Let me guess...most of those commenting on this interview haven't even read it. Perhaps MR should implement a system where comments are turned off for the first 30 minutes or so after an article goes up. Perhaps would prevent less knee jerk reaction. Quality discussion should be more important than number of posts.

Ok? So enlighten these other forum members and explain how their 'Quality Discussion' should be restricted until they read the article. What do you expect? For everyone to have the same agreeable opinion? Everyone has their own tangent and bias, which feeds off of other posts. It happens. It's Macrumors.

 

[theluggage]

For the same price as Haswell, I can have a Skylake which is 10% faster, 15% easier on the battery and 30% better at graphics.

Except, up until a few months ago, the Skylake chip that was 10% faster and 30% better at graphics than the one in your 2015 MacBook Pro wasn't actually available - instead your Dell XPS would have had a lower-TDP CPU and HD instead of Iris graphics. Thanks to Skylake, that chip might give the higher-class Haswell chip a run for its money but there's no guarantee that it would be significantly better.

However, (a) that excuse is now rapidly passing its sell-by date (e.g. Dell are now selling XPS-13s with rMBP 13-class Skylake CPUs and the Skull Canyon NUC appeared in early summer sporting the i7 HQ series/Iris Pro chip needed by the 15" rMBP) and (b) Apple could have explained all this in their publicity. Now, its even possible that they're waiting for Kaby Lake with its integrated TB3 but, if they are going to so that they maybe need to say something because all people can currently see is those "Don't Buy" labels on the web.

 

[manu chao]

Annual upgrade cycle for almost 2 decades huh? Trying to rewrite history to help you troll? Macs have never been on an annual upgrade cycle, and even macOS only has been since Timmy.

There have been times when the upgrade cycle was closer to 9 months (and a few spec bumps, eg, same processor generation but clocked slightly faster or storage changes have been even below that). And some models have had longer upgrade cycles. However, the precise length of the upgrade cycle doesn't change a bit the existence of the two opposing aspects: product line simplicity vs not-running-the-latest-components-in-all-parts.

 

[IJ Reilly]

The problem people have with Apple these days is that, from the outside, it doesn't look like they're doing anything. It doesn't look like progress is being made or innovation is happening. It looks like Apple are on a slow down, or they're just waiting to announce something huge. It's a 50/50 we just don't know at this point.

Agreed, but I'd go closer to 90/10 on the not knowing side. About the only thing we truly do know is that Apple has tightened up on secrecy a couple more notches, and left the rumor sites gasping for air.

 

[apolloa]

So share holders are worried about Apple diversifying too much, and here's Tim Cook talking about how Apple is diversifying more!!!

Bye bye Macintosh, we shall never forget you. Apples too busy with cars and watch straps and changing gun emoji icons...

 

[kwikdeth]

Yet conversely and bizarrely, Apple's share price is rising. How does that work?

Because most shareholders are generally lemmings.

 

[canadianreader]

What is the logic behind not updating their product lines for such a long time ? I mean they're not like preparing for a technological revolution aren't they ?

 

[DevNull0]

There have been times when the upgrade cycle was closer to 9 months (and a few spec bumps, eg, same processor generation but clocked slightly faster or storage changes have been even below that). And some models have had longer upgrade cycles. However, the precise length of the upgrade cycle doesn't change a bit the existence of the two opposing aspects: product line simplicity vs not-running-the-latest-components-in-all-parts.

Then why are you making up 2 decades of annual update cycle. Pre-Timmy, they would do updates and spec bumps as the parts became available. And Post-Timmy, there's no annual update cycle, just years and years of the same old without a word except that there's amazing stuff in Timmy's pipeline.

 

[apolloa]

TC can't be embarrassed about it if he just doesn't give a damn about the line. It's revenue has sunk to below that of media sales and subscriptions, which has been a large part of TC's efforts the past 1.5 years or so. That should tell you where his mindset is.

Yeaaaaaappp services services and services. Concentrate on the one thing they've never done well at by sacrificing the very things they are good at. Makes perfect sense.. To Apple..

 

[manu chao]

However, (a) that excuse is now rapidly passing its sell-by date (e.g. Dell are now selling XPS-13s with rMBP 13-class Skylake CPUs and the Skull Canyon NUC appeared in early summer sporting the i7 HQ series/Iris Pro chip needed by the 15" rMBP) and (b) Apple could have explained all this in their publicity. Now, its even possible that they're waiting for Kaby Lake with its integrated TB3

I highly doubt that. Kaby Lake in the version Apple wants won't very likely come before next year. When has Apple let one of its main product lines, MBPs, left un-updated for close to two years? As much as I can remember, never. My guess is that if you had asked Apple a year ago when they planned to release new MBPs (and they had answered that question), they would have said June-ish. Some component, note that this a new hardware design, must have slipped which delays things by a few months. I don't really buy the Sierra argument (ie, that new MBPs are delayed because they need software features that only exist in Sierra). Apple knew already a year ago that Sierra would come out in the fall (pre-viewed at WWDC with beta releases following shortly after that).