Agreed!
Speaking of "no nickel & diming", my "no Tim Tax" 2TB Mac Mini M4 internal SSD arrives today
Excited to install it in a couple hours!
Edit: Arrived! Time to dig in!
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Q1 2025 Earnings Call Takeaways
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agreed!
Speaking of "no nickel & diming", my "no Tim Tax" 2TB Mac Mini M4 internal SSD arrives today
Excited to install it in a couple hours!
Edit: Arrived! Time to dig in!
I'll break it down so you understand economics slightly better:
2023: 1,000 bottles of milk sold in the world. Mr Moo sold 800 of it, his competitors sold 200.
2024: 1,004 bottles of milk sold in the world. Mr Moo sold 799 of it, his competitors sold 205.
That isn't a drop of 1 bottle of milk It's a drop of 5 bottles.
Nobody said they were doomed Steve, it's not that deep and no Tim Cook isn't sending you a free iPhone. 😂
Oh please let us know where the rose colored glasses were purchased...
In 2023 50 bottles of crème were sold in the world, Mr. Moo sold 10.
In 2023 55 bottles of crème were sold in the world, Mr. Moo sold 40.
This is representative of Apple’s general strategy. Yes, they totally don’t mind selling iPads to folks that already own iPads, but it is CRITICALLY important to them that they sell iPads to folks that don’t already own them. They’ve announced for awhile that half of sales went to customers new to iPad, I think “over half” is new.
Well, that’s due to the DMA. Just like the GPSR defines things that companies are no longer free to do, so does the DMA.
I doubt the Mac mini had that much impact on sales at all. It, like ALL things desktop, has always been a low seller and since it’s still a desktop, that’s not going to change. Now, the newly refreshed MOBILE systems that already make up over 80% of the Macs Apple sells? Yeah, THOSE would be why Mac sales increased.
Can I play? If Tim Cook had have been the CEO instead of Sculley….
It takes a team to become Apple. It was never about 1 person. Jobs had the Pro Vision (no apologies on that one) to steer the company, but he was the first person to praise those who thought different. He said how frustrating it was working with these people but their genius, (his words) was what could make the magic happen. He was able to put people in their right lane because he understood people and what they brought to Apple. There was a reason he selected Cook as his predecessor, and not anyone else.
Jobs talks about getting the right people, and about A & B players. (link to a video I hadn’t seen before). What Jobs would never accept was the power struggle that occurred after he left. Forstall wanted the job and was undermining Cook imo. He became a B player…
Cook made some very strategic decisions regarding product, health and technical alike, and he continued to let those with ideas continue with their ideas, even if some failed (just like Jobs). Apple was in a good place when Jobs passed, but it’s in a stronger place now. It’s just different and that’s exactly what Jobs said what was needed. He didn’t want Apple to become a Xerox or an IBM. Samsung as an example have become a literal Xerox machine. As Jobs would have said, they have A players, but they have poor management.
I'll break down this economics Cow you’ve created so maybe you could understand.
Apple had a 4% increase in world wide sales year over year for Q1. China down 1%, world wide up 4%.
But, this is an earnings call not some stupid competition with cows. If you want to make comparisons with competitors, instead of using cows use actual companies with actual figures, but know that you changed the entire point of the earnings call.
Yep. Jobs built that team, i'm not suggesting he did it on his own.
Nothing you have said changes my mind. Cook has been a good steward of a product line up that was mostly, a few exceptions, left behind by Jobs. He has been a steady hand in charge of what was a very profitable company when he was appointed CEO.
We have seen Cook operate with huge resources for nearly a decade and most of it has been minor product iterations and stock buy backs. That wouldn't have put Apple in the black in 1997.
Jobs brought Apple back from the brink. I don't think Cook could've done that.
I agree. I wasn’t trying to change your mind, just add to the convo. Cook was just one of the A Players he brought on board.
Jobs was really good at getting people to focus on certain things. I like the way he talks about Engineers, being really good at what they do, but he goes to pains to say how much they challenged and frustrated him. But he has no time for bad managers. The buck stops with them.
Just so we are clear, the first iPad came with 256 mb ram and supported just 2 software updates. The 2011 MBA base model had just 2 gb ram and 64 gb storage.
Perhaps it’s more accurate to say that because Apple products then were so new, it felt like they were worth the higher price tag, but I never felt like Apple was particularly generous with specs even under Steve Jobs.
It’s only recently that iOS devices started being supported for 5-6 years. In the past, the iPhone 4 already started lagging under iOS 6 and barely supported iOS 7. It was clear that even back then, phones were designed around the 2-year upgrade cycle in mind.
If you want to talk about value, well, I definitely own more Apple products today than I did back in 2011, and that’s because I find the Apple ecosystem holds incredible value for me as a consumer (I don’t own any Apple stock). Not trying to denigrate Steve Jobs’ legacy here, but it’s clear that too many people are attempt to use a dead man to minimise the contributions of another man whom I feel has done an admirable job of running Apple and I guess that’s just a real shame here. 😕
If you think Apple are going to be reinvesting their obscene profits and not buying back shares/paying board member bonuses/begrudgingly giving out dividends then I think you’re going to be disappointed.
As long as I can completely disable AI and keep the 8gb that Apple added to their recent computer base models I’m fine.
If they force me to waste the 8gb on unnecessary, nay, unwanted AI, I’ll have a sad pickachu face.
Not sure what you mean by this.
Apple has an existing R&D budget. If you expect Apple to throw every last cent of their earnings chasing after every single tech trend in the market, past a certain point, that’s just flushing good money down the toilet.
Rather than hold on to this excess cash, makes sense to just return it to shareholders. In this regard, I am not sure why one would criticise share buybacks but not dividends.
Storage space is negligible on a iPhone with 256 Gb of storage. Battery life isn’t affected if you don’t use it. Again, Apple Intelligence is not taking control of your device.
iPhone are still selling like hot cakes, so they are not worried at all. That surely raised a red flag, so they’ll react accordingly (ProMotion and maybe a new SE).
Maximizing value for shareholders means producing meaningful products and services that customers buy. It’s gotta be a “cognitive dissonance” moment for those who believed with all their heart apple earnings were going into be spiraling down”.
Other people comment with the drop in iPhone revenue it’s a red flag to apple. Nothing of the sort. As we saw services revenues offset any drop in China sales.
So I applaud you for recognizing that by creating shareholder value, it starts with the customer. EVEN IF YOU PERSONALLY DONT LIKE THE DIRECTION APPLE IS GOING.
Taking one premise that is true and putting another against it, doesn't mean that one is automatically true as well.
I believe Jobs did love introducing products. I doubt Cook cares most about Earning calls. That's baseless.
You said Jobs was focussed on maximising value for customers. I think this is wrong. Jobs said the products should be "insanely great" and that customers should have the "best experience". I can't find anything that he said would maximise value for customers. Please share...
Jobs used to say if you provide good products the revenue will take care of itself (paraphrasing). He brought Cook on as the VP of World Wide Sales and Operations. He was brought in because of his absolute skill to fireproof Apple. And he's done that by increasing its value from $350B to around $4T! But it's the products and the services people choose to buy that he caused that to happen. As far as buy backs go, we should probably head over to Steve Wozniak and hear what he thinks from the formative days with Jobs.
To quote Steve Wozniak talking about Steve Jobs
"It starts with a company and you build products and you've got to make your profit, and then that allows you to invest the profit and then make better products and make more profit. I would say how good a company is, it's fair to measure it by its profitability".
Using Profits to increase your value so you can continue to invest in the company is what Steve J and Steve W thought at the very beginning.
Exactly. And you nailed it: if you don’t like the direction Apple is going (it happened to me, with Mac with no easily serviceable battery and SSD), you can buy something else and move on. “Vote with your wallet”, as they say.
But strange enough there are quite a lot of people that prefer to come here and complain over Apple all the time anyway.
I really don’t get it.
I’m not going to post on Google forums (are those a thing ? I don’t even know… 🤔) writing I don’t like Google’s products 🤷🏻♂️
I just ignore them.
Why Apple is attracting so many haters is something beyond my understanding.