Services includes several things beyond TV+, Music, Arcade, News+, etc. Also, revenue is not profit. It is possible that Apple is losing money on one or more of those subscription services. If TV+ is losing money, for example, a price increase may have been justified even if they are making a lot of revenue and profit from the App Store, the Google agreement, etc. which also fall under "services."
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 Q4 2023 Earnings Call Takeaways
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Services includes several things beyond TV+, Music, Arcade, News+, etc. Also, revenue is not profit. It is possible that Apple is losing money on one or more of those subscription services. If TV+ is losing money, for example, a price increase may have been justified even if they are making a lot of revenue and profit from the App Store, the Google agreement, etc. which also fall under "services."
It's MacRumors, so you can always count on it being like a nail salon in here.
My M1 MBP is the best Apple laptop I've ever owned. I adore my M2 Mac mini and ASD. I expect to keep these for 5-6 years.
I'm curious what innovation people expect from their hardware? Especially in laptops and desktops? Or even phones and tablets? Excluding $1700 phablets, of course.
Every time Steve is mentioned it breaks my heart. I miss him, too, but he isn't coming back.
The Apple I cost USD $666.66—equivalent to $3,428 in 2022, which is interesting since there's a new Apple computer coming soon around the same price—adjusted for inflation, of course. The Apple I sold between 175 to 200 units. Wonder if it can match it.
My M1 MBP is the best Apple laptop I've ever owned. I adore my M2 Mac mini and ASD. I expect to keep these for 5-6 years.
I'm curious what innovation people expect from their hardware? Especially in laptops and desktops? Or even phones and tablets? Excluding $1700 phablets, of course.
Every time Steve is mentioned it breaks my heart. I miss him, too, but he isn't coming back.
The Apple I cost USD $666.66—equivalent to $3,428 in 2022, which is interesting since there's a new Apple computer coming soon around the same price—adjusted for inflation, of course. The Apple I sold between 175 to 200 units. Wonder if it can match it.
what has Jony done since he left Apple? I'm genuinely curious. I know he made an emblem for King Charles. A folding red nose for comic relief and a $64K record player. I know AirBnB and Ferrari are LoveFrom clients, so maybe it's hiding in plain sight.
No offense, but one of the most innovative things Apple has done this year is getting rid of the Touch Bar MBP he designed.
Last edited:
I don't think Apple cares very much about the small percentage of customers who want a dual-boot option. Cold hard truth. I think it would be relatively easy for Apple to offer a Mac that still supported x86 Windows if they really wanted to do so. They could offer some kind of coprocessor card for the Mac Pro or perhaps some kind of external coprocessor/graphics box that connects to any Mac via Thunderbolt. But what's the incentive?
Apple's long-term decisions may be starting to bite them.
Sure, they locked customers with upselling. And it seemed to work wonders. But...
While this made them pay for getting exactly what they needed, this has a nasty flipside.
You see, everywhere in the PC world, users buy a cheap base configuration and upgrade later.
While this doesn't maximize profits from the start, it KEEPS customers in the ecosystem, spending throughout their lifecycle.
Apple has made it so that instead, customers will be cautious to purchase, which is usually not a good idea.
It doesn't help that Apple wants to force consumers to use their products in specific ways. A classic, historical example is with gaming. Because they don't make serious efforts with it, and tend to break compatibility so often, they are forcing consumers OUT of the ecosystem.
Of course, it's their company and their products. But Microsoft knows better that you want to keep your consumers always using your products. If you force them out of your ecosystem because it's your way or the highway, they may eventually get fed up and leave altogether.
To temporarily fix the sales, Apple may try to solve their problems by further limiting the lifespan of their devices, or making them break more easily. But such a move if Apple were a complete monopology, which has never been the case. Chances are this would damage the resale value of their products even further, forcing consumers OUT of the Apple ecosystem. After all, why would you buy an Apple device if you knew you would have $1,000 turning to dust every 2 years?
Sure, they locked customers with upselling. And it seemed to work wonders. But...
While this made them pay for getting exactly what they needed, this has a nasty flipside.
You see, everywhere in the PC world, users buy a cheap base configuration and upgrade later.
While this doesn't maximize profits from the start, it KEEPS customers in the ecosystem, spending throughout their lifecycle.
Apple has made it so that instead, customers will be cautious to purchase, which is usually not a good idea.
It doesn't help that Apple wants to force consumers to use their products in specific ways. A classic, historical example is with gaming. Because they don't make serious efforts with it, and tend to break compatibility so often, they are forcing consumers OUT of the ecosystem.
Of course, it's their company and their products. But Microsoft knows better that you want to keep your consumers always using your products. If you force them out of your ecosystem because it's your way or the highway, they may eventually get fed up and leave altogether.
To temporarily fix the sales, Apple may try to solve their problems by further limiting the lifespan of their devices, or making them break more easily. But such a move if Apple were a complete monopology, which has never been the case. Chances are this would damage the resale value of their products even further, forcing consumers OUT of the Apple ecosystem. After all, why would you buy an Apple device if you knew you would have $1,000 turning to dust every 2 years?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
No surprise there. I agree- they don't care.
However, that doesn't help those who need computers to do some things. So to OPs point, if one needs full Windows, what could have been Mac money can become PC money. And if desktops, what could have then led to a purchase of ASD can become some other monitor to accommodate both. Etc.
Apple can easily just let such business go elsewhere to get their NEEDS met. And those of us with such needs can do exactly that: take money that could have flowed to Apple elsewhere.
Last edited:
Apple is going the way where Sony was about 10-15 years ago; stopped innovating, only interested in jacking up prices while cutting cost, slow to transition to new trend.... Tim needs to go. It took Sony years to get out of the financial hell to be where they are, which is still not near where it used to be. Do I need to mention Nokia, Blackberry, etc.?
Apple needs someone who can show the vision and execute them. Microsoft is about to take over Apple as the most valuable company.
As a comparison, Jobs after he came back, in 10-15 years he released iMac, MacBook, iPod, iPhone, iPad. that's in 10-15 years. Cook has been at the helm for 12 years now? Tim has managed operation and finances well but what da heck did he really do in terms of maintaining Apple as the worldwide leader of innovation? I will give you AirPods. What else?
Apple needs someone who can show the vision and execute them. Microsoft is about to take over Apple as the most valuable company.
As a comparison, Jobs after he came back, in 10-15 years he released iMac, MacBook, iPod, iPhone, iPad. that's in 10-15 years. Cook has been at the helm for 12 years now? Tim has managed operation and finances well but what da heck did he really do in terms of maintaining Apple as the worldwide leader of innovation? I will give you AirPods. What else?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
And/or the obvious one they are actively engaged in doing, raising prices while cutting costs... AKA "margin expansion," which allows them to sell fewer units but reap "another quarter of record profit." The problem with that is that it only goes so far. At what level of margin does even faithful fans start questioning why does 45 cents of every dollar I'm spending on this new thing not actually contribute to buying any part of it? Does that (does margin) have to become 50% to reach some kind of big "too rich for my blood" epiphany? 55%? 60%? Where does the customer demand more value for the money spent or else?
Through a shareholder lens, fattening margins are exciting and positive: more money for "US!" However, look at the same through a consumer lens and see that all this money is actually buying LESS of the thing I'm buying... while more is sliced away to feed the bottomless pit of "another quarter of record..."
Look through the companion thread focused on Mac sales being down and expectations for many more sales with M3 from Apple. See possibly the most fanatic of fans writing comments about pricing of RAM & SSD getting out of hand, stretching the time with the Mac they already own vs. buying a new one, etc. Where's the all-new, fever-pitched enthusiasm among the fanatics (yes, there is some buy gauge the percentages within that thread yourself)?
I'm an Apple everything guy and I was completely ready to buy that new 15" MBair on launch... until I upped the specs to make it perfect and found the pricing well in excess of MBpro. Long story short: that culminated with me opting to buy a $55 battery on Amazon to get a few more years out of the Intel MB I already own. I'm probably out now until about M5 or so.
And in re-embracing an actual PC because of a need for full Windows instead of hoping for the best with ARM Windows, getting reacquainted with Windows, Windows apps, etc on a more regular basis... along with the huge reminder of relative value of hardware (such as looking at an 8TB m.2 stick for $750 at retail for a single unit sale vs. $2200 as an upgrade to 8TB from Apple who buys in tremendous bulk), I find myself thinking about that next laptop as possibly being a PC instead of Mac. I much prefer Mac & macOS but there's practical considerations like $750 vs. $2200 for the same benefits. By M5, I wonder if that $2200 will be $2400-$2600... while I'm much more confident that $750 will probably be going the other- LOWER- way.
I believe Apple needs to strike a better balance between maximizing shareholder ROI and delivering tangible value for customers. Customers do not need shareholders for anything... but shareholders absolutely need customers to keep opening those wallets to put every dollar into that "another record quarter..." result. While every quarter's "records" strongly imply the opposite, customers do 100% retain the ability- forgotten as it may seem- to say "NO!"... as this customer did to that incredible new MBair... and then to any new MB at all in 2023.
5-10 years ago, I wouldn't have even flinched... but back then the value proposition felt better. Of course, that was also when target margin was below 40% and there was abundant competition for RAM & storage.
Last edited:
But it's not worth it to Apple for that customer to be Mac money. They'd rather let them go than support x86/Windows. Doing so wouldn't be simple. It wouldn't be cheap. They would have to see a return on the investment.
Windows support was a byproduct of the Intel transition. It wasn't a priority for Apple in the Motorola/PPC years. Once the Mac was basically a PC, why not support Windows? Back then Apple didn't have the kind of developer support it enjoys today either.
And that's exactly what Apple is doing. They aren't blind to those needs. They just aren't interested in delivering a solution. If that means losing a few customers, they're fine with that.
They don’t even need to offer any kind of coprocessor. Fact is that Windows exists on ARM and like MacOS with Rosetta 2 it can emulate x86. But while Apple has shown a lot of willingness to allow Windows and Linux to run in VMs on Mac (even going so far as to offer Rosetta 2 translation for Linux VMs) they have given no help at all to anybody who wants to actually boot an alternative OS on Mac. Smart people have done a lot of reverse engineering to this end but without Apple’s cooperation getting subsystems like graphics, power management, WiFi, etc to work well is a monumental task. Microsoft would love to allow you to dual boot, that I am sure, but Apple is doing their best to make sure it will never happen by providing openness and assistance only where it suits them.
Last edited:
Because that's not what they want. Apple has always wanted to make the whole widget. They've always wanted to make technology simple, easy to use and understand, like an appliance. They've never wanted to be the tinkerer's platform or the platform for people with edge use cases. Apple Silicon was a conscious and very deliberate move further towards the "appliance" end of the spectrum.
The trajectory with Apple is very clear to see. Their platforms will only get more locked down as time goes on. It's no surprise. This has been the vision since the very early days.
I’ve been trying to come to terms with this downward spiral myself. For me it’s more than boring. Having been a science & tech nerd since i was a kid, to seeing the destruction the dotcom crash caused, but then passion rekindled by the big post 2000s tech advances, there was a sort of rogue altruistic spirit to the more successful products that seems long gone now, as everything has some dark dystopian connection. It’s not enough to make a little ipod that plays a users music, the business vultures have sunk their talons into every aspect of everything imaginable, so now that little ipod cant exist bc what it really needs to be is an app, or rather a vehicle to get new signups for streaming services and various other monthly subsciptions and 17 different developers attached to the software will make more selling your usage data and what your sexual demographics & political hatreds are than they will on you ever buying new music to listen to, & hey, thanks to Ai you dont need to buy music & books humans made anyway, we can finally put all those non-engineers, artists and writers and musicians, our of work and make sure that money all goes to exciting new silicon valley startups, it’ll be so great for the economy with the dollars rolling in, nevermind where they're coming from. How about a service or two to turn you into the feds for looking at anything naughty (don’t worry not violence, war and gore, thats A-ok good citizen). When the scifi authors last century warned us of how tech would go wrong, it was all fantastic scenes of legions of robots uniting against us. Instead we simply let a bunch of engineers who never took a philosophy or ethics course in their life make all the civilization-altering decisions they want, bc as long as the plebs are buying it, that must mean it’s great, end of thought. I think I've reached the end of this culdesac, as this journey has produced less & less happiness the longer its gone on. I’m about to settle back into vinyl records, my old film camera, hardcover books, my wood lathe & outdoor sports. In hindsight, each of those things were perfectly fine as they were for what they did, & kept me focused on the content rather than becoming a slave to the tools.
We should have never left Myspace. Or Geocities. Or angelfire.
We should have never come down from the trees.
This whole thing was a mistake.
Last edited:
The first iPhone sold very well despite the 2008 recession of course as long as a company can innovate and bring groundbreaking and useful products to its customers. It’s no longer the case at Apple despite the Vision Pro, a refined version of Meta’s Quest headset, which I don’t see people going around their daily lives wearing it in public. I like it as a gadget but it’s not a revolutionary problem solver.
What we get right now from Apple is mostly small incremental upgrades of the same boring stuff year over year coupled with half baked beta like software. Apple will do ok as long as people stay within the ecosystem and don’t look elsewhere for devices that get the job done for less.
But in doing so, they're preventing their own expansion. Their former customers will not only NOT promote Apple products, but also will discover that there are decent products from the "other side".
Why do you think Microsoft will go as far as allowing you to run Linux and Android INSIDE Windows? Because they want it to be as convenient WHILE you run Windows. And they have done such a good job that in some applications, it's more convenient to run Linux inside Windows than running Linux on bare metal.
Yes, it costs money to support Windows, or to remain compatible, or to invest in a user interface. But Apple can't reap benefits forever without investing somehow. They will have to play a long to a degree.
If they keep letting people go because "it's my way or the highway", that's exactly what will happen.
No, not necessarily. Machine learning refers to the reinforcement techniques. You can have a pretty rudimentary / dumb AI that uses sophisticated machine learning, and vice-versa (though sophisticated AI tends to use machine learning heavily).
Totally agree about the loss of bootcamp. I too need to use Windows along with macOS. When the time comes to upgrade to the newest M chip I’ll be needing a new PC and a KVM switch so I can keep same keyboard, mouse and monitors for both machines.
Surely you recognize that before the first iPhone was released, there was nothing even close to it.
Today, many people, including myself, already have an outstanding iPhone that's 1-3 years old. And with the current economic downturn, there's little reason to upgrade.
Feel free to speculate what a groundbreaking iPhone of today might be. Perhaps all of the other cellphone manufacturers have released groundbreaking phones for 2023?
Apple Vision Pro... it is far different than Meta's Quest. But to understand why, you'd need to know the difference between AR and VR, and understand the potential and markets Apple's device will serve.
So what's your vision for a "groundbreaking" iPhone that people will fell compelled to upgrade their 2021-2022 iPhone in a poor economy?
A few strong examples and ground-breaking features (similar in nature and scope to Apple's recent SOS emergency satellite communications that has saved lives) would be great, supported by your market research. Maybe you're thinking innovation would be a round or octagonal phone, and would be a great crowd-pleaser to get people to open their wallets in a bad economy.
Michael Dell did it (and is one of the richest people in the world, but you never hear people ragging on him.)
Our world may be much better off if all corporations (which are fictitious people, created by law) were PBCs: Public Benefit Corporations.
Regular public corporations require that the profit motive be paramount. PBCs can protect a company if it decides that earnings per share are not the most important thing.
Posted this on another thread but it seems many here need to see it:
Global personal computer sales by quarter, from Statista:
Many here seem to have lots of pent up anger at Apple. Perhaps because they can't afford Apple products.
Regardless, the Mac has always been fighting an uphill battle. First against IBM, then against Microsoft. The very founding video of the Macintosh computer was explicitly advertising that Apple was going to try to take on the behemoths of society.
The Mac has held its own against the masses of MS-DOS and its derivatives.
As for "innovation": for those who think Apple does not "innovate", then tell us what you want to see, and how much you think it should cost.
Apple's quarterly report demonstrates a company that is well run. You might not like it, but Apple is well run.
If by "innovation" you mean "stimulate me" then perhaps you need to find stimulation elsewhere, because the computer business is mature and, like the automobile industry, be one of modest changes year by year.
Global personal computer sales by quarter, from Statista:
Many here seem to have lots of pent up anger at Apple. Perhaps because they can't afford Apple products.
Regardless, the Mac has always been fighting an uphill battle. First against IBM, then against Microsoft. The very founding video of the Macintosh computer was explicitly advertising that Apple was going to try to take on the behemoths of society.
The Mac has held its own against the masses of MS-DOS and its derivatives.
As for "innovation": for those who think Apple does not "innovate", then tell us what you want to see, and how much you think it should cost.
Apple's quarterly report demonstrates a company that is well run. You might not like it, but Apple is well run.
If by "innovation" you mean "stimulate me" then perhaps you need to find stimulation elsewhere, because the computer business is mature and, like the automobile industry, be one of modest changes year by year.
I, for one, do not. The M* series is successful to the point where (most) people wouldn't see a benefit to upgrading past the M1. For all the talk about "planned obsolescence" we now have hardware that's pretty much bulletproof and performance that's waiting for software (like the VisionPro) to catch up to it. I point to the lackluster reception the M3 received on MR as one indication of this: (most) people just don't need the extra horsepower (yet) so it's perceived as "boring."
Lazy & uncritical assessment. I don't care if the rednecks like us or not, it doesn‘t excuse dumping Forstall & Ive and replacing them with the “design by committee” approach they’ve got in place now. Tim did his job well enough to avoid destroying Apple in the first three years, and that’s more than a lot of companies get when they lose their founder. But he did it by taking an extremely conservative approach to the product line, stripping features and cutting unit costs entirely typical of a bean counter put in charge extracting every ounce of value from a popular product line to pay gambling shareholders. Thats all fine & great for a while, chop all the features off your notebooks & ipads, cut your imac models down to 1, ditch all your accessory lines, drag ipad models across years and years w/o updates, switch to your own in-house chipsets that aren't compatible with anything, make all the enclosures cheaper & clunkier, and slap higher & higher premium pricing on it all bc you haven't yet seen correlation that you’re hemorrhaging users, but eventually you‘ve eliminated all the value from a purchase, and when the economy dips, theres no incentive to buy, you’ve milked it dry. It’s time to start offering more for peoples money, or some new product categories. I’m more interested than most in acquiring a Vision Pro, yet I have no illusions that there’ll even be a Mk.2, priced so absurdly. Tim could go at any time now and Apple will have as good a chance as any of survival, but after a decade of an ops guy, its time to get a product person back in there for a while. Then the next bean counter can capitalize on their work for another decade. None of this has anything to do with being sad & dejected that Cook married & it wasnt to me.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
If you haven't locked in on a monitor for that new Mx Mac, consider NOT-Apple monitors that include a built in KVM-like hub. I went that way mostly because I wanted to pair a Mac Studio desktop with an ultra-wide. The one I chose had a great mix of popular ports and the easy ability to share keyboard and mouse with any other computer attached to the monitor. Mine has FOUR such video inputs, so conceptually, I could attach Mac, PC, game console and AppleTV or similar.
It's almost a knee-jerk reaction to buy ASD with a new Mx Mac... but there are PLENTY of fish in the monitor sea and plenty with some great features for those who maybe need a new monitor to be more than only a Mac monitor.
Last edited: