patrick.net

EBGuy says

Traditional PCs/laptops will go the way of the dodo.

No way. Try working on an excel spreadsheet all day with a touch keyboard. Even a netbook is easier than a touch screen.

I know many people who have TWO 19" Wide monitors to work on their spreadsheets with. They would have a really hard time with a 5-7" screen.

If you're changing the amount of hot dogs sold last week from 384 to 452 in F33, no problem. If you're a Realwhore writing a quick "Thank you for coming to my open house. If you need more assistance finding the perfect home for your family..." email, no problem. If you're trying to write a white paper, I pity your wrists and fingers. Or designing a 6-page marketing brochure with lots of images.

There's a difference between a quick edit or email/text reply and substantial content creation.

msilenus says

If AAPL got into broadband, they'd charge far more money for less bandwidth than anyone else. They'd aim to recoup their Herculean infrastructure investment by capturing a status-conscience prestige market. The beauty of the modems would be the differentiator.

you don't really understand the first thing about Apple or how it came to its $100B stockpile of cash, nor how the existence of this $100B stockpile of cash alters the strategic landscape for the company going forward.

Apple can now do whatever the fuck it wants, for whatever reason it wants (outside of antitrust and IP issues of course).

thunderlips11 says

Try working on an excel spreadsheet

Try thinking a bit beyond the 1970s sometime.

No way. Try working on an excel spreadsheet all day with a touch keyboard. Even a netbook is easier than a touch screen.
Read my entire post. I said just need to make it easy to add keyboard/monitor. Currently Android based systems seem to have the edge in this area. We already have systems out like the Motorola Lapdock that allow you to turn a smartphone into an ultra portable PC. We'll always have power users that need the horsepower of an Intel iX product, but increasingly, more functions will be good enough on an ARM (quad core Tegras are coming out in consumer tablets this next round). Again, YMMV.

Bellingham Bill says

thunderlips11 says

Try working on an excel spreadsheet

Try thinking a bit beyond the 1970s sometime.

“Nessuna soluzione . . . nessun problema!„

That spike is two to three years on. But if we were to go back to the internet when we only had dial up, look at all of the communication technology that we had then, that we don't have now with broadband. Even back then there was a push to go tablet, AT&T Safari anyone?

I'm sure the Tablet format will settle into it's own. But it will find new users, that typically weren't tethered to a computer. Or data entry gets manually entered after their duties are performed.

Tablets will be great for Warehouse inventory tracking systems, Bar and Restaurant hostesses, devices given to employee applicants or devices given to customers to enter information or order completion.

But when the dust settles, sales men, finance people, graphic artists, computer software development, database administration, network administration, HR responsibilities, will be done by Laptop or Work Station.

As for the home use, let's face it, we love our gadgets. People buy universal remote controls, not because they work as intended and are able to incorporate every function on every device, but because they look cool.

That will be the same with Computers and Tablets. Most will have both if they can, but most will still want both, even if they only have one or the other.

And hey prices are only getting cheaper on both technologies.

Here's an interesting article about declining PC sales. It could be a temporary blip due to the recession and parts availability (flooding in Thailand) or the start of a trend(?)

PC shipments in the U.S. fell. IDC pegged the country's full-year shipment decline at 5%, which it said was the second-worst decline in the country's history.
"In the United States, market saturation and the economic environment continue to weigh considerably on consumer demand," said David Daoud, research director for personal computing at IDC. Newer product categories such as tablets and smartphones drew consumers away from PC purchases, according to the analysts.
One PC maker that seemed to be unaffected by the U.S. slowdown was Apple Inc., which was the only vendor in the country's top five to register year-over-year growth. Apple's PC deliveries in the U.S. rose 20% by Gartner's tally and 18% according to IDC.

Worth a read:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/314378-apple-fiscal-q1-2012-the-biggest-earnings-blowout-in-history

Bellingham Bill says

you don't really understand the first thing about Apple or how it came to its $100B stockpile of cash, nor how the existence of this $100B stockpile of cash alters the strategic landscape for the company going forward.

I can only imagine that you're cryptically alluding to Jobs' mention of cracking the TV business, and thinking that that might entail an entry into broadband. Doubtful. They didn't buy AT&T, recall --they partnered with them. AAPL's not interested in routing bits. They're interested in selling integrated hardware and distributing content.

AAPL might wind up owning a broadband business as an incindental consequence of securing a content stream for a television play. Probably briefly. That'd be a very different animal from what I was responding to in clambo's post: AAPL building a physical network and undercutting Comcast for Internet. They have no interest in becoming a utility, and it wouldn't suit their strengths.

Finally, don't read too much into their balance sheet. They could be saving up for a huge acquisition. They could also be biding their time for a tax holiday like everyone else. There's no way to tell.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/318794-apple-s-foreign-cash-hoard

I see that they are rioting AGAIN in China over pent up demand for another iPhone.

I just read some article about how they just lauched this monster satellite that will provide broadband across the USA. I think that the cost of the thing was a few hundred million bucks. I think Apple could do that out of their petty cash drawer in Cupertino.

I agree that it seems out of character for Apple to provide internet. But, I wish they did. If Apple had a service similar to netflix and bundled it with internet I'd love it.

I'm never gonna pay for comcast cable, and I'm dumping my landline. I am temporarily using my Andriod phone as a wifi hotspot and paying only $25/month for EVERYTHING, but 3G isn't very fast. (this is an extreme cheapskate experiment).

Huh. A single monster satellite for covering the U.S. would go into geosynchronous orbit, which is a very high orbit. The latency induced by the speed of light would make it unsuitable for general Internet access.

If they wanted to use satellites for Internet, they'd need at least fifty of them, each capable of handling the same load. That's because they'd need to go into low orbit, and would constantly be whizzing over the horizon. You'd need to deploy enough to always have a bird overhead, and each needs to be independently capable of handling the load. You also need spares.

I should add: a content delivery system in GEO should do just fine. But adding more than .2 seconds to everything you do is limiting. It makes certain games unworkable. Page load times would feel sluggish.

Bellingham Bill says

how the existence of this $100B stockpile of cash alters the strategic landscape for the company going forward.

The number is close to $81B reported in Sept-11, but may have gone to $100B by Dec-11.. to be reported..
Actually they wont have $100B in Cash.. its cash and cash equivalent+LT Investments.. or Cash and Short and Long Term Investment Maturities..
Actual Cash is around $3-4B, they actually burned their cash to purchase US Treasuries and other Equity/Bond Securities..

Note 2 – Financial Instruments
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Marketable Securities

http://investor.apple.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-11-282113&CIK=320193

chanakya4773 says

2) Steve jobs with a company which had all the tools in house ( hardware and software- end to end)...unlike almost 90% of other companies.

More of a myth... their in house business tools back in 1984 as they were mocking IBM was the IBM Mainframe 3x0 and their OS Plus VM and TSO plus RAMIS query tools... running McCormick and Dodge (we call ERP today) and various other 3rd Party hw/software programs, .

Today Apple uses SAP, IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, Dell, HP and many other 3rd party hardware/software vendors to run their business as would any large global company. Apple doesnt make tools to run Corporate infrastructure. Never had. Actually, without them you couldnt see introductions of new products/changes/updates/etc very rapidly.

SFace says

Someone from Sandisk told me a 32GB Iphone and a 16GB Iphone cost $8 dollars extra in cost, yet they sell it for $100 delta. That's just them saying the consumer are idiots. The rest of the world uses expansion card. They can't get away with that kind of stuff forever.

This is true, but who knows how long it will last.

TW said: you do know what a server is ? right ....
I suppose we could go back and forth on this for a while (anybody want to join in?) but I don't consider a server to fall in the category of Traditional PCs/laptops mentioned in my original post. Perhaps I should have been more specific and said end user devices. At any rate, it's possible that ARMs could rewrite server history as well due to their power efficiency. Or not. YMMV.

Apple made servers and also an application server, I think it's called webobjects.

chanakya4773 says

If i am dell, i don't have control over software (microsoft) and intel processors.
If i am intel, i have to beg microsoft to make the right software and dell/hp/.. to make the right box.
if i am microsoft, i have to push intel for better processors...etc
in a nutshell, the whole industry was fragmented.

No! its very well known semi, semi equipment mfg, pc-server makers, harddrive makers, software makers etc etc all collaberate across the "supply chain". Intel, Dell, MS, HP, Applied, Lam, Oracle, etc etc all visit each other and plan out what other vendor need ands wants.

Steve Jobs, to his credit he has an eye for industrial design...Bling!

But anyone who applies can do equally well... not to mention lots of Photo Art as adervtisment. Stores that look like high end retail art shops. Slick metallic colors, with hint of black edges ... not a product but ART! Only one color! Maybe two down the road.

If you have noticed, under the hood they stopped using Scsi drives, RISC processors and NuBus Mobo interfaces.

As far as I know, Apple is now shipping more RISC processors than they ever could have hoped for back when they were using PowerPC chips in their laptops & desktops. TW, I'm still trying to figure out why you're dissing chanakya4773's vertically integrated post. The core of their main hardware platform is a proprietary Apple chip which runs Apple software.

thunderlips11 says

c

thunderlips11 says

I know many people who have TWO 19" Wide monitors to work on their spreadsheets with. They would have a really hard time with a 5-7" screen.

Yeah, me too, and it sucks. It's much better to work on spreasheets on my 27in plus the 24 on the side like I do.

19in go for like $50 each now, they cost like a mediocre steak in the bay area. just sayin...

chanakya4773 says

thomas.wong1986 says
No! its very well known semi, semi equipment mfg, pc-server makers, harddrive makers, software makers etc etc all collaberate across the "supply chain". Intel, Dell, MS, HP, Applied, Lam, Oracle, etc etc all visit each other and plan out what other vendor need ands wants.

Collabration is often slow and sometimes does not happen unless all parties are on board..

"...supply chain collaboration..."

lolrotf wetting my self.
No offense to TW. Your view is not reality.
Here is reality of hpq-intl-msft, from exp.

It is almost too obvious to say vertical collaboration is necessary in today’s global tech.
But one has to distinguish between good collaboration from bad ones.
HP and Canon with the laserjet started a whole new industry.
It was the Apple of the 1980’s.
Here is a disaster:
http://news.cnet.com/Itanium-A-cautionary-tale/2100-1006_3-5984747.htm

You should google the projected sales and release date vs actual.
It will be my humor contribution.

Look at Apple's market cap history.
Apple getting in iBooks. I don't know what to make of it.

A bunch of 20 yr old USC students were interviewed on this announcement on CNBC this morning.
One guy said something like, he is too "old and set in his way" on paper books - so funny.
This is why I will never get the success of apple even though I've never bought one. But I still have to trip over apple logo devices in my own home!
Aapl ate Hpq's for lunch and held Intc and Msft hostage. Dell was just intc's bitch anyway.
I was a skeptic in 2004, but I was wrong as an investor to not buy apple.
In reality, I did buy by having owned fcntx - it is a core holding for a while.
Apple was the lone wolf in proprietary or vertical strategy.
Can't argue with such success.

I love Hotel California btw.

Oooh, Apple is $429.
Did you read that corporate computer buyers and the US military is going to Apple?
Wall St. Journal yesterday was about GE and how about employees are choosing mac.
Imagine that. GE has probably 200,000 employees.
I guess many are still using XP. Cool!
There's a new slacker cafe here called Verve and it's funny to see inside. The whole place is full of Apple laptops. There is one sad dude over in the corner hiding his shame with a black plastic craptop as he slurps his latte for an hour.

clambo says

Wall St. Journal yesterday was about GE and how about employees are choosing mac.

Imagine that. GE has probably 200,000 employees.

OK let's
200,000 employees
that's 200,000 Macbook Pro 17inch computers at 2499 a pop.

499,800,000

Half a billion dollars?

kt1652 says

HP and Canon with the laserjet started a whole new industry.

The LaserJet was a glorified LPR until the late 1980s, without actual outline font support and networking, or enough RAM to actually render an entire page.

Apple ate HP's lunch, once PageMaker came out in 1985 (and 1986's Mac Plus made the Mac minimally performant to run PageMaker).

Canon, Adobe, and Aldus were the true drivers of innovation, with Apple being in the right place at the right time with the superior implementation that made development and adoption actually possible.

HP was a joke until their postscript offerings came out in the 1990s. Those were great; wish I still had my 4MP. Made boocoo bank with that little guy in Japan.

The guys at GE won't all replace their XP boxes but the new hires at GE can choose Apple if they want to according to WSJ article.
I'd take a macbook air 15".

Looks like Apple is going to shove iPads into education/textbooks. Since textbooks today cost $100 and students would rather rent them, I predict this will be an awesome sales development for Apple.
Do slacker students really want to pay $100+ for that textbook for "Underwater Basketweaving"?

I bet tomorrow the corporate Mac and Google fanboys, will be singing a different tune.

Google just tanked 10% on missed earnings.

"tanked" and 10% are not compatible.
Who cares what Apple does tomorrow? The premise here is AAPl goes to $500. Wait and see.

Bellingham Bill says

kt1652 says

HP and Canon with the laserjet started a whole new industry.

The LaserJet was a glorified LPR until the late 1980s, without actual outline font support and networking, or enough RAM to actually render an entire page.

Apple ate HP's lunch, once PageMaker came out in 1985 (and 1986's Mac Plus made the Mac minimally performant to run PageMaker).

Canon, Adobe, and Aldus were the true drivers of innovation, with Apple being in the right place at the right time with the superior implementation that made development and adoption actually possible.

HP was a joke until their postscript offerings came out in the 1990s. Those were great; wish I still had my 4MP. Made boocoo bank with that little guy in Japan.

“Nessuna soluzione . . . nessun problema!„

Bb, you cannot just use technical specs as measure of product superiority. You are talking Ferrari and I Toyota. One may be able to argue the Apple Laserwriter Laserjet prints faster and more capable then the HP Laserjet.
But look at the cost in 1984: HP $3495 vs. Apple $6995
Within a year Hp reduced the price to 2995.
This is 1984 dollars! HP Laserjet was a runaway success and a franchise was born, scaling up all the way to business printing and the rest is history.
there were over 70 Laserjet product "series" according to wiki, including color.
There were 100 million laserjets sold between 1984 - 2006- according to an this source. (Edited)
http://h30507.www3.hp.com/t5/The-HP-LaserJet-blog-by-Vince/Remembering-100-Million-LaserJets/ba-p/33346
So that averages to 4.7 million a year.
I couldn't find any Applewriter sales data. But I am sure it is puny. Lexmark was more of a threat than Apple to the HP printer business.
Every continent, HP printers are dominant over Apple. It is rare that anyone or business buying an Apple printer to use on their non-Apple computer product.
For HP they sold many many more printers for non-HP environment than just HP customers.
From a business perspective, only success in the market matter.
Besides, the point was collaboration success, not technical success.

kt1652 says

Within a year Hp reduced the price to 2995.

because it was a total piece of crap. No LAN capability. No fonts. Couldn't even render an entire page. No software support.

It was indeed just a glorified LPR and did not drive innovation in the industry.

That was Adobe & Apple's job, along with Aldus.

Besides, the point was collaboration success, not technical success.

You really don't know WTF you're talking about. For one, Apple's LaserWriter had a 12Mhz 68000 with 1.5MB of RAM for handling the Postscript. This allowed Macs (and, later, PCs) to send their jobs to the printer in compact command streams instead of having to do any of the rasterization work.

LaserJet only got competitive when they copied Apple's innovations here.

Their original printer featured ROM cartridges for fonts, FFS. Totally retarded.

OTOH, here's InfoWorld from 1986:

"Apple's LaserWriter started the desktop publishing craze in 1985 by offering the first populary-priced printer capable of full-page, 300-DPI graphics . . ."

http://books.google.com/books?id=XC8EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&dq=infoworld+laserwriter+review+1985&source=bl&ots=uG55mGCWbg&sig=wOTaSyE7l_eeH0Bb3NbN7QcAn-s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OeYYT-j5C8XTiAKo2_C5CA&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false

It is rare that anyone or business buying an Apple printer

Indeed. They would need to invent a time machine first since Apple stopped making them in the 1990s.

So how many did they sell?
For 200% the price I'd think it should have more performance.
Apple stopped making them in 1990s.
You just made my point.

LOL.

You're waaay to stupid to begin to understand this stuff.

Bellingham Bill says

LOL.

You're waaay to stupid to begin to understand this stuff.

“Nessuna soluzione . . . nessun problema!„

Insults aside. For whatever reason, you could not come up with any sales/revenue data to support your assertion other than Hp's first gen Laserjet was "retarded".
So what, the market spoke and it chose HP.
I did not say people can buy the Applewriter today, no one can buy an HP 2686A today neither.
There is a ton of HP Laserjet product you can buy today.
You are still tunnel vision on technical merit.

kt1652 says

"...supply chain collaboration..."
lolrotf wetting my self.
No offense to TW. Your view is not reality.
Here is reality of hpq-intl-msft, from exp.

That was the B2B revolution which happened back in 1997-2005. Pretty much every companyin various industries from small start ups to billion $$ global mfg have a supply chain and product life management software program.

Next real milestone for Apple:

Conquer the TV business. That's the goal.

chanakya4773 says

Its a fact that APPLE had a significant advantage for a long time with their IOS versus the rudimentary OS that phone companies had.

Apple has a great OS for PCs Frankly it may well be the best for the consumer on their handsets as well.. Its nice and very slick!

But lets not get ahead of ourself here and inflate Apple ability to deliver what Telcom companies need as mission critial OS across their massive and complex networks.... They have been using UNIX with their own platform for several decades... Teradata comes to mind as one vendor many years ago. What OS (MS or Apple) you use ( or salivate) over on your handset isnt really a concern for the Telecom companies. At the end of the day, their back office OS still runs and delivers to the custmer their pix and music.. Its just not something Apple can compete in..

tw - that didn't make any sense.
Apple is not trying to conquer Telecom industry.

thomas.wong1986 says

chanakya4773 says

Its a fact that APPLE had a significant advantage for a long time with their IOS versus the rudimentary OS that phone companies had.

Apple has a great OS for PCs Frankly it may well be the best for the consumer on their handsets as well.. Its nice and very slick!

But lets not get ahead of ourself here and inflate Apple ability to deliver what Telcom companies need as mission critial OS across their massive and complex networks.... They have been using UNIX with their own platform for several decades... Teradata comes to mind as one vendor many years ago. What OS (MS or Apple) you use ( or salivate) over on your handset isnt really a concern for the Telecom companies. At the end of the day, their back office OS still runs and delivers to the custmer their pix and music.. Its just not something Apple can compete in..

Here what's not in steve's house. Lighten up.
thomas.wong1986 says

That was the B2B revolution which happened back in 1997-2005. Pretty much every companyin various industries from small start ups to billion $$ global mfg have a supply chain and product life management software program.

I think Apple is going to do fine in the short to medium term, but I'm firmly in the camp that says that they owe virtually all of their success to Steve Jobs. Without him, I don't think they'll be the leaders of whatever comes next.

It could be that without Jobs Apple will devolve into simply being like Microsoft, making a gazillion bucks but not doing anything really creative or interesting. Time will tell. Either way, AAPL will be good to own because now it's a juggernaut.

The GOP says

You do realize Apple is only doing Marginally better than Chipotle Mexican Grill?

If a fucking hoitey toitey burrito company can be worth 300 plus clams, then damn it, Apple should be like $1200.

Sounds like you are not factoring in shares outstanding into your 'analysis'. Apple's market cap is 398.41B, Chipotle's is 11.28B. Apple is worth $387.13B more than Chipotle - this is more than marginally better. That is Google (189.64B) plus HP (56.90B) plus Groupon (13.24B) plus ... better