[UncleWede]

Originally Posted by Not_Judy

I'm guessing some form of implanted or wearable device that doesn't require typing or touching it at all.

I can't WAIT for this. And I have a nice, smooth spot in back already picked out

[King Rudi]

Originally Posted by UncleWede

I can't WAIT for this. And I have a nice, smooth spot in back already picked out

I'll be honest some form of digital telepathy would be great for me. I've gotten to where I hate sms. I'll reply to important texts but aside from that, those who want to have a lengthy conversation via text I just ignore. I'm too busy of a person to text all damn day. Either call me and give me the info I need or go find someone else's time to waste.

[JohnnyCanuck]

I think there's a misconception about what Apple actually excels at underlying all the negativity surrounding Tim Cook. Apple excelled at taking innovative tech and making it accessible and marketing it as must have.

The only truly brilliant innovation over the years was iTunes as a business strategy (and it was brilliant). 2000cs has the best analogy ... they are/were a fashion company. The iPod was nothing special (it was iTunes that made the iPod). They didn't invent the mouse or the GUI, they made Xerox's tech consumer accessible. They didn't invent the smartphone or the touch screen. They combined the two to create a killer device.

Subsequent to each of these product breakthroughs, Apple has relied on its captured community of users to drive growth. Tim Cook has more than ably managed the company's operations through the current cycle of captured user based growth. What Apple needs to find is the next great idea that they can turn from Xerox's test lab into a a Lisa ... it isn't a smartwatch and it isn't AppleTV. Absent that, Apple's ability to succeed is keyed to two basic imperatives: keep the captured customer engaged; and, effectively manage costs and revenue. From where I sit, Tim Cook has done a pretty good job of both. If Jonny Ive had a bright idea about that next killer Apple adoption, we'd have seen it already.

Yes, Tim Cook is not Satya Nadella, but he's done a pretty good job overall.

[tdott]

The next game changer will be the fully autonomous auto. Apple is behind on that one since aside from a secret project it doesn't seem like they've done much in that area.

[JohnnyCanuck]

Originally Posted by tdott

The next game changer will be the fully autonomous auto. Apple is behind on that one since aside from a secret project it doesn't seem like they've done much in that area.

I'm not sold that we'll really see truly autonomous auto anytime soon, but setting that aside the real money a tech company as an automaker (you'll still be driving a BMW or a Chevy), nor will it be Tesla, but rather a bunch of suppliers. That has never been Apple's game and they won't be a player. OTOH, QNX is a big reason to be hanging on to my BBRY stock. Players like Aptiv, Bosch, Autoliv, Magna, Valeo, etc are going to be the big winners. Given their strength in enterprise cloud services, MSFT and Amazon are going to be important. Apple can noodle around the idea of building an autonomous vehicle all it wants, it was never going to be player in this space. Alphabet might be because their business model is more suited to it, but my money's elsewhere.

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by uniqueMR

Year 2019 will be his last chance at Apple Inc. and "YOU'RE FIRED"

...

I want him fired NOW...

[BayMoWe335]

Even with this recent drop, Cook has been good for Apple.

Full disclosure, I own several thousand shares, but Apple showed MANY areas of strength.

1) Despite this revenue miss, Apple is still going to report record EPS.
2) Services hit a record $10.8B in revenue, 25% y/y growth.
3) 100M more active users added to the user base in last 12 months.
4) “Non-iPhone business grew 19% y/y
5) Double digit iPad growth
6) 50% growth in wearables (Watch, AirPods)
7) $240B in cash
8) Biggest buyback in the world
9) Still did $84B in sales in 90 days.
10) AAPL trades at 10X 2019 earnings.
11) The revenue miss is concentrated in China and on iPhone there.

Now this wasn’t great news. Not at all. I’m disappointed in the execution and feel Apple needs to fix their strategy in China and emerging markets.

HOWEVER...you need a deeper understanding before you dismiss Cook as a failure.

Even with the decline, Apple has returned about 20%/yr with dividends under cook, outperforming the broader market by about 80%.

Markets do crazy things in the short term, but this company still makes so much money, it’s almost unbelievable. The $5B top line miss is pretty specific to iPhone in China and emerging markets.

Haters will get upset, but Apple STILL hit records in United States, Canada, Germany, Korea, and other developed markets.

Trading at about 10X earnings, you might want to buy the stock instead of bashing Cook. His results have been good and less than a year ago, Cook was given a huge vote of confidence by investors by approving all board members for new terms.

Cook is a genius and Jobs PICKED him to be CEO.

If you don’t see the innovation in the mobile silicon, FaceID, depth sensing camera tech, imagin processing, wearables, and the push to services, you aren’t paying attention. Apple still drives the industry. Look how many manufacturers are still trying to get a secure version of FaceID? Or even copying the notch? Or even something silly like removing headphone jacks? Pixel, Samsung on their new mid tier A phones.

The market had been bad th last 3 months. Amazon is also down 25%. You want to fire Bezos? Google is down huge too.

Check back in a year. The stock was $230 just 3 months ago. Apple didn’t change much since then and the valuation has never been sky high.

[EL Jeffe 5]

I hate the company, customer service is S#it in the bad way
Love the product

[WestRace]

How will 5G affect AAPL and in mobile business in general? Will that be a source of growth in the next coming years? I am surprised that very few in the investment community are talking about 5G.

Also as for AAPL, maybe they engineer this drop so they can buy back shares at lower cost. Coming out on the first day of trading seems to much of a coincidence.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by WestRace

How will 5G affect AAPL and in mobile business in general? Will that be a source of growth in the next coming years? I am surprised that very few in the investment community are talking about 5G.

Also as for AAPL, maybe they engineer this drop so they can buy back shares at lower cost. Coming out on the first day of trading seems to much of a coincidence.

I reallyyyy don't think 5G will make as big of an impact as people think. I remember the last go around from 3g to 4G, most people did not care about it all. When it came it was a solid upgrade but most people won't be able to tell the difference between 4g and 5g, the ones that are intelligent enough also know their own mobile carrier's limitations and rollout of it. I think this rollout will take 5 years and short term don't expect growth. People look for flash and new devices and I think we've hit close to peak... (I could be wrong but I have no idea what the next big thing could be). AAPL needs to focus on managing its large cash base, managing ops costs and develop a service of some sort for revenue.

[dsad1]

I think Cook is finally starting to see the light, and is going away from the Steve Jobs philosophy.

Bringing Itunes to Samsung TV's is a huge step. He is finally realizing that Apples ecosystem can't survive on it's own, it has to become cross platform.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by Real Dodger

If I recall, Apple was slow to adapt 4G. They had better be more on their toes for 5g.

Apple put LTE in the iPhone about 1 year after everyone else did. That is because at the time, the only way the Android phone makers were implementing LTE was with two radios. One for 3G for backward compatibility and voice calls and another radio for LTE. That compromise resulted in piss poor battery life if you turned on LTE as two radios were turned on. Apple waited until Qualcomm came out with one radio that had 3G and LTE on it.

Apple was not willing to go with that compromise at the time especially since LTE wasn't widely available yet.

[PshhhhhMW]

Originally Posted by quagmire

Apple put LTE in the iPhone about 1 year after everyone else did. That is because at the time, the only way the Android phone makers were implementing LTE was with two radios. One for 3G for backward compatibility and voice calls and another radio for LTE. That compromise resulted in piss poor battery life if you turned on LTE as two radios were turned on. Apple waited until Qualcomm came out with one radio that had 3G and LTE on it.

Apple was not willing to go with that compromise at the time especially since LTE wasn't widely available yet.

Or they just wanted to make the consumer buy the same phone a year later but with LTE.

[tdott]

Originally Posted by JohnnyCanuck

I'm not sold that we'll really see truly autonomous auto anytime soon, but setting that aside the real money a tech company as an automaker (you'll still be driving a BMW or a Chevy), nor will it be Tesla, but rather a bunch of suppliers. That has never been Apple's game and they won't be a player. OTOH, QNX is a big reason to be hanging on to my BBRY stock. Players like Aptiv, Bosch, Autoliv, Magna, Valeo, etc are going to be the big winners. Given their strength in enterprise cloud services, MSFT and Amazon are going to be important. Apple can noodle around the idea of building an autonomous vehicle all it wants, it was never going to be player in this space. Alphabet might be because their business model is more suited to it, but my money's elsewhere.

Time will tell.

I wasn't saying who, when or how, just that the autonomous car will be a huge market disrupter when/if it happens. I really don't think AAPL will be that, but I don't believe anyone expected them to enter the cell phone market and achieve what they did, so there is still a chance.

[WestRace]

The potential growth:

1. 5G (mobile virtual reality, ...)
2. AAPL service (itunes on Samsung)
3. Autonomous driving
...?

[TXSTYLE]

Originally Posted by Not_Judy

I didn't buy a BMW to look any one way or another. I bought mine because of how it drove and that bitch is sexy as hell. Now my Lexus, Infiniti or the Benz that I'll be buying this year may be because I wanted to look fancy though.

I also don't go out and buy a new BMW each time they release one just to be the guy with a new BMW. Mine is 11 years old this year.

This right here!

[dreamingat30fps]

I use to be part of the PC master race, then was forced to use a Mac for work and became a Mac fanboi. However I have been disappointed with the last couple Apple products I've purchased. Once they ruin OSX I'm done.

[uniqueMR]

One thing is certain: Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway do have bad luck whenever investing in tech companies lol (Apple, IBM, etc.).

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by uniqueMR

One thing is certain: Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway do have bad luck whenever investing in tech companies lol (Apple, IBM, etc.).

I wouldn't mind to be Warren Buffett.

[detroitm2]

Originally Posted by Real Dodger

They went from the Ipod (which was revolutionary) to the Iphone. But they also went from the Apple IIc to the Lisa. There's no telling what's next........But Cook is not the answer.

How exactly was the ipod revolutionary?

[detroitm2]

Originally Posted by quagmire

Apple put LTE in the iPhone about 1 year after everyone else did. That is because at the time, the only way the Android phone makers were implementing LTE was with two radios. One for 3G for backward compatibility and voice calls and another radio for LTE. That compromise resulted in piss poor battery life if you turned on LTE as two radios were turned on. Apple waited until Qualcomm came out with one radio that had 3G and LTE on it.

Apple was not willing to go with that compromise at the time especially since LTE wasn't widely available yet.

First, it was over 2 years later. (iPhone 5 was released in Sept 2012, HTC EVO 4G in March 2010)

Next, I actually had the first US released 4G phone (HTC EVO 4G), that I ordered on pre-sale, in a 4g market (atlanta). I'm certain I was one of the early testers to the 4G infrastructure at the time, given the 4G coverage area's were so small. That being said, the battery usage was not that bad considering what other phones did at the time. Yes, it did have 2 radios, but the 4G (WiMAX) radio was not as bad on battery life as one would expect. I was regularly getting 4ish hours on 4G without much trouble. At the time, that was phenomenal. Particularly considering how much faster the download speeds were.

The fact that Apple waited was unwarranted beyond the fact that they dropped the ball and did not want to figure out how to solder a new chip on their already printed boards.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by detroitm2

How exactly was the ipod revolutionary?

Significantly better user interface than any other MP3 player before.

Significantly better marketing than any other MP3 player before.

I would say the Iphone was the most revolutionary item Apple has ever made simply because of how well it packaged features... all the features were available before on other phones they just sucked ass in how they worked. People started buying Macs because they liked the Iphone interface so much.