> Recognize that Apple will not be the "innovator" that it was in the past. (Apple will still innovate, but not home runs every time.)
I don't know where Apple gets this reputation, but they have hardly hit home runs every time. I mean, does no one remember the Newton? Final Cut X? The original Apple TV? The trash can PowerMac? Does anyone think the Touch Bar is a home run?
Which is good, because innovation necessarily means not hitting home runs every time, and Apple knows that. That's why they hoard so much cash, so they can afford to miss sometimes.
I question whether you understand Apple's core business. They can't vertically integrate like old school conglomerates because they don't have anything to integrate. They own very few assets apart from their IP. Intel and Samsung own factories; Apple does not. The East India Company owned land and ships; Apple does not. Amazon owns warehouses and many $billions of inventory... Apple does not.
From an IP perspective they are already vertically integrated, from chip design to UI to services to retail. But then you ding them for that...
Absolutely - Apple is vertically integrated as much as they need to be.
They don't need to own Foxconn or Samsung. It doesn't give them any advantage, and threatening to drop a supplier gives them leverage.
They do engineer capacity shortages to slow down their competitors. From 2011 [1], to 2014 [2], to 2017 [3].
I put "innovator" in quotes for exactly the same reason. Apple "innovates" as much as they need to, such as branding it #courage to omit the headphone jack.
If I "dinged" them, I don't see it. I predicted their future strategy, with the caveat that it might take them years to begin executing on it.
Apple's earnings calls are the most obvious signal that their "core business" is what all the chatter is about. Apple knows they can't ride iPhone and iPhone alone forever.
Apple Watch Series 3 is roughly equivalent to the original iPhone. It's a weird blindspot for all the Apple critics.
Best as I can tell, Apple is 2 - 3 years ahead of everyone else.
--
My singular and persistent disappointment remains iCloud. I still want seamless sync and handoff and backup and unlimited storage... That just works. That doesn't require me to do tech supp for my family members.
It's getting incrementally better, but isn't quite the whole enchilada yet.
No one has cracked the ubiquitous computing nut, so maybe it's just a hard problem.
I am on the same page as you...I think the Apple Watch is going to be the replacement for the iPhone. In fact this will be the largest segment as we slowly see most functions move from the phone to the Watch (yes I realize that there are some limitations due to screen size) but in general you will see much move over while the Apple Glass will take over the other function that you need a image of.
I don't know where Apple gets this reputation, but they have hardly hit home runs every time. I mean, does no one remember the Newton? Final Cut X? The original Apple TV? The trash can PowerMac? Does anyone think the Touch Bar is a home run?
Which is good, because innovation necessarily means not hitting home runs every time, and Apple knows that. That's why they hoard so much cash, so they can afford to miss sometimes.
I question whether you understand Apple's core business. They can't vertically integrate like old school conglomerates because they don't have anything to integrate. They own very few assets apart from their IP. Intel and Samsung own factories; Apple does not. The East India Company owned land and ships; Apple does not. Amazon owns warehouses and many $billions of inventory... Apple does not.
From an IP perspective they are already vertically integrated, from chip design to UI to services to retail. But then you ding them for that...