Apple decides what to do with $100 billion

[Stark]

It'd be a laugh if since it's not a phone the EU doesn't force them to use a regular plug.

PS if you're reading a PDF on a Kindle every time you turn the page you are taking longer than emailing it to yourself would have.

[JointStrikeFighter]

There's heaps of apps where you just navigate to some variety of 192.168.0.2 in your PC browser, click browse, click upload and the content just appears on your iPad over the network anyway.

[Stark]

If it doesn't get a drive letter it sucks, ok?

I love the 'use program to do it', when the program is iTunes which you'll be using anyway. SO ONEROUS having drag and drop support in iTunes.

[Ryan Thunder]

I'm genuinely curious; how so? I personally find it pretty clunky for just about any purpose I can conceive of, so I'd really like to know how I'm supposed to be using it because its evidently unintuitive to somebody who's used to a sensible UI...

I'm genuinely curious here: what do you consider a "sensible UI" (and I don't mean "Windows", I mean, how elements are arranged, interaction of elements, etc.)?

Just for the record, I'm not ignoring this. I just don't want to write a big long rambling post on it if it turns out I can boil it down to a few relatively simple concepts.

[Phantasee]

What's funniest about this thread is how it's turned into "Apple sucks" and bitching about fucking GUIs. The OP was about the company, and what the world's largest corporation by market value is doing with its mountain of cash.

People clearly like Apple's products; bitching about how they're wrong isn't going to change that fact.

If you can't discuss the subject without nitpicking something you didn't like about your personal experience with one product, get the fuck out.

[Stark]

It should be notable that people like Starglider actually contributed to a discussion of Apple's situation, and the idea that Apple is well aware their current performance (either financially or market-wise) is unlikely to continue is interesting stuff. I'm pretty interested in what companies can do to soften expected drops in performance.

Only... butthurt fatties gotta drag their bullshit in and beat that dead horse.

[Phantasee]

If only they had read the OP and addressed the potential problems with their business strategies as interpreted by that dude. Or maybe they would have learned something! Fuckwits.

Hey Ryan:

• Selling on value rather than selling on price to create margins. This is includes all of Apple's advertising (they sell benefits, not features). This is how you create high margins. It takes cojones to stick to a price and walk away if someone doesn't want to pay it.

It's not overpriced if people are willing to pay that price. What it means is that people see value beyond the specs. Not all boxes are created equal.

[Stark]

Holy shit lol :V

What interests me about this is that Apple is clearly aware that their market share will continue to be taken by other offerings (which are either mature or becoming mature) and that they're trying to prepare for the decline. Starglider thinks its totally unsustainable and that the decline will be serious stuff, but its hard to imagine that Apple will be able to keep its numbers up in the face of increasingly high quality competition. Whether he's right or not they're certainly moving to be more secure.

[Ryan Thunder]

What's funniest about this thread is how it's turned into "Apple sucks" and bitching about fucking GUIs. The OP was about the company, and what the world's largest corporation by market value is doing with its mountain of cash.

It's ill-begotten cash.

People clearly like Apple's products; bitching about how they're wrong isn't going to change that fact.

Because they've been had. The only worthwhile discussion that can be had with respect to Apple is "how do we get people to understand that they've been scammed?"

If you can't discuss the subject without nitpicking something you didn't like about your personal experience with one product, get the fuck out.

Go fuck yourself. I'm not going anywhere. If you don't like being reminded that they sell mediocre products for a premium price, that's not my fucking problem.

It should be notable that people like Starglider actually contributed to a discussion of Apple's situation, and the idea that Apple is well aware their current performance (either financially or market-wise) is unlikely to continue is interesting stuff. I'm pretty interested in what companies can do to soften expected drops in performance.

Apple's situation is built on selling mediocre products at premium prices. We should be discussing how to get them to stop this and start dealing honestly with their customers, so we can ditch them and get back to cool stuff that's actually worth what you pay for it and people can stop fucking worshipping them like some kind of deity.

Hey Ryan:

• Selling on value rather than selling on price to create margins. This is includes all of Apple's advertising (they sell benefits, not features). This is how you create high margins. It takes cojones to stick to a price and walk away if someone doesn't want to pay it.

Yeah, you're right, it does take balls to price something higher than its worth and then expect people to actually buy it.

It's not overpriced if people are willing to pay that price.

1. Appeal to popularity.
2. Bullshit straight out of the (capitalist) microeconomics textbook. That only works if everybody is omniscient, which they clearly aren't.

What it means is that people see value beyond the specs. Not all boxes are created equal.

No, what it means is they've been convinced (because they're not all-knowing demigods) to buy mediocre products at a premium price.

[evilsoup]

Oh for fuck's sake.
Yes Apple computers are underpowered in terms of CPU etc for their price. But the average person doesn't care and they have no reason to care. For 90% of users, 2GB is more RAM than they need, and a dual-core processor is actually overpowered. There actually aren't that many uses for really powerful computers: programming shit, HARDCORE gaming, video editing - even then, the iMacs with 3GB of RAM and a single-core processor are surprisingly good at handling video editing. Probably because the OS is optimised for a known set of hardware.

Now I know this won't make sense to you because, being a fucking stupid fat fucking nerd you have no sense or comprehension of beauty, but: Apple stuff looks good. That is the main reason why people like it.

Now, they also have an impressive marketing machine behind them. But, eh, fuck it - computers are luxury items anyway. If people want to waste their money on 'overpriced' computers, that's their prerogative. And most (the vast majority of) Apple customers are satisfied with their stuff.

So, what? You feel some kind of urge to crusade against Apple and free all the 'brand slaves' with the light of QUAD CORE or whatever? Why the fuck would you care that people are wasting money (that they would probably just spend on other unnecessary shit anyway)?

...
Sorry guys I couldn't resist.
ANYWAYS

What, Apple doesn't pay dividends on their shares? But then what is the point of having them (apart from selling them on to the next guy)?
HMM

Late CEO Steve Jobs, haunted by lean years in the mid-90s, likely stood in the way of returning cash to shareholders. Mr. Jobs died in October.

Now, I don't know that much about Apple as a company, but wasn't it failing before Mr. Jobs came in and revamped their image? And there was that whole 'reality distortion field' cult-of-personality thing going on... might this be a sign that more normal business-types are taking over, maybe without that kind of guiding vision? Might not be a good sign... but then, he was in charge for a long time, so I suppose he would have shaped the upper management around his thinking.

[phongn]

If you don't like being reminded that they sell mediocre products for a premium price, that's not my fucking problem.

Apple's situation is built on selling mediocre products at premium prices. We should be discussing how to get them to stop this and start dealing honestly with their customers, so we can ditch them and get back to cool stuff that's actually worth what you pay for it and people can stop fucking worshipping them like some kind of deity.

Yeah, you're right, it does take balls to price something higher than its worth and then expect people to actually buy it.

No, what it means is they've been convinced (because they're not all-knowing demigods) to buy mediocre products at a premium price.

Ryan, you can't just keep repeating the same tired old thing and hope that it sticks. You haven't defended your assertion that their products are "mediocre" or "overpriced". Everything you say so far has been subjective.

1. Appeal to popularity.
2. Bullshit straight out of the (capitalist) microeconomics textbook. That only works if everybody is omniscient, which they clearly aren't.

First of all, this is a capitalist economy and so yes, Apple has to take into account basic supply-demand economics. This isn't a "appeal to popularity". It also doesn't require that people are omniscient, either, only that they are reasonably well-informed. They can compare "shiny Apple MacBook" versus "shiny HP Envy" for what they want to accomplish (read: not some ridiculous spec sheet) or iOS device versus Android/WP7/whatever.

Secondly, what do you defined as well-priced if not what the market prices it at? Cost of goods + markup?

[Phantasee]

Did you seriously call a basic lesson from Econ 101 an "appeal to popularity"?

You've done a very good job of living up to your title, Ryan.

If you seriously think Apple has made its money in an illegal way, please, call the police.

[Skgoa]

Late CEO Steve Jobs, haunted by lean years in the mid-90s, likely stood in the way of returning cash to shareholders. Mr. Jobs died in October.

Now, I don't know that much about Apple as a company, but wasn't it failing before Mr. Jobs came in and revamped their image? And there was that whole 'reality distortion field' cult-of-personality thing going on... might this be a sign that more normal business-types are taking over, maybe without that kind of guiding vision? Might not be a good sign... but then, he was in charge for a long time, so I suppose he would have shaped the upper management around his thinking.

The business-type manager Jobs had hired to eventually succeed him turned around and led a coup against Jobs, forcing him out of Apple. This guy (plus a couple of other less than competent people) proceeded to demolish the up to then very profitable Apple mostly by being blind to the changes in the market and deaf to what the consumers asked for. Ten years later, when Apple was almost dead, they got kicked out and Jobs was asked to take over again. A short while after that we got OS X, Intel Macs, the iPod, Apple Stores, etc., and Apple is now the richest company in the world.

[Stark]

I gotta say that when professionals like Phongn are saying 'real use-cases are not driven by pixel counts or megahurtz' you should probably listen. That's the core of what Phant (who actually DID pay attention in school :V) is saying; Apple is selling benefits that arguably cost nothing to manufacture instead of features that would require better parts/different manufacture/etc. It isn't just not evil; it's absolutely typical of almost all consumer industry. I'm sure Phant could argue this better than I do, but Apple even uses customers who choose cheaper alternatives and their product launch shortages to increase percieved value of their products, because they become the desired option.

The discussion I'm curious about isn't educating Ryan, though; it's the sort of decisions people make when they see that they are at a high point for the mid-term and want to make sure any downturn affects them as little as possible.

Frankly the fact that people don't go after EVERY OTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD for selling shit for more than it costs to make is hilarious. Coke not really worth $1 a liter!

[phongn]

I gotta say that when professionals like Phongn are saying 'real use-cases are not driven by pixel counts or megahurtz'

Consumer computing is supposed to make our lives richer and easier, and that's what Apple sells (and sells well). Just look at their advertising and what they emphasize: as Phant noted, they sell value - you can edit home video and photos, you can talk to your phone to find the nearest restaurant, you can easily do video-chat with your dad deployed overseas. Are there alternatives on other platforms? Sure. But those guys aren't exactly doing a stellar job selling that value proposition.

Some people (Starglider, the lab where I work, etc) have different priorities, and that's okay, but it'd be nice if Ryan realized that's there can be many needs and wants. It's not like Apple stops him from buying the latest new PC.

The discussion I'm curious about isn't educating Ryan, though; it's the sort of decisions people make when they see that they are at a high point for the mid-term and want to make sure any downturn affects them as little as possible.

Starglider mentioned a few things, but it also might just be a sign of how Tim Cook intends to deal with Apple's shareholders, as compared to Steve Jobs. The latter was infamous for hating on his shareholders and not giving them the time of day; the former is throwing them a bone. For another tack, the guys at Asymco think it's a sign that Apple will use this to continue stock-as-compensation.

[Ryan Thunder]

Did you seriously call a basic lesson from Econ 101 an "appeal to popularity"?

Yeah, I did.

Well, ok, it was an appeal to an authority basing its concept of value on an appeal to popularity. It is literally appealing to popularity by claiming that "if lots of people are willing to pay that price, then it must be a fair price."

They refuse to consider that people do not have all the information and assume that they always make rational decisions when it comes to buying a product. This is simply not the case. Hell, its hardly ever the case.

"Lots of people can be duped into buying our shit at a 30% margin" does not mean that the product is worth manufacturing costs + some fraction of initial investment + 30% margin. That reflects nothing about how effectively it works, how materially efficient it is, or anything else that actually matters like that.

If you seriously think Apple has made its money in an illegal way, please, call the police.

Oh, fuck off. There's nothing illegal about it, but just because its legal doesn't mean its an effective or efficient system.

I gotta say that when professionals like Phongn are saying 'real use-cases are not driven by pixel counts or megahurtz' you should probably listen.

Are you seriously coming back to this again? They're driven by what people want to do, yes. Jesus Christ, this is obvious and has nothing to do with Apple stuff being overpriced for what you get, yet you keep fucking harping on it as though I implied that people should only ever buy the latest blocky, ugly hex-core or some other mind-numbingly overspecced shitpile to do their web browsing, video, email, and word processing.

That's the core of what Phant (who actually DID pay attention in school :V) is saying; Apple is selling benefits that arguably cost nothing to manufacture instead of features that would require better parts/different manufacture/etc.

Then they should be cheap, similarly priced, or marginally more expensive...

It isn't just not evil; it's absolutely typical of almost all consumer industry. I'm sure Phant could argue this better than I do, but Apple even uses customers who choose cheaper alternatives and their product launch shortages to increase percieved value of their products, because they become the desired option.

You even called it 'perceived'! How can you not acknowledge that its just people taking advantage of subjective bullshit for personal gain at the expense of others?

I gotta say that when professionals like Phongn are saying 'real use-cases are not driven by pixel counts or megahurtz'

Consumer computing is supposed to make our lives richer and easier, and that's what Apple sells (and sells well). Just look at their advertising and what they emphasize: as Phant noted, they sell value - you can edit home video and photos, you can talk to your phone to find the nearest restaurant, you can easily do video-chat with your dad deployed overseas. Are there alternatives on other platforms? Sure. But those guys aren't exactly doing a stellar job selling that value proposition.

So, unsurprisingly; the market fails to function effectively because consumers aren't sufficiently well-informed. How you can admit the facts without the obvious conclusions is beyond me.

Some people (Starglider, the lab where I work, etc) have different priorities, and that's okay, but it'd be nice if Ryan realized that's there can be many needs and wants. It's not like Apple stops him from buying the latest new PC.

I do, goddamnit. There's no need to drop a thousand dollars to do word-processing and home video, for fucks sake.

[Stark]

I think it's time you accepted you fundamentally do not understand the concept of 'value' and 'worth'. Even putting aside non-pixel things like experience, satisfaction,etc, there is a way of measuring this and it is being measured right now. It's called 'the marketplace'.

That you say Apple, who are selling on benefits, polish and experience, should be selling 'similarly priced' anything just because you are personally offended by their positioning at the high end of the market is fucking hilarious.

For what its worth, I have never, ever felt 'overcharged' for an Apple product. Indeed, using the other products in the market has always reinforced why I paid a premium for a premium product. The actual discussion the adults are having is about what Apple will do now that competition (like Android devices) is approaching the same level of polish.

[phongn]

So, unsurprisingly; the market fails to function effectively because consumers aren't sufficiently well-informed. How you can admit the facts without the obvious conclusions is beyond me.

If you looked earlier in the thread I argued that consumers are, in fact, reasonably well-informed. Apple's superior marketing is not necessarily "duping" people into buying their products.

I do, goddamnit. There's no need to drop a thousand dollars to do word-processing and home video, for fucks sake.

You have been totally incompetent at actually articulating your points instead of ranting at large about Apple. Calm down, man.

Look, most consumers realize that you can get a laptop from Dell for $600. Have you considered that maybe they find the extra cost for a MacBook worth it for some reason other than "they were duped?" Or if we look at iOS, it's not like those products are outrageously priced compared to their competitors (and have real advantages like timely OS updates)

For what its worth, I have never, ever felt 'overcharged' for an Apple product. Indeed, using the other products in the market has always reinforced why I paid a premium for a premium product. The actual discussion the adults are having is about what Apple will do now that competition (like Android devices) is approaching the same level of polish.

It's a bit of an interesting question - maybe they'll do more to keep developers in their camp as a major competitive advantage? I've read a few studies indicating that the vast amount of money is being made on iOS and not Android or WP7. Their enormous cash pile also lets them corner the market on components and the business they can give a factory means that Apple apparently dictates terms. That advantage is pretty powerful and the relatively fragmented competitor-market will find it difficult to match Apple's margins even once things like user-experience reach parity. Maybe Samsung can match the hardware (as they produce CPU, memory, spun off their LCDs, &c) but they're not very good at software.

[Stark]

Yeah I don't know much about Android stuff, but I've seen it go from a pretty laughable platform to something that can at least stand up as an option rather than a second-tier. I had also heard that in a device sales sense other devices were rising faster than iOS devices, so I'm curious to see what happens if the early round of 4G Android phones (for instance) are solid performers before the iPhone 5 comes out.

[Ryan Thunder]

So, unsurprisingly; the market fails to function effectively because consumers aren't sufficiently well-informed. How you can admit the facts without the obvious conclusions is beyond me.

If you looked earlier in the thread I argued that consumers are, in fact, reasonably well-informed. Apple's superior marketing is not necessarily "duping" people into buying their products.

They pretty obviously aren't. Even going by your own statement; the information is available. The capabilities exist on other platforms. People choose the more expensive product anyway. Why? Because they seriously don't realize they can do all that just as well or better on other platforms that are just as stable, for far less. They've even got stylish casings!

Look, most consumers realize that you can get a laptop from Dell for $600. Have you considered that maybe they find the extra cost for a MacBook worth it for some reason other than "they were duped?"

No, I've tried them myself. I truly do not understand how else anybody could spend $200-$400 on what amounts to "+2 shiny" except by misinformation.

Hell, you can do everything a casual user wants to do on a $400 laptop, these days.

Even putting aside non-pixel things like experience, satisfaction,etc, there is a way of measuring this and it is being measured right now. It's called 'the marketplace'.

It's a useless measure if it doesn't reflect realities like utility, or material, energy, and effort costs.

[Block]

So, unsurprisingly; the market fails to function effectively because consumers aren't sufficiently well-informed. How you can admit the facts without the obvious conclusions is beyond me.

If you looked earlier in the thread I argued that consumers are, in fact, reasonably well-informed. Apple's superior marketing is not necessarily "duping" people into buying their products.

I would disagree with this, mostly because Jobs himself repeatedly was quoted as saying something to the effect of "People want what I tell them to want" and it seeming to work for Apple. I wouldn't call this well informed.

[Stark]

Have you just discovered marketing? :v Regardless, what they are selling is clearly wanted and desired.

Phongn, given the nature of the Android platform what is there in the way of overall marketing or direction? I assume Google makes most decisions on OS featureset but are manufacturers left to implement, design and market their own approaches?

[Block]

Have you just discovered marketing? :v Regardless, what they are selling is clearly wanted and desired.

There's a difference between marketing and directly calling your customers morons who do whatever you say, which is what he did, but thanks for playing.

[Stark]

Dude Jobs can be as big an asshole as you like, but that doesn't make him less correct. Is this because he is a mastermind of international manipulation, or what he wants you to like (ie what he sells) is carefully designed to fit needs?

ITT declaring your successful marketing successful = everyone is dumb lololololol. Are you saying because Jobs is an asshole, every Apple consumer is ill-informed and simply tricked into buying their products? :V

[phongn]

They pretty obviously aren't. Even going by your own statement; the information is available. The capabilities exist on other platforms. People choose the more expensive product anyway. Why? Because they seriously don't realize they can do all that just as well or better on other platforms that are just as stable, for far less. They've even got stylish casings!

No, I've tried them myself. I truly do not understand how else anybody could spend $200-$400 on what amounts to "+2 shiny" except by misinformation.

It's not "misinformation", it's your total lack of comprehension on the values most people have for consumer goods and that market.

It's a useless measure if it doesn't reflect realities like utility, or material, energy, and effort costs.

User experience is paramount for a consumer electronics good. It is not a useless measure at all. And don't think for one moment that Apple doesn't sink enormous amounts of effort into getting an attractive, well-designed and usable product.

I would disagree with this, mostly because Jobs himself repeatedly was quoted as saying something to the effect of "People want what I tell them to want" and it seeming to work for Apple. I wouldn't call this well informed.

SJ was one of those few people who knew the customer's needs and wants better than the customer did themselves - and proceeded to craft his products around it. I have occasionally heard that Apple had only one customer - Steve Jobs - and they were fortunate that he had really, really good taste.

Thus, when his products came to market, well, they met consumer needs and wants excellently (for well-informed and naive consumers alike).

Phongn, given the nature of the Android platform what is there in the way of overall marketing or direction? I assume Google makes most decisions on OS featureset but are manufacturers left to implement, design and market their own approaches?

Google produces the core operating system but it's up to the handset manufacturers to take the core and then build something useful with it (then adding product differentiators like Motoblur, Touchwiz, Sense, etc.) The carriers usually then proceed to add their own crapware and (rarely) add or (often) remove features. Worse now are companies like B&N and Amazon who take the core Android OS but use none of the Google services! As a result, Android is a giant mess. Google can't even keep their flagship Nexus line updated in good order! We're back in the terrible days of mostly-compatible computing.

While Google can set direction of the core operating system, marketing is something of a mess. You get individual handset manufacturers making ads (usually badly), the carriers making ads (usually badly) and the occasional Google effort (not bad!). The cat's out of the bag, too, when it comes to enforcing more direction in the Android ecosystem.