[HN Gopher] Apple Reports Second Quarter Results
___________________________________________________________________
Apple Reports Second Quarter Results
Author : MaysonL
Score : 110 points
Date : 2021-04-28 20:32 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| InTheArena wrote:
| Revenue up 54%, $89B in Q2. M1 macs are a hit. Services are a
| hit.
|
| It's remarkable to see the success that AMD and Apple are having
| without Intel.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| Sorry, I doubt AMD would be where they are now had they not
| been a second source for Intel's x86 chips, that's what really
| bootstrapped them.
| lurkerasdfh8 wrote:
| M1 is meaningless. To 99% of their market it is just a new
| vague number to justify an upgrade (like ram sizes, 3/4/5G,
| etc).
|
| What is masterful is how they redirected the desirable-number-
| du-jour to be something that is both 1) proprietary and 2) not
| cutting into their service revenue (e.g. larger storage = less
| people shelling out for cloud storage)
| valine wrote:
| The M1 is far from meaningless. Apple's new MacBook Air is by
| far the best laptop I've ever used. It has fantastic battery
| life, stays cool without a fan, and competes with the Intel
| i9 in terms of performance.
| 1cvmask wrote:
| The macs are unfortunately still a sideshow compared to iOS
| devices (written on an iPad now).
| faitswulff wrote:
| All related - iOS has never run on Intel.
| busymom0 wrote:
| iOS apps do run on Intel using catalyst. I recently ported
| over my hacker news client from iOS to MacOS and it works
| well on catalyst with small changes to handle right click
| and toolbar color etc. I was legit pleased to see how easy
| it was to get it working.
| ant6n wrote:
| In the emulator, err, simulator it does, doesn't it?
| qeternity wrote:
| Only because the dev hardware ran x86. Now with M1, you
| won't need to.
| vmladenov wrote:
| In theory, iOS can run in a chroot on the M1 Macs, right?
| twobitshifter wrote:
| I've been considering dropping Spotify for the "Apple One"
| plan, looks like I'm not the only one from that huge jump in
| services.
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| The only things that keep me from moving over to Apple's plan
| are being able to import my playlists and liked songs
| (thousands!) from Spotify, and Discover Weekly and Billboard
| Hot 100-esque type playlists.
|
| Does Apple have equivalents of those features? Discover
| Weekly is incredible.
| dcreemer wrote:
| I've used soundiiz.com for importing likes & playlists
| (though from different source and target services). Works
| well enough.
| Jcowell wrote:
| Apple Music has New Music Mixes and Continuous Playing.
| pbronez wrote:
| Spotify is way ahead of Apple Music on everything to do
| with discovery. I tried to switch to Apple Music (mostly
| for the Homepod Mini support) and really disliked the apple
| music app.
| immigrantsheep wrote:
| I had the same experience. I went into it and really
| wanted to buy into Apple Music but after a couple of
| painful months I went back to Spotify.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| It's interesting, I had the opposite experience. Years
| ago used Spotify and found that Discover Weekly rarely
| had anything I'd actually want to listen to, whereas with
| Apple Music's New Music Mix I'm adding the songs it digs
| up fairly frequently. Might have to do with preferred
| genres.
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| Some leaks in the past suggest Discover Weekly simply
| searches through other users' liked songs and if you like
| Artist A and they like Artist A and B, and you haven't
| checked out B yet, there's a better chance you'll like
| Artist B over C that neither of you have heard before.
| TooKool4This wrote:
| Transferring songs and playlist is actually very easy
| (unless you are listening to very niche stuff). Songshift
| (no affiliation) worked very well for my needs and moved
| most of my playlists and songs over. Not sure about
| discover weekly though
| CubsFan1060 wrote:
| I second Songshift.
| Dig1t wrote:
| I did this when it came out and have definitely not regretted
| it.
| asimpletune wrote:
| Send me an email and join my family plan
| busymom0 wrote:
| Is that allowed? Don't you have to be at the same address
| or something?
| anaclet0 wrote:
| $90 billion in buybacks is insane. IIRC analysts were expecting
| something between $70-$80 billion.
| Steve886 wrote:
| Apple folks - if you missed Apple's earnings call, here you go
| https://youtu.be/kTIUcdfcmF4
| halotrope wrote:
| When Steve Jobs passed in 2011 I was certain that Apple would
| lose its way and start diluting their products/brand. To the
| contrary the last 10 years where an absolute tour the force in
| expansion of the spirit of Apple. Sure there where some issues.
| There always are. But in general it is incredible how they scaled
| to such epic proportions while maintaining this high level of
| discipline and excellence. I am amazed. Congratulations to the
| people who made it possible.
|
| Edit: typo
| perardi wrote:
| Have they been perfect? No. Keyboards, App Store, still not
| entirely sure what the iPad Pro does, etc.
|
| But you know what Tim Cook didn't do? He didn't screw it all
| up. Which sounds like faint praise, but I really think it's
| inarguable that Jobs remade Apple, stem to stern, blood to
| bone, software to hardware. And to step in and take over a
| company that had been reborn like that, and not nickel-and-dime
| it into mediocrity? Remarkable.
|
| I don't think anyone is really arguing Cook is a product
| visionary--I certainly don't think Cook is himself. But just
| navigating the _political_ landscape alone is truly impressive.
| ProAm wrote:
| Cook is to Apple like Balmer was to Microsoft.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Balmer kind of blew it for microsoft though. Cook is doing
| well enough.
| adventured wrote:
| Ballmer didn't do much to harm Microsoft, he sales-
| managed the company - Microsoft increased in size
| considerably during his tenure. Sales went from $23
| billion to $86 billion during the Ballmer years, a
| radical increase for an already large company. One can
| certainly give credit to Gates instead, perhaps, however
| Ballmer still didn't botch it. Azure and cloud Office
| were born during the Ballmer years as well, those were
| initiatives during his years that have been perfected
| under Nadella (who is a dramatically better product CEO).
| I consider Nadella's willingness to abandon the Windows
| religion as the single greatest contribution any CEO has
| made to Microsoft since the peak Gates years. The worst
| you can say about Ballmer is that during his reign
| Microsoft didn't take over the world by grabbing search
| and mobile. Which was a near impossible task, no company
| can or should own everything in such a way. I do believe
| if Ballmer had kept control for a longer period of time
| (another ten years or so), the risk would have increased
| of Microsoft getting permanently Oracle'd culturally. It
| wasn't entirely a bad thing to have a strong insider as a
| hand in the post Gates years (maybe a good question is:
| was there anybody else in 1999-2000, in the upper tiers
| of management, that would have been better fit for the
| task).
| kergonath wrote:
| > I don't think anyone is really arguing Cook is a product
| visionary--I certainly don't think Cook is himself. But just
| navigating the political landscape alone is truly impressive.
|
| I agree. However, he _is_ a master at providing the
| infrastructure and logistics to make other people realise
| their vision. And he does have a long-term plan.
|
| The scale and efficiency of Apple's operations, as well as
| their continued success is mind boggling. There have been a
| couple of hiccups every now and then (and some tours de force
| as well); overall it is quite impressive.
| chongli wrote:
| I can't answer for those other issues but I'm an iPad Pro
| owner and I'll say the 120Hz screen with the pencil feels
| absolutely magical. I think any Pro user who uses it for
| drawing and painting will not want to use anything else. It's
| a legit professional tool. Looks like the new M1 version
| pushed even harder in that direction with its display and
| colour support.
|
| It reminds me of Macs back in the 90's. Very few used Windows
| for creative work. The MacOS had ColorSync and professionals
| in photography and print, publishing, etc refused to use
| anything but a Mac due to the need for colour accuracy in
| their workflows. To an outsider it may have seemed baffling
| as to why these computers were considered professional tools
| when everyone else in business was using Windows.
| perardi wrote:
| I fully admit I am a crusty old Mac user, who in fact
| started on the Mac back in those days.
|
| I perhaps don't see the Pro in iPad Pro because I am
| wanting it to basically be a Mac, but tablet. Maybe it is
| truly an orthogonal product that does pro work differently.
| But the software story just still feels incomplete. Just
| feels so limiting in terms of file system and such.
| chongli wrote:
| I am also a crusty old Mac user from back then. I really
| miss MacOS 8 and its simplicity and spatial Finder.
|
| The iPad Pro is a pro device for creative professionals
| in visual arts only, to my knowledge. It's definitely not
| a pro software development tool or anything else of the
| sort we'd use a Mac for. In some sense you can think of
| the iPad Pro as an attack on Wacom's market.
|
| I'm not a creative pro by any stretch of the imagination.
| I use my iPad Pro for tutoring people remotely in
| mathematics, a task it excels at. I also play some games
| on it and use it for FaceTime calls because its front-
| facing camera is nicer than the one on my M1 MBA.
|
| I'm really happy with my iPad Pro even though I was
| hesitant about buying one for over a year. I was
| expecting buyers' remorse to set in but it thankfully
| hasn't. I keep finding new things to do with it.
| Scrolling through PDFs on the device is way smoother than
| the MBA, for example, so I've used it as a second screen
| for reading documentation while working.
| perardi wrote:
| I'm a creative pro who works on math software, so,
| synergy. I just feel like I am slogging through mud to
| work with versions of mockups, quickly bouncing stuff to
| git or onto our damned fileserver, all that
| administrative jazz.
|
| _(I will note my college illustration professor loves
| her iPad Pro with a passion that would fill an Apple
| keynote--she ditched her Wacom instantly.)_
|
| But though I'm iffy on the Pro in iPad, I am pro iPad, if
| only because my somewhat elderly parents _love_ the
| thing. They are like some Platonic ideal of iPad users--
| they have totally and completely ditched their Mac, and
| do all their banking and medical records and weather
| _(old people love weather)_ on their iPad, with a fluency
| they never, ever came close to achieving with a mouse.
| Jcowell wrote:
| I disagree. It makes a fantastic planning tool and on the
| fly monitor to my MacBook Pro and Mac Mini.
| snowwrestler wrote:
| Jobs became Apple CEO in 1997. Tim Cook joined Apple in 1998.
| It's easy to forget, but Cook was a huge part of remaking
| Apple almost from the beginning with Jobs. His role has
| obviously expanded but he's essentially running a company
| that he helped create.
| intergalplan wrote:
| > iPad Pro does, etc
|
| I get that.
|
| But.
|
| Having used many iPads, my favorite sizes are the 12.9" (Pro)
| and the Mini.
|
| Why (for the pro--I trust my love of the mini needs little
| explanation)?
|
| The 12.9" is so big that it's about the size of an 8.5x11"
| sheet of paper, which turns out to be a really convenient
| size for reading anything based on... paper. It's outstanding
| for reading PDFs of, say, textbooks, as it's large enough you
| might be able to get away with reading it in landscape, and
| is _the_ best device I 'm aware of for reading comics (ditto
| on the landscape mode, it works great, it's just _a little_
| smaller than a real two-page comic book spread). Yet it 's
| light enough not to be a giant pain to hold.
|
| It's amazing for art (with a Pencil). Nice and big, very
| responsive. The larger screen makes almost anything you'd do
| on a normal iPad a little better. Movies, browsing, games.
| Low-distraction writing device with an external keyboard.
| It's a great companion for music where, again, the larger
| size is really nice for displaying sheet music or... well,
| almost anything else music-related you want to do. Last I
| checked the cameras & mics beat the hell out of most laptops,
| including Apple ones, for video calls.
|
| Know what it's very close in size to? A 13" MBP or Air. Know
| what it can do? Become a portable external monitor for same.
| Damn nice.
|
| 2-player board games. Again, the size helps a ton.
|
| _My_ personal uses barely call for all the extra horsepower
| of the "pro" line, actually, aside from maybe drawing
| (which, AFAIK, has more to do with specialized hardware on
| the screen than with CPU power or memory) but holy crap, the
| screen size. It's glorious. If I could have only one
| computing device in my house I'd seriously consider making it
| the 12.9" iPad Pro (assuming I could keep my mechanical
| bluetooth keyboard, too). I can always SSH/Mosh to a unixy
| command line somewhere else, but none of my unixy machines
| are much good for _most_ of what I use the iPad Pro for.
| tolmasky wrote:
| I'm not sure if 5 years of stagnation in the Mac lineup is a
| blip. Perhaps as a percentage of revenue? In terms of customer
| satisfaction, it was _rough_. Those keyboards were _really bad_
| , and not everyone has the ability to just swap them out with
| the new fancy computers coming out now, so many will be feeling
| them for some time to come. Same thing with the Mac Pros. But
| yes, things are _now_ looking pretty amazing in the hardware
| department. Unfortunately, the concern is now with the
| software. macOS has been going downhill for a while, and Big
| Sur doesn 't give me a ton of confidence.
|
| Of course, the Mac is some insignificant portion of the Apple's
| footprint these days, but I have to say their mobile offerings
| have been kind of a yawn too. Don't get me wrong, perfectly
| competent, no need to switch or anything, but iPod to iPhone
| happened in 6 years (!), and I don't think the Apple Watch is
| anywhere near that level of consistent culture defining
| technology that kind of defined "the spirit of Apple" from the
| original iMac to the iPhone (I'd like to say "to the iPad", but
| unfortunately the product has been kind relegated to a side
| purchase vs. the Mac-replacement I think it honestly had the
| opportunity to be -- and I guess could still be, its not like
| any "window" has been missed, just hasn't really done much in
| the last 10 years either, in terms of definitive changes in
| workflow like the iPhone did).
|
| As a customer, the subscription stuff is honestly just
| somewhere between boring and annoying. "Apple One" with its 3
| different plans and still tremendously confusing options (if I
| let my parents have access to the movies _I 've_ purchased,
| they can no longer buy their own movies -- what? why? It's
| strictly more profitable for Apple to let them ALSO use their
| credit card instead of locking them out of being able to make
| their own purchases just because I shared my content).
| Honestly, I have to strain really hard to remember what "Apple
| One" includes aside from Apple TV+. Oh right, News or
| something? The ability to not get annoying iCloud space errors
| that users remain not fully comprehending?
|
| Now, flip that around, and investor-wise, you are spot on! I am
| LONG $AAPL, just short Apple products (software specifically).
| Which is unfortunate, because they are still probably the best,
| just no longer... "good". It used to feel like a premium
| experience, for a premium price, now just the latter.
| anonymouse008 wrote:
| This 100% ^^
|
| Apple can be seen as an excellent MBA course in operations,
| as probably to be expected. I'm not going to say Steve was a
| all knowing genius, but it's a pretty dang smart move to put
| someone in place who will put the company on such firm
| economical footing while you wait for your next big thing
| (person) to emerge from the organization.
| anonymouse008 wrote:
| Take the iPod maturation under Jobs - each iPod embodiment had
| a 'purpose' to fill the music / video need in your life. (One
| could say the iPod Touch was a 'gateway drug' because of vendor
| lock-in with Cingular/ATT than actually diluting a lower cost
| product.) Can we say the same of the iPhone line up? or is it
| excellently amortizing last years A{#} processor downstream at
| lower prices?
|
| I think if we peeled back the facade, we can begin to see that
| it's been an operations play since Jobs died, and though the M1
| is pretty dang amazing, what probably brought it over the line
| is the insane profit margins and 'upcylcing' Mac sales for
| folks having a M1 vs M3, etc...
|
| But as everyone here has said - it could have been worse.
| dmitriid wrote:
| > I was certain that Apple would lose its way and start
| diluting their products/brand.
|
| In a sense, they are diluting their products.
|
| Remember the apocryphal story that when Jobs came back to
| Apple, he split a whiteboard into four quadrants and listed
| just one product in each?
|
| Now Apple has several dozen products. And each category is
| anywhere from 1 to 4 different products often with differences
| so minor as to not make any sense (iPhone 12 Pro vs iPhone 12
| Pro Max, the difference is slight size increase and cameras,
| that's it; or iPhone 12 Pro vs iPhone 12; there are four
| different iPads; etc.)
|
| Apple looks like it's trying to cover every niche, and often
| does that semi-satisfactorily.
|
| Slightly tangential: they've completely dropped the ball on
| MacOS software side: there hasn't been a good software release
| from them literally for years. The only exception is the new
| Messages in BigSur, and they spent untold hours in close
| collaboration with the Catalyst team to make it work. Almost
| every other new first-party app from Apple on MacOS _for years_
| has been an unmitigated disaster that has never seen a designer
| in a vicinity and that breaks any version of Apple 's own HIG
| guidelines.
|
| That said, it could've been much much _much_ worse. So, count
| our blessings :)
| kergonath wrote:
| > Remember the apocryphal story that when Jobs came back to
| Apple, he split a whiteboard into four quadrants and listed
| just one product in each?
|
| He showed that during keynotes (I remember he used that to
| unveil the first iBook).
|
| The situation then was a bit different, though. Apple needed
| to be much more focused and had fewer resources to throw at
| new devices. They also needed a clean break from the past and
| could not start from scratch 10 different product lines. But
| Jobs himself did away with the 2x2 matrix, for example with
| the eMac and the Cube. The 12'', 15'', and 17'' PowerBooks
| used the same name, but the differences were more significant
| than between the various iPhones 12.
| justicezyx wrote:
| What is "the spirit of Apple"?
| shoto_io wrote:
| Oh that's easy. Focus and take hard decisions that are
| unpopular in the short term but mostly right in the long
| term.
|
| Examples
|
| - first iPhone doesn't support MMS
|
| - cut the headphone plug in new iPhones
|
| - stop supporting Adobe Flash
|
| - load apps through the App Store only in iOS
| slivanes wrote:
| We must have a different perspective, all of the above are
| to the detriment of the consumer (flash, not so much).
| shoto_io wrote:
| I don't think they are. They are deliberate choices to
| not please everyone. It's product management at its best.
| mlindner wrote:
| You can go back further:
|
| Abandonment of the floppy drive.
|
| Abandonment of the CD drive.
|
| Abandonment of Firewire.
| the_local_host wrote:
| It's not easy. Apple does have a consistent "spirit", but
| it's such a strange combination of idealism and
| ruthlessness that it's hard to know which aspect(s) anyone
| is invoking when they mention it. I don't know why that
| question is getting so many downvotes.
| shoto_io wrote:
| Yes you're right. I should have said: "that's easy for
| me" or something like that
| slt2021 wrote:
| extracting as much of "Apple premium" out of brand-loyal
| customers as possible and keeping that "Apple premium"
| perception in consumers' minds
| halotrope wrote:
| Focus, products instilled with culture, starting with the
| user experience, attention to detail, cohesive ecosystem,
| good design, delivering high quality products at the lowest
| price possible, not shipping things that are not ready.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| "Quality products at Lowest price possible" you're probably
| being sarcastic. Just look at wired AirPods, among the most
| maligned earbud headphones and quite expensive within their
| category.
| NationalPark wrote:
| The $19 EarPods?
| FredPret wrote:
| Airpods are expensive but amazing
| haunter wrote:
| > lowest price possible
|
| You got me until this point ngl
| Spartan-S63 wrote:
| When you take into account total cost of ownership and
| the intangible of pain or frustration from other
| products, Apple typically comes in with the lowest cost.
| You pay more upfront to pay less (literally and
| emotionally) later.
| halotrope wrote:
| This is what I mean: https://youtu.be/gnU9Vgt8Hmg
|
| Sure, the accessoires and e.g ram are steeply overpriced
| dmitriid wrote:
| "We don't offer stripped down lousy products"
|
| 14 years later: base iMac has two ports (three more +
| ethernet will cost you $200).
|
| Not that it's lousy, but it's definitely stripped down.
| amelius wrote:
| Think different.
| slg wrote:
| It is also interesting in that they are doing it in a seemingly
| un-Jobs-like manner. For example, take a look at the current
| models they offer for the iPhone[1]. Wikipedia lists 7 distinct
| models in production, that grows to 20 when factoring in
| storage size, and it likely balloons to over a hundred when
| considering different carriers and colors. Their approach is
| now basically "whatever your budget is, we have an iPhone for
| you". That seems antithetical to Jobs' traditional approach.
|
| [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone#Models
| snowwrestler wrote:
| Jobs put that strategy in place. He did not want to leave
| price points unfilled with hit products. You saw it with the
| profusion of iPod models, colors, and storage. Jobs was also
| still the CEO when Apple decided to keep the iPhone 3Gs in
| production after launching the iPhone 4, in order to meet a
| lower price point.
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| 3 out of those aren't the most recent though. Of the 4 that
| are, the fact that they have several screen sizes is indeed
| unlike Jobs, but Jobs wasn't infallible - he was insistent
| that people want small phones, however given the 12 Mini's
| mediocre sales that doesn't seem to be true save for a vocal
| minority here on HN.
| chongli wrote:
| I love my 12 Mini and I'm really sad about the mediocre
| sales. I hope Apple keeps the product around for us nerds
| who love small phones. They've done the work to design the
| thing and build out the tooling for it so they might as
| well keep making them as long as they keep selling, even if
| it's not their most popular version.
| flowerlad wrote:
| > When Steve Jobs passed in 2011 I was certain that Apple would
| loose its way and start diluting their products/brand.
|
| They are doing well in hardware and services. Software, not so
| much. Design they have gone downhill.
| tomp wrote:
| > Software, not so much. Design they have gone downhill.
|
| I mean, maybe compared to Apple 2011. But compared to
| Microsoft 2021, Google 2021, Linux 2021, Android 2021, HP
| 2021, Lenovo 2021, Dell 2021? They're definitely on top.
| bch wrote:
| Isn't Lenovo (at least Thinkpad series) being a good
| steward of that legacy and doing well with it?
| perardi wrote:
| I'd argue...well I was going to argue Dell did well with
| their legacy, but they haven't. They went private,
| pivoted _(sorry)_ to strong enterprise sales, and de-
| emphasized the cutthroat race-to-the-bottom consumer
| computers.
|
| Which ain't exciting, but, the rotting corpse of Compaq
| over there in the corner stands as warning of what could
| have been.
| halotrope wrote:
| Really? I think we are a bit hungover from 5 years of
| pro/hacker neglect. Which operating system would you
| recommend to friends and family?
| adampk wrote:
| I think that is a fair assessment but what about compared to
| their peers? Could you say the level of excellence from 2011
| to 2021 Apple has deteriorated at a higher rate than
| Facebook, Microsoft, or Google?
| kergonath wrote:
| > Design they have gone downhill.
|
| Ups and downs. The M1 iMac is very interesting. I am not sure
| I love it but it is encouraging to see some more playful
| design and new approaches.
| satysin wrote:
| I think most people thought the same. As you said there have
| been a few blips but I suspect those would have happened under
| Jobs also.
|
| Seems Jobs was bang on with wanting Tim Cook as his successor.
| [deleted]
| kergonath wrote:
| > As you said there have been a few blips but I suspect those
| would have happened under Jobs also.
|
| Oh yes. Jobs could be stubborn and did make mistakes every
| now and then. The first iMac mouse was another ergonomic and
| reliability disaster.
| halotrope wrote:
| Yes. It is easy to forget over some bad keyboard or software
| choices that rub HN crowd the wrong way what they have done.
| It could have been very, very different.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > When Steve Jobs passed in 2011 I was certain that Apple would
| lose its way and start diluting their products/brand. To the
| contrary the last 10 years where an absolute tour the force in
| expansion of the spirit of Apple.
|
| Under Jobs, they would regularly create whole new categories
| and concepts of technology and revolutionize others. I don't
| recall it happening since; they capitalize on everything that
| was created under Jobs (and do it well).
| pjanoman wrote:
| I think apple watch was post jobs. Additionally, while this
| is more abstract, I think Apple has continued to
| revolutionize consumer's privacy.
| MattGaiser wrote:
| Here restarts the buyback boom.
| gnicholas wrote:
| Shares are currently up 3% in after hours trading, at $136.70.
| [deleted]
| wombatmobile wrote:
| "This quarter reflects both the enduring ways our products have
| helped our users meet this moment in their own lives, as well as
| the optimism consumers seem to feel about better days ahead for
| all of us," said Tim Cook, Apple's CEO.
|
| What a skilfully crafted piece of rhetoric that is. For a moment,
| I forgot I was in the gutter and imagined we were all united,
| looking at the stars.
| dylan604 wrote:
| It's on par with all of their propaganda. Their WWDC and
| product release events are all written like that.
| surfer7837 wrote:
| blew it out the park
|
| AAPL is up 3% after hours (so $60bn or so)
| tedunangst wrote:
| AMD was up 5% last night and finished down 1% today, so don't
| order your lambo just yet.
| PartiallyTyped wrote:
| That seems to happen every time with Amd. They post record
| earnings, exceed expectations and stock tanks 5%.
| dhosek wrote:
| It's common for many if not most companies. The guiding
| principle of buy on the rumor, sell on the news often means
| that a lot of investors realize gains after a big positive
| news event driving the price down. There were drops like
| that, iirc, when Apple announced the change to Intel and I
| think also the iPhone announcement. The drop is generally
| short-lived as the long-term investors buy in.
| scsilver wrote:
| Its a well know rule to sell on the news.
| ant6n wrote:
| It seems most of the incredible performance is already priced
| in.
| qeternity wrote:
| Most people don't understand that bank analysts (the people
| whose estimates get averaged for every "Apple beats
| estimates" headline) are complete jokes. Research departments
| are there to support the sale of bank services, and making
| management look amazing by having lowball estimates creates
| good relationship with the IB desks.
|
| The markets trade on whisper numbers, which are what people
| with skin in the game are expecting. This is why you often
| see a name that beats estimates and drops...it's because they
| missed the whisper numbers.
| microtherion wrote:
| I doubt that this played a role here. Apple traded more or
| less flat over the quarter. If there were whisper numbers
| of even better results than what turned out to be a
| massively successful quarter, one should have seen the
| stock price go up significantly over the quarter.
| smiley1437 wrote:
| How much is due to Covid, and how much is due to Jony Ive's
| departure?
|
| The designs seem to make a bit more sense now, I was always
| perplexed at Ive's 'thinness at the expense of everything else'
| mindset (butterfly switch keyboard, ugh)
| robenkleene wrote:
| Here's my speculation: After the stellar early growth years for
| the iPad (here are some graphs from 2015
| https://qz.com/376041/the-ipads-first-five-years-in-five-
| cha...), there was an impression at the Apple that the future
| of the Mac is iOS. Then that growth leveled off, and now iPad
| looks more like a comparable category to Macs (see the more
| recent Six Colors graphs
| https://sixcolors.com/post/2021/04/apples-record-second-
| quar...).
|
| So Apple appears to have been asleep at the wheel with the Mac
| (which is perhaps why Ive's had so much leeway with clearly
| unpopular decisions like the keyboard, missing escape key,
| etc...) resulting in its worst years ever. The laptop keyboard
| is one example, but the iOS-ification of the Mac is another
| (i.e., moving towards the iOS security model), as is the
| stagnate Mac Pro.
|
| Now things are back to normal, see the M1, the new Mac Pro, the
| new iMac, etc...
|
| The M1 transition going to smoothly and with such an emphasis
| on backwards compatibility (they ported OpenCL! they helped
| with Blender!) is my favorite example of this, contrasted with
| the complete &$@^*% you! treatment that developers got with
| things like notarization, new security features, and pretty
| much everything going all the way back to Mac App Store
| Sandboxing, which I'd personally consider the start of the dark
| years (and I'd also consider the single worst decision in all
| of this, worse than the keyboard, that's the one that
| fundamentally broke the Mac ecosystem, maybe forever).
| ardit33 wrote:
| maybe that's what happens when you give designers too much
| power. They will create something beautiful at the expense of
| daily usability.
|
| You need some balance. The key is to produce the best looking
| product without compromising functionality or usability.
| anonymouse008 wrote:
| Bam! Jobs was the counter weight in that relationship.
| zukzuk wrote:
| Designers design for usability. The idea that design is about
| "making things pretty" is on par with the idea that software
| development is about making computers crunch numbers.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Not sure I agree with that. The trashcan MacPro was
| definitely not useable as far as what Pro Mac users
| wanted/needed. That was definitely designed for the
| designer's sake totally misunderstanding the user's needs.
| davidivadavid wrote:
| So it was just bad design.
| pembrook wrote:
| So it was poorly designed.
|
| Not sure how that has anything to do with the parent's
| argument.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >Designers design for usability.
|
| It wasn't usable for the majority of the market. Even in
| the infamous mea culpa Apple made about it, they admitted
| they designed themselves into a corner. It was designed
| so poorly, they had to take years to undo it after
| admitting it needed to be done.
| lurkerasdfh8 wrote:
| > Designers design for usability.
|
| In theory.
|
| In practice, designers design for two things: market
| demand, and personal predilection.
| davidivadavid wrote:
| So like everyone who does any job, sure.
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| So fundamentally correct?
| dkdbejwi383 wrote:
| Design isn't just about how something looks, but also how it
| behaves
| da02 wrote:
| Which keyboard(s) do you use currently?
| [deleted]
| flowerlad wrote:
| > _how much is due to Jony Ive 's departure?_
|
| Yes, Ive was a bit of a farce. Under Jobs he flourished.
| Without guidance from Jobs he proved to be comically bad. It
| will take years for Apple to recover from the damage he did.
| For example, copying Flat-UI from Windows Phone. Apple hasn't
| recovered yet.
| crazygringo wrote:
| > _Without guidance from Jobs he proved to be comically bad._
|
| I mean, he did basically design the Apple Watch which has
| been an absolute runaway success, the most successful new
| entire product category since the iPhone.
|
| So not exactly sure how that's comically bad.
| beforeolives wrote:
| Runaway success is exaggerated - those watches were not the
| coolest thing in the world when they came out (and they
| looked the same as the current models). They gained more
| traction as the health features got buffed up and Apple
| stopped marketing the watch as primarily a notification
| device.
|
| I don't think that any of this is due to the design either.
| unicornfinder wrote:
| I'm sure I read somewhere that Ive actually really wanted
| to push the Watch as a high ticket device for rich
| people, and it was him being ousted that lead to Apple
| taking the more health-focused direction they're taking
| now.
| crazygringo wrote:
| There are a million ways to eff up design. The Apple
| Watch and its OS are elegant and do a great job. It's
| basically a masterclass in design. Remember, the best
| design is largely invisible, when things just feel
| obvious and intuitive. Which describes the Apple Watch to
| a T.
|
| Finding product-market fit for health is a separate issue
| -- that's not the design department's job.
|
| Ive's job was to design a brand-new smartwatch from
| scratch and he and his team knocked it out of the park.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| Apple has recovered. It made me buy my first MacBook Pro in
| my life, M1 was just too good to pass on even with the
| disadvantages that I was used to Windows and I'm still not
| sure about the differences between control, option and
| command keys.
| intergalplan wrote:
| I have good/bad news: the command key thing, and most
| related macOS shortcuts, are so good that once you get used
| to them you'll be really annoyed when you use anything
| else, and left wondering how it's been this long and no-
| one's copied _their exact physical keyboard arrangement,
| en-us keyboard layout, and shortcuts_.
|
| Windows and Linux (desktop and server) user for ~15 years
| before getting my first Mac (at work) around 2011 (DOS user
| even earlier). Other keyboard+OS combos are so frustrating
| now. Not in the "this is unfamiliar" way macOS was
| initially, but in a "I know this _and_ the Apple way now,
| and this is worse, why the hell do you keep doing this, and
| not either just copy Apple or come up with something even
| better? " way.
|
| Point is: you'll get used to it, and probably like it. But
| you might permanently be slightly irritated when using
| anything else, afterward.
|
| (Try Spectacle, or something similar, if you want somewhat
| better window layout management from the keyboard. It's in
| Homebrew. It's pretty much the only OS-behavior-modifying
| thing I install on Mac--my other tweaks are just in the
| settings GUI, mostly just making CAPS lock an extra ctrl.
| The default spectacle shortcuts are a bit wild, but 95% of
| what I use is just split-half-screen left, split-half-
| screen right, and fullscreen, and it'd be worth using if
| you never used any others)
| Jtsummers wrote:
| Command is (mostly) control under Window (CMD+C/V/X for
| copy/paste/cut, CMD+P for printing, CMD+Z for undo, and so
| on). It's also used for alt-tab.
|
| Option is Alt. Used to modify some keyboard shortcuts like
| the above, sometimes on its own, and often used to type in
| alternate characters than standard on your keyboard
| (Option+e e gives you an accented e).
|
| Control is honestly something I use often outside the
| terminal on macOS. I think Control+<left/right arrow key>
| gets you linear navigation with multiple full screen
| windows or multiple desktops. It probably does more, I
| don't know.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| I wish Apple opted for an Apple key that does window
| management (similar to Windows), so that those shortcuts
| are separated from application shortcuts, but I love at
| least how configurable they are.
| klelatti wrote:
| I'd like to see what a 'recovered' Apple can do when a 'not
| recovered' version has just sold almost $90bn of products in
| a quarter.
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| It's not helpful to point to revenue when a scenario in
| business like this plays out and says, "Look, clearly they
| know better than you."
|
| If you notice people complaining about something in
| numbers, there's a reason for it.
|
| There were people who held out for years because MacBook
| Pro designs were anti-consumer and people held out for
| compromise. I know I did. Everyone I know did. It wasn't
| some niche. There's an entire professional class that
| relies on good tooling.
| klelatti wrote:
| Sorry Apple != MacBook Pro Keyboard however bad that
| latter may be and upset you may be about it.
|
| The idea that Ive has somehow fundamentally damaged
| Apple's business in a way that they've yet to recover
| from when they've just had an almost $90bn quarter is
| .... just wrong.
|
| (And anyway they've fixed the keyboard and Mac sales are
| up hugely).
| [deleted]
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| I never mentioned anything about their keyboards.
| klelatti wrote:
| > If you notice people complaining about something in
| numbers, there's a reason for it.
|
| MacBook Pro keyboard.
| dylan604 wrote:
| You're focused on the horrendous MacBookPro Keyboard, and
| forgetting the trashcan MacPro. That thing was so bad,
| they had to make a Pro version of the iMac!
| snowwrestler wrote:
| The trash can Mac Pro was a bet on the power of
| Thunderbolt, which for the first time was a peripheral
| bus fast enough to connect things like SSDs and GPUs
| without loss of performance. The idea was to make
| upgrading even _easier_ than the previous Mac Pro... as
| easy as plugging in a Thunderbolt cable.
|
| It didn't work out that way. High performance Thunderbolt
| peripherals like eGPUs were slow to develop, for reasons
| outside of Apple's control. They thought you'd soon be
| able to buy the latest GPUs in external enclosures as
| well as internal cards, the way you can hard drives.
| Didn't happen.
|
| It's a good example of a big bet from Apple that _didn't_
| move the whole computer industry. Eventually Apple threw
| in the towel and went back to the traditional big box
| case for a pro machine.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _For example, copying Flat-UI from Windows Phone. Apple
| hasn 't recovered yet._
|
| Huh? If anything, everybody and their dog were yelling at
| Apple against the non-flat "skeuomorphic" UI at the time they
| made the switch.
|
| And while the first version was undercooked, the current (and
| 2-3 years) iteration of the flat UI is just fine...
| vulcan01 wrote:
| Speculation on why Jony Ive pursued "thinness above
| everything":
|
| - for the first x years of apple, everything was legitimately
| thick
|
| - so each generation Ive wanted to make things thinner
|
| - it entered the culture (of the design division perhaps) that
| you had to make each generation thinner than the last to please
| Ive
|
| - Then when things got to a comfortable thickness for users,
| people kept making each generation thinner to please Ive
|
| - Ive never told them to stop making things thinner so they
| didn't stop.
|
| - snowball effect and we got those horrible products
|
| - he had to leave to stop the cycle
| kbenson wrote:
| > - Ive never told them to stop making things thinner so they
| didn't stop.
|
| > - he had to leave to stop the cycle
|
| Or, you know, correct people on their misinterpretation of
| his desires, if indeed there was any.
|
| I'm trying real hard to not see this comment as some sort of
| Apple logic distortion field showing itself in an overt
| manner, but not having much luck.
| cbhl wrote:
| Lighter and thinner products also increase total addressable
| market by allowing products to be sold to parents and their
| kids. See Apple Watch Family Setup; iPad Mini, the various
| iPods...
| arcticbull wrote:
| They're also better for the environment: less materials to
| assemble, less packaging, less fuel to ship, less waste. At
| Apple's scale, that really adds up.
| Dah00n wrote:
| Non user upgradable products aren't better for the
| environment though.
| arcticbull wrote:
| I think that's a fair assessment in general. As an open
| question I wonder how much your average customer would
| take advantage of a reparability option if available, and
| if the additional material required to make it reparable
| wouldn't offset the gains? I'm just thinking out loud.
| joshuamorton wrote:
| Of course there's tradeoffs here if it requires custom
| external hardware (dongle proliferation etc.)
|
| In general I think this is less of an issue today, since
| usb-C is both generally great and very small, so you can
| just use it. But, if thinness came at the sacrifice of
| common connectors like USB-A (or like HDMI), the
| opportunity cost of standard connectors might be lost.
|
| I'm ignoring that like many of apple's ports are just
| better than USB-A to focus only on the waste argument
| here though.
| jrsj wrote:
| Covid had a lot more to do with it. Mac is at an all time high
| yes but the last iteration of Intel MBPs was only slightly
| different from what we had while Ive was still around, and Mac
| is still a relative small % of overall revenue which has
| increased _a lot_.
|
| I don't really get the Jony Ive hate. The only particularly bad
| thing I can think of him being involved in was the butterfly
| keyboard, and the fact that the Apple Watch is the only real
| success among smart watches more than makes up for that.
| soperj wrote:
| They still don't have a day's worth of battery do they?
| Garmin watch actually lasts a week.
| soperj wrote:
| They do have over a day's worth of battery then? Or you
| just don't like that being pointed out?
| jamie_ca wrote:
| I've had my series 3 a little over seven months, it gets a
| day and a half easily - if I fully charge before bed, it's
| good two overnights and usually at around 20% the second
| morning. No comment as yet on longer-term battery
| degradation though.
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| A little tangential information on Garmin battery life for
| anyone in the market. I see that the upper end of Apple
| Watch is 800 dollars. That's around what I paid for my
| Garmin fenix 6 pro solar which I'm very happy with. I get
| about 15 days of battery and dropping to around 10 days if
| I record around 1.5 hours of activities per day.
|
| Never owned an Apple Watch so can't compare but I really
| like my Garmin. It is a little large though so not
| everyone's cup of tea. Smaller versions probably last a bit
| shorter.
| flenserboy wrote:
| With Ive it's not the specifics, it's the trend -- always
| thinner, always shaving away functionality, always looking to
| subtract something without appearing to have consulted users.
| Compare this to the work of the designer Ive has taken many
| cues from -- Rams went for simplicity, but always with an eye
| to functionality and a user-orientation. It's the latter
| that's missing from Ive's designs.
| hardwaregeek wrote:
| Yeah it's pretty baffling. Is there any designer even close
| to Ive? Is there any company making computers or phones that
| are even close in terms of aesthetic? I know that wishy-washy
| ideals like beauty, elegance and feel aren't that appealing
| to a lot of HN users but Ive's emphasis on them is a
| significant part of Apple's success
| Reason077 wrote:
| > _" The designs seem to make a bit more sense now, I was
| always perplexed at Ive's 'thinness at the expense of
| everything else' mindset"_
|
| And yet now we have the new iMac, the "thinnest iMac ever" at
| just 11.5mm. So it seems like Ive wasn't the only one at Apple
| obsessed with being thin.
| thesimon wrote:
| Dropped even the Ethernet port for the thinness.
|
| Really moving into the lifestyle product market.
| bobbylarrybobby wrote:
| Ethernet is still there, it's just in the power brick
| instead of the monitor.
| nighthawk454 wrote:
| which, honestly seems fine to me. it's likely to be
| running from the floor anyway, probably from a nearby
| place to the power outlet. one cord on the desk.
|
| some have also mentioned potential synergy with future
| MacBooks, which might also adopt this port on the power
| brick. that could bring a magnetic connector back to
| laptops _and_ ethernet without a $30 dongle
| thesimon wrote:
| >it's just in the power brick instead of the monitor
|
| Sure, but it was removed from the main device.
| anomaly_ wrote:
| How well does an iMac work without that power brick? It's
| functionally part of the main device.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Too bad they couldn't figure out how to put the SD card
| reader in there too. At least it still has an audio jack.
| [deleted]
| angott wrote:
| Wild and unfounded speculation: I feel that the thinness of
| the new iMac was not an explicit design exercise, but rather
| a consequence of bringing the M1 over to the desktop. Because
| of how powerful the M1 is, they were just able to recycle the
| already thin laptop designs, putting them in a desktop
| enclosure. They couldn't do this before, because Intel mobile
| CPUs didn't match the performance of their desktop
| equivalents. And since those desktop CPUs had more demanding
| thermals, they couldn't make a thin iMac.
| flenserboy wrote:
| While that seems to be the case, I bet Cook, with his
| supply-chain focus, was very excited to save a few grams of
| material here and there, knowing how it adds up.
| mhh__ wrote:
| I used a MacBook Air in early 2020, and I thought the keyboard
| was broken/damaged due to the lack of give in the keys, is that
| what you are describing?
| Reason077 wrote:
| Yes, but it's not really the feel/travel that was the major
| problem with those keyboards. It's that they were highly
| prone to keys getting gummed up and/or failing due to dust
| and debris ingress.
|
| To be fair, Apple acknowledged the problem and provides free
| out-of-warranty repair/replacement for keyboard issues on the
| affected models. But it took them years to come out with a
| better keyboard.
| microtherion wrote:
| And yet, Apple just released its thinnest iMac ever last week.
| asimpletune wrote:
| Mostly due to M1 though
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| That appears to be a product of merging iPad technology with
| the Mac ecosystem. The display is basically a giant iPad Pro,
| isn't it? They borrowed some thin from one product and
| applied it to another. The M1 allows it, they just needed to
| add a larger screen, remove some sensors, and flash a
| different OS.
|
| Obviously dramatic over simplification but it doesn't seem to
| be the usual kind of thin for the sake of thin design - this
| iMac seems objectively better than its predecessors and its
| thickness (or lack thereof) doesn't seem like a problem or
| unnecessary constraint.
| greenknight wrote:
| essentially yes, and even then with the current level of
| thickness, they coudlnt fit the power supply (or an
| ethernet port) inside the imac itself.
| runawaybottle wrote:
| It's going to be a stationary desktop item, so it is
| expected that the wires will be tucked away elsewhere.
|
| Again, they don't have to solve the mobile/tablet issues
| on this product, it's never going to be a portable
| device.
| cactus2093 wrote:
| If it were designed like the ipad, the components would
| live behind the screen in a similar way. I think this is
| what a lot of people were expecting. They could have done
| that, but they chose to make it just a little bit thinner
| and put all the components into a big chin below the
| screen.
|
| They made a trade-off to make it look uglier/bulkier/worse
| from the front when actually using the machine, just so
| that if you happen to glimpse it from the side it's a
| little thinner. There's not even the argument of
| portability to support the pursuit of thinness here as with
| most of their other devices. So I would argue the opposite,
| this new iMac is just about the pinnacle of thinness for
| the sake of thin design.
|
| (You could of course argue that it's not ugly, that's
| totally subjective, but they clearly went out of their way
| to make it as thin as possible).
| rancar2 wrote:
| Thin = less material, less cost, and more environmentally
| friendly per unit
| iainmerrick wrote:
| No, assuming the same volume of internal components, a
| thicker design would have less surface area hence less
| material overall. Could fit in a smaller box, too.
| runawaybottle wrote:
| I think that's fine. No one is going to buy a 24 inch
| IPad and then unmount it from the stand and go sit on the
| couch (and stare at a giant screen).
|
| They will always be two different use cases,
| desktop/mobile.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Really wish the bezels were thinner on it and at least black.
| White bezels with a thick chin at bottom looks atrocious imo.
| amelius wrote:
| You can always buy a competitive product running on M1. /s
| johnmorrison wrote:
| Dumb Q - why is it called Second Quarter results when this is the
| end of the first quarter of the calendar year?
| [deleted]
| dhosek wrote:
| A number of people have already pointed out that a corporate
| fiscal quarter doesn't necessarily align with the calendar
| year. There are assorted benefits to this, usually around the
| seasonality of income. Some companies with multiple sub-
| corporations may choose to have differing fiscal years for all
| the corporations which can somehow create a tax advantage
| (although beats me how that works). It's interesting to note
| also that there's a (smallish) tax disadvantage to not aligning
| with the calendar year in that typically tax brackets adjust
| upward from year to year and having a non-calendar fiscal year
| means that income might be taxed at a slightly higher rate
| since the tax rate is based on the year the fiscal calendar
| begins. At large corporation scale, this difference amounts to
| a rounding error.
| dinglefairy wrote:
| corporation's fiscal year start and end could be any quarter
| depending on when the accounting started.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| Companies often have a "fiscal year" that is their own made-up
| 12-month period that may not align with the regular calendar
| year: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fiscalyear.asp
| verdverm wrote:
| Accounting calendars do not always align with the "normal"
| calendar. Companies can choose their own cycles (generally)
| a-posteriori wrote:
| Apple's fiscal year (internal accounting year) ends Sept, 30th
| instead of being aligned with the calendar year.
| [deleted]
| halotrope wrote:
| The fiscal year is not necessarily equal to calendar year.
| Apples Q1 starts in October.
| [deleted]
| jchw wrote:
| I'm very curious to see where it goes from here. In particular
| with M1... more memory, more cores, higher frequencies?
|
| I'm pretty impressed with the M1 Mac Mini and look forward to
| follow ups and the Linux porting efforts, too.
|
| With other companies announcing their own custom CPU designs, I
| wonder if we are entering into a new era of some kind.
| MengerSponge wrote:
| M1 is a very impressive chip, but it can't compete with the
| Threadripper/Xeon club. It really has trouble with the high-end
| laptop club too.
|
| You can say "16gb is enough if you swap efficiently", but I run
| models that need 100+GB on the regular. I'd love to see what a
| super high-end Apple core can do to that workload!
| jchw wrote:
| Well, that's why I'm curious where it goes from here. I don't
| think Apple is under the impression that 16 GiB of RAM is
| enough to phase out their entire line-up of Intel-based
| computers, which is apparently the goal. All eyes are
| definitely going towards what the higher end machines will
| look like. It's easy to doubt them, but it was also pretty
| easy to doubt their claims regarding the M1, too.
|
| All in all, I think it's impossible to draw any hard
| conclusions from here. We all have to wait and see.
| intergalplan wrote:
| > M1 is a very impressive chip, but it can't compete with the
| Threadripper/Xeon club.
|
| _Looks at fanless M1 MacBook Air, with 14+ damn hours of
| battery life in my real-world use_
|
| I mean... OK? My minivan isn't an aircraft carrier, either.
|
| > It really has trouble with the high-end laptop club too.
|
| If you're memory-constrained or doing something with GPU,
| that might be true. Otherwise, benchmarks plz. And again,
| high-end laptop... _looks at big desktop-replacement laptops,
| then back over at tiny little fanless MacBook Air_
| perardi wrote:
| I, too, want my rocket car Mac.
|
| But we haven't seen what they can really do yet. The M1 sure
| "feels" like an iPad SoC, what with the weirdness with some
| of the ports and bus limitations. _(External displays: little
| off-kilter right now in terms of limitations.)_
|
| I'm optimistic they are preparing some real firepower for a
| 30-inch iMac and 16-inch MacBook Pro. Or at least, I sure
| hope so, as I type here, looking at this damned useless OLED
| strip above my keyboard as my leg hairs are slowly burned
| away.
| odshoifsdhfs wrote:
| I find this train of thought fascinating.
|
| "I am in the 0.0001% of the people that need 100+Gb ram", so
| it seems this massive hit of a cpu/laptop, where everyone is
| raving about it, is not so good when I compare it to what I
| need that are thousands of a percent of what regular people
| use.
|
| I'm a developer, I bought the M1 mbp with 8 (yes eight) gb of
| ram, for testing and was supposed to then be my gf's machine.
| You know what, almost 6 months in, she still hasn't touched
| it. I would maybe go for 16gb in the next one, but she will
| pry it from my cold dead hands before I get a newer model and
| she can keep this one.
| zemvpferreira wrote:
| I'm interested in the same question but from the opposite point
| of view: with the M1 a resounding success, is there a need for
| M2 through 5 to be a huge improvement? Asides from marketing.
|
| My daily driver is a 2015 Macbook Pro. My iPhone is a 2016(?)
| 6S. My iPad is the original Air. I'd be happy to upgrade but
| for someone who lives in Books, Safari and Excel all day, they
| all work fine. I just can't justify it.
|
| The M1 equivalents are leaps and bounds faster and there are
| plenty of people who need that power and more but... will
| 99.995% of Apple users notice further upgrades? Where do we go
| from here? What's the future of personal computing?
|
| (Fingers crossed for lightweight fully immersive no wires VR in
| five years)
| busymom0 wrote:
| I was looking to buy a m1 Mac mini but went with Intel only
| because I need 32gb ram and apple for some reason only offers
| up to 16gb on Mac mini. I bought the Intel one with 8gb and
| manually upgraded it to 32gb. The m1 can't be upgraded manually
| which is a bummer (but makes sense as that's what makes it even
| faster).
|
| I wish running multiple iOS and Android simulators didn't need
| so much memory.
| meepmorp wrote:
| Mac revenues went from $5.351B to $9.102B from 2020.
|
| 70% up.
| andy_ppp wrote:
| I bet what 2/3 non-Intel? That means an extra (complete stab in
| the dark) 1/2 a billion ish $ in extra profit every quarter,
| maybe more!
| klelatti wrote:
| Sounds about right - which would mean 1.5% or so addition to
| gross margin - fairly material.
| linux2647 wrote:
| Six Colors offers some graphs of the earnings from the call:
| https://sixcolors.com/post/2021/04/apples-record-second-quar...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-28 23:00 UTC)