Sometimes I need loud power pop to drive my writing. While working on a story about Windows 10 for BetaNews, I selected R5 to stream from Apple Music—and not for the first time. I started with track No. 6, “Smile”, which is among the two highest-rated tracks from album “Sometime Last Night“. But today, rather than the full song, I get a 90-second preview.
What the frak?
Today’s question: Is Apple’s CEO hiding weak smartwatch sales or does he demonstrate transcending leadership by positioning for greater platform success—taking the long view? The answer lies perhaps in his comments made during yesterday’s fiscal Q3 2015 earnings conference call.
In data released today, Strategy Analytics puts Apple Watch shipments at 4 million for the April quarter. Yesterday, Canalys gave estimate that is 200,000 units higher. Apple doesn’t share the real numbers that it surely has, although in chief exec Tim Cook’s remarks that follow, there are hints—but little more. Something he says later in the call is quite provocative; genius and contrary-logistics-thinking. Either he’s hiding or abiding.
After the closing bell today, Apple announced results for fiscal third quarter, which largely is congruent with calendar Q2 (End date, April 27). Broadly: $49.6 billion in sales, $10.7 billion net income, and $1.85 earnings per share. Year over year, revenue rose 33 percent and EPS by 45 percent. Apple guidance before the big reveal: Between $46 billion and $48 billion revenue. Wall Street consensus was $49.31 billion sales and $1.81 EPS. The Street’s estimates ranged from $46.9 billion to $53.64 billion.
Gross margin reached 39.7 percent compared to 39.4 percent annually and 40.8 percent sequentially. Company guidance: 38.5 percent to 39.5 percent. Once again, international sales accounted for most of the quarter’s sales: 64 percent, which is up from 59 percent the previous year but down from 69 percent three months earlier.
In another universe, I don’t own Apple Watch. Either LG Watch Urbane or Moto 360 adorns my wrist. But in this one, I not only sold my soul to the bitten-fruit logo company but I grew to enjoy the servitude. Thirty-three days after purchasing the smartwatch, I can express satisfaction, even if sometimes muted, with the user experience.
I prefer Android Wear for its fantastic contextual utility, but find greater overall usability and positive emotional response from living with Apple Watch. As expressed in the previous post, I suspect that returns rates may be high for this device—at least compared to others that Apple produces. The real measure of any product’s success is: 1) Did you keep it?; 2) Do you use it?; 3) Do you enjoy it?
Apple announces on Tuesday quarterly results that will for the first time include its wearable. Already, ahead of the big day, speculation soars about Apple Watch sales. Expect drama for sure, as CEO Time Cook explains how supply shortages constrained availability, leaving investors with more questions than answers.
I am more interested in data the company likely won’t reveal: return rates. I took back two. The first: I ordered online but sales started, after long delay, in the retail store before the device arrived. Rather than wait another week, I bought there and later returned the other, which the shop specialist sold seconds afterwards to a family that had come in looking for Apple Watch only to be told the Sport sold out. The second: A week later, I exchanged the aluminum timepiece for stainless steel. How many other people returned one for another because of taste or altogether because of dislike? The measure of Apple Watch success is percentage of returns.
Reviewing most any MacBook Pro is a pointless exercise, because this year’s model isn’t much different from the previous—or the one before. That’s why I typically buy refurbished rather than new. But I broke with that practice last month, after a sudden electrical calamity laid my wife’s laptop to rest. Fried and died it is. With Apple releasing new versions of iOS and OS X and launching a streaming music service, a summer sojourn seemed opportune. I lent my beloved the Chromebook Pixel LS and purchased a new MBP. She will never give up the Google laptop, BTW.
I wouldn’t call myself super satisfied with MacBook Pro, which feels slower than the last one used, which packed 2.6GHz Core i5 processor, 8GB RAM, and 512GB SSD. Current: 2.7GHz Core i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD. The 2015 model has newer-gen Intel chip compared to the 2013 refurb. Could the difference be speedier storage? Perhaps it’s subjective recall, coming from the Pixel, which feels fast, with its 2.4GHz i7 microprocessor and 16GB memory. I have long asserted that Google’s target market is the MacBook Pro buyer, and that’s a recurrent theme you’ll find if reading further.
Happy Birthday! iPhone is 8 years-old today. Oh my, it seems so much longer because so much has changed. Think back. Eight years ago, there was no Android. YouTube was but 18 months available to the public, and Facebook or Twitter only about a year. There was no market for tablets, or smartwatches.
The iPhone marks everything right about the Steve Jobs era of risk-taking design. More changes: He is gone from this world and some of that other-worldly innovation with him. In 2007, the smartphone was a decade-old slow seller that few people owned. Now it’s everywhere! Apple deserves credit for the transformation, whether or not anyone wants to give it.
After spending 7 days with Apple Watch Sport—and largely enjoying it—time comes to test the next pricier model. When trying to compare the two, I find very little useful from Internet searches. So a primer is in order for other folks also wondering: Which one is right for me? Ultimately, the best answer will come from going into an Apple Store (if there is one nearby) and putting the timepieces on your wrist.
Last week, I compared Android Wear and Apple Watch platforms, starting from the different design ethics behind them. Obviously, timepieces from the bitten-fruit logo company are more alike, with the main differences being materials, pricing, and target customers. Interestingly, the combinations offer subtle changes in benefits that will matter much to some shoppers. Henceforth, I will refer to the devices as Sport, for the aluminum model, and Apple Watch for the stainless steel sibling.
Now that Apple plans to compensate artists for the first three months of music streaming, it’s time to ask: Were the whiners grandstanding or sincere? The question mainly is meant for Taylor Swift, whose Father’s Day Tumblr post seems to have brought, eh, swift response to the—what I call—”play for no-pay” plan.
The company unveiled Apple Music during the World Wide Developer Conference on June 8. The streaming service will be free to subscribers for the first three months, with Apple initially choosing not to make royalty payments to artists. I condemned the ridiculous strategy last week. The company sits on a nearly $200 billion cash horde, and content creators are among its most loyal customers. Stiffing them makes no sense from several different perspectives, with good public relations being one and expressing thanks to artist customers being another.
Last week, I had opportunity to use Apple Watch, making it third of the modern smart variety that I have experienced (the others being LG Urbane and Moto 360). The differences between the platforms are quite startling and worth highlighting. They begin with diverging design ethics derived from the fruit-logo company’s app-centric heritage and Google’s place in the cloud.
For people who use either Android handset or iPhone, existing device really determines what watch platform you choose, if any—that is for now. Down the path you go. But where it leads is somewhere else, not the same destination. One platform is more responsive to you in varying contextual situations. The other requires more direct interaction, but gives other benefits.
“This is not about me”, singer Taylor Swift writes in a Tumblr post that is viral news everywhere today. She explains why her newest album, “1989”, will not be available on Apple Music when the service starts on June 30.
“This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt. This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field—but will not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs”.
I shouldn’t be surprised, but…While in Apple Store the other day making a purchase, I chatted with the staffer helping me about the retail shop’s legacy. I don’t remember what influenced me to mention being at the original store’s opening in May 2001, which I covered for CNET News. “In Virginia?” She asked. I affirmed, Tysons Corner. “I have a picture”.
After which I fumbled like an old fart bringing up the image above from Flickr on my phone. She politely suggested the app, which wasn’t installed, as I clumsily used the browser. When I finally got the image on screen she asked, with some giddiness: “Is that Tim Cook?” Not cofounder Steve Jobs, who sits next to Apple’s current CEO.