| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 21 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 28:34:05 |
| Calls: | 139 |
| Files: | 91 |
| Messages: | 42,687 |
Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
badgolferman wrote on Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:50:28 -0000 (UTC) :
Maybe it is and maybe it has to do with the people being employed to
develop these things. Are they the best and brightest developers
available, considering Apple has the money to pay them? Or are they
DEI candidates selected to make Apple look good to shareholders and
those who demand such things?
All I can say is I am always reasonable in all my factual assessments.
As you know, zealots never know ANYTHING about what Apple actually does.
At least you read about Apple outside of Apple's (brilliant) Marketing ads. >>
To your concerns, all I can tell you is what is in the news about Apple's
strategic decisions, which I'm sure you can handle - but the zealots can't. >>
This, from midyear 2024 says, for example the iPhone accounts for "55%
($115.7 billion) of Apple's $210.3 billion in net sales", so it behooves us >> to concentrate on what Apple has improved on technology for that iPhone.
<https://www.fool.com/investing/2024/05/07/apple-spent-183-billion-rd-in-12-years-674-billion/>
Notice the fact that Apple spends far more on propping up stock than on R&D >> (where the article uses the word "breathtaking" where the article says no
other company comes close to what Apple spends, not in R&D, but on P:E.
What's a possible assessment takeaway from those two facts?
Maybe:
a. Apple cares more than anyone about artificially propping up stock...
b. And, yet, Apple cares far less than most in terms of actual R&D.
What do YOU make of those two breathtakingly different facts about Apple?
It says Apple is on track to spend $31 billion this year on R&D,
underscoring its record of increases every year since 2013. That’s certainly no number to sneeze at, but unfortunately there hasn’t been much innovation to show for it over the last 5-6 years. I know some will say the mobile phone has reached its peak in features, but they’ve been saying that for a long time. A truly innovative company would create things customers didn’t know they wanted, not new colors or emojis.
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-08-02 13:15, badgolferman wrote:
Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
badgolferman wrote on Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:50:28 -0000 (UTC) :
Maybe it is and maybe it has to do with the people being employed to >>>>> develop these things. Are they the best and brightest developers
available, considering Apple has the money to pay them? Or are they >>>>> DEI candidates selected to make Apple look good to shareholders and
those who demand such things?
All I can say is I am always reasonable in all my factual assessments. >>>> As you know, zealots never know ANYTHING about what Apple actually does. >>>>
At least you read about Apple outside of Apple's (brilliant) Marketing ads.
To your concerns, all I can tell you is what is in the news about Apple's >>>> strategic decisions, which I'm sure you can handle - but the zealots can't.
This, from midyear 2024 says, for example the iPhone accounts for "55% >>>> ($115.7 billion) of Apple's $210.3 billion in net sales", so it behooves us
to concentrate on what Apple has improved on technology for that iPhone. >>>> <https://www.fool.com/investing/2024/05/07/apple-spent-183-billion-rd-in-12-years-674-billion/>
Notice the fact that Apple spends far more on propping up stock than on R&D
(where the article uses the word "breathtaking" where the article says no >>>> other company comes close to what Apple spends, not in R&D, but on P:E. >>>>
What's a possible assessment takeaway from those two facts?
Maybe:
a. Apple cares more than anyone about artificially propping up stock... >>>> b. And, yet, Apple cares far less than most in terms of actual R&D.
What do YOU make of those two breathtakingly different facts about Apple? >>>>
It says Apple is on track to spend $31 billion this year on R&D,.
underscoring its record of increases every year since 2013. That’s
certainly no number to sneeze at, but unfortunately there hasn’t been much
innovation to show for it over the last 5-6 years. I know some will say the >>> mobile phone has reached its peak in features, but they’ve been saying that
for a long time. A truly innovative company would create things customers >>> didn’t know they wanted, not new colors or emojis.
Give some recent examples of what you would term "things customers
didn’t know they wanted"...
...from any smartphone manufacturer.
Face ID,
contactless payments,
QR code scanning,
like these. New colors and new emojis don’t count.
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-08-04 14:46, badgolferman wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-08-02 13:15, badgolferman wrote:
Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
badgolferman wrote on Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:50:28 -0000 (UTC) :
Maybe it is and maybe it has to do with the people being employed to >>>>>>> develop these things. Are they the best and brightest developers >>>>>>> available, considering Apple has the money to pay them? Or are they >>>>>>> DEI candidates selected to make Apple look good to shareholders and >>>>>>> those who demand such things?
All I can say is I am always reasonable in all my factual assessments. >>>>>> As you know, zealots never know ANYTHING about what Apple actually does. >>>>>>
At least you read about Apple outside of Apple's (brilliant) Marketing ads.
To your concerns, all I can tell you is what is in the news about Apple's
strategic decisions, which I'm sure you can handle - but the zealots can't.
This, from midyear 2024 says, for example the iPhone accounts for "55% >>>>>> ($115.7 billion) of Apple's $210.3 billion in net sales", so it behooves us
to concentrate on what Apple has improved on technology for that iPhone. >>>>>> <https://www.fool.com/investing/2024/05/07/apple-spent-183-billion-rd-in-12-years-674-billion/>
Notice the fact that Apple spends far more on propping up stock than on R&D
(where the article uses the word "breathtaking" where the article says no
other company comes close to what Apple spends, not in R&D, but on P:E. >>>>>>
What's a possible assessment takeaway from those two facts?
Maybe:
a. Apple cares more than anyone about artificially propping up stock... >>>>>> b. And, yet, Apple cares far less than most in terms of actual R&D. >>>>>>
What do YOU make of those two breathtakingly different facts about Apple?
It says Apple is on track to spend $31 billion this year on R&D,.
underscoring its record of increases every year since 2013. That’s >>>>> certainly no number to sneeze at, but unfortunately there hasn’t been much
innovation to show for it over the last 5-6 years. I know some will say the
mobile phone has reached its peak in features, but they’ve been saying that
for a long time. A truly innovative company would create things customers >>>>> didn’t know they wanted, not new colors or emojis.
Give some recent examples of what you would term "things customers
didn’t know they wanted"...
...from any smartphone manufacturer.
Face ID,
Not recent. The first phone with it came out in 2011, and when Apple
developed it enough to use it, it was 2017
contactless payments,
First used in a phone in 2004 (by Sony), but not actually useful until
Apple got it right.
QR code scanning,
Seriously?
So the newest thing you can point to is from more than a decade ago.
and other useful things
like these. New colors and new emojis don’t count.
So it's not like Apple is somehow unique in not rolling out the
innovations, is it?
Admittedly I am not an early adopter of technology and tend to wait for
stuff to become mature. I gave you examples of useful things. At the time they were not considered important but they have become so over time. These are the type of things smart phone manufacturers should be developing.
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Yes, you did.
The topic was about Apple. Other smartphone companies were not mentioned by me.
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 03:10, badgolferman wrote:
badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Yes, you did.
The topic was about Apple. Other smartphone companies were not
mentioned by me.
But implicit any discussion of whether someone (person or company) is
doing enough of something is that it must be in relation to some
standard.
I can drive very fast in my Formula F Honda open wheel race car...
...but it's only very fast if I compare it against other Formula F
cars at the same track.
No. It's not anything innovative if it's not better than previous
versions of itself.
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 14:13, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 03:10, badgolferman wrote:
badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Yes, you did.
The topic was about Apple. Other smartphone companies were not
mentioned by me.
But implicit any discussion of whether someone (person or
company) is doing enough of something is that it must be in
relation to some standard.
I can drive very fast in my Formula F Honda open wheel race car...
...but it's only very fast if I compare it against other Formula F
cars at the same track.
No. It's not anything innovative if it's not better than previous
versions of itself.
But your argument was about the PACE of innovation.
Is Apple's pace of innovation noticeably worse than any other
smartphone manufacturer's?
No, you are the one constantly comparing to other manufacturers. This
is an Apple newsgroup and that's what I am concentrating on.
On 2024-08-06 09:16, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-06 08:42, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 14:13, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 03:10, badgolferman wrote:
badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much
lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Yes, you did.
The topic was about Apple. Other smartphone companies were
not mentioned by me.
But implicit any discussion of whether someone (person or
company) is doing enough of something is that it must be in
relation to some standard.
I can drive very fast in my Formula F Honda open wheel race
car...
...but it's only very fast if I compare it against other
Formula F cars at the same track.
No. It's not anything innovative if it's not better than
previous versions of itself.
But your argument was about the PACE of innovation.
Is Apple's pace of innovation noticeably worse than any other
smartphone manufacturer's?
No, you are the one constantly comparing to other manufacturers.
This is an Apple newsgroup and that's what I am concentrating on.
Pace of anything requires a comparison; it is implicit.
I already gave you a comparison. It's not my fault your reading
comprehension is suspect.
No, you didn't.
You specifically incorporated all other smartphone manufacturers when
you said "the mobile phone hasn't done much lately". Not "the iPhone".
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-06 08:42, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 14:13, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 03:10, badgolferman wrote:
badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much
lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Yes, you did.
The topic was about Apple. Other smartphone companies were
not mentioned by me.
But implicit any discussion of whether someone (person or
company) is doing enough of something is that it must be in
relation to some standard.
I can drive very fast in my Formula F Honda open wheel race
car...
...but it's only very fast if I compare it against other
Formula F cars at the same track.
No. It's not anything innovative if it's not better than
previous versions of itself.
But your argument was about the PACE of innovation.
Is Apple's pace of innovation noticeably worse than any other
smartphone manufacturer's?
No, you are the one constantly comparing to other manufacturers.
This is an Apple newsgroup and that's what I am concentrating on.
Pace of anything requires a comparison; it is implicit.
I already gave you a comparison. It's not my fault your reading comprehension is suspect.
On 8/6/2024 12:38 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-06 09:16, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-06 08:42, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 14:13, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 03:10, badgolferman wrote:
badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much
lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Yes, you did.
The topic was about Apple. Other smartphone companies were
not mentioned by me.
But implicit any discussion of whether someone (person or
company) is doing enough of something is that it must be in
relation to some standard.
I can drive very fast in my Formula F Honda open wheel race
car...
...but it's only very fast if I compare it against other
Formula F cars at the same track.
No. It's not anything innovative if it's not better than
previous versions of itself.
But your argument was about the PACE of innovation.
Is Apple's pace of innovation noticeably worse than any other
smartphone manufacturer's?
No, you are the one constantly comparing to other manufacturers.
This is an Apple newsgroup and that's what I am concentrating on.
Pace of anything requires a comparison; it is implicit.
I already gave you a comparison. It's not my fault your reading
comprehension is suspect.
No, you didn't.
You specifically incorporated all other smartphone manufacturers when
you said "the mobile phone hasn't done much lately". Not "the iPhone".
Ever the pedant... being a pedant
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 14:13, badgolferman wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2024-08-05 03:10, badgolferman wrote:
badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much lately.
Implying that others were.
You inferred incorrectly.
Yes, you did.
The topic was about Apple. Other smartphone companies were not
mentioned by me.
But implicit any discussion of whether someone (person or
company) is doing enough of something is that it must be in
relation to some standard.
I can drive very fast in my Formula F Honda open wheel race car...
...but it's only very fast if I compare it against other Formula F
cars at the same track.
No. It's not anything innovative if it's not better than previous
versions of itself.
But your argument was about the PACE of innovation.
Is Apple's pace of innovation noticeably worse than any other
smartphone manufacturer's?
No, you are the one constantly comparing to other manufacturers. This
is an Apple newsgroup and that's what I am concentrating on.
Andrew wrote:
iPhone revenue fell for a second consecutive quarter
<https://www.wsj.com/tech/apple-aapl-q3-earnings-report-2024-5e3eb3ae>
Apple chip design was incompetent at GPUs, and now they're failing at
5G and falling two generations behind already, in AI - but oh those
colors!
There's only so much brilliant marketing can do for a company that
spends the least in R&D per revenue than any other company on the
planet.
Even far smaller companies in the smartphone industry spend more in
R&D in total dollars than Apple - but where Apple is the worst in the
entire world is its dismal R&D spend based on revenue.
There's a reason Apple is always five to ten years behind in
technology. Specifically, Apple's failed R&D effort in AI & in
integrated 5G modems.
What's to say they would be able to create those chips even if they
spent more money? Look at one of the premiere chip makers in the world
Intel and what a hot mess they are now!
There's a reason Apple is always five to ten years behind in
technology. Specifically, Apple's failed R&D effort in AI & in
integrated 5G modems.
What's to say they would be able to create those chips even if they
spent more money? Look at one of the premiere chip makers in the world
Intel and what a hot mess they are now!
And to be clear, there are no smartphone companies that spend more R&D
in total dollars than Apple.
Maybe it is and maybe it has to do with the people being employed to
develop these things. Are they the best and brightest developers
available, considering Apple has the money to pay them? Or are they
DEI candidates selected to make Apple look good to shareholders and
those who demand such things?
On 8/2/2024 8:05 PM, Alan wrote:
And to be clear, there are no smartphone companies that spend more R&D
in total dollars than Apple.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/which-companies-spend-the-most-in-research-and-development-rd-2021-06-21
Huawei, $22.04 billion
Samsung, $18.75 billion
Apple, $18.75 billion
It says Apple is on track to spend $31 billion this year on R&D,
underscoring its record of increases every year since 2013.
Thatós
certainly no number to sneeze at, but unfortunately there hasnót been much innovation to show for it over the last 5-6 years. I know some will say the mobile phone has reached its peak in features, but theyóve been saying that for a long time. A truly innovative company would create things customers didnót know they wanted, not new colors or emojis.
On the other hand theyóve spent $674 billion on stock buybacks to prop up their value. One could argue this has had a much greater effect on the livelihood and future prospects of millions of people within their portfolios. Personally Ióm happy with that even though I only own their
stock indirectly in ETFs and such. Certainly Apple has been a great contributor to my retirement outlook, even though the stock market has
taken a dump the past few days.
The word "greatly" doesn't appear.
And the chart provide shows a minuscule drop:
<https://media.ycharts.com/charts/a9cdb555d19470ecebf9f8064448e144.png>
What else have you made up?
And to be clear, there are no smartphone companies that spend more R&D
in total dollars than Apple.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/which-companies-spend-the-most-in-research-and-development-rd-2021-06-21
Huawei, $22.04 billion
Samsung, $18.75 billion
Apple, $18.75 billion
See that's right there in the URL?
"2021"
What year is this?
On 8/2/2024 4:00 PM, Alan wrote:
And to be clear, there are no smartphone companies that spend more R&D >>>> in total dollars than Apple.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/which-companies-spend-the-most-in-research-and-development-rd-2021-06-21
Huawei, $22.04 billion
Samsung, $18.75 billion
Apple, $18.75 billion
See that's right there in the URL?
"2021"
What year is this?
https://www.fool.com/investing/2024/04/06/apple-cuts-spending-in-1-key-area-for-meta/
Apr 6, 2024: Apple's R&D expenditure has greatly declined in the past year.
On Aug 2, 2024 at 5:53:17 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
The word "greatly" doesn't appear.
And the chart provide shows a minuscule drop:
<https://media.ycharts.com/charts/a9cdb555d19470ecebf9f8064448e144.png>
What else have you made up?
But hey. The good news is that since revenue has dropped, doesn't that automatically mean that R&D spending has gone up as a percentage of revenue?
Isn't that the metric that this dimwit has been using?
The adult question is whether those facts are related to Apple's well-documented atrociously low (by percentage of revenue) lack of
R&D.
I think they are.
The adult question is whether those facts are related to Apple's
well-documented atrociously low (by percentage of revenue) lack of
R&D.
I think they are.
No, you brainless troll, it's due to the fact that most people are
simply waiting for the next models to be released, probably next month.
Every business in the world sells less in the months leading up to a replacement model being released, unless they dramatically drop the
price of the out-going model.
On 2024-08-02 15:02, Tyrone wrote:
On Aug 2, 2024 at 5:53:17 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
The word "greatly" doesn't appear.
And the chart provide shows a minuscule drop:
<https://media.ycharts.com/charts/a9cdb555d19470ecebf9f8064448e144.png>
What else have you made up?
But hey. The good news is that since revenue has dropped, doesn't that
automatically mean that R&D spending has gone up as a percentage of revenue? >>
Isn't that the metric that this dimwit has been using?
Oh, he's shifted now.
Now--suddenly--what's important is comparing R&D to stock buybacks.
:-)
On Aug 2, 2024 at 6:10:35 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-08-02 15:02, Tyrone wrote:
On Aug 2, 2024 at 5:53:17 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
The word "greatly" doesn't appear.
And the chart provide shows a minuscule drop:
<https://media.ycharts.com/charts/a9cdb555d19470ecebf9f8064448e144.png> >>>>
What else have you made up?
But hey. The good news is that since revenue has dropped, doesn't that
automatically mean that R&D spending has gone up as a percentage of revenue?
Isn't that the metric that this dimwit has been using?
Oh, he's shifted now.
Now--suddenly--what's important is comparing R&D to stock buybacks.
:-)
Gee, who could have predicted that? "Apple's revenue is always rising, let's compare R&D to that. Ooops, revenue drops slightly, let's no longer compare R&D to that because I now see how stupid it is to compare R&D to revenue".
