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.

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!

On 2024-08-02 10:46, badgolferman wrote:
> 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!

And from a sales standpoint, how could it possibly matter to the
customer WHO is making the chips?

And to be clear, there are no smartphone companies that spend more R&D
in total dollars than Apple.

badgolferman wrote on Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:46:48 -0000 (UTC) :

>>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!

Hi badgolferman,

I never disagree with a sensible well-thought-out assessment of facts.

I've been to Intel in Chandler & Oregon many times when I worked in Silicon
Valley startups, and even today, some of my family works at Intel (or SK
Hynix - who bought the RAM business from Intel) so I know all about it.

Hence, you're correct to note Intel is cutting mostly marketing & R&D.

But to your point of "what's to say" Apple isn't incompetent anyway?
Without the fact that Apple spends the least in R&D than any company?

You have a point - but you have to understand HOW I wrote that topic up.

Most of my threads are dumbed down for the reason that very few of the
people on this newsgroup know ANYTHING about how Apple operates,
specifically, that Apple is essentially all marketing and no R&D.

The facts they complain about are still facts, which is that Apple R&D
spend (which is measured as a percentage of revenue) is the worst.

Having the absolute worst R&D metrics in the world has to have an effect.

Now, let's look at that effect, where just today, Intel announced a 15%
spending cut where - notice what they said about their R&D spending...
"Intel specifically called out looming cuts to marketing and R&D,
the latter being a concerning development for a company that's
reliant on developing new tech, along with reductions in general
and administrative staff."
<https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-to-layoff-more-than-15-of-workforce-almost-20000-employees-encountered-meteor-lake-yield-issues-suspends-dividend>

The point is that for a high-tech company, both marketing & R&D are
important, but for Apple, R&D has *never* been anything like normal
outfits.

That's just a fact.
The zealots try every childish way they can to deflect from that fact.
But it's a fact.

It's also a fact Apple is two generations behind on AI, right?
And it's a fact Apple failed at GPU chips, right?
And it's a fact that Apple is years behind in integrated 5G tech, right?

Yet Apple has great unique colors!
Those are well researched fantastic bold new colors they have!
Emoji too! Woo hoo!

I'm always logical. Sensible. Reasonable. Fact based.
Apple is behind on many critically timely technologies, right? (See above.)
Why?

I didn't even discuss that the iPhone has the most zero-day holes and the
most exploits in smartphone history month after month, badgolferman, right?

Why do you think Apple's QA sucks, badgolferman?

Remember, even Craig Federighi's internal emails said that QA isn't doing
their job - where at least we now know why there are so many holes in iOS.

In summary, the fact remains that:
a. Apple spends the least in R&D of all companies in its category (by %).
b. Apple is many years behind on technology that appears to be important.
c. Apple's record on 0-day holes & exploits is the worst in the industry.

Those are facts.

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.

Andrew wrote:

>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.

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?

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?

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

On 2024-08-02 12:42, Enrico Papaloma wrote:
> 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

See that's right there in the URL?

"2021"

What year is this?

:-)

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.

On the other hand they’ve 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 I’m 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.

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.

badgolferman wrote on Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:15:12 -0000 (UTC) :

> It says Apple is on track to spend $31 billion this year on R&D,
> underscoring its record of increases every year since 2013.

I appreciate a conversation with you since you don't just deny every fact
you don't like (or never knew about) for Apple products like zealots do.

You bring up good points, which adults should flesh out to better
understand those point, e.g., Apple's total R&D is not puny, right?

But it is laughably puny for a company of that size in high tech.
Huawei spends more in R&D and it's nowhere near the size of Apple.

So does Samsung, who spends about the same as Apple does in R&D
(even as Apple dwarfs both Huawei and Samsung combined in revenue).

When you compare other companies, Apple's R&D spending doesn't exist.
That fact alone is telling us a lot about Apple's R&D strategy, right?

As a free thinking adult, I propose that other adults need to fathom the
extreme scope of Apple's almost total lack of R&D spending for its size.

There's a reason Apple is generally five to ten years behind in tech.

> 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.

Well, integrated 5G modems are a thing in the Android world for a while.
Why do you think Apple can't make & integrate something as simple as that?

Being a sensibly logical person, you have to ask yourself that question.
Why is Apple five to ten years behind everyone else in integrated SOC tech?

> On the other hand they�ve 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 I�m 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.

Well, it's clear what Apple cares about, given they use the word
"breathtaking" when saying nobody but Apple spends money that way.

What Apple does not spend its money on, clearly, is on technology R&D.

For example, *QA is part of R&D*, right?

Knowing that fact, why do you think the iPhone is always the most exploited
phone in human history? It's not because they're testing it well, right?

I posit these are logically sensible questions to ask of Apple's spending.

On 2024-08-02 14:20, Enrico Papaloma wrote:
> 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.

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?

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?

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.

:-)

Andrew wrote:
>
> 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.

Your Name wrote on Sat, 3 Aug 2024 10:55:59 +1200 :

>> 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.

Then how do you explain that Apple is five to ten years behind in tech?

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".

On 2024-08-02 16:17, Tyrone wrote:
> 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".

I know, right?

LOL

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.

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, and other useful things
like these. New colors and new emojis don’t count.

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?

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.

On 2024-08-04 16:46, badgolferman wrote:
> 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.

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 wrote on Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:07:15 -0000 (UTC) :

>> But your argument was that Apple wasn't doing much lately.
>>
>> Implying that others were.
>>
>
> You inferred incorrectly.

With respect to Apple being five to ten years behind Android in technology,
which I attribute to Apple's dismal lack of proportionate R&D spending, do
you really want me to even begin to list the tons and tons of rather useful
functionality on Android that is impossible on iOS?

Seriously?

Anyone who doesn't doubt Apple is five to ten years behind in technology,
doesn't have any clue where technology is on the other operating systems.

Hint: Integrated 5G modems (as just one) although torrenting, wi-fi
debugging, homescreen management, system wide firewalls, gps spoofing, tor
privacy browsing, ad-free youtube clones, ungoogled chromium browsers, IPA
backup and restore tools, system-wide ad blocking, saving photos to a
sensible filename, platform portable encryption containers, etc., come to
mind - but the list goes on for a very long time of useful functionality
impossible to do on iOS that every other common consumer OS easily does.

It's only iOS that can't do what every other operating system easily does.