TSMC would obliterate their fabs before they let something like that happen
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is Apple doomed?
- Thread starter d5aqoëp
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Something similar was probably once said comparing blockbuster to netflix. Just saying.
Except blockbuster could never survive on its cash reserves alone, Apple could go without making a penny for a whole year without drying up their cash reserves.
Funnily enough these first two comments kinda back up the OP.
From what i can guess of what the OP is saying; apple is primarily a hardware company. The others are mostly services and software.
Electronics shortage is incoming; so is apple's (mostly hardware) strategy going to hold up?
First two responses are "i'm doing find on my 10/15 year old device", which unfortunately for apple, isn't new hardware that they're selling today. Sure they might make a few dollars on icloud subscriptions or something; but take it for the team and go buy a new macbook to keep our AAPL healthy.
OP's premise is ridiculous. That Apple's business is hardware-centered and therefore increased prices for components will somehow "doom" Apple.
Many of us are old enough to remember insanely high RAM and storage prices. It wasn't that long ago. What did Apple do? It charged higher prices for RAM and memory than they do now. Though back then, the very expensive RAM was slower, and smaller capacity, and the memory was spinning disks, in smaller capacities. Often, people who upgraded were doing it aftermarket, so Apple wasn't concerned with how much RAM and memory cost for those people - it was an expense that Apple didn't have.
Bottom line is, Apple didn't go anywhere near out of business then. And they were on MUCH more shaky ground as a business at the time than they are now.
The iPhone is Apple's #1 revenue source. Services is second, representing roughly 25% of revenue and ~40% of gross profits. OP's premise is very weak when you look at the facts. I asked OP to back up their claim that Apple users "will be relegated to old tech till it stops working or switch to shiny new thin clients with cloud computing subscriptions" but after 12+ hours they still haven't.
We should all move on from this thread.
Many of us are old enough to remember insanely high RAM and storage prices. It wasn't that long ago. What did Apple do? It charged higher prices for RAM and memory than they do now. Though back then, the very expensive RAM was slower, and smaller capacity, and the memory was spinning disks, in smaller capacities. Often, people who upgraded were doing it aftermarket, so Apple wasn't concerned with how much RAM and memory cost for those people - it was an expense that Apple didn't have.
Bottom line is, Apple didn't go anywhere near out of business then. And they were on MUCH more shaky ground as a business at the time than they are now.
The iPhone is Apple's #1 revenue source. Services is second, representing roughly 25% of revenue and ~40% of gross profits. OP's premise is very weak when you look at the facts. I asked OP to back up their claim that Apple users "will be relegated to old tech till it stops working or switch to shiny new thin clients with cloud computing subscriptions" but after 12+ hours they still haven't.
We should all move on from this thread.
RAM, GPU and SSD prices have doubled or tripled with no relief in sight. Sam Altman has already said that they need even more chips for their Stargate project which means every Computer company on this planet will be forced their hand one way or the another by looking at alternatives. Apple is definitely in good position compared to others when it comes to 1-2 year contracts. If the initial cloud computing instances are cheap enough like say $20 per month for latest hardware that gets updated every 1-2 years, people will jump on it. Who will want to pay for an expensive $2000 Macbook Air (If component prices stay high for long)? Once we are past the initial inertia, people will switch to thin client based terminal in droves and it will be the new normal.
You are just speaking for yourself. Think realistically. Most people in this world will take easiest and least path of resistance. For them, subscription would be cheaper than buying costly hardware outright. This is a fact and not some mumbo-jumbo. If that happens, Apple will also be forced to adapt and stop being a hardware company we know of today. People can laugh it off but you all know deep down that this future is a very much a possibility. This thread is just a warning that we might potentially be moving towards a dystopian future where we will not own anything, all our data will remain in the cloud and we will be happy doing so.
Thanks for the reply.
Ditto.
No, it is not a fact. What you have presented is a premise and your own conclusion, not a fact. You are saying that people will "switch to thin client based terminal in droves" and eagerly pay for a cloud processing service that does not exist. Nor does the hardware you describe. All of the things you present are suppositions, not facts. This entire thread is speculative fiction.
People really need to understand what the word "fact" means.
Ohh so you don't believe people take least path of resistance?
High memory prices prompt Apple to visit South Korean factories daily, causing hotel boom
Samsung and SK hynix factory workers are likely tired of seeing the same faces every day. Apple has reportedly kept executives stationed in hotels near the factories. The memory shortage may impact smartphone prices, prompting the company to lobby for long-term contracts.
www.notebookcheck.net
Enjoy
Last edited by a moderator:
Sam Altman says a lot of things. Ignore what he says, and look at the company's financials; you'll see where it's all heading.
Just wait out the nonsense.
Just pointing out that Apple collected your payment on that 17 years ago... for Apple to survive, they need people to be buying their stuff this year and every year.
===
There's a huge focus in this thread on the Mac, but that's only 9% of Apple's revenue - it's irrelevant to whether Apple is Doomed or not. The iPhone is 47% of Apple's revenue, and nothing people are discussing here is a risk to Apple's ability to sell the iPhone. The issue is that the iPhone is on track to be much like eyongren's Mac - people will find that their 10+ year old model is plenty for them, and they won't buy a newer one. This has been happening for awhile now - Apple stopped reporting iPhone sales volumes 8 years ago, in 2018, because they've been in decline since then - they've been achieving record high revenues since then by raising prices faster than the volumes have been falling. Eventually this tactic will stop working.
Apple's second biggest pile of revenue is Services with 29%. I'm actually super curious about this... I can't find anyone discussing a breakdown of Apple's revenue from Services. Apple makes over $100B/year from Services and about 44% of their revenue overall comes from the US, so that means they get over $44B/year from services sold in the US. There's 330M people in the US and Apple has about half the marketshare for phones here, so lets say they have 165M customers in the US... $44B/165M = they make an average of $266 per iPhone user in the US every year = $22/month.
===
That... doesn't even seem possible? I know dozens of iPhone users... maybe 3 or 4 are using TV+, but that's only $13/month at the worst, and I'm pretty sure everyone is just using the free trials then never actually paying for it. I know someone who uses Apple Music, but that's only $11/month. I know one person on Apple One Premier, but they're fully utilizing the ability to share it with 6 people so that works out to about $7/user/month (and it means they aren't paying for all the other subscriptions).
I know a few people pay for extra iCloud storage... but that maxes out at $10/month.
I can't figure out how one even spends $22/month on services with Apple in the first place - the vast majority are spending way under that, which means there's some tiny minority spending way more than that... and I'm starting to think it must be In-App Purchases...?
Update: Multiple sources say Apple made $10B on the US App Store, so subtract that from the $44B at the start and they're making $34B/165M = $206 per year/user = $17/month. It is easy to actually spend this much with Apple without being stupid (just get Apple One and you're already over it)... but IDK, somehow that's the average amount despite, IDK, 70% of people paying less than half that amount?
OH! I found it! The answer is Google pays Apple $20B/year and its reported under Services. That's a global number so apply 44% to it and that's about $9B, subtract that out, and it's $25B/165M = $151 per user/year = $12/month. Which still seems a bit high but we're to a point where it seems believable that Apple makes that much per user per month on average.
Last edited:
Apple lumps their $20 Billion/year check from Google into the services revenue category. App Store sales, too.
Apple’s Growth Story Is Built on Google’s Money. That May Not Last.
If Google’s search deal with Apple ends, it won’t just rattle services revenue — it could reshape how Big Tech funds user experience.
you nailed that point,
according to App Business, Service was 10% revenue in 2015 while 30% in 2015.
Mac computers was steady which is good, or bad,
since computers last as long as the owner/buyer deems possible, that steady 10% ain't so bad, or good?
I never understood the matrix movie and liked the Terminator ones as them humans can survive,
so I will hope for T2 advancement over bi-colored pill choices today!
You're asking me whether people would take the "least path of resistance (sic)" based on a premise that has no factual basis? It's a pointless question. The situation you're claiming does not exist. All of your suppositions are complete fiction. Made up. Trying to say anyone should apply real-world economic behavior to the fantasy that underpins your argument is exactly as useful as saying that people will want to look for bargains when shopping for unicorns 🦄.
There is no terminal client for sale, there is no cloud-based processing farm for consumers.
Last edited by a moderator:
LOL! No, no they didn't. Not from me anyway.
My first Mac was a TiBook and that was a Christmas gift. My sister's then boyfriend didn't want it and gave it to my mom, who gave it to me.
The second Mac I owned was purchased used off eBay, a 17" PowerBook G4 in late 2010. $150. And so on and so on. My current 2009 MP was bought in 2020 for $250.
Last year I received three 30" Cinema Displays, a second Mac Pro (same model) and various parts from a generous MacRumors member for free. I swapped processor trays because the gifted Mac had a more powerful CPU. It still means I have two fully functional MPs though.
Over the years, some other MR members have been kind and I also have a G4 from Reddit. No charge.
I'm about 15-16 years behind the current model and that allows prices to fall in to my price range. I have NEVER purchased a new Mac, not because I don't want to, I just can't afford to. So making what DOES fall in to my price range work for me is how I function.
Other people bought these Macs new - not me.
------
I would suspect that the constant mentality around here (and probably in other places) where you MUST have a new Mac every year or two is encouraged by Apple - in reference to your comment above. And I do not doubt that Apple makes certain decisions about older Macs that are largely driven by getting people to buy new.
But, buying new has so far not been an option for me.
Last edited:
Why are people acting like this is the first time memory prices have fluctuated? Cyclical markets be cyclical.
seekingalpha.com
This happens over and over again. When chips get expensive they become more profitable and companies allocate capital to make more chips. That's how price signals work in a free market.
Memory Spot Price Update
Memory spot prices need a detailed look to understand what is going on. DRAM prices are down.
seekingalpha.com
This happens over and over again. When chips get expensive they become more profitable and companies allocate capital to make more chips. That's how price signals work in a free market.
Isn’t that what we all do all the time in a way? We don’t really buy the hardware outright; instead, we purchase it on a monthly payment basis, and the cost of owning that expensive hardware isn’t particularly high when compared to our monthly living expenses. We don’t even notice that monthly cost. Apple, for example, won’t lend you hardware on a subscription basis, now or ever.
For phones, yes most buy on a payment plan...Wife and I don't and just prefer to buy outright, but most do. Computers and other Apple products, like watches and Airpods, on the other hand...I bet that most people just buy them outright.
The iPhone Upgrade Program is kind of a subscription/lease agreement. I don't know how popular it is, though, and don't know anyone that has ever used it.
You can run macOS in AWS. I haven’t tried it yet but can’t see it being an issue
I'll quit using computers before I shift fully into the cloud. If it's not available offline, it's not mine.
I don’t know how old you are but I’m 57, I’m hoping in my lifetime to have achieved at best a system biologically integrating me with massive cloud based computing or at worst a wearable stepping stone to that.
I have never purchased a brand new Apple product. Only a few refurbs, but mostly used. Never on credit. I don't need to have the latest thing. In fact I stay at least one version behind on OS, and hardware. I don't want to be an unpaid beta tester.
I'm older, but I wouldn't want a connection to some entity/entities that I can't turn off.
This way madness lies
What you are talking about has already existed for years though. There is a reason nobody knows what Microsoft Windows 365 is, because nobody outside of enterprise wants to use something like that. If it's a fact and not mumbo-jumbo, provide the evidence to support your claims and predictions. Show me something that supports the claim that this is where the consumer industry is headed.
Last edited:
That's possible. I took a brief look at AWS's MacOS resources and they say they offer MacOS servers, though it looked like it was for developers wanting to test their apps, not the kind of distributed processing OP was claiming that consumers would be flocking to. If they provide that service, I couldn't find it. I couldn't even find pricing for MacOS based customers, just Linux and Windows, mostly enterprise flavors.
I didn't spend that much time doing a thorough search, but from what I saw, nothing was the kind of cloud processing service for MacOS customers that OP claimed.