Is there any chance Apple will innovate again?

[theatremusician]

Apple seems to have fallen into complacency and is relying on old product lines and giving those products improvements. Where is the next iPhone (as an innovative product, not the phone itself)?

I hope there's something in the pipeline. Maybe the Apple TV will take a big leap forward? Maybe a watch? The Mac Pro was a good try, but doesn't seem to excite the pros which were its target. The iOS and Mac OS integration is excellent to have baked in rather than through 3rd parties. But these aren't revolutions, but evolutionary consolidation.

As a company, to justify the stock price and confidence of those who invest, they need to give us a product that we didn't know we wanted or needed. This is where Jobs shined. He pushed those around him to be creative rather than corporate. This is the Apple I'm looking for again.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to imply that Microsoft or Linux is in my future. I love Apple and want to see them strong both now and in the future.

 

[vvswarup]

Apple seems to have fallen into complacency and is relying on old product lines and giving those products improvements. Where is the next iPhone (as an innovative product, not the phone itself)?

I hope there's something in the pipeline. Maybe the Apple TV will take a big leap forward? Maybe a watch? The Mac Pro was a good try, but doesn't seem to excite the pros which were its target. The iOS and Mac OS integration is excellent to have baked in rather than through 3rd parties. But these aren't revolutions, but evolutionary consolidation.

As a company, to justify the stock price and confidence of those who invest, they need to give us a product that we didn't know we wanted or needed. This is where Jobs shined. He pushed those around him to be creative rather than corporate. This is the Apple I'm looking for again.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to imply that Microsoft or Linux is in my future. I love Apple and want to see them strong both now and in the future.

Is every new Samsung Galaxy S device a quantum leap over its predecessor?

As for justifying stock price, let me remind you that Apple now has a lower stock price than Google. Also, Apple's stock trades at a lower P/E multi than Google, carries a dividend, and maintains full voting rights to shareholders. All this and Apple's market cap is still higher than that of Google's.

 

[theatremusician]

The current stock price is due to a 7 for 1 split last week. Market cap is number of shares times price.

As for Samsung, I just don't care what they do. Apple is Apple and Apple needs a home run before long or they'll just become another lackluster electronics company.

 

[vvswarup]

The current stock price is due to a 7 for 1 split last week. Market cap is number of shares times price.

As for Samsung, I just don't care what they do. Apple is Apple and Apple needs a home run before long or they'll just become another lackluster electronics company.

OK, sure. Apple's current stock price is due to a 7 for 1 split last week and market cap is number of shares multiplied by price.

But the rest of it just doesn't make any sense. You're saying Apple needs a home run before long or they'll become another lackluster electronics company. You've basically repeated the gist of your previous comment. I'm asking you to show me your standard for "not lackluster." Put it in relative terms. How does Apple compare to its peers.

In terms of stock price, which you brought up, Apple stacks up pretty darn well compared to its peers. Let me repeat. Apple trades at about 15x earnings. Google trades at almost 30x earnings, nearly double that of Apple. And Google stock carries no voting rights and pays no dividend. Amazon trades at a P/E of approximately 510. Tell me which stock investors are paying a "high price" for.

And while you're at it, what kinds of home runs Apple's peers have been coming up with. And by "home runs," I mean products that I can hold in my hands. That excludes driverless cars and modular smartphones.

 

[theatremusician]

As of this moment, Apple stock holders are banking on Apple's name and reputation. In order for a Jobs-less Apple to keep its stature, they need a groundbreaking product before too long. If they go too long without the homerun under Cook, then Apple's stature begins to disintegrate and once that starts, it's damned tough to bring it back. Then, as I said before, they become nothing but another electronics company.

As for what other companies are doing; that's completely irrelevant to the conversation.

 

[Naimfan]

As for what other companies are doing; that's completely irrelevant to the conversation.

Wrong. Apple only exists relative to other companies; if Apple doesn't have a 'home run' it only matters if another company does.

And it's impossible to reliably predict what might be a "home run" in any event.

 

[Imaginator]

As of this moment, Apple stock holders are banking on Apple's name and reputation. In order for a Jobs-less Apple to keep its stature, they need a groundbreaking product before too long. If they go too long without the homerun under Cook, then Apple's stature begins to disintegrate and once that starts, it's damned tough to bring it back. Then, as I said before, they become nothing but another electronics company.

As for what other companies are doing; that's completely irrelevant to the conversation.

Another rookie in the common sense department I see.

 

[Tech198]

I reckon its more do to with finding current features that someone else may already have, and find a new interesting use for it.

And i always though 'innovate" would be always new stuff. not drag on existing stuff though the mud, which most seem to do..

Maybe it's sign that companies (not just Apple) has run out of ideas. Touch ID was really the only thing i guess, but has its name in lights for 30 seconds before we suddenly saw every man and his dog doing the same time over at Samsung.

And Apple's going "all out" with Touch ID in every since one of their newer tablets, with no option NOT to have one..

so, no,, when a company does that with everything, its not innovative. It's just liking something too much. While its all "due to feedback".. Maybe so. but i often wonder just how much is users wanting it, and how much of it Apple just decides.

 

[960design]

60% of the time, they will innovate every time.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

It seems Apple post Jobs is an evolutionary company rather than a revolutionary company. Is there any one working at Apple now that can make Apple what it was (or better)? Ives perhaps?

It took Steve Jobs/Apple a number of tries and about 30 years to finish the job-- they wanted to take the emerging personal "computer" and make it so easy to use that ordinary people could/would use it. From the Apple/Apple II, Mac, Lisa, NeXT, until finally, around Snow Leopard or so on a minimum Core 2 Duo or Xeon Mac Pro/MBP, they finally got the hardware and software that more or less completed the initial job. Lots of other companies tried to do the same thing. Microsoft obviously figured out the mass-produced packaged software angle, Sun Microsystems the Unix workstation for engineers, SGI the 3D graphics version, and so on. But, really, nobody did the "usability" part as well as Apple or put it together so smoothly.

At a certain point, they started working on the direct interaction portable thing. Such as the Newton as a start. There were pen computers. Others did smart phones, and integrated the pen computer with the phone, but, they weren't really that great (e.g. Palm). Apple did figure out how to put it all together better and make it more usable than anyone else, and stretch it to the iPod touch and iPad, and integrate the iPod media capability. All into one device. That is two major revolutions.

Now, think of some other too-complicated-usage too-expensive devices out there that you use, that could become mass-produced consumer devices used by many more people than use them today. That could be the next revolution in the making.