Gregg Thurman on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'When it comes to a battle of wits concerning Apple/AAPL Sansoterra, like most analysts, are unarmed.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'For the above to make sense you have to separate system memory from storage memory. When you talk “memory” the first (only?) thought that comes to mind is storage. But that isn’t where apps perform their respective jobs. It’s in System memory. Everybody else buys DRAM and VRAM because their architectures are different. Apple developed UNIFIED MEMORY that merged those two architectures. Then in a great misdirection play Apple stressed how UNIFIED MEMORY was faster because data streams weren’t being shunted back and forth between the two disparate architectures. The real benefit, which wasn’t listed was that it took less SYSTEM memory to get the same performance. But what did Apple do? It raised onboard system memory from 16 to 24 gigabytes? Unified memory is built Into all current A and M Series silicon (SoC), not requiring additional memory purchases from either Samsung, SK Hynix or Micron. Price increases are for increases in job performance due to AI enhanced apps. Game, Set, Match.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'I figured it out. I know what the killer app is for AI!. In 1990 BASF started an ad campaign that didn’t address its products directly, but made a very important statement about them. “We don’t make a lot of the products you buy. We make a lot of the products you buy better.” AI’s job, the thing it does, is make the apps you use BETTER at what they do. There is no “killer app”. The “killer apps” (plural) are already on your devices. AI just takes them to the next level. AI makes them BETTER. And for that you don’t NEED data centers that can handle 80 billion parameters, you only need 9-12 billion parameters. Remember what Craig Federighi said? Apple is going to use YOUR data, on YOUR device and shunt the rest to the Cloud (AI of choice). Translate that to YOUR apps on YOUR device most often (virtually all?) used by you. For that you don’t need more storage memory than you already buy. You need more RAM, and Apple solved that limitation with unified RAM, making Apple’s RAM vastly more efficient.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'Excellent questions Bart. The Gemini response makes Apple’s decision to raise prices on AI hardware, not the software, look absolutely prescient. Apple’s recent price increase announcements were blamed on the increased cost of memory. I believe those price increases would have increased anyway because of the additional jobs Apple products can do. Memory price increases are just a perfectly timed scape goat for what Apple was going to do anyway. Apple isn’t selling the higher prices as new AI jobs, an issue the average consumer hasn’t seen value in yet, it’s blaming Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron. The consumer believes that because the media has been beating that drum for months now, so the consumer will suck it up and pay the price Apple is FORCED to charge by those greedy memory people. I’ll bet that Apple management saw memory pricing increases coming years ago, and entered into elevated memory purchases for a longer period way before the spikes materialized.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - '”When I first started investing managers wanted steady income growth over quarters before they approved of investing in a particular story.” To a great extent they still do. They are trained by brokerages that made their bones on commodities, that being the largest part of the economy at the time. Commodities were stable. Like Warren Buffet they didn’t understand the technology revolution. Most still don’t. We have investors like that here on Apple 3.0. When earnings multiples get above 30/35, they get nervous. But technology firms can’t be judged by traditional commodity metrics. First of all technology firms enjoy higher gross margins than do commodities. Besides multiples are an attempt to measure investor sentiment (expectations) for future growth, and the earnings multiple formula, as used, is wrong. FUTURE PRICE TARGETS SHOULD BE DIVIDED BY FUTURE EARNINGS ESTIMATES. But nobody does that because it’s easier to divide current prints by trailing earnings. When our important industries were mostly commodities the result was close enough – because growth was stable, predictable and small. The FED can be partially blamed for that with its “acceptable” annual inflation rate target of 2%. Commodities have very little opportunity for future growth except by acquisition. That why brokerages get so excited by acquisitions. Before Carter the DOW was made up of regulated (practically guaranteed profit) industries, airlines, railroads, communications (radio, television, telephone), etc. Apple confuses the hell out of most analysts because it values it products based on the jobs it does, not on COGS or BOM, then makes its products better than the competition to justify the higher prices. Add to that the fact that Apple’s competition does virtually nothing in the way of value added that is little more than short lived gimmicks. Analysts estimates of AAPL’s future value are underscored by the fact that you can’t estimate the value added caused by being a superior product in a spreadsheet.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'Daniel, I’m going to query Gemini regarding the AI monetization and AI killer app questions raised here. I’m phrasing the questions differently to start though: “is there any evidence AI or killer AI apps are increasing Android smartphone sales?“ “The evidence that AI is driving overall Android smartphone sales is mixed. While AI-capable phones are expected to make up roughly 45% of global shipments in 2026, consumer surveys show that AI features are not the primary reason people buy new phones. Key market factors reveal a complex reality: Hardware Fundamentals Still Rule: Consumer priorities haven’t changed; price, battery life, and storage remain the top deciding factors. Many buyers still view AI as a marketing gimmick rather than a “killer app” that justifies an upgrade. AI is Making Phones More Expensive: The booming demand for memory chips in AI data centers has created a squeeze on global supplies. This has driven up the average selling price of smartphones and hurt lower-end Android sales. AI App Growth is Strong: While AI isn’t necessarily driving massive new hardware upgrades, AI apps are seeing massive engagement, with downloads of AI-enabled mobile applications surpassing 1.5 billion in recent metrics. Would you like to know: Which specific Android devices currently have the most capable on-device AI? How much prices have increased on flagship Android models recently? Which AI-powered mobile apps are seeing the most traction with users? Let me know how you’d like to narrow this down!“ Continued'
on Apple dodged chip tariffs by doing a deal with Intel - 'Government should not be in the business of picking the winners.” There is a big difference between picking the winning companies, and picking the winning principles by which companies can win. The present government wants the principle “made in America “ to be the winning principle. Footnote: I wish I was on my way to the bay area for dinner'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'With the disclosure of many of the facts involved in the lawsuit, what are the implications for Jony Ive? How does OpenAI approach its IPO with this major issue now in play?'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'When I watched this on live TV I considered his last line in the clip shown here. He hasn’t seen the killer app for AI on Apple devices and wants to see that first. So if Apple has a popular AI incorporation in Iphone, IOS Mac etc and sales take off he will miss that move on the portion of his investment which he is underweight on Apple. Not an uncommon position for managers who have trouble being equal weight Apple stock. When I first started investing managers wanted steady income growth over quarters before they approved of investing in a particular story. This meant they missed very large moves in turnaround stories and other changes in a stocks story which didn’t have a smooth rise. By the time they said a stock was a reliable investment they likely missed huge profit gains. If Apple is a prove me story at this point in his mind then I think he hasn’t paid attention for the last 20 years. At least he has an underweight position.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'Thanks Gregg. It appears Autocorrect or Siri gives similar mis-corrects which we both didn’t see. That’s one of the things I hope Siri AI sees from previous written content in our notes and emails. At some point, we might be able to have Siri examine our written content here on Apple 3.0 and other platforms to further absorb our styles and writing preferences, and for me, fat fingered typos with the iPhone keyboard I use. I would think that after hundreds of the same typos and corrections it would learn that.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - '$6 Billion for IO is a lot, unless you with stock, in that case if OpenAI goes down, nobody gets anything. On the other hand, if IO was paid in cash Ives and others at IO can walk away now on the pretext that Altman’s conduct drove them away. They keep the money and save their reps, such as it is now.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - '$6 billion for io is a LOT. Jony Ive will be remembered as someone who backstabbed Apple for money because — like many of you have pointed out — he, of course, knew and was part of the process of poaching many of those 400 Apple employees. This is his fall from grace.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - '” Sam Altman, with every test, has been failing my sense of integrity and trustworthiness” OpenAI’s BoD fired Altman for undisclosed conduct. Altman fought back (and won) then fired the Directors that acted against him. I never understood what that was all about. Since then I have grown wary of Altman, but could never pinpoint the reason. I now know why.'
on Apple bull flips to bear - '” What is this amazing thing that Huawei has that will CRUSH apple in china?” It’s primary investor (the Chinese government) and nationalism. China has MCGA chapters, just as we have MAGA chapters.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'Wish I could “like” your comment Bart but there is no mechanism to do that. So I’m going to say ”EXTREMELY WELL DONE” and start a “like” post here.'
on Silvant's Michael Sansoterra doesn't believe in Apple AI - 'Obviously this opinionated, over educated excuse for actual knowledge hasn’t ready my treatise that Apple is monetizing AI through sales of AI capable hardware, and that everyone that buys Apple hardware will be paying for AI, whether they use it or not. Whereas subscription models will never achieve 100% of the TAM, and that competition will driven the cost of tokens downward in a race to the bottom. I swear CNBC invites guest speakers not for their knowledge, but for the controversy their idiot opinions spawn.'
on Apple dodged chip tariffs by doing a deal with Intel - 'How things change. The conservative position used to be a favorite saying of Maine’s junior senator, Angus King: “Government should not be in the business of picking the winners.” Fast forward 13 years since he became Senator: China is ascendant in no small part because of its industrial planning, and the conservative position today is to go beyond picking winners by also pressuring their customers to support them. With so many American workers cheering on “made in America”, even Trump’s detractors are forced to admit it’s good politics. For those who want to see Trump and Vance out, the question becomes in part, how do we do a better job than Trump has done of creating more manufacturing jobs? There’s tons of justified criticism of Trump, but the question remains: what’s the better plan that many Trump voters will buy? Oddly, with Trump’s chaos, the bar for answering that question is pretty low–so what is it?'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'My hypothesis: Apple’s purpose is not an eventual payout years from now. OpenAI has been considering an IPO, seeing how successful the SpaceXAI one went. It would be the big payout they have all been hoping for. That hope may be gone. This type of lawsuit, from such a large corporation, with connections to virtually every company OpenAI would want to work with (including the financial ones who would be responsible for the IPO) , could have a huge impact on the valuation of the IPO. It makes OpenAI a bit more toxic to work with. And who would want to piss off Apple by working with OpenAI? One part of this that is telling about culture – Apple claims that OpenAI lied to one of Apple’s suppliers, telling them Apple had given permission to reveal trade secrets when it had not. In an industry where trust remains a big part of the interactions, this could well poison OpenAI’s relationship with every supplier.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'I see Mark Gurman is now claiming previous beef… Apparently Tan was miffed when he was passed over for John Ternus as hardware chief of engineering at Apple a few years ago… So it might not be personal with the Jony dynamic, although that has to be part of it – it definitely appears personal with Tan. As an interesting note remember Steve’s widow Laurene and a number of Apple icons were invested in IO as well… doing quite well when Sam bought them out. They might be finding out that backing Jony is now caught up in backing Sam, something many of them must be squirming about. I recently discovered Steve’s discomfort with the military and intelligence communities and their interest in Next, (connected through Ross Perot). I can only imagine what is going on in AI land with the kind of applications it empowers.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'Is there a reason Apple picked now to go public with the claim and file the suit? In other words, it appears there been a lot of investigative work performed by Apple to back up the case. The cause of the claim didn’t create itself last week or last month.'
on Apple dodged chip tariffs by doing a deal with Intel - 'If the Trump Admin. is successful in forcing the diversifying of semiconductor supply chains for Apple and other US tech companies towards US suppliers while simultaneously boosting US chip companies, then something good will have come out of all of this.'
on Apple dodged chip tariffs by doing a deal with Intel - 'Corrupt because his family probably insider traded on the situation. Anyone look into Intel purchases by them before the announcements were made and the info confidential?'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'Jony Ive has a legacy defining choice to make. What he does in the next 3-6 months could define him far more than anything he did at Apple. An eventual ugly and immoral loss, be it legally or simply in the court of public opinion, would be what most remember. Today’s generation were barely alive when he was doing great things at Apple. THIS is what they’ll remember.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'Howard Lindzon on StockTwits: lolol.. $AAPL suing open ai and Its no small thing time for sam altman to go If they have a shot at saving anything'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'Unfortunately, we know the pattern from here. Lots of pre-trial motions. Lots of challenges. Lots of delays. Then if we’re lucky, a trial sometime before I die. Then lots and lots of appeals. The US justice system has a tremendous problem with rich litigants/defendants (of all political persuasions) who use the system to delay and frankly pervert the course of justice. But hopefully E. Jean Carroll gets her money from one of her lawsuits before she dies.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'In particular, a company may have a ‘delete all email after one month’ policy (which is legal in general, there are exceptions.) Such an order would prevent/disable that deletion policy.'


