Recent Comments

  • Charles A. on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Come on, Gregg, don’t be an ostrich. We all need to know what the media is saying: the bad, the good, the pro’s and cons. I for one do not want to bury my head in the sand.'
  • Bill Donahue on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Mic drop to Bart! That could have easily also been posted as a response to Gurman’s “Apple has lost its design mojo under Tim Cook” bloviating.'
  • Bill Donahue on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'I absolutely second that opinion, James! When left to his own devices, Jony Ive goes way too far down the navel-gazing, minimalist design rabbit-hole. Yay, he designed a new rostrum for Christie’s auction house! And clothing created from a large single, folded piece of material! And then of course there’s the interior and much of the new electric Ferrari “Luce” – which was roundly panned by everyone, including one commentator who described it as “the Apple car that nobody wanted”. So amazing was the design that on its public reveal Ferrari stock immediately tanked 8%. What’s funny is how often people criticize Tim Cook for not having done anything significant since Steve Jobs, but Jony Ive continues to be lionized by people like Gurman, despite not having done much of note once he stopped working under the supervision and direction of Jobs.'
  • Bill Donahue on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Sure, the design excellence of Apple is a thing of the past. I guess it was just dumb luck that resulted in Apple coming up with M-series of chips. And my impression was that back in the day Apple kept various teams separate and firewalled, and that the only people privy to what was going on with many of its products and technologies under development was on a need-to-know basis especially when it came to what the group under Jony Ive was playing around with. As opposed to Gurman’s “need-to-be-inspired” basis. Am I wrong in that impression?'
  • Raymond Poh on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Hasn’t industrial design been a part of Ternus’s portfolio after he became head of hardware? If so, he hasn’t done anything to help with the design, so how is that going to change? VisionPro looks good but not very functional due to the weight. Isn’t that part of the ID team’s responsibility to ensure that the device is to start, extremely usable daily? Doubt much will change. Will need not a design person, but more an ideas and vision person more aligned with Jobs.'
  • David Emery on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - '…. And we know what such orifices are full of…'
  • Steven Philips on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Let’s see if I understand this. Gurman says Ternus said (Apple) would keep focusing on design. So Gurman with his after the fact pontification says Apple should focus on design? Brilliant! I’ve got a great idea, too. Apple should make a watch! Color me brilliant! 🙂'
  • James Hillhouse on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'I never cease to be surprised at Gurman’s ability to express his sense of self-importance. I would counter Gurman with my own (unwanted) view of why the Jobs-Ives era worked. It boils down to Jobs as a sanity check on Ives’ tendency to design the ultimate slab, with Jobs nudging that a product had to actually be useful for people. To this customer, since Ives’ left Apple in 2022, the slate-focused design trend has yielded to something that better balances form and function. Products such as the MB, MBPro, iPhone, and iPad are much better than they were in a very long time, certainly since the mid-2010’s. Now I shall hush.'
  • Joseph Bland on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Hey, opinions are like anal orifices; everybody has one. But some are more like anal orifices than others….'
  • Fred Stein on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'For years Gurman has demonstrated that he doesn’t understand Apple at all. Now it seems he doesn’t even know that Ternus has been in charge of the design team since he joined. Apple Watch validates his design chops. The rest of the smart watch field, broadly defined, remains a discordant mess, with basically no 3rd party App ecosystem.'
  • steve dubinsky on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'what a blowhard gurman is'
  • Gregg Thurman on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'When you hold up an Apple product everybody knows what you have. That isn’t good design, it’s GREAT design. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, comes to mind.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Still don’t understand why Apple 3.0 continues to print his tripe. My daily life would improve by an order of magnitude (maybe two) if it wasn’t. Especially on the same day that Bart blessed us with his contribution the collective wisdom of Apple 3.0.'
  • Rodney Avilla on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Gurman must subscribe to Tommo’s blog.'
  • John Konopka on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'Design seems good now. The software UI and bugs need more attention.'
  • David Emery on This week's Apple trading strategies (6/22-6/26/26) - 'That would follow the pattern of “The Newton was 13 years too early”, right?'
  • David Emery on Here's what John Ternus needs to do about Apple ID, says Mark Gurman - 'My comment to this is partially NSFW: bleep Gurman and the horse’s ass he rode in on. Seriously, I’m not sure how much value to the PED3.0 community repeating Gurman has going forward.'
  • Joseph Bland on This week's Apple trading strategies (6/22-6/26/26) - 'GREAT perception by Horace today on Asymco Plus: Was Siri just thirteen years too early? by Horace Dediu I suggested it should be broadened to “Were computer assistants like Siri thirteen years too early?” That levels the playing field, IMO.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'I’d suggest that Bart stitch all of these together into a single .pdf, and post them all over the internet (especially on Android sites). Special attention should be given to bloggers. Bart, I’d rather enjoy having a .pdf copy I could put into Books for quick access. I’d like being able to quote its passages when debating with Android cheapsters. This work is tremendous. Can it be distributed via Apple Books? At 99 cents per, my guess is that it’ll pay for your next vacation to the Mediterranean. It might even cause the creation of an AI generated “book” section. '
  • Carl Sullivan on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Great stuff Bart. Appreciate you'
  • Robert Stack on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Bart: Thank you (and Gemini) for that series of comments. A real tour de force!'
  • David Emery on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Actually, I’d suggest PED consolidate those posts and create a new PED30 entry from them as a single ‘stream’.'
  • Jonny T on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Bart, I am not patient enough to read this opening each post. If you could share a PDF I can add it to my Books app and enjoy reading it all at leisure on my Friday flights to Sicily. Thank you Signore!'
  • Bart Yee on Joanna Stern: 'I spent a week with new Siri' (video) - 'Even Star Trek starship computers of the 2260’s had compute time, sometimes saying “Working!” while using compute cycles. Pre and post Kirk and Next Generation computers of 2360’s still had female voices. Some still required to restate the questions, or provide more information, much like ChatGTP asks today. Hopefully, we gain less latency, and more accuracy.'
  • Bart Yee on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Hope you enjoyed that, nice exercise in using Gemini AI to help suss out details and perspectives based on published articles. I look forward to being able to use Siri AI to do the same thing via Safari or natural language inquires.'
  • Bart Yee on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - '“Does anyone or tech company competitor to Apple (like Samsung, Xiaomi, Huawei) have a similarly successful Services component to their business?” “None of Apple’s direct consumer hardware competitors have replicated the massive, recurring services profit that Apple enjoys. While others boast vast, active user bases, their internet and services divisions act primarily as loss-leaders or low-margin drivers to sell physical hardware. The service strategies for each competitor differ: 1. Xiaomi The Model: Xiaomi uses its massive 754.1 million global Monthly Active Users (MAU) to drive revenue through advertising, pre-installed apps, and fintech. The Scale: While internet service revenues hit a record 37.4 billion yuan, ($5.5B USD) they still only make up roughly 8% of Xiaomi’s total group revenue. The Catch: These services primarily subsidize their budget hardware; they do not represent a premium, subscription-based “ecosystem lock-in” akin to Apple’s. 2. Samsung The Model: Samsung operates the closest analog to Apple’s premium global ecosystem, but it relies almost entirely on the Google Play ecosystem for its Android software and services. The Scale: Services like Samsung Wallet, Galaxy Store, and Samsung Health are massive engagement drivers, but they are not standalone financial profit engines. Samsung does not break out standalone services revenue, as its profit is dominated by hardware and semiconductor chips. 3. Huawei The Model: Following U.S. sanctions, Huawei was cut off from Google Mobile Services. To survive, they built Huawei Mobile Services (HMS) and the HUAWEI AppGallery. The Scale: Huawei offers premium subscriptions for Huawei Cloud, video, and music, alongside developer services. However, their primary focus remains enterprise ICT, telecom infrastructure, and selling physical hardware.” “What about its Mag-7 competitors?” Comparing Apple to its Magnificent Seven (Mag-7) peers changes the entire dynamic. While direct hardware rivals treat services as an afterthought, Apple’s Mag-7 peers are heavily services-dominant platforms. Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta do not just have “similarly successful” services components—their services segments are much larger, structurally distinct, and in several cases, significantly more profitable than Apple’s Services business. Key Financial Overview Alphabet (Google) Search, YouTube Ads, Google Cloud, Play Store~$400+B Very High margins (Driven by advertising scaling) Microsoft Azure Cloud, Office 365, LinkedIn, Xbox~$240+B High Margins (Enterprise to enterprise software) Amazon AWS Cloud, Prime Subscriptions, Ads~$220+B Mixed margins (Low on Prime retail, massive on AWS) Meta Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp Advertising~$150+B Extremely High Margins (Pure digital ad network) Apple App Store cuts, iCloud, Apple Music, Apple Pay~$100B-120B ~74% (Extremely stable & profitable)'
  • Bart Yee on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'And finally, “how did Apple services disrupt the tech sector?” Remember, Tim Cook told us to pay attention to Services, that he and Apple would double its revenue over time. Did they pay attention? No, “Apple was and still is a hardware company”, “to be always valued as a hardware company”, and should always be viewed by historical multiples as when it was “just a hardware company”, not the multipronged revenue engine it is today. Per Gemini: “Apple disrupted the tech sector by turning a hardware-reliant sales cycle into a multi-billion dollar recurring revenue engine. By shifting focus from selling devices to monetizing the activity on those devices, Apple transformed how software is distributed, how digital media is consumed, and how companies calculate customer lifetime value. The Services division —spanning the App Store, Apple Music, iCloud, Apple Pay, and Apple TV+ — drives nearly $31 billion per quarter at staggering 75% gross margins. This strategic pivot fundamentally reshaped the tech industry in four primary ways: 1. Invented the Modern App Economy Before the App Store launched in 2008, software was bought on physical discs or fragmented mobile storefronts. Apple consolidated mobile software distribution into a single, secure gateway. The 30% Tax Standard: Apple established a 30% commission baseline for digital goods. This sparked industry-wide emulation (e.g., Google Play) and triggered massive antitrust battles with developers like Epic Games. Disrupting Trillion-Dollar Verticals: By streamlining secure in-app payments, the App Store acted as the foundational launchpad for entirely new mobile industries, including ride-sharing (Uber), mobile gaming, and streaming video. 2. Formulated the “Hardware-as-a-Gateway” Model Historically, consumer electronics companies suffered when hardware markets matured and device replacement cycles lengthened. Apple inverted this vulnerability. The Post-Purchase Monetization Engine: Apple proved that a flat or slightly declining hardware market could be offset by highly profitable subscriptions. High-Margin Subsidies: Because Apple Services operate at 75.3% gross margins (compared to ~36% for hardware), the service ecosystem effectively decoupled Apple’s profitability from raw device shipment numbers, forcing competitors like Samsung and Sony to aggressively build their own software layers. 3. Weaponized Bundling to Choke Point-Solution Competitors Apple disrupted standalone service providers (like Spotify, Netflix, or Dropbox) by introducing Apple One, which bundles storage, music, gaming, and video into a single subscription. Zero Marginal Cost Integration: Apple uses its multi-device ecosystem to eliminate decision friction. Users buying an iPhone are instantly prompted to upgrade iCloud storage or join Apple Music. Customer Retention (The “Golden Handcuffs”): By weaving services directly into the operating system, Apple helped push customer loyalty and device retention rates above 90%. Leaving the Apple ecosystem means losing curated music playlists, cloud backups, and shared family subscriptions, making switching to Android financially and socially friction-heavy. 4. Reshaped Global Fintech (Apple Pay & Apple Card)Apple disrupted the banking and credit sectors without actually operating as a regulated bank. The Ultimate Digital Wallet: By leveraging the biometric security of iPhones (FaceID/TouchID), Apple Pay forced traditional credit card issuers and point-of-sale vendors to re-engineer their entire infrastructure around contactless NFC technology. Interchange Fee Extraction: Apple acts as a powerful intermediary, taking a slice of transaction fees from banks simply for facilitating a secure tokenized transaction, permanently altering the economics of retail banking.'
  • Bart Yee on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Continuing from Gemini: “2. Empowering the Local AI Ecosystem As cloud-based AI API costs balloon and data privacy concerns rise, there is a major market pivot toward local, on-device execution. Apple has capitalized on this by creating specialized optimization paths. The MLX Framework: Apple introduced MLX, an open-source machine learning framework designed specifically for Apple Silicon. It treats unified memory as a primary constraint, allowing local models to achieve blisteringly fast generation throughput speeds. The “Personal AI Agent” Boom: Hardware like the redesigned Mac mini has become a breakout success for AI enthusiasts. Consumers and developers are leveraging always-on Apple Silicon boxes as local, sandboxed servers to run secure personal AI agents (such as OpenClaw and Hermes Agent) 24/7 without recurring subscription fees. 3. Normalizing the “Edge AI” Baseline Apple has integrated high-performance Neural Engines across its entire silicon lineup, spanning from entry-level iPhones to Max-tier chips. By baked-in AI acceleration into consumer chips, Apple has forced software developers to rethink their deployment strategies. Top AI startups and companies are increasingly prioritizing desktop versions of their software for macOS first, relying on the guarantee that the underlying Apple hardware can smoothly handle heavy edge-computing workloads natively.” (The future for Apple Silicon looks very good, now only constrained by foundry capacity and competing availability and supply of memory. At some point, the AI enterprise boom may slow, but Apple may already have the upper hand, for now, in the consumer AI market, at least from the desktop/notebook side.)'
  • Bart Yee on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'Apple Silicon for Macs Apple Silicon dominated the ARM-based PC market almost immediately, capturing nearly 90% of its revenue by 2021 (just over a year after the M1 launch). It took about 2 to 3 years for the Mac lineup to completely leave Intel behind, establishing a new industry benchmark for performance-per-watt that forced rivals to radically shift strategies. The timeline unfolded in a few key stages: The Initial Drop (Fall 2020): The first M1 Macs (MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro, and Mac mini) were released in November 2020. They immediately outperformed competitor chips in both power and battery life, shocking the industry. The Revenue Takeover (2021): By 2021, Apple seized almost 90% of all revenue generated by ARM-based PCs, leaving competitors like Qualcomm far behind in processing speed. The Broad Market Capture (2022–Present): By the time Apple completely phased out Intel with the Mac Pro in June 2023, it held a massive lead in laptop hardware, growing past rival companies like AMD in overall laptop market share. Vs the broader PC market: Apple Silicon impacted the PC market almost immediately upon launching in November 2020. The release of the M1 chip forced the entire industry to pivot toward ARM-based computing, with immediate effects breaking down as follows: Instant Performance Shock (0–6 Months): The M1 offered unprecedented battery life and thermal efficiency while outperforming most x86 competitors, instantly establishing a new baseline for laptop processors. Shifting Market Share (1–3 Years): Apple’s Mac sales surged as consumers flocked to the new architecture. By forcing a shift in consumer expectations, Apple’s laptop market share grew significantly, eventually approaching rival AMD’s sector share within five years. The Windows Pivot (3+ Years): The industry was forced to respond, leading to Qualcomm’s Snapdragon X Elite chips. However, creating a viable competitor required years of ecosystem and hardware alignment, cementing Apple’s head start.” And did Apple have an inkling of Apple Silicon and AI? “Apple Silicon influences the AI market by establishing Macs as the premier consumer hardware for local AI inference and decentralized development. Rather than trying to compete directly with Nvidia in the massive AI cloud data center market, Apple has fundamentally disrupted the economics of running Large Language Models (LLMs) on individual devices. Apple’s influence is driven by unique architectural choices and shifting market demands: 1. The Unified Memory Disruption Traditional PCs separate processing memory (RAM) from graphics memory (VRAM), creating a severe bottleneck when loading massive AI models over a slow PCIe bus. Apple Silicon uses a Unified Memory Architecture (UMA) where the CPU, GPU, and Neural Engine share a single, high-bandwidth pool of pool of memory.The Cost-to-VRAM Advantage: To load a large 70-billion or 200-billion parameter model on a standard PC, developers usually require multiple enterprise-grade Nvidia GPUs. A top-tier Mac Studio or Mac mini configured with up to 128GB or 192GB of unified memory allows developers to fit massive models entirely in memory at a fraction of the hardware cost. Zero-Copy Performance: Because the data is shared natively across all components of the system-on-chip (SoC), Apple Silicon eliminates the “copy to VRAM” performance penalty entirely. Continued'
  • Bart Yee on Ice Universe: The difference between Samsung and Apple is profound - 'How well did it do? “Apple’s wireless earbuds dominated the market in just 1 to 3 years, effectively creating a new product category from scratch and maintaining massive market leads over competitors like Samsung and Xiaomi. The explosive timeline highlights how rapidly the devices took over: 1 Year (2017): Within 12 months of the original AirPods launch in September 2016, Apple captured nearly 85% of the “totally wireless headphone” segment by dollar sales in the US. 3 Years (2019): By 2019, Apple cemented total industry control, boasting over 50% of the global market share in both unit sales and revenue. Sales skyrocketed to roughly 60 million units in a single year. The “Pro” Acceleration (2019–2022): The introduction of the first AirPods Pro in late 2019 with active noise cancellation drove monumental growth, pushing earwear sales to new heights and helping Apple secure upwards of 30% of global shipments even as total market competition grew.” Not bad for something critics claimed were ugly, Q-tips sticking out of your ears, battery life needed to be better, not repairable, and Early adopters were often stereotyped as pretentious or ostentatious, leading to a wave of “AirPods flex” memes that poked fun at the high price tag relative to their appearance. But eventually, AirPods and especially AirPods Pro have won people over. With expanded Hearing Aid capability, there’s even more to like.'