Intel Profit Warning: What Is Going On? More People Going Mobile And Less PC

It's been confirmed over the last year that tablet sales have been down.  So, does that mean PC sales are up?  Well, Mac sales are but the larger PC market is still stagnating.  Hence, Intel's warning.  So, what is exactly going on here?  What are the billions of people doing their computing on? 

For the most part, people are holding on to their computers and tablets longer.  The upgrade cycle has become longer largely because today's computers and tablets are so powerful.  While Microsoft struggles to stimulate demand for next version of Windows, Windows 10, it certainly has not help with the computer buying cycle.

When Intel warned that its outlook was not as rosy as stated, an interesting thing happened.  Microsoft and other tech companies associated with the PC market lost value while other tech giants like Apple and Google rose.  It spoke volumes about where the future is headed when Microsoft manages to stem the the PC market from bleeding for a peroid with Windows 10.  If anything, Micrisoft could be look to continue its Windows brand beyond PC and double its effort in mobile and tablet markets where it is barely a blip.

Furthermore, it does not help with Lenovo, Intel and Microsoft partners, install spyware in their laptops. 

As for Intel, it's multi-year plan to move beyond the PC and reinvent itself into a provider of mobile chips and services underscore again that more users while connected are doing so wireless on non-PC devices.

With over one billion Android devices sold and a couple of hundreds iOS devices sold in 2014, a vast major of them are not running Intel chips and Windows.  The question now is quickly and effectively can Intel, Microsoft, and the other PC guys pivot and become relevant again.

As consumers and mobile warriors, we want more competition and wish them luck.

If Apple Can Bring Innovation and Disruption To the Auto Industry, None of the Arguments For or Against Matter

This post from Boy Genius Report rehashed many of the reason why Apple is not likely to develop its own car.  The most talked about reason why Apple will not develop its own car is because of the historically low margin the auto industry has selling each car while Apple's products enjoy margins might higher.

If margin is more of an issue than the billions that Apple will likely make from selling cars, then that is correct.  It should also mean that Apple should get rid of some products with margins that are dragging down the iPhone.  Apple's crack team of executives have thought about this and will adjust the company as well as Wall Street accordingly. 

As far as margins go, Apple would make sure it can at least match if not exceeed the 15% margin that Porchse is pulling in and at least twice that of most luxuary brands. 

The other argument is the number of models Apple is likely to put out compared to BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, and other high-end cars.  Telsa has only a couple of models.  Except for a few hiccups, it's doing quite well.  And on top of that, it has long-term plans in the works that should help the company stay lean and ahead of its competitors.  Apple with much more resources could manage at least that.

Then there is the argument that make a couple of extra billion dollars a year won't interest Apple.  Seriously?  If Apple looked at the number and auto landscape and think it is worth the risk, an extra $2 billion a year is not something it'll walk away from. 

The best argument that I can think of against Apple entering the auto industry is innovation.  What can Apple bring to the car that no one else has beyond just CarPlay and how it can maintain any competitive advantage over other auto makers.  In the smartphone market, Apple maintained a couple of years lead with the iPhone in 2007 and the iPad later but the market quickly caught up.  While Apple has managed to earn the lion's share of the mobile profit, the auto market is a different take altogether. 

So, it is not about margin and how much profit Apple can earn by selling cars.  It's about innovation and disruption of the auto industry and bringing a level of innovation that the auto companies have not faced in decades.  Even with the Model S, Tesla isn't quite putting the fear of Steve Jobs in GM, Ford, or BMW.  But Tim Cook and Apple can. 

And Apple has one advantage no automakers has, not even Telsa or Mercedes.  Apple's rich cult fans.  Period.

Still, I'm skeptical.  But I'm not Tim Cook and no one else is. Only he and a few at Apple knows whether it is worth the risk of developing and selling an Apple car.

Apple Watch Nano or Apple Wrist

There is some disturbing news that Apple is discontinuing sales of competing health bands like Jawbone UP and Nike Fuelband.  Granted, these are health bands and not actual watches and, granted, the Nike Fuelband is as good as discontinued, it really highlights a segment of the health monitoring market that Apple is not addressing with the Apple Watch.

Anything $250 and under market.  I would, in a heartbeat, get in on a $200 Apple band that monitors just steps and is integrated with the Health app on my iPhone. 

I'm hoping that perhaps after a year or so, Apple will introduce additional health monitor devices and other forms of wearables for those not interested in a fully functioning computer that sits in a wrist. 

I've been a dedicated user of the Up, Fuelband, and Fitbit - tried them all at different times as wear and tear forced me to get one or the other.  My latest was the Fibit Force that also monitored how many stairs I take.  After it died, just before Apple unveiled the Apple Watch last fall, I've been getting by with my iPhone Plus as a step counter.

It works just fine except I have to carry it with me pretty much everywhere. 

And frankly, I've already decided that I would use my Apple Watch for my daily workout and don't necessarily plan on carry it with me from the moment I wake up until I charge it at night.  A Apple branded band would be able to fill my needs between 6am and 5pm.  After that, I'll switch to the Apple Watch when I go on my run or the gym. 

Hopefully, like Apple often do after years of a product launch, it'll release the same device under a different form factor just like it has done with the iPhone, iPad, and iPod.  We got the original iPod that was then followed by the iPod Mini, iPod, Nano and the Shuffle.  The same with the iPhone and iPad.

So, let's see what Jony Ives and his design team can come up with and maybe they'll be able to address the $250 and under health band market.  It would be a real shame if it doesn't happen. 

Starting Own Music Streaming Services Equals Quick Billions?

Looks like Jay Z is trying to follow Apple's Dr. Dre, formerly of Beats, to become the next billionaire rapper.  That can be the only reason why he's starting his own music streaming service... (The Verge)

Apple Watch: Servicing Questions

Today, we got some needed answers to the Apple Watch's battery replacement.  It's important not only from the standpoint that the Apple Watch is completely a computer and without a functioning battery, it's as good as a dead weight.  In the case of the Edition, a very expensive dead weight.  It's not like you can wind it to make it work again (maybe someday). 

But what about other forms of servicing?

What comes to mind is what good is a gold-encased digital watch if it's going to be obsolete two or three years down the line?  As an Apple fan, I like to know the answer to this question even though I'll never put down $10K for a regular watch much less one that will lose out in favor of newer ones. 

Don't get me wrong.  There will be folks who buy the Edition, costing up to $17K depending on the band.  And maybe the fact that there will be a limited number of Edition it itself value.  We'll just have to see how much value it holds up over the years and whether there is an appreciation over time like some watches do.

Steve Jobs Is Smiling: HBO on Apple TV

Yup, Steve is smiling his trademark smile with a bit of a smirk at the news of the standalone HBO service, HBO Now, with Apple as its exclusive launch partner (media reports Apple with a 3-month window exclusivity).  The success of this launch, which others and I have already called it, will put mucho pressure the current cable TV model.

According to Recode, HBO is hoping to gain leverage over the cable and satellite industry in generating more revenue.  For now, HBO will charge $15 a month.  With Apple and, 3 months later, other means by which HBO Now will be able to be watched, it will add a new market for the cable channel - cord-cutters who want HBO without paying for cable TV bundles that most do not want to watch.  HBO wants broadband service providers to sell this new standalone service. 

And of course, Apple is all the more willing help HBO out if it means wrestling control of the media content away from the traditional players and destroying the current TV model.  Already, Sling TV with its $20 a month service that includes EPSN, TNT, CNN, and the Disneyland (there are more channels) is finding many takers. 

As a Sling TV subscriber, I can tell you that I'm very happy.  It would be awesome to have a science bundle includying SYFY but I'm patient. 

In the coming months, we'll see more effort along this line:  wrestling control away from tradtional cable TV.  Apple will certainly be a major player.  Even now, Sling TV is not available on Apple TV.  Perhaps, Tim Cook has a few designs with a rumored upgrade to the current Apple TV model. 

The end of the Recode article spoke of a stand-off between content providers and the cable TV gatekeepers and what weapons are at their disposal.  As a consumer, as long as the stand-off also mean others like Disney, Paramount, and Sony also provide their content via the HBO and Sling routes and we get more choices with less bundles, I'm happy with that.

Apple To Frame Watch Success Based On Lives Saved, Improved Health, And Convenience

Apple Watch may well be a flop.  No one knows until it actually goes on sale and, even then, we will have to wait a couple of quarters at least to know if this is actually the case.  On top of that, should the Apple Watch add a mere $10 billion a year to Apple's bottom line, it's only a flop compared to other Apple launches.  Ask any of Apple's competitors and ask them if they would like to see an extra $10 billion to their revenue.

Still, this has not stopped headline grabbers from news outlets to "analysts" and other forms of pundits to come out and used the same tired argument about how Apple is doomed and/or how a device that will sell millions is a failure. 

Take this list of detractors via USA Today. One of the arguments made about the Apple Watch being a failure is that it only works with the iPhone.  Duh.  It's the iOS ecosystem.  As last I checkedly, it's limited to the iPhone and iPad. 

The success stories that Apple will be sharing will not be limited to how many Edition units it'll sell.  In fact, it's entirely possible that Apple will no share any data regarding how many units of specific Apple Watches it sells and the average prices for competitive reasons.  The stories will be about how the lives of Apple Watch users are enriched by the plethora of features like the health ones that many will beneit from. 

It'll be about Apple Pay and other conveniences the watch offers. 

And this is only the first one.