Twelve years after the death of Steve Jobs, the cracks are starting to appear at Apple

[Redaktion]

Apple is at the first major cross-roads since the passing of its late co-founder Steve Jobs 12
years ago. It finds itself still largely dependent on the product lines and businesses that Jobs left behind. Its Vision Pro has received mixed reviews on launch, while it is also facing several other headwinds including a major lawsuit against what the DOJ claims are its anticompetitive practices.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Twelve-years-after-the-death-of-Steve-Jobs-the-cracks-are-starting-to-appear-at-Apple.816597.0.html

[Mark001]

I guess have an iPhone+airpods and a Macbook to satisfy all our needs in regard of mobile fun and work and there is already enough services to keep us glued to screens all the time we are not asleep. I mean, I can not think of another breakthrough device from Apple other than, like, exoskeleton. We do have it all already.

[Dawnstar]

Thumbs up for this thorough article.

[gjbkgjb]

The author is delusional.

[RobertJasiek]

can not think of another breakthrough device

The ultimate breakthrough device would be the air functioning as a private holographic computer.

Before that, there might be the hardware and software combination of server, desktop, notebook, 2-in-1, tablet, ebook reader, smartphone, smartwatch but not from Apple because it always wants to restrict functionality and sell us each type of device. "a browser, a phone, an ipod in one device" was Apple's past. It does not want to unify Mac, iPhone and iPad.

[RobertJasiek]

"While security and privacy may be core values at Apple"

In its PR. In reality, security is limited (e.g., there is no separation of different user accounts and user-specific access rights on iOS and iPadOS) and privacy is a fake (the iCloud terms declare the "right" to share all the enduser's local and remote data with anybody in the world).

[George]

IMHO: the author got ONE thing right - Apple needs a product VISION person at the helm.

All they are currently doing is recycling Job's products.

Of course there's the FAILED headset mess - Meta has dumped BILLIONS on that failed market. Sure it has 'potential' however will never be picked up by the masses.

- Least everyone forgets that just about NOBODY wanted to wear 'polarized sunglasses' for 3D they surely won't want to wear heavy/hot headsets.

[Luuthian]

The author of the article is right, Apple's at the peak of greed right now with the cost of devices vs. their feature sets. They're basically extracting every possible penny for the lowest return to the consumer, and using a very stacked playing field to their advantage to do it. That's just how Tim Cook operates though, it's all he knows how to do. He was always a supply chain guy and shareholder guy, not a consumer goods guy.

Problem is, does anyone see this changing any time soon? Apple is still a stock market darling and Tim Cook hasn't shown any signs of retiring. As long as profits roar there's no reason for them to change course.

I use Apple devices as my primary for just about everything but I admit the cost of what I pay for the absolute lack of freedom I get is begining to wear thin. In the end though it'll probably have to be me that makes a change in the end, because Apple won't

[Max Power]

Apple has hit the law of diminishing returns in terms of product development. In other words, all the low hanging fruit has been picked. See how little the iPhone has changed in the past few generations. What's left now is to poach whatever good features of Android are left that iOS still lacks (honestly, similar to how Android has been copying some features of iOS as well). As an example of this, see the recent rumors regarding Home Screen customization that are purported to be implemented in iOS 18. Basically, we've reached peak smartphone in its current iteration and until foldable devices improve more technologically and come down in price drastically there really isn't anything else coming up on the horizon.

As such, all Apple can really do at this point is defend its existing fortress, which is a mighty one indeed. That's what Tim Cook has done, and he's done a pretty decent job at it.

[NikoB]

Capitalists really don't like the fundamental costs of searching for the new and unknown. They prefer to nationalize such losses (or simply steal technology from taxpayer-funded public universities) and seize successful achievements.

Market capitalization, after tons of QE printing fiat candy wrappers, means nothing. There is no QE and all capitalization, along with the money supply, begins to rapidly melt.

Usually massive raids on some TNC begin purely for the selfish interests of a number of large investors in order to drain the price of shares and buy a new package when what they need has already been sold to the stupid herd on the stock market and all sorts of pension funds.

Sometimes this is a systemic attempt to bring stocks and "smart" money down as low as possible, sometimes it is a tactical ploy for the sake of momentary market speculation by top managers in circumvention of the laws.

In any case, it is obvious that Apple has never been eager to invest in serious fundamental technologies, preferring to collect the cream of the crop from others who have gone through the hardships to achieve results.

Neural networks themselves on modern household hardware are a priori not possible in terms of truly useful functions for the average person. These are all the same stupid entry-level expert systems. For serious things, the power of the hardware in the "pocket" should increase by orders of magnitude, as well as the capacity of memory and storage devices.

Apple's influence on the market will fade gradually. At some point there will be a collapse, but it is too early for collapse. It is not enough to have a wagon of money - you need to have powerful brains in the company, enormous human potential. But now, real ones, they are extremely scarce and money sometimes does not solve this issue, but completely different factors. A company without a strong layer of cutting-edge research pioneers is dead. Even if it still has a lot of money...

[RobertJasiek]

Apple's influence on the market will fade gradually. At some point there will be a collapse

Taking IBM as an example, it is also possible that a large company seeks a new purpose for itself. Taking Windows as an example, decline may be very slow and long while its company, Microsoft, still has top capitalisation. Taking some airlines as examples, it is possible to bankrupt a huge company by a few wrong financial decisions. There is no a priory reason why Apple must face a sudden collapse (other than a principally possible splitting due to anti-monopilism orders). Your first statement is likely; after much growth, a slow decline is a possibility. Further growth is also still a possibility but there are limits to the amounts mankind can spend on electronics and services at uninflated prices. Your thesis of a collapse needs justification though. I only see unlikely scenarios, such as a 0-day exploit bricking all devices and Apple unable to fix and unwilling to compensate all devices owners.

[NikoB]

Corporations are fading away, having lost all the human capital in the company. The closest living example is Intel, which was revived by the US authorities using non-market methods.

Boeing is another recent example. There are already more than 50% of zombie-companies in western economies - without printing money there will be collapse with mass bankruptcy.

Therefore, false capitalization in fiat candy wrappers (not in real prices) and SP500 will continue to gain momentum, as it did after the 70s.

Look at Intel - they still haven't reached the stock levels of the late 90s. Moreover, taking into account the real devaluation of the dollar, they have since collapsed downwards. Their investors have made nothing in 25 years and lost almost everything.

Apple is great in comparison, but its best days are behind it...

[NikoB]

And remember, Apple was already on the verge of collapse when Huawei began to defeat it in the global market. Only the intervention of US authorities stopped Huawei.

[RAM128]

In the intervening years since, it has largely appeared that it was coping very well. However, as outlined here, most of that success has been built on the groundwork and the legacy products that Jobs left behind and which has been expertly iterated upon by Cook in the years since.

What do you expect? Every two years groundbreaking innovations like in old times the first car, the first airplane, the first telephone, the first computer, the first smartphone?
That's obviously not how reality works. Accusing Apple, under Tim Cook's leadership, of not releasing such groundbreaking innovations every few years is absolutely absurd.

This article is a piece of cheap journalism.

[NikoB]

Time will judge everyone. Those who don't invest in the future lose.