Slashdot Mirror
Apple Is Outdated, Says Chinese Conglomerate LeEco CEO (cnbc.com)
An anonymous reader shares an article on CNBC: Apple is "outdated" and losing momentum in China, billionaire entrepreneur Jia Yueting told CNBC in his first international television interview. "Apple only has individual apps. This was the right choice during the first generation of mobile net, when CPUs [central processing units] and the mobile network speeds were not fast enough," Jia said. "However now we're moving into the next era of mobile internet, these problems no longer exist. Moreover, having separate apps just means great obstacles in the user experience. We hope to break down these obstacles. One of the most important reasons [for slowing sales] is that Apple's innovation has become extremely slow," he said. "For example, a month ago Apple launched the iPhone SE. From an industry insider's perspective, this is a product with a very low level of technology... We think this is something they just shouldn't have done. [...] The Watch hasn't cut it. And they're looking at content on the services side, on the iTunes side. We'll see how that works out. But definitely they need something to drive the next leg of growth." In some other Apple news, the company is expected to announce its first quarterly year-over-year revenue decline since 2003 later today.
What is this clown babbling about?
The comments are about as logical and as coherent as his were.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
The way some of these "billionaire entrepreneurs" talk really makes me think that they got to where they are with pure luck and no knowledge or skill in the area they are involved in...
And the other 10 percent are questionable.
But that's just an objective measure from someone who was part of the first IPO wave of investors in China last century.
Still true today.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
IBM was also once one of the largest companies in the world at one point. same with tons of companies that did not adapt and grow with the changing times. Even better example is... does anyone know who the largest horse and buggy whip maker was?
Apple has the potential to be the new microsoft: a bloated corpse that is just carrying on via inertia. They DO however still have time to buy their way out of the mess they are in. BUT their NIH syndrome (and arrogance) may be their downfall... as they never invented shit. They always stole it, refined it, and repacked it. Those days however a loooong gone as the master of seeing what would be the next 'big thing' and making the next big thing is worm food.
When sales settle down, dividends come into play.
You can't grow at 25% per year for a decade, from Apple's existing point or it will have sales 10 times what it has today which would be over $5 Trillion market cap.
Let me translate what he just said.
"The old model includes local native apps in which freedom of security of data at the device level is a threat to the ruling class and totalitarian regimes; specifically in China. The new way is centralized back-end app that are dynamically updated, monitored, and content is controlled. Imagine having a back-end proactive spellcheck that removes all references to 'Tiananmen square'. It's a value-added bonus of conveniences that keeps citizens from breaking the law. This is how we can keep a more harmonious society with government control content through advanced technological paradigms.
Congratulations, you got to drink from the Firehose. The Red Headline means the story hasn't made it to the front page except for subscribers. At least, that's what it used to mean. I think if you have a high karma level select future stories will be visible with the red headline as well (speculation only since I too occasionally see the red headlines but have never subscribed).
Apple has many businesses still growing - if you thought of any one product Apple makes a business, it would generally be growing more than most companies around.
The AppleWatch for example, was estimated to have sold more than twice the units of the first iPhone - and sales in the first twelve months brought in $1.5 billion more than Rolex.
Apple's music and video sales are constantly growing. Apple Mac sales still see a healthy growth every quarter. Apple's services growth is greater than Google at this point, and because services are tied to hardware which Apple has so much of in the field, there's no reason to think service growth will slow.
Even the iPhone is still growing more than not.
Sometimes what the "law of large numbers" means is that if you are large enough, you win.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Mr. Yueting isn't wrong when he says "having separate apps just means great obstacles in the user experience" or when he writes says that "CPUs and the mobile network speeds" a sufficient for integrated systems. however, he is wrong when he implied that this design was only good for "the first generation of mobile net" because he has not mentioned perhaps the largest and most fundamental issue with third party software: security. right now, smartphone security is still arguably an oxymoron and unless you rectify the situation, you are going to have a fully integrated system of fully compromised software.
when it comes to "smart" technologies, currently, the only winning move is not to play.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Apple simply followed the same path by not only offshoring their manufacturing, but by giving it away. They own NOTHING of what is important.
Really? You think the commodity manufacturing activity that can be done by low-skilled labor is the important part of an iPhone? China only adds about $6-8 of the value of an iPhone. The vast majority of the value is added in the US, by the designers and engineers.
I think GP is referring to the habit Apple has of taking a great idea with a shit UI (or shit ecosystem, or shit design, or shit quality) and turning it into gold.
Example 1: The iPod
PMPs had been around long before the iPod - I played mp3s off of my Compaq PDA viz. an SD card back in the day, and the Nomad and its ilk were around, etc. Problem is, nearly every solution had either shit battery life, shit interfaces, shit storage, or shit playback quality... Apple saw this, made a device that didn't suck, gave it a few awesome features (e.g. the then-obscene battery life), and suddenly they couldn't manufacture the things fast enough. There were of course the flurry of imitators who wanted to horn in on some of that sales goodness (e.g. the Dell DJ, Microsoft Zune, etc), but those eventually crashed and burned along with all the progenitor devices.
Now, did Apple 'steal' the iPod from someone? Fuck, no - they completely revolutionized it: Among other things, they launched the iTunes Music Store, then levered DRM right out of the music industry's grubby little hands (first by providing a route to un-DRM their own licensed music tracks, then by doing away with DRM altogether). Also, if Apple "stole" the PMP, then why was everyone else so damned eager to imitate the iPod's feature set (and in some cases, even its design) not even six months after it was released?
Same story with the iPhone. Before the iPhone came out, everyone's phone product had a fixed keypad, a tiny screen, and a shitload of buttons. You know -BlackBerry style with maybe a few interesting variations (e.g. SideKick style). Within 6 months of the iPhone, everybody (esp. Samsung) was busy as hell trying to copy as much of it as they could. That still goes on today.
But anyway, the trope would be like saying that Ferdinand Porsche somehow stole the automobile from Henry Ford, so Porsches will always suck when compared to a Ford (we all know better, no?)
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Apple computers and devices consistently come at the top of customer satisfaction surveys. Their popularity is not status or form, it's because they have better UX. For sure you pay extra for that, and I understand that some people can't or don't want to pay for that. But you're kidding yourself if you think you are not missing something.
Just like MS, Apple stole their entire UI idea from Palo Alto.
Nope. They PAID for that, then took it FAR beyond what Xerox PARC even ENVISIONED.
They have stolen countless software app ideas over the years from devs.
And if you have written more than 10 lines of code in your life, so have you, me, and EVERY other Developer. Next!
Ipod. Stolen. Then refined with a better interface.
So NOT "Stolen". Refined. So, as another Poster said, Porsche "stole" the CAR from "Ford", right?
Ipad. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.
Stolen? From WHAT, exactly??? Those POS "Slabs" that ran Windows for about 45 minutes and weight 10 pounds? See Porsche, above.
Iphoney. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.
Again, Really? Who STOLE from WHO, again?
MB Air. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.
Stolen? Again, from WHO? If you count "Netbooks" as "Prior Art" for the MBA, you might as well count the horse and buggy "prior art" for the Tesla.
Apple TC. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.
TC? Time Capsule? How does that even make the list? It is nothing more than an obvious marriage of a WiFi Router and a Hard Drive for Time Machine Backups of several machines in the same household. But it isn't "Stolen".
Apple Watch. Stolen. Then they tried but failed to make it into being 'revolutionary'.
Everybody and his dog was more or less simultaneously working on Smart Watches. Apple's is cooler than most, because of the infrastructure it shares. But I don't think that anyone particularly "Stole" stuff from anyone else. There are only so many ways to do a SmartWatch. That's why they are ALL so similar. But seriously, STOLE???