Slashdot Mirror
Apple Beats Sales Estimates Amid Reports of Poor Demand For iPhone X (bloomberg.com)
Apple today reported revenue and profit that beat analysts' estimates and projected continued sales momentum. The results come amid reports that demand for its flagship iPhone X have fallen. Bloomberg reports: Apple revenue rose 16 percent to $61.1 billion in the fiscal second quarter. That was the fastest growth in more than two years. Profit came in at $2.73 a share, the company said Tuesday in a statement. Analysts expected sales of $60.9 billion and earnings per share of $2.64, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Fiscal third-quarter revenue will be $51.5 billion to $53.5 billion, also ahead of Wall Street forecasts.
Apple sold 52.2 million iPhones in the fiscal second quarter, up 2.9 percent from a year earlier. Analysts had projected of 52.3 million, on average, although some investors expected fewer units. The average selling price was $728, versus analysts' expectations of $740. That suggested the flagship iPhone X didn't perform as well as some anticipated when it launched last year. Earlier this year, Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri said iPhone revenue would grow by at least 10 percent year-over-year in the fiscal second quarter. Apple easily hit that goal, with 14 percent iPhone revenue growth in the period.
Apple sold 52.2 million iPhones in the fiscal second quarter, up 2.9 percent from a year earlier. Analysts had projected of 52.3 million, on average, although some investors expected fewer units. The average selling price was $728, versus analysts' expectations of $740. That suggested the flagship iPhone X didn't perform as well as some anticipated when it launched last year. Earlier this year, Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri said iPhone revenue would grow by at least 10 percent year-over-year in the fiscal second quarter. Apple easily hit that goal, with 14 percent iPhone revenue growth in the period.
Ha ha! You morons fall for trumped-up reports of Apple sales declines like EVERY QUARTER so the short sellers can cash in.
The amusing thing is, the Apple Haters of Slashdot act as a tool of the wealthy elite.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Why are you lying?
1. The S9+ 64GB model is 888EUR, the iPhone X 64GB is 1056EUR a difference of 168EUR close to $200USD from Vodaphone. The price gap is the same from electronics stores. From the electronics stores the S9+ 256GB model is 1049EUR vs the iPhone X 256GB being 1319EUR, a difference of 270EUR!
But that's just EU. I hear you man! The S9+ 64GB is $799 in the US, the iPhone X 64GB is $999 a difference of $200USD
2. Ridiculous is in the eye of the beholder. What is not is calling it "Apple's Notch". It's a "notch" period. It is ridiculous on the iPhone X, and it was ridiculous on the 2 android phones which introduced BEFORE Apple copied it. But it's amazing that Apple "needs" the ridiculous piece of shit while Android doesn't. You just gave props to Android. Bad FakeTimCook, Bad.
3. No Android phone on the market is banned from airplanes. There were phones that were recalled in a panic resulting in users not only being $0 out of pocket, but actually getting a significant discount on a replacement phone. All Apple users get is a middle finger, and they LOVE IT!
Apple often works with multiple companies in parallel, trying various technologies to decide what they're going to ship. I would be shocked if Apple weren't well aware of it and hadn't been using engineering samples to see how it would work in real devices. Whether they decided to go with it based on incorrectly believing FaceID to be better or because of Qualcomm's production delays, I couldn't say, but my money would be on the latter, because I apparently have more faith in the competence of their security engineers than you do.
It is likely that it would have been used exclusively until they could do FaceID without the notch, but I don't think for a minute that FaceID would have replaced TouchID had it not been for production ramping delays from Qualcomm. FaceID might have been eventually added in parallel, once they solved the notch problem, or maybe not, largely depending on how low they could get the BOM cost.
FaceID really is fundamentally inferior in at least two important ways:
Other than a targeted attack by the sort of third party who would find a way to lift your prints and make a latex finger, there's nothing that FaceID handles better than TouchID, and in most of the common use cases, it is significantly worse. And in the case of a targeted attack by such a third party, they're likely to have their hands on hardware that can crack an iPhone externally anyway, making the differences between TouchID and FaceID moot.
So I strongly disagree that TouchID would be a stop-gap until FaceID was ready, because FaceID can never be ready. At a fairly fundamental level, facial biometrics are trash—even more so than fingerprint biometrics. At best, FaceID would have be added as a way to augment security for specific transactions (e.g. to use Apple Pay, you must use a fingerprint *and* a face match), not as a replacement. That really is the *only* way FaceID makes sense at all. As a replacement, it is downright bizarre.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.