Apple Reports Strong Third-Quarter Results (cnbc.com)

Apple reported strong third-quarter results Tuesday, posting big beats on earnings per share and average iPhone selling price. CNBC highlights how Apple did compared with Wall Street projections: EPS: $2.34 vs. $2.18, according to Thomson Reuters consensus estimates
Revenue: $53.3 billion vs. $52.34 billion, according to Thomson Reuters consensus estimates
iPhone sales: 41.3 million vs. 41.79 million, according to StreetAccount Apple reportedly sold 41.3 million iPhones in the last quarter and 11.55 million iPads, both beating estimates. The average selling price of iPhones last quarter was $724, versus the expected $693.59. Apple also sold 3.7 million Mac computers.

Apple's services revenue accounted for just 15 percent of Apple's total revenue for the second quarter, but CNBC notes that it's "been outpacing iPhone revenue growth for several quarters." The company hopes to double services revenue to more than $14 billion a quarter by 2020. Looking forward, all eyes will be on the next iPhone. Apple is expected to launch new iPhone models at the end of the quarter, in mid-September.

Comments

Not sure why this is a surprise

[SuperKendall]

Apple beats earrings most quarters, because while other phone makers focus on adding more notches to phones or producing big budget ads to mock the iPhone, Apple keeps quietly incrementally improving products across the board and making devices better and better... even older devices people already own.

Apples strategy of constantly improving even old devices is finally starting to pay off as after several years users are bound to update anyway, so if you keep them happy that whole time they will naturally move on to another Apple product.

Of course the results are helped a lot by the iPhone X which is currently way more usable than other phones thanks to FaceID and removing the home button. Really looking forward to seeing iPad sales surge again when those technologies reach the iPad.

Re:Not sure why this is a surprise

[TheFakeTimCook]

Sure sure... it couldn't possibly be that Apple has consistently sand bagged their projections every quarter. They had a miss on the raw # of iPhones sold so your little theory is kind of a giant ball of BS.

Oh, you mean like Slamdung (or was it Macroshaft?) that counted units they force-fed to their Distribution channel (and still sitting there on their shelves) as "Sales"?

Sorry, Apple don't play those games, homey.

Re:Not sure why this is a surprise

[Plumpaquatsch]

What are you a 12 year old. Grow up.Most people just dont give a shit about apple.

He wasn't talking to "most people", he was talking to you morons who care enough to actually not just open a Slashdot story on Apple but to also posting to it, just to whine when somebody rips it apart.

Fuck, you could care less - just do it, and stop clicking on Apple stories, you moron.

Re:Not sure why this is a surprise

[Tough Love]

While the Android makers continue to lose money, selling less and less of their crappy phones, instead of staying flat. That's the wrong kind of winning

Why would an Apple asshole care what kind of winning the Android phone makers are doing? (Rhetorical question.)

Even if it were true that Android makers are losing money, which it isn't. High end Android phones have big fat margins just like Apple's products. Low end Android phones like the ones that are flooding India are certainly not loss leaders. The makers make them because it makes them make money, see? Even an Apple asshole like you should be able to see that. (BTW, if you don't want to be called an asshole then consider keeping that dumbass word to yourself.)

Then there is the fantastic amount of money that flows through the entire Android engineering, manufacturing and distribution ecosystem. And the Android app ecosystem, now far larger than Apple's walled garden. So many companies benefiting, so many employees taking home good salaries. The Android industry is actually a significant portion of the world economy now, regardless of how much it infuriates an Apple asshole.

Re:I report...

[TheFakeTimCook]

I report not giving a fuck.

And yet you felt compelled to waste all our time and bandwidth with your useless comment.

No, they beat the adjusted estimates

[SuperKendall]

Apple makes projections that are conservative (which they always tell you up front).

Instead what they beat were estimates from people whose entire job it is to figure out how MUCH Apple has sand-bagged estimates, and produce a larger number.

THAT is the number Apple beat, partially because a lot of the analysts for some reason listen to people like you instead of trying to understand Apple's market

Re:No, they beat the adjusted estimates

[SuperKendall]

The market likes it better when a company meets its projections vs going under or exceeding it.

"The Market" (which is actually individual people and companies) has increased the price of AAPL by $10 since yesterday...

Gee, I guess they liked exceeding after all. Since shareholders get a portion of extra revenue via cash distributions each quarter...

Not lock in

[SuperKendall]

Or, as the Slashtards spin it: Vendor Lock-in.

The thing is it's not lock in. No amount of vendor lock-in will keep you buying new systems if you've had a bad experience.

Yes Apple makes it pleasant to stay within their ecosystem but so does everyone, and it simply doesn't matter own a world where apps are dirt cheap and photos can be easily moved.

The reason people go to Apple for new products is generally not because of lock-in, but because Apple has not pushed them away from making the natural choice to stay with a product line they have been using. How are non-technical people supposed to feel about a phone that doesn't receive updates any more after a year or so? Wouldn't they be more likely to consider some other brand?

Re:Services

[TheFakeTimCook]

$5 per month for unlimited sounds pretty good, actually.

I currently backup to a network drive and periodically sync that to an offline drive.

How long do they maintain backups? Can I store other things (not just their backups)? For example, can I use my current software and just point it at BlackBlaze?

And if you pop for a year, it's $50, and $95 for 2 years, which works out to a measly $3.95/mo for UNLIMITED storage!
I am not sure about data retention. I assume it is perpetual. They advertise on their site that you can even retrieve VERSIONS of Files for up to 30 days, which is kind of cool (like a temporary Time Machine thing!). Plus there is a mobile app to access files on iOS or Android. And a Web Client for remote access, too. So, in a way, you could certainly use that as a type of "Cloud Storage". Just save the file Locally, and have BackBlaze (which runs CONTINUOUSLY) "back it up" to its Server. Then use the web/mobile portal to Retrieve the file. And if you have your computer with you; then BackBlaze IS backing it up, regardless. Don't have to be hooked to your TM Drive (it will "catch up" when you get back home). Oh, and BackBlaze DOES include External USB (don't know about TB)-connected drives in its Backups. But I don't think it will include a Networked NAS (see Cloud Storage, below).

They also have a Free Trial.

Plus, if you're in a hurry, they can send you your Backup on a USB Stick or HDD for faster Restore.

One other thing: Their "Personal Backup" product is understandably (at that price) geared toward SINGLE Macs/PCs. There are other vendors that allow you to Backup multiple desktop and mobile clients on the same network; but those aren't nearly as inexpensive if you start getting above a few hundred GB. BackBlaze also has a "Business Backup" that allows centralized Administration/Provisioning of multiple devices; but I didn't look into the pricing. But a glance at their website makes it look like the pricing is the same as the Personal Backup; but with the addition of centralized Administration. Plus, I don't think they do any mobile-device backups. They also advertise "30-day rollback" of all backed-up machines and FREE loaner "Restore" Drive service (the Personal Backup charges $ to send you your Backup on physical media.

And while BackBlaze Backup isn't a "Cloud Drive" (I don't think), they have a companion product, "B2 Cloud Storage", that is.

Here's the site:

https://www.backblaze.com/

Re:Services

[TheFakeTimCook]

A better solution is to use Amazon Glacier for backups. $0.004 per gigabyte per month.

So, at 1 TB, it is roughly equivalent to the cost of BackBlaze (which can go lower with a longer committment), with none of the other amenities (30-day versioning, mailed Restore drive, zero-conf backup s/w included, support, etc.). Not to mention the fact that Retrieval times SUUUUCK!

"Amazon Glacier provides three retrieval options to fit your use case. Expedited retrievals typically return data in 1-5 minutes, and are great for Active Archive use cases. Standard retrievals typically complete between 3-5 hours work, and work well for less time-sensitive needs like backup data, media editing, or long-term analytics. Bulk retrievals are the lowest-cost retrieval option, returning large amounts of data within 5-12 hours."

Oh, and did you notice that any significant Retrieval COSTS EXTRA!!!

"Glacier offers a 10 GB retrieval free tier. You can retrieve 10 GB of your Amazon Glacier data per month for free. The free tier allowance can be used at any time during the month and applies to Standard retrievals."

Hell, even DELETING Data can cost money!!!

"Amazon Glacier is designed for use cases where data is retained for months, years, or decades. Deleting data from Amazon Glacier is free if the archive being deleted has been stored for three months or longer. If an archive is deleted within three months of being uploaded, you will be charged an early deletion fee. In the US East (Northern Virginia) Region, you would be charged a prorated early deletion fee of $0.012 per gigabyte deleted within three months. So if you deleted 1 gigabyte of data 1 month after uploading it, you would be charged a $0.008 early deletion fee. If, instead you deleted 1 gigabyte after 2 months, you would be charged a $0.004 early deletion fee."

Oh, and that $0.004 figure you quoted was an "As low as..." rate. Obviously, that's if you dial-in EVERYTHING "just right"...

And it STILL doesn't beat BackBlaze on large backups. Amazon Glacier will cost $16/mo to backup that 4 TB drive in your iMac Pro. BackBlaze will cost.... $5. AND provide INSTANTANEOUS (other than transfer-time) Retrieval!

In short: No fucking thankyouverymuch, Amazon.