I suspect a lot of Apple owners have several devices eg a Macbook, iPhone, Apple Watch, and maybe an iPad or a Homepod too. I would be all that surprised if owning multiple Macs was relatively common as well if you include work computers.
Used to be that SMS was popular everywhere EXCEPT the US!
We finally caught up, and everyone left us behind again.
I suspect the primary reason is it's a big country, and texting nationwide has been effectively free for a long time. Roaming/international calling and texting has been a disaster in Europe forever, and more people are texting across national boundaries there, so there was more of a reason to switch to something like WhatsApp. Also, related, data service has been expensive in the US for a long time.
Messenger apps in the US are most popular among those with family ties across international borders.
Yeah because SMS costs money, it used to be significant that’s why “free” texting apps pretty much killed it in countries where you didn’t get a ton of free texts or weren’t as wealthy.
- Android phones have a low end, and thus a lot of people associate them with being poor. It's simple status symbol showing off. This is stupid - I don't like it, but it's what people seem to think.
- A single Android user can "drag down" the conversation of a bunch of iPhone users. Group chats are a perfect example of this. Not to mention, reacts, rich media sharing, and threading doesn't work across platforms. This is really frustrating when it happens. You could argue that Apple should adapt RCS - I would argue that RCS is technically terrible, poorly designed, and Apple has a legitimate point of not adopting it on those grounds.
- "Green bubble" is also beyond just messaging. It's referring to the overall friction of the two ecosystems, such as file sharing, location sharing, payments, etc.
> Not to mention, reacts, rich media sharing, and threading doesn't work across platforms.
Because none of those are SMS features. They are features Apple introduced with iMessage, and then refused to scale across the rest of the industry. RCS is a response to iMessage being closed; if Apple can do better, nobody is stopping them from opening the iMessage specification.
..except they won't. Not because it's impossible, but because there's no money in improving the cross-platform user experience, even if it makes your users happy.
Well, let me preface by saying I specifically avoided talking about vendor lock-in in my previous post for a reason. I only wanted to talk about why iPhone users perceive Android users negatively. I think this lock-in is generally bad.
I think there are actual, material reasons why Apple won't integrate with RCS until they're forced to, but also opening up iMessage is a very difficult proposition. Here is my speculation:
> refused to scale across the rest of the industry.
iMessage was not designed to be a decentralized chat protocol, RCS was. iMessage was not designed to work well with carrier UIs, RCS was. They are extremely different things. "scaling it" is much easier said than done.
> nobody is stopping them from opening the iMessage specification
iMessage is tied closely to apple accounts and centralized auth. It'd take a huge amount of engineering effort to open iMessage up, for zero benefit to Apple.
iMessage uses per-device-keys as a mechanism of spam control, and will blacklist physical devices. One of iMessage's key spam controls would be wrecked if it was "completely open". This means that android devices would have to be certified for imessage, to ensure that they have unique device keys, and that the manufacturer is actually operating in good faith.
They'd probably have to negotiate with individual device vendors for enrollment. How would you feel if iMessage was on Samsung devices only? Anyways, it's a huge amount of work that only yields negative strategic benefit.
Anyways,
Porting iMessage to Android is extremely non-trivial. RCS is a piece of shit (it really is, go look at the spec, the carriers put their hands all over it and it's rough).
Stop trusting major vendors, use signal or self host your chat.
I don't know why you're obsessed with RCS so much; Apple doesn't have to use it. People just want a sustainable, open interface to use with iMessage; if Apple won't provide that, then they're the ones responsible for locking people out. It's as simple as that.
Your response here is a very measured take that boils down to "don't trust iMessage either", which defeats the purpose of promoting any improvement over SMS. If we're just going to promote cross-platform software anyways, why should we not encourage our software vendors to work together? What do we stand to lose?
1. Not obsessed with RCS, it's just directly relevant to the conversation. I think that RCS is poorly implemented and something else should take it's place. I feel like you are being unnecessarily combative.
2. What people want is decent cross platform chat.
3. The iMessage model makes an open interface a difficult proposition, for the reasons mentioned plus additional ones. I would describe it as a technical deficiency, and not a sustainable solution.
4. I think SMS and carrier-provided messaging is a dead end. Frankly, they're defacto authn providers, and I don't like that either.
5. Only one phone OS software vendor provides a compelling E2EE solution, and that's Apple - and they've made their choices, quite clearly. I don't trust the major phone os vendors to do the right thing - they've had a decade to figure it out and they still haven't.
It makes sense in markets where iMessage has a relevant market share.
In other markets other messaging apps like WhatsApp dominate (and for those it’s irrelevant what platform you are on).
Also, "Green Bubble" is not at all about (any and all) friction between platforms. That makes no sense. It’s fundamentally about a specific kind of friction relating to network effects and and an obvious display of difference.
> Also, "Green Bubble" is not at all about (any and all) friction between platforms. That makes no sense.
My friends and I all use Find My Friends, I have heard some refer to our android-having friends as not being able to share location because they have "green bubbles".
It's become a term that means more than just chat.
I'm in a few group chats where someone is an Android user. It's not a status thing for me and I'm fine with it. But it does mean I need to type from my phone rather than MacBook.
If you wanted to you can sign in to Messages and enable general SMS messaging from your device. I send SMS through Messages on my Mac all the time without any issues.
It was a thing. It never bothered me. I moved to iPhone after I got tired of fighting Android over privacy. Apple isn't great but they're mostly in the hardware business and not software/ad business (for now) so they aren't quite as invasive.
I am happy to clarify: Google has been running a PR campaign against the green and blue bubbles in iMessage. It’s a weird and distorted thing for them to focus on and really matters to any degree in the US market. Do we disagree? I thought we didn’t but maybe I was in the wrong there.
I’m not aware of that PR campaign – which is why I didn’t understand your comment at all – so (not living in the US) if this is something that didn’t reach me Google may have well placed their PR efforts even if what they claim is not globally true.
FWIW, RCS is terrible, half-baked, and the E2EE solution they offer is weak and flawed.
Not to mention, they'd have to continue to support iMessage. It's a requirement, since it's the underpinning of some of their other successful ecosystem products.
The correct solution, imo, is to get your friends on something like Signal. Cross platform, easy, E2EE messaging - it's not perfect, but it's better than vendor lockin or RCS
It's an international standard, supported by carriers and everyone not-Apple. Google pushed it forward, but did so in coordination with standards bodies. I'm not sure how you arrive at the above conclusion when the history is not in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services#Hi...
Slow your roll there and define your terms: who actually is everyone not-Apple?
Do you just mean carriers and Google? That leaves out in your apparent definition of “Apple” a bunch of things I thought were “not-Apple”: LINE, WeChat, KakaoTalk, Kik, WhatsApp, Viber, Facebook Messenger, Snapchat, Skype, Telegram, Signal, Discord, Slack, Teams and basically every single app with some form of DMing.
RCS might have made sense in a different world, but in this one it’s just another protocol among many and without any compelling reason to support it other than it’s “not SMS”. There’s a lot of “not SMS” out there and iMessage and RCS are just two among many; you’re going to need something a lot more compelling than that.
The same people who standardized SMS. We're talking telephony, it's widely standardized, and it has nothing to so with WeChat or Discord et al. These are telecom standards issued by the same telecom standards bodies that run everything else in your phone. I've provided sources linking to this.
I'm surprised how controversial this seems to be with Apple users.
You're being very imprecise with your words and causing confusion. I understand what they are trying to say - "everyone not apple" is an ill defined phrase and functionally doesn't actually mean anything.
I was talking about telephony in a discussion about telephony standards but Apple users seemingly confuse notions like "SMS" with apps like WhatsApp. When I say everybody not-Apple, I mean literally that. All modern entrants in the mobile phone space with one single exception have some basic support for RCS.
My language was precise, it just doesn't agree with the notions of Apple users.
Nobody is “confusing” anything. My argument was that the distinction was irrelevant on a modern smartphone and the “telephonic” standard was simply irrelevant. You can choose not to engage that part of my argument, but don’t misrepresent it. Telephone networks do everything over IP as of LTE, and RCS isn’t especially relevant for the reasons it’s proponents claim that it is now when it’s just a protocol among many accessible via an app among many, so you would need to make a stronger case for it elsewhere.
Are you sure you’ve got the cause and effect there?
So let’s say hypothetically Apple did implement RCS support in iMessage thus introducing a fourth messaging protocol into the mix (SMS, MMS, iMessage) and we just ignore that it’s more “standard” than standard and is probably only properly implemented by exactly Google anyway, and we disregard the dozens of cross platform alternatives to RCS, SMS and iMessage: why wouldn’t Apple just make the bubbles for RCS yellow or orange or red or something? The actual visual style is a holdover from iChat which you could visually theme (and those were options) and bringing blue bubbles in was intended to visually distinguish which protocol you were sending a message down the virtual wire on so you knew not to try and use iMessage features with someone that could only receive SMS and MMS messages.
Is the concern the color of the bubbles, or is the concern the lack of RCS?
> Is the concern the color of the bubbles, or is the concern the lack of RCS?
The lack of compliance and interop with internationally accepted standards by Apple, which should be of surprise to exactly nobody. It's kinda their thing.
“Internationally accepted” in context means other corporations and a telecoms body governed by or influenced if you prefer mostly those corporations. It’s a spin that only makes sense if you ignore what messaging looks like on a modern smartphone in most of the world: apps, most of which are not iMessage and used a lot more than iMessage, RCS or SMS. The blue bubble/green bubble campaign by Google is largely a U.S.-centric PR campaign trying to influence specifically American iPhone customers. You need a better selling point.
Hey you finally arrived at the answer: Apple's solution is Apples' solution, not a standard. Google's solution is the industry, internationally accepted standard and no quotes are needed around that statement. The same standards bodies that formalized SMS did the same with RCS. Everyone except Apple is on board.
You can try all you want to spin this as Apple being in the right, but it's Apple vs everybody on this one.
Google’s flavour of RCS is a custom extension, goes through their own servers and is closed, except for partners. It’s not really that different than iMessage in that regard.
Vanilla RCS in general is a bit of a crapshoot, especially when you start considering multiple countries and varied carrier support.
It's more like if Apple was the richest person at the party, and they turned out their pockets when someone asked them if they brought any food for the rest of us.
We're not kicking them out of the party, but everyone in-the-know will roll their eyes when they see Apple drinking from the punch bowl.
They should have a color for every model that way kids can identify the poors that only have iPhone SEs. Then limit new chat features to the Pro and Pro Max. Really lean into the bubble fiefdom.
Shhhhh. They already do that with the product design (you can tell “serf” vs “pro” and “last gen” vs “latest” from 10’ away for every Apple product). I would hate to see that leech in to the online communications.
The colour of the bubble depends on the protocol. SMS messages are sent with green bubbles, iMessages are sent with blue. If all your messages are showing up with green bubbles then either all your friends are on Android devices or you're not signed into iMessage.
Apple is certainly very good at their core business of building hardware and software, but the thing that sets them apart from the rest is their unimpeachable Brand Halo. Owning Apple products is now considered the ticket to entry for affluence. And 2 billion devices hasn't done very much to dilute that position. Android users (myself included) will show off all the incredible features you get on a device that costs half the price of iPhone and not make a dent in anyone's opinion.
Just as a rough count, I've got a dozen active apple devices in my home. Desktops (3 - one old pro, one current pro, one mini), laptops (2 - one old, one not as old), phones (2 - one current, one old), iPad (1), iWatch (1), home pods (3).
I'll admit to being fairly invested in the ecosystem (and have been for a long time). If you're counting iphones, iwatches, AirPods - it can easily get to multiple devices per person.
Macs are quality machines that have a longevity, so most consumers aren't replacing them every two years. I think Apple should get serious about infiltrating enterprise, the world of Microsoft, with seamless desktop solutions that won't cause any extra work for IT. They could pick up a lot of sales with inexpensive hardware undercutting base model PCs for non-power users by creating secretary suites and suites for desk-monkeys that don't use anything more esoteric than email, office apps and web, while cutting power costs dramatically, as long as the software seamlessly integrates with Active Directory, Exchange/O365, and other Microsoft technologies without any hassle or learning curve, and machines that just work without generating any IT incidents, ever or rarely. This seems like a no-brainer to me, because it's kind of silly and expensive giving a secretary a $800-$2500 base model HP or Dell running Windows 11. They should also try to attract power users with more performant Apple Silicon, but the entire point rests on a proactive developer team issuing fast updates to fix Microsoft periodically breaking things with their updates, and never allow Microsoft to confound the Apple enterprise initiative, as Microsoft will undoubted try to do at every turn.
Not Mac sales related, but I also think Apple should infiltrate and take over the residential kitchen with advanced, efficient utilities, a refrigerator, an inductive range top, a microwave that doesn't "KLUNK!" when the door is closed, a toaster-broiler, maybe a faucet and purifier.
And I think they should do these things before they ever release any VR/AR hardware and get burned like everyone else in the history of VR/AR.
IT is a generalist field. Techs don't shy away from things they don't yet have experience with, and as long as the machines bind to the directory without hassle, that's all the administration they should need.
> Techs don't shy away from things they don't yet have experience with, and as long as the machines bind to the directory without hassle, that's all the administration they should need.
lol what? how many IT support orgs have you been in? how many have you had to run? Most of my (local) techs had room temperature IQs, and many of the outsourced help, be it in India or NYC, wouldn't do jack until you told them exactly what to do. IT lends itself extremely well to specialization because many fields are so deep that you almost have to specialize; no way I'm trusting a random Linux admin to handle BGP, nor my Network guy to fix my deep-in-the-DB SAN problems.
Plus there is an entire galaxy of software that would have to be ported, made to work, and made to work in ways that satisfy compliance requirements.
Then there is maintenance, updates, RMAs, and training.
It's a big, demanding, ruthless market, and Apple knows this -- and is why they haven't bothered to enter it.
There was a lot of built-up demand for the M1s, especially the MacBook Pros. Those shipped in 2021. The sales you are looking for are spread out in the year before this last quarter of 2022.
And the M2 MacBook Pros were initially rumored for late-2022, causing others to wait.
Yeah, good point. and it probably 'pulled forward' a lot of demand that might have landed in 2022 otherwise. I forgot how 'early' the M1s came out.
(Personally, I bought an Intel Air in 2020 then immediately flipped it when the M1 Airs came out.. figured I might as well eat the loss right away and enjoy the new computer, vs suffering... and bought a studio in 2022.. and my new work machine is an M1 16". Definitely not feeling any FOMO over not waiting for the M2. Perfectly happy with what I have, although the M2 Mini might have been a better fit for me than the studio)
Mac numbers are not surprising at all. Everyone who was interested in a max already bought one when the m1s dropped. Now the max line is entering the more predictable phase of its life cycle.
Macrumors has a stacked area chart showing the breakdown of the categories by quarter going back to 2009[0]. It's helpful to see all these numbers in context
They'll have to dip their finger into that sweet ad revenue at some point to sate the shareholder's hunger for growth. Ads are already leaking out of the app store into apple news and the stocks app.
That would be fine as long as they don't go for the attention like with regular ads. They need to be very careful though, other device makers are not that behind Apple and worsening the user experience can very well kill Apple.
I have an Apple M1 MacBook Air. Didn't jump yet for M2/M2 Pro/M2 Pro Max. Will probably jump for the next.
I bought an Apple Watch and returned it. It did nothing for me.
If I could run full Mac OS X on an iPad, I'd buy one. Otherwise, I don't have one.
I haven't upgraded my AirPods/I don't have AirPods Pro because I don't like the in-ear and don't need noise cancellation that badly.
I'm probably an outlier but... they haven't been able to convert me on Apple Watch or iPad yet. I wonder how many other customers like me are sitting out there.
Interesting that you upgrade your phone every year. It kinda makes sense when you think about how often you use your phone, but I've done the opposite and only ever upgraded my (or my partner's) phone when it broke or started slowing down, which typically takes ~3 years now with iphones and ~1.5 years with android -- $600-1k just feels like a huge purchase if you're not actively reminding yourself to amortize it.
I'm starting to consider going to your approach (with trade-in) just to get camera upgrades.
I feel like the gains are becoming smaller, at least in terms of stuff that interests me. I was happy to get the OLED screen on my iPhone 12. It's still running strong and have no plans to upgrade for at least another few years.
iPad has an increasingly narrow use-case now that phones are so big and displays are so good (imo). The only reason I got an iPad was to take notes for class, which it exceeds at very well. It feels like writing on paper, almost. And I'm starting flight school soon too. Seems all the charts/etc. are electronic now, so a tablet with ForeFlight (App Store only) is almost necessary.
FWIW, my reMarkable 2 _does_ feel like writing on paper (IMhO it's superior to paper in most ways except perhaps very very fine details). It is however a more narrow-usage device which is both good (distraction free) and bad (distraction free :)
It will be interesting to watch that service revenue evolve now that the EU and Biden Administration is rethinking their stance on the App Store. Tim Cook did a fairly good job diversifying Apple's service offerings, but how competitive will they be on an even playing field?
Apple is allowed to collect the 15-30%. No one including EU or US has said otherwise.
And what happened in Netherlands with the dating apps underscores this.
What will happen instead is that there will be other stores/payment methods and Apple will simply bill them instead using the telemetry it has around which apps are being launched. And what those stores will find is that its an unprofitable and unenjoyable business to run and the status quo will largely remain the same.
You're right. However, the Biden administration is now on-record stating that iPhones need more app competition[0] and sideloading will happen in the EU regardless.
The hammer is dropping, just not in a very exciting fashion. The fun part comes when Apple is forced to implement something that complies with EU regulators and pleases the US Department of Commerce.
If Windows, MacOS, or even Android did the same thing, I don't think the Department of Commerce would be very happy. In fact, I think they're starting to recognize that all platforms should be treated equally, or at least that's what the official US inquiry reports:
> NTIA’s “Competition in the Mobile Application Ecosystem” report found the current ecosystem is not a level playing field, which is harmful to developers and consumers. The report recommends policy changes to improve the ecosystem.
Apple continuing to charge an arbitrary fee probably doesn't "level the playing field" they're talking about. But we can agree to disagree for now, I'm perfectly contented waiting for Apple's response in Europe first.
a) Apple will still require the developer to be registered with their Developer Program in order to get the certificate to allow apps to be installed. They can simply ask for the cost of the app to be self-reported.
b) With existing telemetry they know which apps are being installed and run and can simply bill the developer directly.
c) In the case of a developer using a third party store, Apple can have an API which stores can use to report this information so they can manage the developer relationship themselves.
d) All of the above will simply shift revenue collection to a compliance activity. If you don't provide accurate details your certificate is revoked and you're banned from the store.
> in order to get the certificate to allow apps to be installed
Personally, I think this goes hand in hand with the App store requirement - if that one will be lifted, the certificate one will be lifted as well.
> They can simply ask for the cost of the app to be self-reported.
The app itself is free, and the customer will pay for something else instead. I'm not sure about the legalese (possibly different per country), but this just reeks of loopholes.
Does Apple's 30% cut of all app store payments count as "services revenue"? If so, quite a bit comes from sketchy loot box games (though certainly not all)
I'm actually kind of curious about this. I will be keeping a smartphone or tablet out of my kid's hands for as long as possible. Most games on the App Store seem designed to sell microtransactions and not just, be a fun game.
I'd feel much better giving her a Switch and some Mario games.
Apple has a pretty good parental control system called “Ask to Buy” where the kids can’t make any purchases in the App Store without the permission of the ”family organizer”.
As others have said - Apple Arcade is the best thing to do here. I have a 10 year old son and I refuse to approve anything if it isn’t Apple Arcade or free to play without in app purchases.
App store revenue is mostly games, but there's also Apple Music, AppleTV+, Apple News+, iClouds storage plans (almost necessary to use iCloud photos), Apple Fitness+, Apple Arcade, and probably others I'm forgetting.
In hindsight, it's perfectly clear that Fortnite was removed from the App Store for it's irreversible damage done to our teens. Definitely wasn't an early move to strong-arm dissenting developers before regulatory bodies did their own research.
Ugh. Apple Services are flawed at the root and are a worrying trend. I want to buy hardware that I own. I don't want crappy DRM crap.
Hope they don't get addicted to that crappy business model and become the next Google (search results are so terrible now, almost should call it ad results).
What a drop! M1 success and exodus out of butterfly keyboard probably pumped those numbers last year, but I guess we know the trend of growth there is on shaky ground.
Also, i wonder how much of that are companies not needing to buy new hires new laptops
M1 was such a big leap in terms of performance, that people will be happy with it for quite a while - I would expect Apple's user base to keep widening, but the profit from hardware keep falling because people won't need to upgrade as much.
For years they churned out flawed laptops, I know people who went through multiple rounds of keyboard repairs. That has got to have put some people off buying mac laptops for a long time, M(1|2) or not.
I bought many M1s, but haven't bought any M2s yet because the M1 is so great. I am saving the M2 purchase for when it like rains for 2 weeks straight or something.
I didn't upgrade to Apple Silicon right away but I did last year ago with gear going out of OS upgrade support last fall. I imagine a lot of people decided that Apple Silicon was a good upgrade point and I can't see upgrading again for a while unless I replace my iMac with a new mini.
There has to be a reason Apple has any cash on hand whatsoever instead of parking a lot there? Unless they look at that as a cash-equivalent... which I am guessing they don't?
Cash on hand is marked as "Cash And Short Term Investments" in the balance sheet and includes US treasuries which are very liquid and basically as good as cash.
Seems like the shares have only given back today's gains so (for now) I guess the market isn't too concerned. China coming back online should help with the supply chain issues.
Most of the tech gadgets this year will not release crazy features with the recession coming anyway. I expect iPhone 15 not to have huge improvement, just like Samsung s23.
Pretty sure next year apple will have a hike after this year's negative
I'm doubtful of this. Apple has more than enough cash to keep the ball rolling on R&D to weather this recession we keep hearing is "about to hit us" and the R&D cycle takes years anyway.
Current/future state of the economy aside, I think the whole tech industry is hitting this point where nobody really knows what to else to add to phones. It's really just refinement on the tech at this point. Wanna know what they'll do for iPhone in the next 5 years? Better camera, usb-c, add touch ID again, screen will go further to the edges, better screen, change in form factor (maybe thinner again), maybe maybe some folding option in in 5 years if that ends up being a large enough market, and lots of software tweaks.
We've run out obvious improvements that would make the average joe go out and upgrade their iphone/macbook. M1 was great, but now that I have it do I really need M2? Not for my needs. Maybe widespread VR/AR will be that next thing, but man Apple's gotta do that right from the get-go or they'll leave a bad taste in people's mouths.
> Just by adding USB-C they will sell a lot of them.
I have a hard time imagining that would factor into many people's decisions, and if it did it might actually be a negative.
If you already have an iPhone, you already have Lightning connectors everywhere you need them regularly. So upgrading to USB-C means the hassle of replacing or finding Lightning->USB-C adapters for existing cables/docks/etc.
USB-C is mostly a small benefit for people who have never bought an iPhone before, but it's such a small change I can't imagine it actually being the reason anyone would switch from Android to iPhone.
N=1 but I am long time Android user going back to the Nexus era and bought an iPad Mini and iPad Pro entirely due to the USB-C switch when I wouldn’t have considered them before. I’m pretty committed to the Samsung ecosystem but a USB-C iPhone would actually make my next phone purchase competitive instead of Android by default.
Having one cable to charge everything is too convenient for me to give up.
I have a stereo dock that's lightning. An iPhone stand/dock that's lightning. A car charger that's lightning. And a backup power charger that's lightning.
If I upgrade my phone to USB-C I've got to figure out what to do about all of those. (And they're all used exclusively with my phone, connecting with any other Apple device doesn't even make sense.)
While the fact that my MacBook charger is USB-C is irrelevant since it's always plugged into my laptop.
I wonder if the china fisco during peak holiday season was a wake up call for higher ups, and if well see pressure from investor for diversifying supply chains
It's time for a more exclusive/luxurious brand to hit the market, because this userbase is starting to get ridiculous.