Only partially. Analysts think China is responsible for about 2 million units. However, this year for the launch weekend, Apple sold around 3 million more (total 13 million) than last year (10 million), which means probably 1 million more excluding China, or about a 10% increase excluding China.
Only partially. Analysts think China is responsible for about 2 million units. However, this year for the launch weekend, Apple sold around 3 million more (total 13 million) than last year (10 million), which means probably 1 million more excluding China, or about a 10% increase excluding China.
It's always amazing to me that Apple can increase sales year over year like this. Really truly an impressive performance. Especially in the consumer market where people are notoriously fickle.
I wonder if there will be another move in the next generation to offer an even more upscale model to further bolster profit margins. A QHD or AMOLED screen? Might be interesting to see Apple's spin on one of Samsung's signature tech.
Personally, I suspect Apple is more likely to move around 85-90 million iPhones. It shipped 74.5 million in calendar Q4 (that's fiscal Q1) last year, and the iPhone 6s' launch weekend sales are 30 percent above last year's model. Even if that initial spike isn't directly proportionate to Q4 volumes, it's hard to believe that this isn't reflective of increased demand.
I've already asked several coworkers with the iPhone 6/+ if they were going to upgrade to the s models. Nobody said they would. I'm not sure if the s models will outsell last years model since most who wanted bigger screens got them last year.
I'm expecting my 6S+ to arrive today, will be back with iOS for the first time since using a 3G. I'm going to try out Tmobile as well, it was too easy not to since they have a nice guarantee.
Uh, Apple already confirmed the 6s/6s+ outsold the 6/6+.
QHD is a no-go; Apple isn't interested in playing DPI races.
AMOLED is the only major hardware differentiation left to set itself from Apple. Doubt they will let that go to Apple, and they don't have the capacity to supply Apple either.
QHD is a no-go; Apple isn't interested in playing DPI races.
AMOLED is the only major hardware differentiation left to set itself from Apple. Doubt they will let that go to Apple, and they don't have the capacity to supply Apple either.
Er, this is the same Apple that kicked off the DPI races with their "Retina" branding, right?
They don't engage in the DPI race because it largely makes little difference to go past where they are now, and have been since the iPhone 4 (excluding the 6 Plus weirdness).
They were the first to do high DPI yes, but they didn't kick off any "race". They took their displays to the DPI that they thought was necessary, right to the point where the slope on the diminishing returns curve becomes exponential. The Android OEMs desperate to differentiate themselves started the "race".
Apple Inc. reported a 30% increase in quarterly profit after posting strong sales of its iconic phone and nearly doubling revenue in China, its second-largest market.
The Cupertino, Calif., tech giant said Tuesday that it sold 48 million iPhones during its fiscal fourth quarter ending Sept. 26, up 22% from a year ago.
That spurred revenue of $51.5 billion for the worlds most profitable company, up from $42.14 billion a year earlier.
Apple Inc. is preparing for a larger initial production run of its next iPhones, betting that even modest hardware changes will entice consumers to upgrade handsets and outstrip demand for the larger-screen phones that it released last year.
Apple is asking suppliers to manufacture between 85 million and 90 million units combined of two new iPhone models with 4.7-inch and 5.5-inch displays by Dec. 31, according to people familiar with the matter. The screen sizes are the same as in the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus.
By comparison, Apple last year ordered a then-record initial production run of 70 million to 80 million for its first larger-screen iPhones.
They don't engage in the DPI race because it largely makes little difference to go past where they are now, and have been since the iPhone 4 (excluding the 6 Plus weirdness).
They were the first to do high DPI yes, but they didn't kick off any "race". They took their displays to the DPI that they thought was necessary, right to the point where the slope on the diminishing returns curve becomes exponential. The Android OEMs desperate to differentiate themselves started the "race".
It's funny some by now still don't understand the concept that raw spec increases like DPI doesn't necessarily means an equal gain in real world utility, and the latter is what ultimately drive demand not the former.
very less cost price, very high sale price, i will never buy it
very less cost price, very high sale price, i will never buy it
iPhone sales were definitely good y/o/y at over 20%, though including China at launch seems to be taking the wind a bit out of next quarter. Guidance seems to be flat y/o/y for iPhones sales in the holiday quarter which would be the first time in a while to have flat growth.
It's hard to find anything to criticize when you're pulling in over 11 billion in quarterly profit, but it could point to 1H 2016 sales being a bit underwhelming.
Exactly, I think the explosive growth is over, and the danger to Apple is that they need to stay ahead of the rest of the players and keep customers convinced they need flagship phones while the lower end and midrange becomes commoditized.
They've done a great job so far, pretty impressive.
Also interesting that 30% of buyers last quarter came from Android phones.
The biggest mistake that anti-Apple zealots make is assuming that Apple cares about playing the market share game.
very less cost price, very high sale price, i will never buy it
Well, avoiding commoditization has been Apple's specialty for a while. It's one of the few PC makers to increase shipments and market share, and that's despite prices that are much higher than the industry average (which tends to be just a few hundred dollars).
E
The smartphone market isn't the same, of course, but I suspect Apple is already doing with the iPhone what it did with the Mac: become the aspirational brand, own the high end, and let the rest of the industry kill itself chasing after market share. The biggest mistake that anti-Apple zealots make is assuming that Apple cares about playing the market share game. All it wants is enough share to remain influential and keep improving its profit -- it'd rather remain standing 10 years from now than get a market share lead that would likely evaporate after a year or two.