That's a bit spun too, though. Revenue is up just .93%. Net income is down 12.7%. And they beat the estimates because the estimates were expecting bad news, as the overall trend has been stagnant for about two years.
Those just aren't good numbers for a company that, over the past decade, has been literally the most profitable in history. They aren't "bad" numbers, but for Apple they're sort of a disaster. The iPhone gravy train is running out of steam, basically.
When are we going to stop expecting exponential growth though? Or should the exponential growth just continue indefinitely? Is there no value in having a nice S-curve, ending up as one of the most profitable companies in history, and then just staying insanely profitable for a long time in a sustainable way?
Eh, you are equating slow growth with "running out of steam". Even if they don't grow from here on out, they will stay one of the world's most profitable companies for decades. Apple is turning into a stable, mature company. This is a completely normal and expected stage in the business lifecycle.
I agree on Apple having been more or less stagnant for a while now. It's no surprise when you look at their products IMO. They seem to mainly be consolidating the market share that they have. As a consumer, you get immense advantages from staying inside their ecosystem, but there seem few people left who aren't yet in their ecosystem and are open to getting into it at the same time.
But calling this a "disaster" is a bit much. The "iPhone gravy train" is still going very strong, albeit a tiny bit slower. They have lots of other products that sell very well. They make a huge amount of practically free cash from their plattforms. If their services and content creation efforts are even semi-successful, they will continue to diversify away from being just a consumer electronics company.
Given how slow the rest of the world economy is, and that they still managed to eek out 1% revenue growth on an absolutely gargantuan $50+ billion base for the quarter, despite earning the majority of their revenue abroad on a luxury product, I'd say these numbers are pretty amazing.
Phone market is consolidating for sure but Apple seems to be doing better than Samsung. This is opposite of what one might assume namely that less excitement around mobile phones would cause people to buy cheaper and just good enough phones.
To (hopefully) noone's surprise. The innovation mostly hit a brick wall and Cook just seems intent on squeezing every last dollar out of incremental improvements to the iPhone until he sails into the sunset
Their reporting on technology is often intentionally misleading and sensationalist, but it isn't surprising considering they directly compete with the likes of Facebook for attention and also rely on Google, Apple, and Twitter for visibility.
I stopped reading NYT after their obvious crusade on Facebook followed by their embarrassing "privacy" series. Most of these companies disgust me, but NYT's reporting almost made me feel a semblance of sympathy for them due to how ridiculous it was.
They do this a lot. It is (rightfully) pointed out any time a right leaning website story is posted, with the whole "Note this is from X publication, and they are right leaning, so take that into consideration" comment. For some reason NYT seems immune to this criticism though.
Generally the New York Times fact-checks and corrects itself—but all newspapers spin stories for more clicks or interest. “Everything’s going okay at Apple” isn’t going to move advertisement dollars, the metric by which all news media ultimately value stories. Having worked at a newspaper or two myself, it’s inescapable. That said it’s also worth pointing out the New York Times has endorsed Republicans before... just not recently. I suppose it’s also worth noting the Republican Party wasn’t always this way, either. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidential_electio...
I'm an Apple shareholder...biggest concern with driving "services" is that the 30% commission on in-app purchases is borderline obscene and I don't think longterm sustainable e.g. if the tech regulation hammer is pointed at Apple, regulation around the App Store, including limits on Apple's commission, would make the most sense.
The App Store is awash with stuff, I don't think the 30% charge is hurting them at all. In fact I expect they are wondering why they didn't start higher.
And the stock increased over 4% in after-hours trading, as increases in non-iPhone hardware sales and services overcame the decrease in iPhone sales. Earnings per share slightly beat the consensus forecast.
An interesting quote from Cook in the press release:
"The balance of calendar 2019 will be an exciting period, with major launches on all of our platforms, new services and several new products"
AAPL is still undervalued compared to stocks like AMZN. Apple's P/E of 17 is amazing compared to Amazons 78. I'm not really sure why their stock isn't traded with the same enthusiasm that other tech companies see.
Stock values aren't only about earnings. Amazon continues to be a growth bet, and their low earnings are because their income has historically been reinvested productively to access new markets. A quick google shows their 2018 revenue was up 31% over 2017, which was up 31% over 2016, which was up 27% over 2015. You don't buy Amazon for a share of the amount they're making today, you buy them for a share of the much bigger company they'll be tomorrow.
Apple, on the other hand, sells boutique products into a rapidly commoditizing market, and is having a terrible time with growth right now (the numbers today show less than 1% revenue growth). So profit is the only reason to buy AAPL right now. And the profits? Down almost 13%.
AAPL seems to have hit its peak in the device market, and can only grow revenues at this point by effectively raising prices on existing customers (that’s what the services category amounts to). This strategy can only take them so far.
Apple will never get the same P/E love, because they only make like 4 things (Mac, iPhone, iPad, services).
Everyone loves to hate on Apple on multiple fronts (elitist, expensive, over the hill), whereas the hate on Amazon is really about one thing.. that ol "makes no profit" canard.
CLARIFICATION: I’m talking perception, not my beliefs. Uber’s a scam, as far as I can tell, but they will either pull off a miracle or be the biggest Groupon of all time. And Snap isn’t very good at being a public company.
> AAPL is still undervalued compared to stocks like AMZN. Apple's P/E of 17 is amazing compared to Amazons 78. I'm not really sure why their stock isn't traded with the same enthusiasm that other tech companies see.
I'm not so sure it's useful to compare stock valuations in this way. An assessment of "undervalued" should be based solely on the facts of that specific company, IMO.
Comparing a high-cost consumer electronics company with market dominance but little growth projection to an online retailer with enormous growth makes absolutely no sense. Comparing their P/E makes even less sense.
AAPL's capacity for sustainance is doubtful, when they are giving money back to investors. What is the growth path for them ? They will continue to milk successful product but no "next" strategy in sight.
Because they're dependent on selling hardware, not software. It's not rocket science, hardware doesn't scale as easily as software, so it leads to a smaller multiplier.
Apple has run out of people to sell iPhones to, Amazon is just getting started ("day one" as Bezos likes to say). P/E is about growth potential and the market is saying Amazon has lots more of it than Apple.
I can argue that in the last 10 years, the stock price for non-payers of dividends is no longer a function of KPIs. Take for example Pinterest. It was offloaded to the stock market when KPIs have been dropping for a very long time [1]. The company is likely doomed.
Yet the stock is above the IPO [2].
If one of these major launches is a MacBook Pro with the same (or better) specs (esp video graphics) as their latest MacBook Pro, but without a TouchBar, they will get at least $2,500 from me.
If one of these major launches is an iPhone X-like phone with a thumbprint reader (home button or otherwise), they will get at least another $1,000 from me.
I have an pre-touchbar macbook pro on my desk that I've been using as an in-place workstation. For some reason, I pulled it out of its place and opened it up this past week, and I was blown away by the improved typing experience.
I think that I'll be upgrading back to the old one going forward.
And I promise that the next laptop I buy (or my company buys for me) won't have a touch bar or a butterfly keyboard.
If they could make an iPhone X-like phone with a headphone jack, then I'll buy it. I have zero interest in airpods or other wireless earphones though, so its a hard pass from me as long as that's the route they're going.
> And the stock increased over 4% in after-hours trading
Because the shift to services is exactly what everyone has been clamoring for. Looks like a pretty great quarter for Apple. I think it is the biggest June quarter revenue wise ever.
>The balance of calendar 2019 will be an exciting period, with major launches on all of our platforms, new services and several new products"
A nitpick, but I wish people in business would diversify their vocabulary and learn to use words other than "exciting" to describe everything. Calling something exciting does not make it so. Show why it's exciting, don't just claim that it is.
That iPhones were less than half their revenue, while still growing overall revenue, is a positive sign. Apple has done a good job of diversifying their revenue base over the last few years. It will be interesting to see how large wearables and services can become as revenue sources, I suspect they are still quite early in their growth.
And because the services have much higher margin, the earnings story is even better.
Products are 42.4 - 29.5 = 13 ish
Services are 11.5 - 4.1 = 7ish
If the iphone has the same margins as the other products, and about half the product sales are iphones, the services are producing more earnings than the iphone!
(To be clear: the services are delivered through the iphone, so its not like the iphone is not a key part of the services.)
They're big on services, which would point towards some AI thing but the next step that seems relevant in this area for an Apple-like product is probably general, reliable, human-like AI which is too far off. So my bet is on AR. VR went nowhere but its tech might push AR into something usable. I can totally see Apple producing a Google Glass like device and getting it right, somehow.
They do have ARKit going, which sets them up with a platform to do it on.
They also have the H1 chip in the AirPods, which could potentially be a stepping stone to streaming video from your phone to your headset via an H2 chip.
I don’t see them doing a stand-alone device, or a device with a cable, for awkwardness/dorkiness reasons.
Glasses that are indistinguishable from normal glasses but just pair with your iPhone is the play.
They will make a fortune on premium frames.
Seems like battery size is the limiting factor, but who better than Apple to squeeze a crazy amount of battery into a tiny space. Then there’s heat though. That’s a tough one.
Doesn’t feel like a “this year” thing to me. Feels like a “we’ll release it when the battery/chip tech hits a sweet spot” thing.
I recently read the book "The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing" and it talked about how when a company adds more lines of business that long term it can have negative effects (lack of focus). Do you think Apple has over diversified?
Still, the company hasn't released an innovative hardware product since 2008. That's a long time for them. If Apple can't innovate anymore, regardless of whether they have continued financial success, are they still really Apple?
I guess it depends on how you define innovative. The iPad was unveiled in January 2010, and while there were other tablets before it, and it was similar to the iPhone, it has now started to replace a regular computer for many people.
I have thought long and hard about upgrading my iPhone 8 to one of the new X models, but I don't like the lack of a home button. I guess I am officially old now, but I dont want to look at my phone to unlock it. I like that I can reach in my pocket, and unlock it with my thumb as I retrieve it. It may be user error, but I see several co-workers have to really train the phone on their face to unlock with Face ID. That would drive me nuts. the swipe up gesture just seems annoying, and on my iPhone 8 is unreliable to bring up the control panel. they need to do what they did before and copy the other vendors that put the fingerprint reader on the back of the phone so that the nice bezel free design can be implemented.
I was an early adopter of iPhone X and the following year with XS Max, from my experience any unfamiliarity with FaceID is extremely short-lived, I wouldn't go back to a home button which feels archaic at this point and unnecessarily takes up valuable real-estate that should go towards a larger screen. The gestures also become fluid and second nature after a while.
Even the next Pixel4 is moving to using FaceID, going back to a home button or fingerprint scanner would be a step backwards.
I like the gestures, but the unpredictability of when FaceID is going to work is maddening. Sometimes it works with sunglasses, sometimes not. Sometimes it works in the dim light of my bedroom, sometimes not. Sometimes it works when I absolutely don't expect it (half my face hidden in my pillow, towel wrapped around my face, complete darkness with face illuminated only by my lock screen) which only fools me into half expecting it to work when I shouldn't. Sometimes everything seems right, but it still doesn't work. I'm never completely taken by surprise because I'm never sure what will happen.
In other words, about a hundred times a day my train of thought is interrupted for a second or two while I stare at my phone and wonder if FaceID is going to work. This is a pretty terrible pattern of disruption. Technology should disappear into the background instead of inserting itself into the foreground of my attention every time I use it. The fingerprint home button was more reliable, and it was much easier to anticipate when it was going to fail because of a wet or dirty thumb.
Agree, new UX sans home buttons is amazing. I was a sceptic but ended up buying XS outright as it didn’t make sense to spend so much money on a XR and not get the camera. It’s an amazing device.
I was skeptical as well coming from my iPhone 6+ to the Xs... but it turns out that it just works and works fine. I wasn't missing my home button after about a day or two. Switching between iPad and iPhone is slightly awkward now, as I am sometimes waiting for my iPad to unlock on facial recognition and it never happens.
FWIW I was similarly skeptical. As others have mentioned, swiping up becomes a very natural motion. And I have sweaty fingers that confounded the fingerprint reader, so Face ID was actually a huge improvement in recognition rates for me. Looking squarely at the phone becomes second nature (because what else are your neck and wrist muscles doing?), and the only times I need to type a passcode are when I need to unlock the phone while lying down.
I resisted the button-less form until my buttoned iPhone broke, and I got a hand-me-down X.
Now when I use my iPad, which has a button, there's a brief moment of indignation, "What!? I have to touch a button to unlock this thing!?" every time I use it. It's funny how quickly we get used to things.
That said, I wish the phone wouldn't unlock when I'm just looking at the screen sometimes.
While I cannot comment on the rest, Face ID has proven to work surprisingly well for me, beating even the wildest expectations.
The unlock time seems to be less than half a second, so as I look at the phone, it is already unlocked.
And the detection is really good too. After I shaved my long beard and went fully clean-faced, FaceID had zero issues unlocking the phone with zero hiccups for me.
I’m even older than you apparently, but I just don’t see the attraction of the bezel-less design. I like bezels, they:
- let me hold the phone without blocking the screen
- act as a buffer for cracks: a smaller crack in the corner (the most common kind in my experience) won’t affect your experience.
- mean I don’t have to deal with notches or curved displays
Privilege check: I have large hands, I can single-handedly operate my iPhone 8 Plus with little difficulty. I could see bezel-less allowing greater ease of use for people not like me. If that overcomes the points above... so be it. I’m keeping my 8 Plus for now though.
Have you actually used a bezel-less device? They’ve sold hundreds of millions of them. I think it would be a scandal much like the laptop keyboards if their software for ignoring accidental input at the screen edge wasn’t essentially flawless.
Yeah, I think you are forced to re-train how you pickup and use the phone. An older non-smartphone could be easily picked up by grabbing the entire girth of the phone. With smartphones, people learned to pick it up using the side edges without triggering any touch interactions. Old-folks found this confusing as they constantly kept inadvertently dialing someone or launching random apps. At-least with the change from non-smartphones you got a bump in functionality, the face-id change seems to be entirely superficial to me. I'm still rocking my 6s, but will have to eventually upgrade when Apple slows down my phone with their updates. I held on to my 4s too till it became unbearably slow..
One feature I'd upgrade for is if Apple completely sealed off their phone and made it waterproof.
Iphones 7 and 8 already have a 'virtual' home button using haptic feedback--I assume this is what you mean. X-factor iphones use a gesture-based system instead of any kind of button.
I broke my home button and lost touch ID. For a while until I could replace the home button, I used the software home button which floats on your screen. The actual home button for navigation isn't really needed and swipe gesture is a natural evolution of that. However I would prefer fingerprint to face biometrics is what I discovered during this physical home button-less period.
There is a Face ID setting to require attention that you can disable which would then allow you to unlock the phone without looking at it. Of course, your face still has to be in front of the phone somewhere, but your gaze needn’t be on the device.
I found it took getting used to my Surface Pro unlocking when I look at it, but now I resent my work laptop which doesn't support Hello. I expect to have the same arc with iPhones once I go past an 8.
I'm fairly shocked to find that a community of seemingly technically competent people would forfeit their 4th amendment rights in order to save a few seconds keying in a passcode. This small detail feels like a microcosm of tech in general currently :/
You might unlock your phone 10,000 or 100,000 times over its lifetime. It is just a hugely convenient thing to have that work as quickly as possible, without needing to enter a passcode every time. How likely is it that you will experience an unexpected breach of your 4th amendment rights where you don't have time to disable biometric access to your phone in advance, especially as the iPhone has a 'panic button' specifically to do this quickly. Face ID requires you to look at the phone anyway so in theory it's simple to avoid giving access to a cop.
Who’s forfeiting anything? If you don’t want to unlock your device for law enforcement, just use the sleep/lock button to make your phone require the passcode (which the police can’t legally compel you to give, I believe). It takes several seconds to key in a reasonably secure passcode, and it ceases to be secure if you type it in view of any security cameras. Also, if you open your phone 50 times per day, it’s way more than just a few seconds.
The fourth amendment covers search and seizure by the government, not the willful disclosure of information to a company by a user.
But I get what you mean. Even without getting into my inherent distrust of facial recognition systems and the security/privacy implications of creating the infrastructure for it to work reliably, biometrics are usernames. They shouldn't be used as passwords.
Any time I'm about to go through security, I long-press the volume and side buttons which immmediately activates the requirement for passcode to unlock.
It's a quick and easy shortcut to enable the passcode requirement.
Thank you. Reading the comments on HN always leaves me wondering if I'm the only one that doesn't have any interest in any kind of biometric unlock feature.
The number of human man hours invested into that guidance number is vast. As accurate as that number is (and for what it is), people are going to make and lose a lot of money even still. Basically I’m saying — check your amazement because it’s amazement all the way down.
Well, Apple provides guidance to investors, so it's not like they are starting from scratch. The rest is public markets doing exactly what they are supposed to do.
This is a very big company with products that have a well understood track record. You could probably be pretty accurate if you just expected it to be the same as this quarter last year.
I'm bullish on AAPL because of their planned services. Anything they roll out has a gigantic audience and will have immediate revenue impact. They have a tremendous bully-pulpit inside their users devices, incomparable email lists, and a habit of making TV commercials people like to watch. The fact that they are adding 4 lines of business (banking, ad-free gaming, news, and streaming) is going to sustain double-digit, high-margin growth for the foreseeable future.
If I had money play with I would buy after this earnings report dropped; but it looks like the stock price isn't getting beat up.
Apple beat out EPS and Revenue estimates and the stock is trading up in after-hours. This is a headline for the cap-wearing anti-Tech Company crowd, as has been typical of the New York Times over the last year or two.
I don't understand why these articles think that people will just keep buying, like in the past decade the lifespan of devices has become bigger and bigger. I'm typing this post on a 2013 Macbook and I'm sure a lot of other users are using older laptops than that, that run perfectly fine. Like does the media just expect people to be buying new stuff again and again?
I don't know if I'm just missing the point or something...
Sooner or later you will have to buy a new device due to planned obsolescence, i.e. when (security) updates are no longer released. But then you can of course install a free operating system instead.
You do bring up a very valid point but I think that is true with anything that consumers buy like cars, or common household products when things just start to break or newer iterations of those products come out with better features.
2012 Macbook Pro here. Works like I just bought it. 5G is apparently the reason next year for your phone upgrade. I'm not sure how anyone will notice the difference, not to mention plans being throttled to death to begin with.
Macs have always been durable. Nothing has changed in that regard. If anything they've become less repairable and user-upgradable, shortening replacement cycles.
Readit News
Apple beat most estimates. Revenues grew. All time high revenue from services. Forward guidance was raised.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/07/apple-reports-third-q...
Those just aren't good numbers for a company that, over the past decade, has been literally the most profitable in history. They aren't "bad" numbers, but for Apple they're sort of a disaster. The iPhone gravy train is running out of steam, basically.
I agree on Apple having been more or less stagnant for a while now. It's no surprise when you look at their products IMO. They seem to mainly be consolidating the market share that they have. As a consumer, you get immense advantages from staying inside their ecosystem, but there seem few people left who aren't yet in their ecosystem and are open to getting into it at the same time.
But calling this a "disaster" is a bit much. The "iPhone gravy train" is still going very strong, albeit a tiny bit slower. They have lots of other products that sell very well. They make a huge amount of practically free cash from their plattforms. If their services and content creation efforts are even semi-successful, they will continue to diversify away from being just a consumer electronics company.
I stopped reading NYT after their obvious crusade on Facebook followed by their embarrassing "privacy" series. Most of these companies disgust me, but NYT's reporting almost made me feel a semblance of sympathy for them due to how ridiculous it was.
I don’t think it’s limited to tech. You’re likely experiencing the Gell-Mann amnesia effect here.
They do this a lot. It is (rightfully) pointed out any time a right leaning website story is posted, with the whole "Note this is from X publication, and they are right leaning, so take that into consideration" comment. For some reason NYT seems immune to this criticism though.
Not from where I've been sitting: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aycombinator.com+NYT+b...
You could argue NYT took a while to get called out, but not that they aren't getting called out.
Dead Comment
It's also a contrarian position because most people love their tech, and contrarian positions and outrage drive clicks.
Dead Comment
An interesting quote from Cook in the press release: "The balance of calendar 2019 will be an exciting period, with major launches on all of our platforms, new services and several new products"
Apple, on the other hand, sells boutique products into a rapidly commoditizing market, and is having a terrible time with growth right now (the numbers today show less than 1% revenue growth). So profit is the only reason to buy AAPL right now. And the profits? Down almost 13%.
Everyone loves to hate on Apple on multiple fronts (elitist, expensive, over the hill), whereas the hate on Amazon is really about one thing.. that ol "makes no profit" canard.
CLARIFICATION: I’m talking perception, not my beliefs. Uber’s a scam, as far as I can tell, but they will either pull off a miracle or be the biggest Groupon of all time. And Snap isn’t very good at being a public company.
I'm not so sure it's useful to compare stock valuations in this way. An assessment of "undervalued" should be based solely on the facts of that specific company, IMO.
1. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=p...
2. https://robinhood.com/stocks/PINS [1Y]
If one of these major launches is an iPhone X-like phone with a thumbprint reader (home button or otherwise), they will get at least another $1,000 from me.
I think that I'll be upgrading back to the old one going forward.
And I promise that the next laptop I buy (or my company buys for me) won't have a touch bar or a butterfly keyboard.
If they make a one-handed iPhone again, they will also get money from me.
For now, I'm sticking with the 2015 MBP and the SE.
Based on everything else they've done, I figure it will be $3500+ build though and push into the $5k range.
Dead Comment
Because the shift to services is exactly what everyone has been clamoring for. Looks like a pretty great quarter for Apple. I think it is the biggest June quarter revenue wise ever.
A nitpick, but I wish people in business would diversify their vocabulary and learn to use words other than "exciting" to describe everything. Calling something exciting does not make it so. Show why it's exciting, don't just claim that it is.
Deleted Comment
Products are 42.4 - 29.5 = 13 ish Services are 11.5 - 4.1 = 7ish
If the iphone has the same margins as the other products, and about half the product sales are iphones, the services are producing more earnings than the iphone!
(To be clear: the services are delivered through the iphone, so its not like the iphone is not a key part of the services.)
Source https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/Q3%20FY19%20Consolidated...
They also have the H1 chip in the AirPods, which could potentially be a stepping stone to streaming video from your phone to your headset via an H2 chip.
I don’t see them doing a stand-alone device, or a device with a cable, for awkwardness/dorkiness reasons.
Glasses that are indistinguishable from normal glasses but just pair with your iPhone is the play.
They will make a fortune on premium frames.
Seems like battery size is the limiting factor, but who better than Apple to squeeze a crazy amount of battery into a tiny space. Then there’s heat though. That’s a tough one.
Doesn’t feel like a “this year” thing to me. Feels like a “we’ll release it when the battery/chip tech hits a sweet spot” thing.
Except for iCloud services, which are an embarrassment to technology.
Their contacts management has a 10 year old bug with syncing images and God only knows how they wrote their web app interfaces.
But to your point, since 2008:
- Mac revenue has grown
- iPad was introduced and by itself its revenue and more than likely profit is something that any company would kill for.
- the Apple Watch was introduced and all indications it’s bigger than the iPod ever was.
They then spent $17 BILLION on share buybacks in the last quarter.
It's not a tech company anymore it's just a financial engineering scheme for large shareholders. If you're a shareholder, good for you!
Even the next Pixel4 is moving to using FaceID, going back to a home button or fingerprint scanner would be a step backwards.
In other words, about a hundred times a day my train of thought is interrupted for a second or two while I stare at my phone and wonder if FaceID is going to work. This is a pretty terrible pattern of disruption. Technology should disappear into the background instead of inserting itself into the foreground of my attention every time I use it. The fingerprint home button was more reliable, and it was much easier to anticipate when it was going to fail because of a wet or dirty thumb.
I resisted the button-less form until my buttoned iPhone broke, and I got a hand-me-down X.
Now when I use my iPad, which has a button, there's a brief moment of indignation, "What!? I have to touch a button to unlock this thing!?" every time I use it. It's funny how quickly we get used to things.
That said, I wish the phone wouldn't unlock when I'm just looking at the screen sometimes.
I really like(d) the ability to unlock my phone as it laid flat on my desk using touchid, but my FaceID experience has been virtually flawless.
I really couldn't go back to the huge black bar across the bottom.
The unlock time seems to be less than half a second, so as I look at the phone, it is already unlocked.
And the detection is really good too. After I shaved my long beard and went fully clean-faced, FaceID had zero issues unlocking the phone with zero hiccups for me.
It will let a sibling in too, or at least at a point in the past.
- let me hold the phone without blocking the screen
- act as a buffer for cracks: a smaller crack in the corner (the most common kind in my experience) won’t affect your experience.
- mean I don’t have to deal with notches or curved displays
Privilege check: I have large hands, I can single-handedly operate my iPhone 8 Plus with little difficulty. I could see bezel-less allowing greater ease of use for people not like me. If that overcomes the points above... so be it. I’m keeping my 8 Plus for now though.
One feature I'd upgrade for is if Apple completely sealed off their phone and made it waterproof.
You can turn this off in Settings.
But I get what you mean. Even without getting into my inherent distrust of facial recognition systems and the security/privacy implications of creating the infrastructure for it to work reliably, biometrics are usernames. They shouldn't be used as passwords.
It's a quick and easy shortcut to enable the passcode requirement.
Deleted Comment
EPS: $2.18 vs. $2.10 estimated by Refinitiv consensus estimates.
Revenue: $53.8 billion vs. $53.39B estimated by Refinitiv consensus estimates.
Q4 Revenue guidance: $61 billion to $64 billion versus $60.98 billion estimate by Refinitiv consensus estimates.
iPhone revenue: $25.99 billion vs. $26.31 billion estimated by FactSet.
Services revenue: $11.46 billion vs. $11.61 billion estimated by FactSet.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/30/apple-earnings-q3-2019.html
If I had money play with I would buy after this earnings report dropped; but it looks like the stock price isn't getting beat up.
I don't know if I'm just missing the point or something...