Apple sold 74.5M iPhones in Q4 2015

You could even argue that the huge amount of cash in the bank has stifled Apple's innovation and the company can opt to play relatively safe and continue to make huge profits, rather than take any big risks.

If you've got a shed load of money, it's not exactly hard to keep making money through safe investments and minimal risk.

But, that said, the iPhone 6/6+ were quite big leaps for Apple. Clearly the hardware isn't that revolutionary, but the form factor was a big step up. People clearly wanted big screens for a long time and were going elsewhere, so Apple finally relenting has paid off.

Now it's done that, what's the next big thing? And the same can be said of all phone makers, now that we've clearly reached a point where people own hardware that far exceeds their needs and expectations.

People are no longer desperate to upgrade, so unless they suddenly want a 6 or 6.5-inch screen, or get desperate for a Cat 6 LTE device (or faster), then why change from their iPhone 6/6+? The latter has great battery life, an awesome camera.. so will Apple be able to repeat its success with the 's' models?

Although the 'where do they go from here' question is always an interesting one, there were many who claimed that Apple had nowhere to go a couple of years ago and that the large screen market was not available to them because they had miss the opportunity.

The upgrade market is always there due to improvements in processor power, battery life, etc. I'm sure they have an interesting journey ahead.

jonmorris · 02-02-2015, 12:21

Quote:

Although the 'where do they go from here' question is always an interesting one, there were many who claimed that Apple had nowhere to go a couple of years ago and that the large screen market was not available to them because they had miss the opportunity.

The upgrade market is always there due to improvements in processor power, battery life, etc. I'm sure they have an interesting journey ahead.

They were ridiculously slow to realise people wanted bigger screens. I say that as someone who also thought bigger screens were silly, laughing at devices like the Dell Streak 5 (okay, it was a tablet not a phone but it still seemed silly - then) but Apple should have been ahead of the game.

People didn't suddenly want larger screens overnight though, but as time goes on they get used to what they have and can go up a bit. A gradual step, but Apple got stuck for too long. That allowed people to move elsewhere, many of whom may not come back. I've gradually moved up and now have no issue using the 5.5-inch LG G3, which is bigger than the Dell Streak I ridiculed years ago. Even the Note has now become quite ordinary, after the initial shock of the first version.

Now Apple has finally made the step, it's clearly paid off big time. Well done Apple, but I do think the company has become a little stuck in its ways. And it also shows that Apple was wrong to keep thinking it could sell the iPhone with a small display, and all those who said so have been proven right.

I am looking forward to a new MacBook Air, with hopefully a retina display, and to see what it may or may not do with a future Apple TV. I also took the plunge and got a Retina iMac on Black Friday (when John Lewis knocked off £100, which is a pretty big discount for an Apple product!) and I love it. I didn't even bump up the spec, after having used the entry level model and finding it more than ample for my personal requirements.

But besides the 5K screen, Apple isn't wowing me as much as it used to. I don't think Apple is necessarily failing to innovate, but simply finding that the smartphone market is probably getting to saturation point. I think the Apple watch is going to be a real problem, with woeful battery life and a UI that really hasn't convinced me (based on what I've seen online). I'm not a real fan of Android Wear either, and have opted to stick with my Pebble. Its selling point for me? Battery life and relaying notifications that I want to read quickly without the need for fancy colours, graphics and animations.

I really do think fewer people will be caring about things like processor upgrades and more RAM in the future - and even the camera is probably just fine. Better battery life is probably about the only thing people might make a switch for, and Apple has got that pretty much spot on with the 6+.

d123 · 02-02-2015, 12:27

Quote:

Better battery life is probably about the only thing people might make a switch for, and Apple has got that pretty much spot on with the 6+.

You can never have too much battery life Jon

.

kidspud · 02-02-2015, 12:41

Quote:

Now Apple has finally made the step, it's clearly paid off big time. Well done Apple, but I do think the company has become a little stuck in its ways. And it also shows that Apple was wrong to keep thinking it could sell the iPhone with a small display, and all those who said so have been proven right..

i find that one hell of an assumption. I would suggest Apple got the timing pretty spot on.

jonmorris · 02-02-2015, 13:20

Really? The timing was spot on? Seriously?

You don't think people wanted a bigger screen before then? Why the huge sales of large-screened Android phones?

And why the huge sales of the iPhone 6/6+ when they did ship? I suspect a lot of people had waited long enough that they were pre-ordering the second they could, hence the massive number of sales that Apple is now boasting.

Apple was late to respond. It had no reason to be late, as it can move very quickly if it wants, but I suspect a level of arrogance played a big part.

tdenson · 02-02-2015, 13:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdenson

have opted to stick with my Pebble. Its selling point for me? Battery life and relaying notifications that I want to read quickly without the need for fancy colours, graphics and animations.

It seems to me that colour is even more important on a small device since it adds another dimension to the ability to convey information. The days of monochrome are coming to an end.

jonmorris · 02-02-2015, 13:28

Quote:

It seems to me that colour is even more important on a small device since it adds another dimension to the ability to convey information. The days of monochrome are coming to an end.

I've got a colour screen smart watch and simply don't use it. It's nice to have colour, but battery life wins out every single time. Okay, that's just my opinion but many people agree with me (such as The Verge which regularly points out the Pebble is the only really usable smartwatch out there even now).

With the latest updates, my Pebble now has a very good and predictable level of battery life and the low battery warning is now sufficient to give me about 24 hours warning that it needs charging. That's so much better than having something that needs charging EVERY 24 hours.

Colour e-ink might be a solution, but there's no commercial product that I know of that has this (the Qualcomm proof of concept watch doesn't count). Even OLED doesn't reduce power levels enough, especially once there's the temptation to use some snazzy watchface that's heavily animated and uses the whole display - as against, perhaps, a small thin font showing the time and nothing else.

Pebble is in fact getting Android Wear support soon, which means it will get the same Google Now cards and notifications as the colour watches, and it will be interesting to see how that works in practice (lower resolution, lack of colour and forget about graphics).

I liked the Moto 360 for its design, but it came down to battery life. Until that's fixed, I'll stick with a low-powered, easy to read in ALL lighting conditions, display and the ability to convey every notification that comes to my Android phone in a simple and easy to read manner, as well as a permanently on watchface that shows me the time, date, weather and other information - and tracks my movements and sleep.

The only issue I have is that the watch is ugly. The Pebble Steel is far nicer, but I wouldn't upgrade just for a new look. Pebble needs to release a new watch at some point, as I feel a lot of people won't buy simply because it's not 'new'.

Faust · 02-02-2015, 13:32

Quote:

I'm sure we've had this conversation before, but I don't think there is anything wrong with people buying stuff on a monthly basis rather than outright as long as they can afford it. There are many people who can afford £20 p/m who could not afford £400 one off payment.

Why should they be denied things?

Love the economics. If they are paying monthly they clearly can't afford it, that's why HP was invented.

Faust · 02-02-2015, 13:37

Quote:

i find that one hell of an assumption. I would suggest Apple got the timing pretty spot on.

You know absolutely nothing about business do you?

It was predominantly pressure from disgruntled investors which pushed Apple towards larger screens.

kidspud · 02-02-2015, 13:40

Quote:

You know absolutely nothing about business do you?

It was predominantly pressure from disgruntled investors which pushed Apple towards larger screens.

With your posting history on here, please don't try and tell me what I do or don't know about business. I can only assume my company is successful because it makes significantly more then 40% profit

kidspud · 02-02-2015, 13:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

Love the economics. If they are paying monthly they clearly can't afford it, that's why HP was invented.

What a silly comment.

Faust · 02-02-2015, 13:49

Quote:

Well, if most phones are on contract, and people get credit scored then haven't they passed exactly that?

Totally wrong. Someone who has a 100k in the bank and always pays for things cash will have a much poorer credit score than someone who buys everything on tick.

Reason - the person with money in the bank and always pays cash has no credit history.

kidspud · 02-02-2015, 13:50

Quote:

Really? The timing was spot on? Seriously?

You don't think people wanted a bigger screen before then? Why the huge sales of large-screened Android phones?

And why the huge sales of the iPhone 6/6+ when they did ship? I suspect a lot of people had waited long enough that they were pre-ordering the second they could, hence the massive number of sales that Apple is now boasting.

Apple was late to respond. It had no reason to be late, as it can move very quickly if it wants, but I suspect a level of arrogance played a big part.

I'm sure some wanted bigger screens. However phatlets do not make up the majority of the market (the iPhone 5s and 5c are both still selling in large numbers) and Apples timing seems pretty good to me, and the numbers seem to back that up.

Faust · 02-02-2015, 13:51

Quote:

What a silly comment.

Thank goodness you're not in banking. There again with your comments you may be.

Faust · 02-02-2015, 13:53

Quote:

With your posting history on here, please don't try and tell me what I do or don't know about business. I can only assume my company is successful because it makes significantly more then 40% profit

I know because I own Apple stock, along with MS. Oh and if you care to check my posting history you will see mention of this going back many years.

calico_pie · 02-02-2015, 14:01

Quote:

I know because I own Apple stock, along with MS. Oh and if you care to check my posting history you will see mention of this going back many years.

Going back a few posts - could you explain the difference between someone with a £51 iPhone contract but no winter coat, and someone with a £51 Samsung / Nokia / Sony / LG / HTC contract but no winter coat?

Is it that the person with the iPhone has made a lifestyle choice to be part of this Apple collective, having been conned by Apple, but the others have not made a lifestyle choice, or been tricked in the same way?

This is the part that still isn't very clear.

jonner101 · 02-02-2015, 14:02

Quote:

Totally wrong. Someone who has a 100k in the bank and always pays for things cash will have a much poorer credit score than someone who buys everything on tick.

Reason - the person with money in the bank and always pays cash has no credit history.

There is a very easy solution to this. Get a credit card and pay it off in full each month.

You sound financially a bit backward it has to be said. Most people with no debts have a credit card because it's much the safest way in the modern world of buying stuff online.

Oh and what about a mortgage are you saying that someone who can get enough deposit for a house and afford the mortgage re-payments cant afford the house because they can't stump up 200k in cash in one hit.

kidspud · 02-02-2015, 14:02

Quote:

I know because I own Apple stock, along with MS. Oh and if you care to check my posting history you will see mention of this going back many years.

You know what? What has owning apple stock got to do with anything? Did you ring TC up and tell him the although he is in charge of one of the most successful businesses in the world, he's got it wrong

kidspud · 02-02-2015, 14:03

Quote:

Thank goodness you're not in banking. There again with your comments you may be.

So can people not afford their homes, or their cars?

calico_pie · 02-02-2015, 15:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonner101

Love the economics. If they are paying monthly they clearly can't afford it, that's why HP was invented.

Love your logic.

So does this mean that most people can't afford to buy a house, because they pay for it in monthly instalments?

Stiggles · 02-02-2015, 15:20

Quote:

There is a very easy solution to this. Get a credit card and pay it off in full each month.

You sound financially a bit backward it has to be said. Most people with no debts have a credit card because it's much the safest way in the modern world of buying stuff online.

Oh and what about a mortgage are you saying that someone who can get enough deposit for a house and afford the mortgage re-payments cant afford the house because they can't stump up 200k in cash in one hit.

Heh, there is a slight issue there. I always pay things with cash outright from mobiles to tellys etc. I can't get a credit card because i have zero credit.

Stiggles · 02-02-2015, 15:28

Quote: