Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by sQL_inject 1850 days ago
I'm have to sort of disagree, not a decade but easily half a decade lead. Source: I worked in this space years ago with what was, at the time, the leader in the space, and remember how many of my coworkers laughed at the Apple Watch unveil. Now Apple is the one laughing with a girthy, multibillion dollar schadenfreude.

Apple has leads in silicon and cross-platform integration which is inarguably led to a better user experience, extended battery life, and smaller form factor. Try piecing together an Airpods Pro grade product with 'off-the-shelf' parts and half the firmware engineers.

Apple has orders of magnitude greater scale through their supply chain, and a real clincher: technological mastery of material science; from CNC milled aluminum to tooling for high grade plastic resin, and can shoulder out competitors from even touching the raw material once they've even realized they need it.

Apple has solid brand cachet, which drives loyalty which drives revenue.

Apple has (last I checked) the highest revenue/sq. foot retail space in the world. Yes, the rest of retail is dying, but Apple controls the image, experience, support, and purchasing of all it's own products. Check out an Apple store on a Friday night in the Bay Area, it's incredible how packed they are.

Arguably the most difficult thing for competitors to copy is the culture of industrial design and UX prioritization backed by engineering. Every other major competitor in their spaces shamelessly copies the externals without the same cohesion and mastery of internals -- it's embarrassing frankly (checkout the Oppo 'Enco X' earbud site, it's a poorly made rip off of the Airpods site).

I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices, but I respect their brand, products, and patience in releasing GOOD things at the right time. Consumers do too, judging by revenue.

Apple's weakness is now their precarious position in bed with China, which will take decades to undo.

5 comments

> Apple's weakness is now their precarious position in bed with China, which will take decades to undo.

But this holds for the entire world economy.

Kind of, but among the largest tech companies, Apple uniquely runs most of its revenue through the hardware category, and gets a lot of revenue from China.

Google (Alphabet), Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook all use hardware from China, but most of their revenue comes through software interactions. Google does not officially even operate in China. Amazon has a limited corporate footprint in China.

I think it’s reasonable to say that Apple has higher risk related to China than many of its competitors.

> Google does not officially even operate in China

Google lists three offices in mainland China:

https://about.google/intl/ALL_us/locations/?region=asia-paci...

What happens to their services if they can’t procure hardware?
Services could be sold to existing customer with existing hardware at a moment.
Because hardware never fails and needs to be replaced…

You do remember the disruption when the earthquake in Japan caused hard drive failures? Can you imagine what would happen if the entire supply chain gets disrupted?

Of course finally service companies (or all companies) need hardware but the situation isn't too bad compared to company profited by selling hardware. BTW the HDD disaster was flooding in Thailand
Both Google and Facebook have substantial proportions of their revenue from CN based advertisers.
It's also in bed with the US, a huge flaw for us in China.

I mean, there are dark forces at the top here, which probably will misuse any kind of dominant position, but it's not like the US has our best interests at heart either.

As for Apple, now they have to play nice with a 300+ M people direct market in the US + all the allies they can sort of bully into segregation against us, vs a 1.3bn (and trending down) direct market in China + very few allies who'd be rich enough to afford Apple products.

I wouldn't blame Apple for cutting itself in half to work with both side of this artificial competition both our rulers decided they should have to defend our respective precious "national security" (which I'd rather call national distraction but heh).

I’m glad you highlighted the materials/manufacturing component, which I think is frequently overlooked by tech people (who mostly focus on the chips and software). Apple’s ability to build millions of devices with such precision and tight tolerances is really a huge accomplishment.
Just to clarify, Apple doesn't actually build any devices. They are built by Foxconn, mainly. It's still very impressing, of course.
To be clear. Apple provides the designs, the build procedures, fixtures, and test stations. Foxconn provides the facilities and workers.
And Apple spends billions a year to design and create the manufacturing equipment that Foxconn uses.
> Apple has (last I checked) the highest revenue/sq. foot retail space in the world

Does this also correctly count the area of all Apple partner stores? In some countries they sell Apple devices but don't operate a single store themselves.

The revenue/sq foot ratio is based on the sales from those square feet, not the total revenue. They measure sales at each individual location for location revenues/sq foot and all locations for overall. Revenue from partner sales, internet orders, etc. are not counted in that (although they might include deliver to store website orders, I don't know). It doesn't hurt that they're selling products with a high price-volume ratio.
> I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices,

So which labor practices does Apple engage in that every other phone manufacturer doesn’t - using the same factories and supply chain?

> Apple has leads in silicon and cross-platform integration

I stopped reading after this part.

Both are simple, factual and true statements? Why does that make you stop reading?
Bias
Towards truth, or?
Bias "against X" (here: Apple).

Whether the fact is true or false makes no difference. The person with the bias will cherish both true and false statements if they are against X, and reject them if they are in favor of X.

If you read the post from the bottom you would start with:

> I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices,

would you have stopped reading it because of anti-Apple bias?