• On TV.com: TOP 10 Shows CANCELED Too Soon
July 21, 2008 5:16 PM PDT

Apple getting ready for 'product transition'

by Tom Krazit

Is it time for a price cut on the iPod Touch?

(Credit: Ina Fried/CNET News)

Let the guessing begin.

Apple Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer's decision to warn financial analysts Monday that Apple's fourth-quarter gross margins will be negatively impacted by a "product transition" should be enough to get the rumor wheels turning: of course, it doesn't take all that much. The remark came within yet another Apple's earnings report that produced stellar numbers for the previous quarter but an outlook below what Wall Street had been expecting.

Oppenheimer deftly avoided several questions from analysts who tried to get a little more information on just what that "product transition" might involve. He used the exact same phrase last year in July during an earnings call to warn analysts of pretty much the exact same situation: that the transition would cause lower profits for the upcoming quarter. The result? New iMacs in August, and the iPod Touch in September.

There are two obvious scenarios that would cause a CFO to warn shareholders that his profit margins might be a little light heading into the upcoming quarter: lower prices, or more expensive production costs.

We already have a pretty strong suspicion that Apple is planning to introduce new notebooks during the quarter. It's been quite some time since the design of the MacBook has received an update, and with Apple's other notebooks sporting an aluminum enclosure these days, it's not hard to envision a similar design in the works for the MacBook based on Intel's new Centrino 2 technology.

But how would that change the margins on the MacBook? The MacBook seems to be the most popular segment of Apple's notebook lineup (the company doesn't break out the details), and perhaps switching to the aluminum enclosure for such a high-volume product would increase Apple's production costs for the MacBook.

Could Apple be considering overall pricing changes in the Mac lineup? One financial analyst seemed to suggest that with a line of questioning that Oppenheimer parried. Apple offers a smaller degree of customized options for Macs on its Web site than other PC vendors do on theirs, and the markup on some of the extra components (like $200 for an extra 2GB of memory) is pretty steep.

New MacBooks are also expected to arrive this quarter, which could affect Apple's product margins.

(Credit: Apple)

The trouble with that theory is that there doesn't seem to be any real reason for Apple to change the pricing of the Mac at this point: the company just sold the highest number of Macs in a quarter in its history. Price doesn't seem to be an object to sales, so why take the margin hit?

Likewise, the iPhone pricing isn't likely to go anywhere in the quarter with the iPhone 3G just making its way out to the public. The subsidized pricing courtesy of AT&T isn't going to change that quickly: Apple COO Tim Cook admitted that the company's internal surveys revealed that a lot of people who liked the iPhone weren't going to pay $399 for it. Apple and AT&T are likely to give the $199/$299 pricing scheme at least the remainder of the year before revisiting things.

The most likely bet for a price cut is the iPod Touch, which sticks out like a sore thumb at $499 for the high-end model compared to the new pricing for the iPhone. Apple wants the iPod Touch to be the future of its iPod lineup, but it's a pretty pricey option compared with the rest of the iPod lineup right now.

Consumers responded very well last quarter to the February price cut for the iPod Shuffle, Oppenheimer said. Obviously, those people buying the Shuffle and those buying the Touch are looking for two very different things in a portable music player. But still, in a economically tepid (at best) year, every dollar matters more than usual.

An iPod Touch price cut makes perfect sense: drop the low-end 8GB model, move the 16GB down to $299, and the 32GB down to $399. And if the company is feeling a little more daring, it could double the capacity of the iPod Touch at those price points.

One scenario that was not addressed by any of the initial questions from the financial community was that involving a brand-new product. There has been lots of speculation over the past year or so that Apple has a minitablet/UMPC/MID type device in the works that would take the Cocoa Touch interface found in the iPhone to a larger screen. But that has always seemed like a more far-fetched notion, given all that Apple has had on its plate this year.

If I had to bet, I'd pick new Centrino 2-based MacBooks and a significant price cut for the iPod Touch as the most likely causes for a gross margin decline next quarter and into next year.

Both of those products could take some time to ramp up to volumes that could make the margins more palatable, although it's important to remember that Apple's margins will still be 30 percent after the decline. That's still pretty healthy for a company in its category.

Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom.
Recent posts from Apple
In Apple parody, Florida says 'there's no app for this'
Apple updates Mac OS X Snow Leopard
Apple Store opens in the Louvre: Where next?
Rickrolling iPhone worm is never gonna give you up
Apple said to be working on 'world mode' iPhone
Smartphone market unfazed by recession
Steve Jobs, Fortune's CEO of the decade
Apple, RIM grab market share from Nokia
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 3 pages (80 Comments)
by Constable Odo July 21, 2008 6:11 PM PDT
No matter what Apple does at this point it will keep the company in healthy condition. They got a store open in China and if Apple's products capture their fancy, Apple will continue to boost revenue. Now the stock price is something altogether different. Unfortunately, I don't see that going anywhere up until the Christmas season. That sucks.
Reply to this comment
by jawash22 July 26, 2008 2:17 PM PDT
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/07/23/red-iphone-for-xmas/

RED Iphone 3g for Xmas!!
by AZ_Big_Mike July 21, 2008 8:06 PM PDT
Two words...............

Mac Mini

This little guy needs a serious update and new video card.

Minis rule..............
Reply to this comment
by Perry_Clease July 21, 2008 8:57 PM PDT
Maybe they are going to get away from the Intel chip and go back to something of their own. Not that they wouldn't also have an Intel chip for those who are bi-OS-ul and want to run Windows as well as OSX, or OSXI as the case may be. This would also stop Mac cloners who operate in a gray area of the law from running OSX on non-Apple PCs.
Reply to this comment
by drfrost July 22, 2008 9:51 AM PDT
The market pressures that pushed them towards Intel have only become stronger. I assure you, you won't see apple transition to another processor unless the market changes dramatically.
by eyepoker July 25, 2008 10:29 AM PDT
Intel is not the only chip that can run windows. If apple changes it will go to AMD. But they won't and even thinking about it that possibility is a waste of time.
by natsuissa July 21, 2008 9:12 PM PDT
yep the mac mini is coming, it should be a good product to boost the sales

brian
http:www.themostpowerfulcompany.com
Reply to this comment
by CBSTV July 21, 2008 10:03 PM PDT
I'll take a guess about the upcoming transition: OS X for non-Macintosh computers.
Reply to this comment
by iertry July 22, 2008 4:29 AM PDT
This is something which is quite possible. It would kill all the mac-clone competition Apple has been facing. But there have been rumors of this ever since the intel version of osx was introduced. This would be a wwdc or maybe macworld announcement.
by Penguinisto July 22, 2008 7:39 AM PDT
I don't quite see that yet.

The reasons are many: Apple has said repeatedly that they wouldn't, They're making killer profits and growth right now off of Mac sales (41% growth year-on-year), and they probably don't want to dilute the brand.

IMHO, if they did it, Windows would likely end up a minor player in the home market within 3-5 years, and in the enterprise within 7-10 years. OTOH, they've been doing VERY well without having to take on the support and brand-dilution headaches that a commodity OSX would bring.
by MrTangent July 22, 2008 9:19 AM PDT
Never happen. Ever. Reason being that Apple makes its profits on hardware mainly, not software. Secondly, Apple likes to control the "whole widget", which they'd lose with commodity PCs. Lastly, OS X would take a hit in the public's perception and the press because -- as great as OS X is -- it would be less stable when you factor in the millions of different configurations of PCs out there. That's part of the reason why Windows runs so poorly... too many configurations to maintain!

To reiterate, there's about as much chance of (Apple blessed) OS X on non-Apple hardware as there is a chance of George W. Bush being elected President a third time. Which is to say, nil.
by drfrost July 22, 2008 9:56 AM PDT
Apple management likes to control everything (including the media but that's another story). You don't seriously think this same company would give up control over it's own hardware do you? As much as I would love to install Mac OS on one of my comps to play around with... it's not going to happen.
by Kev Orng July 23, 2008 9:21 AM PDT
This one comes up often, and I've never understood why. Why would a hardware company sell its operating system to run on competing hardware?
It makes sense for a software company like Microsoft to sell their OS to run on as many computers as possible, but OS X exists to sell Macs. And now iPhones and iPod Touches too, but still Apple hardware.
by make_or_break July 24, 2008 12:51 AM PDT
An unlikely scenario for sure, although initially it WOULD suck down profits just to handle all the multitude of hardware configurations and peripheral (non)support that would occur. Apple traditionally likes their hardware controlled, thereby making the bits predictable and manageable. Seems totally at odds for them to seek out PC chaos.
by lkrupp July 26, 2008 2:02 PM PDT
Yeah, that would affect profit margins alright, right into bankruptcy. Repeat after me. Apple is a HARDWARE company, NOT a software company.
by Moozle July 21, 2008 10:44 PM PDT
Well, there?s one product that I?m still waiting for:

The Mac

Not the iMac or Mac Mini or Mac Pro or MacBook, but a Mac.

An upgradeable tower with:

One CPU slot, not Two;
Two Hard Drives, not Four;
Three PCI slots, not Six;
Four RAM slots, not Eight.

I suspect Apple has many cogent reasons for
not making a mid-size tower like this, but it?s
hard to believe that ?Profits? or ?Market Share?
are among them.

MacMinis are nearly impossible to upgrade, as are
iMacs - not to mention that awful glare on the screen.

Give me an affordable mid-size tower with a separate
screen. I could use about four of them right now.
Reply to this comment
by drfrost July 22, 2008 9:59 AM PDT
You're not the first to say this, and I'm not the first to agree with you. This would be a great addition to the Apple line-up. I really don't know why they haven't done this already... but, to be honest, I don't have a lot of hope for this. Apple's "new steps" have rarely coincided with the direction I thought the company should go.
by kelmon July 22, 2008 12:18 AM PDT
I have to agree with Tom on this one - it's going to be something to do with the iPod Touch. I'd expect the iPod line to transition to something iPod Touch-like, although I wonder how this will be achieved while maintaining a diversity in the lineup (iPod Touch Nano?). This seems more likely than any of the other wild predictions. This would also be inline with the usual iPod revamp prior to the start of the US holiday season. I can't see any significant changes being made to the Mac product line beyond a migration to the new Centrino 2 and the 3G iPhone has only just been released.
Reply to this comment
by aMUSICsite July 22, 2008 12:47 AM PDT
Blu-ray?
Reply to this comment
by gumpman155 July 22, 2008 1:22 AM PDT
How about comeing out with Open MacOS X simulare to Open SuSE 11 but where its a linux based MacOS X this away people who want to run OS X on thire computers with out buying a Mac can do so leagly . This vertion of Mac OS would be under GPL v 3.0 and Open Source as well. Now for the main OS that has to be used on the Apple Computer they should get away from useing FreeBSD in the kernal and switch over the SCO that away the OS is copyrighted and fixed where it can't run on any thing els but Apple computers. Apple would be able to have it lisenced for Apple only as long as they work with SCO. They would be able to use a product key just like Windows XP dose thats if they run it on an Intel Mac but other wise they would be able to go back to the PPC format. But the Open OS X would be based on eather a FreeBSD or Sun Microsystems OS or some thing of that type. Both OSs would still work the same but Apple would have the rights to one wile the other would be open to every one
Reply to this comment
by Peter Bonte July 22, 2008 1:28 AM PDT
This phrase is important:
"Apple introduces new products that initially cost more because they deliver a new level of value to the customer. Then drive costs down and staying out of reach of our competitors. Apple will follow this plan again in the future."

Macs and ipods can use a small pricecut and/or update but they are not hugely overpriced, the MacBook Air on the other hand is overpriced and has to compete against $300 mini laptops. A low-cost laptop or small tablet / big ipod seems like a nice addition to the current product lineup. Fingers crossed. :)
Reply to this comment
by Penguinisto July 22, 2008 7:21 AM PDT
Actually, the MacBook Air doesn't have to compete with a crap low-end $300 laptop... trust me. It's competition is against the Sony Vaios and the other ultra-thin, ultra-light laptops - those which also have dual-core CPUs and high-end graphics, but weigh little and are sized thin... In this case, the Air is priced fairly competitively. Seriously - this is not a market you may be familiar with.
by gumpman155 July 22, 2008 1:33 AM PDT
The Mac OS X thats open to every one would be an amuture vertion of Mac OS. This would open up for other companys to make thire own amuture vertion. The real Mac OS would be a Unix based system witch would be under exclusive rights of Apple inc. and SCO or OPEN GROUP inc. the real Mac OS X would work on Apple hardware only and thats it. How ever they would look at the amuture OS X and see if the public and or other companys have come up with any good ideas and try to incorperat those ideas but in thire own way that would be more professional and not quite as sloppy as the amuture stuff would be. This is some thing that might help Microsoft as well if they would make an amuture vertion of windows thats under GPL 3.0 and Open Source as well. They would be able to keep a pro vertion of windows and run it the same way but look at what the public is doing as well and see what other companys come out with ideas as well. I think this would improved Mac OS X and Windows grately. This would give the public a chance to try thire hand at helping to build up the OSs in a better way as well as help the Open Source community.
Reply to this comment
by Peter Bonte July 22, 2008 2:12 AM PDT
Ow man, i was going to answer these posts but its some sort of computer generated answer that somehow is ontopic but is pure bull when read. Get y'er systems clean Cnet.
by iertry July 22, 2008 4:09 AM PDT
I can't see this happening. They would need to make osx run on two architectures and this would mean a lot of wasted time and effort especially since we only moved to intel a few years ago. Also if they included the components for both architectures on the one install the hard drive space needed for osx would be huge because there are still power pc components in the install.
Reply to this comment
by iertry July 22, 2008 4:31 AM PDT
Sorry this was meant to be a reply to an earlier comment suggesting apple would introduce their own cpus.
by Penguinisto July 22, 2008 8:44 AM PDT
I doubt they do, but more for practical reasons... OSX already runs on x86, PPC, and ARM (iPhone).

OTOH, there's no telling what's sitting in their labs right now...
by Perry_Clease July 22, 2008 7:12 AM PDT
"I can't see this happening. They would need to make osx run on two architectures and this would mean a lot of wasted time and effort especially since we only moved to intel a few years ago. "

Apple had that Intel ready OSX sitting in a desk drawer. Who knows what they have sitting in the lab ready to surprise pundits and analysts.
Reply to this comment
by Dirk VanNerden July 22, 2008 7:37 AM PDT
Maybe somthing a little more simple...

Such as new display screens, or better batteries.

Maybe new colors for MacBook(upgrade overdue) as well.

Price cuts on Air and Touch would also be good.
Reply to this comment
by Penguinisto July 22, 2008 7:41 AM PDT
My wishlist would include a cheaper laptop and a low-end Mac that wasn't so constricted. But... I'm not them.
Reply to this comment
by OlsonBW July 22, 2008 8:16 AM PDT
Comments One through Ten.

Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.
Apple is a HARDWARE company.

Apple makes software so they can sell THEIR hardware.

No matter how much money you or anyone else things Apple could make selling OS X or any other software. The only reason they write software is to sell Macs, iPods, iPhones, and Apple TVs.

Can you guys FINALLY get this? CAN you? CAN YOU?

If you can't, quit reading about Apple.

----

Next. Apple said "new products". Does this mean new versions of the same products or brand new products?

I don't know what new things Apple might be coming out with. What I would like is:

Updated Mac Mini - easily my biggest wish.
Updated Cinema displays with built in iSight AND lowered prices. $599 for the lowest price Apple monitor is just too high.
Reply to this comment
by Thomas, David July 22, 2008 9:17 AM PDT
I'm sorry, but Apple themselves have repeatedly stated that their products are designed with hardware AND software in mind. They never created hardware to sell their software, and they never created software to sell their hardware.

This has always been evident, even if they haven't repeated it time, and time again over the years. To give you some insight, their is a podcast/video interview, at D3, a couple of years ago with Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs. From this interview, you will see the common goal, but opposing views. Oh yes, and you will find out why Apple sells both hardware, and software.
by Thomas, David July 22, 2008 9:22 AM PDT
Correction, it was D5 in 2007. The video is in parts on youtube. Here is the link to the first part.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5Z7eal4uXI
by drfrost July 22, 2008 10:08 AM PDT
Apple provides hardware and software. I dare say they would contend that they add considerable value in both areas. To say that they are a hardware company is as accurate as saying they're a software company. (You do realize they sell items that are both, one or other and neither... because they also sell services.)
by Kev Orng July 23, 2008 9:31 AM PDT
You're mostly right, and I've said the same thing (in this very thread, in fact) but I think that if you dig into Apple history, you'll find some commentary from 80s Steve Jobs suggesting a personal belief that Hardware and Software are inseparable.
So it's probably more correct to say that Apple is a computer (iphone/ipod) company, and that they create (or at least integrate from outside sources) all the elements of the final product, which includes hardware and software. And they aren't going to sell their OS for use in other machines any more than they are going to sell iPhones to run Windows CE.
by glev123 July 23, 2008 6:28 PM PDT
I disagree... Steve Jobs stated himself at the D5 conference that Apple is a software company that makes really good hardware to run the software.
by rocket999 July 24, 2008 3:52 PM PDT
I think *you're* the one who doesn't get it. They like to call themselves a hardware company, but they're a software company.

$2,500 for a notebook built with $1,000 in parts? Its all marketing hype and $1,000 for the OS. Install Windows on a Mac book and you have a shiny windows machine. Install OSX on an intel machine ... oh wait ... you can't do that ... why not? Because at $100 for the OS they wouldn't be rolling in it, but at $1,000 for the OS by forcing a monopoly & making mac usability only available with a mac... that's their angle.

Yes, the computers are pretty (I like mine) but do people spend $2,500 because it is shiny or because it runs Mac OS?

They're a software company in disguise.
by stevicus July 22, 2008 8:58 AM PDT
I am still waiting for the return of the 12" notebook, but I fear they've forsaken that footprint. I was hoping the air would have been that size (and was also disappointed at the lack of 1394.
Reply to this comment
by spurgeon88 July 22, 2008 9:22 AM PDT
I can't reveal my sources, but I also heard that Apple is going to change the processors again. I do not know if that will affect being able to use "BootCamp" or not. This is not official so please do not take it as that.

Loving my iphone...
Reply to this comment
by drfrost July 22, 2008 10:11 AM PDT
Apple is not leaving Intel. If you had any understanding at all about the reasons they went to Intel in the first place you'd realize this whole idea is ludicrous. Market forces will keep the big players on x86 processors until the market has a very good reason to change.
by Perry_Clease July 22, 2008 9:46 AM PDT
"I can't reveal my sources, but I also heard that Apple is going to change the processors again. I do not know if that will affect being able to use "BootCamp" or not. This is not official so please do not take it as that."

Remember few months ago when Apple bought that chip design company. Now that could mean something for iPhones, iPods or something else, but it could be for something proprietary in a Mac that is required for OSX to boot.
Reply to this comment
by Cube Over July 22, 2008 9:58 AM PDT
@OlsonBW: "Transition" might as well mean "transition from hardware company to software company".
Can YOU get it? CAN YOU? :)
Notice all the hardware companies having troubles thanks to shrinking margins and standartization/globalization. Indeed, this could be a PC OS X release as well as iWork version that can replace MS OFFICE (the cash cow of M$), with ODF/OXF format support.
Now that they are already in homes, they can go to offices.
This could be the transition, and it will require undermining M$, a SOFTWARE company.
Bill Gates is out, maybe there's a gentleman's agreement...
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 3 pages (80 Comments)
advertisement

After 5 years, Firefox faces new challenges

Mozilla helped reshape the Web since releasing Firefox 1.0 five years ago. Now it's got a reawakened Microsoft and Google Chrome to reckon with.

There's a map for that: GPS or smartphone?

Almost every handset comes with mapping software these days, but standalone GPS devices are becoming more affordable than ever.

About Apple

At the start of the 21st century, there's no tech outfit more influential than Apple. CNET News' Erica Ogg and other reporters will attempt to make sense of the rumors, hype, products, and people that will shape the future of the company. But Apple's not the only game in town, as the established cell phone companies and others strike back against the iPhone. E-mail Erica at erica.ogg@cnet.com.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Apple topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right