* Posts by Alex Smithe

6 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Nov 2014

Apple growth flatlines ... Tim Cook thinks, hey, $80bn is still $80bn

Alex Smithe

FUDS never adds up

Because the iPhone business is so large and works on a 2 year cycle, then Apple as a whole can only be viewed or measured that way.

15 months ago, when Apple reported it’s first full quarter of iPhone 6 sales, it reported the highest quarterly profit of any company ever, beating Exxon’s record by 13%.

In doing so it beat it’s own profit from the same quarter 2 years, i.e. one cycle, earlier by 37.4% or by 55.3% on a profit per share basis. Remember Apple’s primary way of returning cash to shareholders is not by dividends, but by share repurchase.

Last quarter, the 12 months on and the first report for a full quarter of the iPhone 6s sales, Apple again reported the highest company profit of any company ever beating its own previous record by 1%.

In doing so it beat it’s own profit from the same quarter 2 years, i.e. one cycle, earlier by 40.4% or by 48.3% growth in profit per share.

Yes, it’s years over year growth was only 1%. But 2 years earlier in the same quarter it was 0%. That’s just part of the 2 year cycle.

It looks like overall for the 2 year cycle iPhone 6 & 6s cycle, Apple’s earnings will be up about 40% or about 50% as profit per share, which annualises to about 18% or 22% profit per share. On top of that growth, Apple also pays a 2% dividend

How, on the basis of that, do you report Apple’s growth story as being over.

Of course Apple’s growth had been about to be over every year for at least the last decade, but has still managed 960% growth in that decade. If that sounds like it’s slowing then consider that 960% over 10 years annualises to 26.6% percent annual growth, and is about the same either as profit growth or as growth per share, as for the majority of the decade Apple’s share count was growing. Also, over most of that period, Apple was not paying out the 2% dividend that it currently pays.

Apple’s stock remains a growth stock. The growth certainly hasn’t plunged. And now it pays a dividend too.

The late 2014 Apple Mac Mini: The best (and worst) of both worlds

Alex Smithe

Re: "Proper Unix, not Lunix"

"...that ultimately killed off the many Unixes as mass market contenders..."

The only 'proper' Unix that was ever a mass market contender was and is OS X. Free BSD is great, but not mass market. Solaris, A/UX, AIX ... never mass market contenders.

Alex Smithe

Locked down?

What exactly of you imagine is locked down?

As an Admin user, open a terminal window and type

sudo su

and give your password.

How locked down to you imagine you now are?

You even know how to use it. Some of Linux's code may not have been stolen from Unix, but all of the underlying command syntax was.

Alex Smithe

Re: To think Apple once marketed the Mini as a server machine (do they still do that)?

"What, a 5400 RPM disc, when we've used 15000 RPM part since the turn of the century?"

A modern 5400 drive will stream sequential data faster than a 2000AD 15000 RPM drive. And if you need fast random access, the only way to go is SSD. So there is little justification, and little use of, 15000 RPM drives these days.

"1 Gb Ethernet that has been around for an equally long time?"

You can run IP over Thunderbolt. The new Mac Mini had 2x Thunderbolt 2 ports. So 20G IP twice over. Should cluster well.

Alex Smithe

Re: To think Apple once marketed the Mini as a server machine (do they still do that)?

My wife bought a car with no place for, and with no, spare wheel.

When I questioned the wisdom of this, she pointed out that if she had a flat she had no intention of replacing the wheel herself, and hasn't had a flat in the last 150,000 miles of motoring. Things change. Time was I used to carry a spare head gasket and needed it more often than that.

Apple just radically dropped the price of the mini. My wife wasn't offered 20% of the price of the car for not having a spare wheel.

Last Mac Mini I bought, I bought with maximum memory that the chipset could support. So how much good did the extra cost and reduced reliability of the socketed memory do me?

Alex Smithe

Re: Just what were you running exactly???

For software testing I create a lot of virtual machines, OS X and Windows, and to minimise the size of snapshots, I don't give them more memory than I need to, to do the job. And of course I have the flexibility to specify exactly the amount of RAM that I want.

And guess what. I can make OS X 10.9 machines work with significantly smaller RAM than Windows 8. Not tried optimising for 10.10 yet, but straight off it doesn't look much different, though it will make use of more memory, when it's available.