“The historical record will show that the era of Apple computers bearing microprocessors from Intel began at 10:16 a.m. Pacific Standard Time on January 10, 2006,” Arik Hesseldahl writes for BusinessWeek. “That was the moment that the Associated Press issued the following one-sentence NewsAlert:”
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) Apple Computer Inc. CEO Steve Jobs unveils an iMac computer based on Intel Corp.’s chips, just six months after the historic partnership was announced between the two once-unlikely Silicon Valley bedfellows.
“It’s the first time in my memory that a product announcement by Steve Jobs has caused the AP to send an alert — especially since this development was fully expected. And it says a lot about the intensity of media attention Apple generates. When is the last time a NewsAlert went out based on the words of Michael Dell or Bill Gates? Clearly, the AP’s editors determined this news was important enough to warrant such action,” Hesseldahl writes. “Half the fun in covering Apple is covering the coverage of Apple. The argument has been made that we in the press are a little nuts about Apple. It’s a fact. The highs and lows of Jobs & Co. are so dramatic that the erudite prose practically writes itself. And I can’t help but think something is wrong with that.”
Hesseldahl writes, “Take the way Apple was treated in 1997, when it was beset by sagging sales, a profound lack of product direction, and the onslaught of Microsoft’s (MSFT) Windows. That summer Wired did a cover depicting the bleeding Apple logo surrounded by a crown of thorns with the headline “PRAY.” Brilliant in its honest execution and frank assessment of the situation, it was for Mac-lovers a low-water mark.”
“As great a company as Apple computer is — I’m often as guilty as anyone of falling for the hyperbole — the pointed, skeptical, analytical, dispassionate, and yes, uncomfortable questions about this unusually influential outfit and its unique, legendary, brilliant, and complicated chief don’t get asked often enough. And they should be, more often than they are now. Great companies deserve nothing less,” Hesseldahl writes.
Hesseldahl’s full article includes the question, “why only 1.25 million Mac sales for the quarter?”
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. $49.00.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related articles:
Fortune: ‘tiny’ Apple has big influence on personal computer and consumer electronics industries – January 11, 2006
IDC researcher: iMac, MacBook Pro ‘nice,’ but Apple will have to innovate more or they’ll disappear – January 11, 2006
Apple posts Steve Jobs’ Macworld keynote via QuickTime – January 10, 2006
Apple posts new Intel Mac ad online – January 10, 2006
Apple introduces MacBook Pro; up to four times faster than PowerBook – January 10, 2006
Apple unveils new iMac with Intel Core Duo processor; twice as fast as iMac G5 – January 10, 2006
Apple announces the iPod Radio Remote with FM radio capabilities – January 10, 2006
Apple announces iWork ’06 with 3-D charts, advanced image editing tools & spreadsheet-like tables – January 10, 2006
Apple announces iLife ’06 with new versions of iPhoto, iMovie HD, iDVD, GarageBand and new iWeb – January 10, 2006
MacDailyNews presents live coverage of Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ Macworld Expo Keynote – January 09, 2006
Three Words: SLOW NEWS WEEK
Eric:
Slow News Week??? Slow News Week?
Where have you been?
in generations to come the suffix for the age beginning 10 Jan 2006 will become AI – or Apple/Intel
Did Steve Jobs himself actually state the 1.25 number. I am not so sure of it and a bit too lazy to go back into the QT feed.
No, he did not say that.
MW: evidence
I’ve got that Wired mag. One that I read every couple years and another in sealed plastic. It’s a fun read to see how off base some of the 101 ways to save Apple are. Also fun to see that some were right on.
MW ‘hell’ as in, what word rhymes with a computer company and simlutaneously describes what it’s like to use their products?
Steve Jobs said there were 1.25 million macs sold in the 4th quarter. That was the end of September. He did not say how many sold in the holiday quarter (Apple’s fiscal 1st quarter)
An article about how some articles about Apple aren’t as hype piercing as they could be. And the author admits he sometimes wimps out as well. That’s some kind of navel youze gots to gaze into there Aric. Go ye therefore and pierce the great wall of media fawnage over all things Apple with the penetrating pen of dispashionate truth! Why drag us through your inner journo authentico turmoils? Apple’s not perfect. No kidding? Give us some specifics. Tell us where we should actually be concerned as shareholders. (That bit about Intel’s marketing subsidies was so weak.) An article devoted to wishing that other writers were tougher on Apple and Steve Jobs is a funny way to waste time, ink, trees and bandwidth.
My favorite bit: “When I see Jobs interviewed on TV, he remains so irritatingly on-message, reporters seem almost sorry to do their jobs and change the subject by asking an off-topic question,…”
Simple answer to that thorn in your psyche Arik, Steve wants to be the strongest person in the room, period. Any room, any people, any time. He must be the winner, and this is how he wins. More importantly, in PR venues, he gets to overpower others for the sake of the company. Why, it’s just like a selfless act. Self indulgent and selfless at the same time! What ego driven business iconoclast wouldn’t love that?
forgive my spelling errors. wee hours and all. too much pashion. heh.
BTW, remember when Wired actually mattered to people? Glad you hung on to yours Hammer. LOL
“It’s the first time in my memory that a product announcement by Steve Jobs has caused the AP to send an alert — especially since this development was fully expected
Id love to see Dell have that effect! NOT!
Man I’d love to see the Mac in the corporate world (banks, insurance companies, e-Commerce firms, and etc) however I don’t think is ever going to happen.
Funny that the BusinessWeek writer remembers that Wired cover so vividly but has apparently forgotten BusinessWeek’s own cover with the “Death of an Icon” caption.
Funny hmmm, not funny ha ha.
1.25M Mac was not mentioned by Steve but was visible on one of the slides durnig his Keynote.
1.25M is indeed a bit disapointing.
I think the press can’t get much right most of the time, and not just about Apple. But they do seem to have a reality distortion field of their own when it comes to Apple.
For years we had to listen about the imminent death of Apple when, in reality, it was still a very healthy company (with no debt to speak of and billions in the bank at any given time).
Now i do think the press is going a little gaga over Apple now, but given how they’ve falsely persecuted the company in the past, i suppose it’s all a karmic balancing out now, and the cosmos is returning to equilibrium.
Everything is as it should be.
1.25M is indeed a bit disapointing.
—
Hmm.. it’s almost as if…. informed Mac users were holding off buying.. maybe they were waiting for some.. kind of.. transition…
As pointed out by Alec in http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/8148/ (and verified by myself watching the keynote from start to finish early this morning), SPJ actually quotes the 1.25 million figure for Q4 in FY2005.
If Apple sold 14 million iPods, it probably did so at an average of around $200 a throw (this would be an increase for the first time in a long while, Q4/05 averaged $188 and the previous quarter was $179) meaning that the revenue achieved was around $2.8 billion.
They probably moved around $1.0 to $1.2 billion in miscellaneous items like iTMS, displays, pro software etc which accounts for around $4.0 billion.
That leaves $1.7 billion which – if you use an average of $1275 (in line with the gentle degradation of average revenue/sale over the last few quarters) – gives you a figure of around 1.4 million CPUs for the quarter, or a rise of over 40% from the same quarter last year.
Journalists could start being a bit more critical by looking more closely at Microsoft for starters, instead of calling viruses “internet viruses”, why not start calling a spade a spade, they are “windows viruses”. I am all for incisive, critical journalism, even of Apple. But there are plenty more deserving focusses for it.
And even if the figure was a mere 1.25 million, that would still be a 25% increase on the same quarter in 2004.
“As great a company as Apple computer is … the pointed, skeptical, analytical, dispassionate, and yes, uncomfortable questions about this unusually influential outfit and its unique, legendary, brilliant, and complicated chief don’t get asked often enough.”
‘Ere, ‘ere!
My pet peeve – how when it comes to performance, Intel isn’t doing anything special (that every other CPU manufacturer isn’t also doing – and often better), and yet every kool-aid drinker and stock price lover gloss over that fact. Intel goes from (rightly) criticized ‘monolith’ company, to ‘Savior’ company overnight.
The author talks of the stock price going up despite the fact that everything announced was well within expectations for months. What he also could have mentioned was just how much WASN’T announced that was expected. No Macintel Mini, no DVR, no multimedia news of note at all. This, after the Consumer Electronics show put such devices and services front-and-center in the PC world. And for good reason – Intel is one of two main hubs of the PC world, and it’s main strength these days (as they so well know in PC-Land) is not performance, but multimedia. Apple not really being on that train yet (Frontrow being a nice looking, but feature poor entry thus far) should have had more of an effect on AAPL attitudes, if anyone was thinking clearly that is.
Multimedia hardware (including DRM technologies) and content deals – that’s what Intel has devoted most of it’s corportate attention to, b/c THAT’S where its growth opportunities lie. Unlike AMD, which actually does make superior performing x86 computer CPUs, and is expected to continue to do so. The problem as I see it is that the longer Apple lingers on how ‘great’ their computers are because of Intel chips, the longer they expose themselves to people saying, “Yeah, but …” based on the facts & real world tests (with PPC and AMD), NOT Jobs’ RDF and Keynote graphs. Apple needs to start releasing products based on what Macintel is really all about – VIDEO. If this transition is going to actually bring tangible benefits beyond what could have been done with the status quo (PPC), then they need to get to what strengths Intel brings to the party. Performance is not it. Video is.
And yet Jobs has gotten an almost complete pass on the fact that nary a word was uttered on that front, regardless of the products everyone expected – nay, DEMAND – Apple to begin making, to put them on at least equal footing with the PC world.
That April 1st/30yrs old reference in the speech was probably a clue. Knowing Jobs, that could be the day he announces the good stuff. If he doesn’t, and regardless of how much ‘love’ I have for Apple in my heart, I stand by what I’ve said before – Macintel is money down the drain.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cool smile” style=”border:0;” />
My pet peeve – how when it comes to performance, Intel isn’t doing anything special (that every other CPU manufacturer isn’t also doing – and often better), and yet every kool-aid drinker and stock price lover gloss over that fact. Intel goes from (rightly) criticized ‘monolith’ company, to ‘Savior’ company overnight.
>> Uh, Me thinks Intel has been held back by the Microsoft monolith (monopoly). Yeah, AMD is pushing the x86 architecture but innovation ain’t gonna come from antiquated ideas. The Apple-Intel alliance will push innovation to a new level….remember, Think Different. I can tell you for a fact that Intel employees are really excited about this new partnership. When you have excited people with innnovation in mind, watch out.
The author talks of the stock price going up despite the fact that everything announced was well within expectations for months. What he also could have mentioned was just how much WASN’T announced that was expected. No Macintel Mini, no DVR, no multimedia news of note at all.
>> This has to be one of the funniest comments I’ve heard here on MDN. Since when do rumors become expected product annoucements? A rumor is a rumor is a rumor. Sometimes they are true, most times they are not. Why do you have a problem with this concept is a mystery to me. Why you have animosity against Apple based on unrealized rumors is an even bigger mystery.
Multimedia hardware (including DRM technologies) and content deals – that’s what Intel has devoted most of it’s corportate attention to, b/c THAT’S where its growth opportunities lie. Unlike AMD, which actually does make superior performing x86 computer CPUs, and is expected to continue to do so.
>> Again, I don’t think you know what Intel has been working on in the background. A friend at Intel tells me they are working on things….that’s all he could tell me. We’ll just have to see. Don’t dismiss the biggest name in IC design and fabrication. It would be a mistake.
I think the real problem is that ‘analysts’, reporters, fans, Mac Users and Apple Computer themselves all have their own concepts of what Apple should be and how they should proceed. The analysts and fans have forecast that Apple will introduce every product imaginable, to an un-realistic level. But when products are presented they are compared to each group’s expectations. Apple may make computers but they don’t make computers for every purpose. They don’t make cash registers or ATM machines, or airline reservations terminals. They make consumer and pro artistic oriented machines with a heavy dose of multi-media. This is why they have such a small presence in the corporate world. Joe’s Insurance Inc. does not have much need of Quick Time video presentations. Apple has found a target audience but it does not include the entire planet. For the purposes I use them I am more than happy with the quality of their work and I will continue to use Apple Computers as long as they continue to make them as they are. But we must all realize that from a business perspective, Apple has hit their target dead on, but it is not the same target we all compare it to.
“why only 1.25 million Mac sales for the quarter?”
Uh because of the Intel switch held up sales from the Mac folks.
Because most folks are trained to use Windows at work, don’t have a computer science education worth a dam to know the difference between a computer and a toaster? Much less a Mac vs a Windows PC.
Uh because a lot of Windows users don’t want to rebuy all their software for a Mac?
Uh because some folks like to game with their computers and Apple doesn’t offer a decent gaming box at a decent price?
Uh because the modding crowd can’t really mod a Mac too much like they can a PC because of the low amount of third party products and parts, because of Apple’s low market share and closed architecture one computer revision to the next?
Uh because Apple Computers are viewed to used by unstable artists, liberals, writers and the “fringe element?”
Uh because Apple Computers are viewed as “gay” (as in homosexual) because they look so nice and to most, fine things is a luxury they can’t afford and only gay folks care about design and astetics?
Uh because Windows PC users like being a Stockholm Syndrome slave to Microsoft’s continous lack of innovation and malware?
Uh because buisnesses only care about the bottom line and don’t have a choice of vendors to force prices down like they do on the PC side?
Uh because most buisneses don’t want nice well working operating systems because they can hide all sorts of illegal practices and blame it on a “hacker” and “Microsoft software” knowing all too well nobody is going to try to sue M$.
Uh because buisneses don’t want their employee’s happy because they get spoiled with a nice computer and productivity drops off.
Uh because buisneses don’t want good looking computers with high value because they tend to grow legs and walk out the door.
Uh buisneses don’t want Mac’s because it empowers employees with it’s great feature and ease of use, resulting in higher turnover because employees snap out of their “pidgenhole” and decide to actually do something with their lives instead of blindly slaving for the PC like buisnesses want them to do.
Uh because corporate IT would be out of a job if easy to use and secure Mac’s were deployed on a large scale? Also no kick backs from PC resellers to make that Christmas oh so much better?
MacDude “Uh because Apple Computers are viewed as “gay” (as in homosexual) because they look so nice and to most, fine things is a luxury they can’t afford and only gay folks care about design and astetics?”
Very male orientated perspective. Are you forgetting roughly 50% of the human race is female?
And while we’re at it:-
MacDude “Uh because corporate IT would be out of a job if easy to use and secure Mac’s were deployed on a large scale? Also no kick backs from PC resellers to make that Christmas oh so much better?”
Why do so many people on this site have this view that all corporate IT are desktop support drones. The ones you see at your desks with their limited knowledge and MCP qualifications are the bottom of the food chain. Anyone who knows their stuff rarely leaves the comms or server room.
BTW, HP once paid for me to go to Paris. Kickbacks are great, but I still buy Apple.
Dave H
Yes but everyone knows girls know nothing about “real” computers<sarcasm>