So Apple generated record revenue and profits, not to mention record sales for the iPhone and the iPad, during the company’s fiscal first quarter. That’s what is generally considered to be the holiday quarter for 2013. But it wasn’t enough to impress Wall Street, which explains a sharp dip in the company’s stock price in after-hours trading once the financials were released.

The biggest issue, as usual, is the fact that Apple still missed Wall Street expectations. So revenue was $57.6 billion, with a profit of $13.1 billion, or $14.50 per diluted share. This compares to revenue of $54.5 billion and a net profit of $13.1 billion in the year-ago quarter.

But the Street expected revenue of $58 billion, so I suppose that’s a huge negative. Worse was the report that “only” 51 million iPhones were sold, compared to 47.8 million last year. But expectations called for sales closer to 56.5 million. Yahoo! Finance, for example, ran a story suggesting iPhone sales were “weak” despite being somewhat higher than last year. Other headlines used the word “disappointing.”

Of course, such estimates are seldom grounded in reality, but you get the picture.

Apple’s response during the quarterly conference call with the financial community indicate that it took awhile to get enough iPhone 5s supplies to meet demand. This implies that Apple expected to sell more of the iPhone 5c, which may confirm reports of less-than-stellar sales of the plastic cased iPhone. Later statements about the “demand mix” not being what Apple expected clearly confirmed this view. So this situation, and the time it took to switchover production to deliver more copies of the iPhone 5, may have reduced the sales totals somewhat.

In his comments in response to questioners, Tim Cook also pointed to the fact that the Touch ID and other unique features of the iPhone 5s may have attracted more customers than expected.

So is the report from the Wall Street Journal, that the iPhone 5c and plastic iPhones in general will be history when the new models are announced later this year, based on their confirmation of the lower iPhone 5c sales? It is beginning to sound quite reasonable.

Looking at other numbers: Gross margins were 37.9 percent, compared to 38.6 percent in the year-ago quarter. That’s still way up there compared to other tech companies, but it’s still not enough for some of the key players in the financial industry who continue to expect Apple to adhere to higher standards than other companies.

Apple, however, did much better with the iPad, where the market expected sales of 24.5 million. The actual numbers were 26 million, despite constraints on supplies of the iPad mini with Retina display. This compares to sales of 22.9 million last year.

Macs? Well, 4.8 million were sold, up from 4.1 million last year, and above the 4.6 million market projection. This is the highest number since the the fourth fiscal quarter of 2012. So much for the claims from the recent IDC survey of flagging Mac sales. Of course, last year’s sales were lower because of Apple’s inability to get enough iMacs out the door, but it’s also true that the Mac Pro barely left the factory in Austin, TX at the end of 2013, so it’s possible sales would have been at least somewhat higher if production ramped up a month or two earlier.

As you probably realize, though, the financial prognosticators expected better results from the iPhone, even though Apple is selling more high-end smartphones than Samsung, which is actually having problems selling the Galaxy S4 series.

For this quarter, Apple has released guidance for revenue between $42 billion and $44 billion, with gross margins between 37 percent and 38 percent. Since this is lower than last year, the Wall Street freakout will continue. Apple’s answer is that it took longer to ramp up production for the iPhone 5 last year, and that’s true for the iMac, because it was largely unavailable in the 2012 holiday quarter.

And I haven’t bothered to include additional billions of dollars in deferred revenue now that OS X, iLife and iWork are all free. So Apple really did much better if you don’t consider the accounting procedures.

Now compared to the usual slow rollout of Android updates, some 80% of the iOS gear still in service is running iOS 7. Yes, I realize there are still bugs, and some interface glitches. But nobody forced anyone to install those OS upgrades, so it does appear that acceptance is excellent. There are also published reports of a forthcoming iOS 7.1 update that will fix the usual spate of bugs and apparently offer some interface changes or improvements. So we’ll see.

So much for the numbers. If you’re still curious about Apple’s performance, you’ll find plenty to chew over in Apple’s press release, and industry analysts will be offering their own interpretation. But expect the meme that Apple is doomed to continue without letup. The small misses compared to those arbitrary financial community projections guarantee that.

In response to the inevitable question about new product categories, Tim Cook gave the usual non-answer that they are working on new things and customers will be absolutely delighted with them once they are released. I didn’t expect Cook to say more about future gear, and I realize the question has to be asked. But it is getting a little boring. With Apple, you’ll know when the rumors hit a fever pitch ahead of the actual product intros.

From reading much of the press chatter about Microsoft’s quarterly financials last week, you almost had the impression that the Surface tablet had been a huge seller. Almost. Although revenue, at $893 million, doubled from the previous quarter, Microsoft is still selling a paltry amount compared to the iPad.

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that Microsoft received $400 from each sale after the dealers and distributors got their share. That would amount to some 2,232,500 units sold. However you break this down, however, that number isn’t very impressive.

Worse, it cost Microsoft $932 million to deliver that $893 million in sales, so chalk up yet another loss for the Surface tablet, though it’s nowhere near as bad as 2012 when the company took a $900 million write-down on the product. There’s something to be said for progress, because it means Microsoft may actually earn a profit from the Surface one of these days.

Continue Reading…

It is really early as such things go, but there is a surprising amount of speculation about the form and shape of the next iPhone, or iPhones if you assume more than one new model will be launched. There’s so much of it out there, you wonder whether you should call your favorite wireless carrier and place an advance order.

Of course, nobody out there is ready to take your order–at least not yet.

But one thing the discussions seem fairly consistent about is the possibility that the so-called iPhone 6, whether in comes in just one or more models, will sport a larger display. The Wall Street Journal is now reporting, for example, that there will be both a 4.5-inch version and one larger than five inches, which means, if you believe the story, that Apple is planning on making a phablet.

All right, there’s nothing particularly strange about this possibility, since these claims aren’t unique. And that’s before you consider whether or not it stands a chance of being true in any respect. What is interesting in the WSJ’s speculation is that the iPhone 5c, the plastic model, will be history. This appears to fit with the media meme that this model has been an abject failure, and that people don’t care about plastic iPhones, even if they come in neat colors.

Now I don’t know what is meant by failure, except to point out that the iPhone 5c has shown up among the most popular smartphones among online listings, even though many more are reportedly buying the iPhone 5s. But that plays to Apple’s advantage, since it means that the average sale price is higher. That also should appeal to Wall Street, which has shown concern in the past when transaction prices have declined, even though Apple does better than the competition.

Without knowing Apple’s real plans, I’ve long felt that the iPhone 5c was designed to offer a better alternative for shoppers on a budget rather than simply offering the previous year’s model at a lower price. The cost of making them is lower, obviously. If Apple sells more units than they would have sold had the original iPhone 5 remained in the lineup, or even the same number, it has to be a success. If fewer units are sold than projected, it won’t be a success.

So this seems to mostly argue for keeping the iPhone 5c in the lineup as a free-with-wireless-contract model, and offering the iPhone 5s for $99 when the iPhone 6 arrives. At least that seems to make sense t o me, if you look at Apple’s prior iPhone history. But that doesn’t mean it’ll be followed.

So if the iPhone 5c vanishes, it might seem that it wasn’t as successful as Apple hoped. Or maybe Apple decided to take a different approach. It’s not that Apple hasn’t killed successful products before, witness some of those iPod revisions over the years.

So if there are larger iPhones in our future, the question is how they will integrate into the iOS ecosystem. If Apple keeps the 16:9 form factor used in the 4-inch iPhone 5 series, it would mean a gadget that would be larger in length and width. Or maybe not. A narrower bezel on all sides might accommodate a somewhat larger screen without increasing the size of the device, or seriously hampering usability.

Obviously there would be a period of migration as iOS developers revised their apps to accommodate one or two additional display sizes. At the end of the day, it may also mean somewhat larger apps to include the extra artwork, unless the OS just scales it down to the appropriate sizes, assuming aspect ratios are the same. That should help reduce the bloat, so maybe there won’t be so much of a difference after all.

But an iPhone phablet would appear to work against Apple’s claims about one-handed operation, unless you have the hands of a basketball player. And maybe not even then. There seems to be just so much a smartphone’s display can be increased without making the user experience more awkward. That’s a major advantage Apple has over the competition, which doesn’t care about anything but building enough varieties in an attempt to catch a wave.

Yet the clear success of phablets, particularly in Asia, may count for something in Apple’s future marketing schemes.

As to the accuracy of these rumors, assuming iOS 8 and the new iPhone will appear around fall, in keeping with recent tradition, I suppose it makes sense that the final size and shape would have to be nailed down around now to assure an efficient production ramp. That means getting the supply chain set up to start things rolling.

Since the most recent Apple rumors appear to have emerged from the supply chain, it may well be that the WSJ and other publications and industry analysts are getting the correct scoop after all. Sure, some final hardware features may still be in flux, and the next iOS would be in a very early development stage. But there’s little reason to disbelieve these reports. As things go, however, there’s no reason to take them seriously either — at least not yet!

It’s clear the media, particularly publications focused on the goings on at Apple Inc., are sometimes desperate to find useful tidbits of information. You have stories from Asia, for example, said to originate from the supply chain, which supposedly reveal previously unknown details about unreleased products that might already be in production.

So there were those stories about large flat panels allegedly earmarked for use in an Apple connected TV set. Of course no such set has arrived, or has even been announced. But even if the stories were true, it doesn’t mean such products will ever be released. There’s a long road from prototype to released product, although it appears some members of the tech media aren’t always aware of that distinction.

Yet another source of a Mac rumor is the apparent placeholder or premature listing of a new product from a dealer. Often those listings disappear about as quickly as they appear, but not before the media discovers the listing and makes the appropriate assumptions. On rare occasions, you’ve seen such an entry at Apple’s site. Regardless, you wonder about people who have nothing better to do than comb the inner recesses of an online’s store in search for something interesting.

You also have to wonder whether the Webmasters responsible for these pages simply made mistakes, illustrated their hopes and dreams for a new product, or are doing so at the behest of Apple. Certainly a listing at Apple’s site has to be somehow authorized.

The latest supposedly mistaken or premature placeholder comes from a Belgian computer store,  Computerstore.be, which displayed an apparent 2014 version of the Mac mini sporting the new Intel Haswell chips.

To be sure, an updated Mac mini isn’t out of the question, even though Apple doesn’t seem to pay a whole lot of attention to that product. It would probably not cost a lot in R&D to swap in new chipsets and a faster drive bus, along with support for the new 802.11ac Wi-Fi standard.

But before you start saving your pennies for the new Mac mini, bear in mind that Haswell’s biggest advantage is not performance but power consumption. Sure, the built-in integrated graphics are a lot better, but if you’re not into casual gaming, the new model probably won’t be much faster than the current one. So if that 2014 Mac mini appears, you may benefit from the savings on the outgoing model.

The real issue, though, is whether unexpected postings from a computer store should be taken seriously. I suppose they should be, since customers will depend on that information to do online shopping or place orders. If a new Mac is on display, even as a placeholder, you would expect a real product to emerge in the very near future.

But if the computer retailer in question made a mistake, how would Apple react? Would they threaten to pull the dealer’s authorization, or simply chalk it up as an innocent error? Or should you believe that the marketing people at Apple carefully and strategically manage apparently random listings of this sort to keep people talking about the company?

After all, it’s obvious that Apple receives tons of free publicity, wanted and otherwise, just for being Apple and generally quite secretive about possible new products.

In the scheme of things, the Mac mini, and periodic refreshes, probably aren’t very significant. The entry-level Mac, good as it is, evidently isn’t the best seller in the lineup, particularly compared to an iMac or a MacBook Air. But this tiny personal computer offers pretty decent performance that’s good enough for many Mac users, particularly if you want to repurpose an old display, keyboard and mouse. There’s even a server version for use in a datacenter. Maybe it’s not as robust as the high-end models with redundant power supplies and other industrial strength components. But they get the job done, particularly for a small business or school system.

As far as the Mac rumor universe goes, perhaps the story that’s getting the most attention this week is the claim that Apple has nailed down the raw configuration of the next iPhone. So an industry analyst, one Timothy Arcuri of Cowen and Company, is claiming it’ll sport a 4.8-inch display, along with 802.11ac Wi-Fi.

It doesn’t matter if the story is true. Cowen has gotten his headlines. But if the real iPhone 6 differs substantially from this prediction, you wonder whether anyone will ever pay attention to him again. More than likely, they will continue to listen to his bold announcements, right or wrong. That holds true for other so-called industry analysts who are constantly wrong, yet manage to stay on the payroll.

Sure, it’s quite possible Apple is outfitting a larger iPhone for release later this year. After all, CEO Tim Cook hasn’t dismissed the possibility. His excuse, that existing oversized smartphones have technological deficiencies, could very well be part of a marketing plan to claim the bigger iPhone 6 has solved those problems.

We’ll see.

But one thing is certain: We haven’t heard the last of those premature Apple product announcements from previously unknown stores in faraway places.