A highlight from Mac OS Ken: 10.14.2021

Mac OS Ken


That Bloomberg report I told you about yesterday, the one that had Apple reportedly cutting iPhone 13 orders this quarter by 10 million units thanks to a lack of processors from Broadcom in Texas Instruments. Lots of forget about it today from the financial front. Apple three ran part of a note from Morgan Stanley analyst Katie Huberty if people are selling. She says she's buying. After saying that she and hers have heard nothing concrete about iPhone production bottlenecks, Huberty's note says regardless of whether supply challenges become more pronounced near term, we'd remind investors of three data points that support a by the view on the back of supply driven disruption. Those are said by the analysts to include preferential treatment from suppliers and ability to beat the odds as witness from the start of the pandemic through the end of 2020, and the customer base that will wait for iPhones to be available rather than jump ship. Puberty has an overweight rating on Apple shares, or a price target on the shares is $168. Coming in just as bullish as Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives. That piece from Apple insider gathered up the thoughts of a few analysts, including his, like puberty, Ives, things would be iPhone buyers will wait. Taking a step back, he writes 5 million to 10 million units moving out of the December quarter into the March quarter due to well understood supply chain issues is not a worry for us and ultimately speaks to a stronger demand trajectory than the street had been anticipating. He is double plus positive on Apple shares, his price target on the shares is $185. JPMorgan analysts amygdala says analysts should have seen production cuts coming or really that cuts should not be completely surprising. While every 5 million iPhones postponed is about ten cents off December quarter earnings per share in his estimation, those phones will eventually be made and sold. Quoting Apple insider, chattery notes that JPMorgan has continuing to see demand and interest for the iPhone 13 lineup, tracking better than investor expectations. He says the supply issues may only push the timing of upside for apple investors. He digs Apple shares in a positive way, his price target on the shares is $180. I have no use for Goldman Sachs analyst rod hall, where apple is concerned. He has been nothing but wrong on the company for at least a couple of years now. Apple insider chose to include him in their roundup for some reason. I guess it is worth mentioning that not every analyst is shrugging off the Bloomberg report, but E or is always going to be E or why ask him about the weather. Rod hall has a hold reading on Apple shares, his price target on the shares is $140. Now the punchline. There may be no iPhone production reduction. Mac rumors highlights a pay walled report from digit times that says component suppliers for apple's new iPhones have claimed no cut back in orders thus far this year. When it comes to product rumors, I tend to distrust digit times. When it comes to the supply chain, I don't know how far I trust the site, but what they say is worth noting. Even if the Bloomberg story is correct, it's not that big of a deal, according to oh. It's not that big of a deal, according to another report from Bloomberg. Earlier this year, a Bloomberg says, Bloomberg said that Apple had ordered roughly 90 million iPhone 13s through years and that would have been a 20% increase from the 75 million units that it is typically ordered in previous years according to the report. Lop 10 million off the 90 million and the latest Bloomberg piece as you're still ahead of where iPhone 12 was at a similar time in its initial run. Yes, there are things to worry about, but the Bloomberg report isn't one of them so says the other Bloomberg report. NDAs have ended for the Apple watch series 7 reviews. The verdict looks like Apple has another winner on its hands or your wrists. Apple must pull money quotes from a slew of sources, TechCrunch, the independent and CNBC, all see the bigger screen as a big improvement, I knew like the bigger display as well, though they don't see the need for an upgrade unless you're a sporting a series three or earlier. And gadget seems to feel the same way for any one sporting a series 5 or earlier. I didn't see one dang against the series 7 that I kind of felt as well. Apple and cider also gathered a number of reviews, including one from marques brownlee. Quoting the site. He is disappointed with the range of colors now available particularly for the base aluminum model. Apple doesn't offer a neutral color for the aluminum baseline Apple watch. He says, I repeat no neutral colored aluminum. I know some people might consider the starlight model pretty neutral he says. But it definitely has a warmer hue than a silver wood and midnight has a slight blue hue much more than a black wood. I wondered about that. I suspect the midnight model had in my way will be close enough to black or space gray for me. That would have been happy going brushed aluminum again, no. Anyway, if you're cool with the colors, brownlee says the series 7 is the best overall smart watch for the iPhone still. Make way for another big bunch of beta updates, apple inside around a couple of reports Wednesday, one of those says that the fourth betas of iOS, iPadOS and tvOS, 15.1, we're out to developers along with the fourth beta of watchOS 8 one meanwhile the other report said that the tenth beta of macOS Monterey was out to the same developer crew. If you're in the developer program, they are there for the taking. If you're in the public beta program, there is a pretty decent chance they'll turn up for you. Sometime today. Apple has taken the fight against sideloading to well I was going to say the paper, but it's the 21st century. That said, building a trusted ecosystem for millions of apps, a threat analysis of side loading would be 31 pages long if we did the whole paper thing. Instead, Apple three says the Cupertino company posted its response to the EU's proposed digital markets act to its site I have not read it yet. I can't even pretend I have the part pulled by Apple three, has apple making the same argument it's made time and again. Outside the walled garden, there be monsters. Inside, when monsters get in, apple can kill them. If side loading from third party app stores were supported, says Apple, malicious apps would simply migrate the third party stores and continue to, in fact, consumer devices. So goes part of apple's argument. I hope to read through the report in the coming days. If you'd like to, too, it's available through Apple cite. You can find that at Apple dot com slash privacy.

Coming up next