It's nothing but wrongs all the way down as we look at Peter Misek's latest advice, a glowing review of another Apple-killing product and, yes, you, the Apple-loving community. You know what you did. Or, if you don't, you're gonna find out.
Wrong about almost everything, but still employed
Enjoying your iPhone 5s or 5c? Well, too bad for you, sucker!
Patrick Seitz of Investors Business Daily says the "Apple iPhone 6 news might cause iPhone 5S buyer remorse" (tip o' the antlers to Tay Bass).
Clearly the fact that Apple will some day ship another iPhone is bad for Apple.
Apple's flagship iPhone 5S has been available for just over two weeks, but reports of a new, bigger-screen iPhone on the way are already trickling out.
Oh, sources in the supply chain! You're incorrigible!
Suppliers are indicating that the upcoming iPhone 6 will have a 4.8-inch display compared with the 4-inch display for the iPhone 5 series, Jefferies analyst Peter Misek said in a research report Monday.
You mean Peter "Wrong Way" Misek? Here's just one of Misek's previous predictions:
Prediction: In August 2012, Misek claimed that Apple's HDTV is in full production and that Apple is going to sell them with a subsidy through Verizon and AT&T starting in early 2013.
Which Misek said would be announced at an event in March. This past March. And, other than in Gene Munster's Apple slash fiction, Apple has not held an event to announce an HDTV.
Apple is missing out on over half the smartphone market by not offering a bigger phone, Misek says. He estimates that more than 50% of smartphones sold in the second quarter had displays larger than 4 inches.
That timing sure is convenient, given that Samsung launched the Galaxy S4 in the second quarter and it's two quarters since Apple updated the iPhone. Even if it's true, one wonders (as John Gruber did on the latest edition of The Talk Show) what Apple's percentage of high-end phones is: 50 percent? 60 percent? Higher?
Misek upgraded Apple stock to buy from hold and raised his price target to 600 from 450.
That's probably a smart move since the stock's over 490 right now.
Remind the Macalope again why we're supposed to listen to anything Misek says?
There's that word again
Time to bust out the k-word again as the Chrome OS juggernaut defeats Apple yet again! After telling us last month what a colossal fail the iPhone 5s was, Anton Wahlman is back to tell us about "HP's New Radical, $279, Apple-Killing Laptop" (tip o' the antlers to Alpesh Shah).
I'm typing this review on a radical new $279 laptop ...
OK, we know it's radical, but is it radical to the max?
... that, if it had an Apple logo and were sold in Apple stores, would sell 50 million units in the first month alone.
As Apple generally only sells about 10-15 million iPhones a month, that must be some o' that hyperbole that the Macalope's heard so much about.
Hyperbole? In an article about Apple? Now the Macalope's seen everything. Oh, wait, turns out this whole article is hyperbole. Go figure.
This is an 11.6-inch screen that's housed in a plastic package that weighs just over 2 pounds--basically similar to Apple's 11.6 inch MacBook Air, which starts at $999.
And is not made of plastic.
This plastic looks and feels similar to the old MacBooks from a half-dozen years ago ...
IT'S JUST AS GOOD AS SOMETHING APPLE SOLD SIX YEARS AGO.
Yet, this laptop is positively feather-weight compared to those MacBooks of yore, ca 2005.
Uh, how does it compare to laptops that ship, you know, today?
1. It charges using your regular cell phone charger.
I have been on my knees in front of all laptop makers, begging for this since at least 1991.
OH, MY GOD, HE'S CLAIRVOYANT.
Since, you know, USB wasn't created until 1996. (Wahlman really is stuck in the early 1990s, isn't he?)
3. It uses a Samsung CPU.
This is apparently a benefit in and of itself. It has the processing power of a smartphone. Yay?
It is products like this that make you wonder how companies such as Microsoft and Apple could possibly survive.
Sure, because everyone wants a Web operating system.
Oh, wait, no they don't.
Google is taking its competition to the cleaners, in this case with HP's help.
Because everyone uses Chrome OS.
I can't find a weak spot on this product ...
Whew. OK, look, this seems to be a fine product. Assuming you are chin-deep in Google's ad-driven services and loving it. It is a little funny that the word "advertisements" doesn't appear anywhere in this piece. It is the first thing out of HP since Mark Hurd's sex scandal letter that's been worth taking a second look at.
But we'll just have to agree to check back on that "Apple-killing" part.
This is why we can't have nice things
You know, it's not always the anti-Apple pundits who are a little loose with reality.
Awwwww, that's right! It's street cred, time! Yes, as required by the terms of his community service, the Macalope must from time to time take on Apple or the members of the Apple-loving Web.
Actually, that's not true at all. He does it when it seems necessary.
Any-hoo, many an Apple site reported this week the shocking news that teens love iPhones and iPads! You could knock the Macalope over with a feather. A really large and heavy feather travelling at extreme velocity.
Writing for AppleInsider, Kevin Bostic reports on the latest from Gene Munster.
Now, the Macalope has not seen the details of this survey, but in the past, Munster's statistical rigor has been less Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and more Beaker. Or possibly Animal. Who could forget his "Let's go to the mall for a couple of hours and write it up!" report on Apple retail? Maybe this one is better, though. The sample size of 8643 certainly seems decent. Or is it?
The new figures come from Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster, who found that the iPhone represented nearly 55 percent of all phones used by teens in the United States.
No, actually, he did not! And Bostick should know this because later he wrote:
Piper Jaffray's survey is built on interviews with thousands of teens from high-income families (household income above $104,000) and similar visits with more teens from average-income families ($54,000).
Low income families? Meh. Who cares? They probably don't own iPhones.
Let's also remember that Apple is--or at least has been--a Piper Jaffray investment banking client. Imagine, if you will, the reaction from the Apple community that would occur if we substituted "Samsung" for "Apple" in all of this. Such a wanton garment-rending would be so severe as to only make American Apparel happy, because all the Apple nerds would need to buy new ironic t-shirts.
It would be nice if keeping track of this stuff was a one-way street. Alas, it is not.