My Galaxy Phone

The blocking of Apple mobile entertainment services in China poses fresh challenges for the tech company (Source: AP)

The blocking of Apple mobile entertainment services in China poses fresh challenges for the tech company as it prepares to report its first-ever drop in iPhone sales.

The news on Thursday that Apple Inc’s online book and film services had gone dark in China came at a vulnerable moment for the company. Apple executives have said that iPhone sales will fall for the first time in the company’s second quarter, and the results for that quarter will be released on Tuesday. Investors are sensitive to any signs of trouble in Greater China, the company’s second-largest market by revenue.

Apple executives have flagged the growing services business as a potential source of revenue as sales of the company’s flagship devices level off, upping the stakes for success in China, said analyst Bob O’Donnell of TECHnalysis Research.

“It raises questions in an area that we know long-term is going to be very strategically important to Apple,” he said.

The New York Times reported on Thursday that a state regulator demanded Apple halt the service. The move came after Beijing introduced regulations in March imposing strict curbs on online publishing, particularly for foreign firms.

Still, the outage is only troubling if it persists, O’Donnell said. Apple said in a statement on Thursday that it hopes to make the services available to customers in China as soon as possible.

Apple has a strong track record of working with officials in China, where it has launched a series of services including mobile payment Apple Pay, but some analysts questioned whether the company may receive a chillier reception in the future.

“Is this the beginning of more pressure on Apple by the Chinese government?” asked analyst of Frank Gillett of research firm Forrester. “It’s a symbolic turn, and the question is to what extent is it a harbinger.”

The company released its book and movie services in China only late last year, leaving Chinese consumers little time to form a habit.

“People who are buying iPhones in China aren’t buying them for iTunes,” said O’Donnell. “They are buying it for the status and the cachet of owning an Apple product, and that is really more about the hardware.”

Chinese consumers’ appetite for the phones themselves will be critical to quarterly earnings. Apple is expected to post its first-ever quarterly drop in iPhone sales, to about 50 million units, reflecting a saturated global market.

Wall Street expects adjusted earnings per share to drop 14 percent to $2.00 and revenue to drop 10 percent to $52.0 billion, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

Watch all our video reviews

Government is likely to exempt iPhone and iPad maker Apple from mandatory local sourcing rule (Source: Reuters)

Government is likely to exempt iPhone and iPad maker Apple from mandatory local sourcing rule, a move which would pave the way for tech giant opening single-brand retail stores in the country.

The company had given a detailed presentation to a committee headed by DIPP Secretary Ramesh Abhishek on April 19, on its products, technology, innovations and camera.

By early next week, the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) would send the proposal for final approval to Finance Ministry, sources said.

“The panel has looked into the detailed proposal. The committee feels that it is a fit case for exemption of the mandatory sourcing norms,” they added.

The US-based company has sought approval from the government on setting up single-brand retail stores in the country.

As per the foreign direct investment (FDI) norms, the government may relax the mandatory local sourcing norms for entities undertaking single-brand retailing of products having state-of-the-art and cutting edge technology and where local sourcing is not possible.

The government had set up a committee to decide whether a product is state-of-the-art and can be eligible for exemption from the mandatory local sourcing applicable for FDI single brand retail trading.

At present, 100 per cent FDI is permitted in the single-brand retail sector but companies are required to take FIPB permission if the limit exceeds 49 per cent.

The company sells its products through Apple-owned retail stores in countries including China, Germany, the US, the UK and France.

Apple has no wholly-owned store in India and sells its products through distributors such as Redington and Ingram Micro.

Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi has also submitted an application to open stores in the country.

Watch all our video reviews

There's been a resurgence of speculation around Apple's (NASDAQ:AAPL) rumored electric car, codenamed Project Titan, as of late. Motor Trend should probably get most of the credit for that, after it took a stab at what an Apple car might look like, for better or worse (mostly worse).

Subsequently, some fellow Fools and I also weighed in on what Apple's car might be like once it debuts (you can read our stunningly insightful thoughts here).

But if and when Apple releases its car, there at least a few reasons why its vehicle could have a rough road ahead of it. The company does have its advantages in the automotive space, of course, but let's take a look at three possible downfalls for now.

Problem No. 1: The high-end price tag
Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster has speculated that an Apple car will cost $75,000 when it launches. That's not an astronomical price for an electric vehicle these days -- Tesla Motors' (NASDAQ:TSLA) Model S starts at $70,000 before any tax breaks -- but it is very much out reach for most car buyers.  

A luxury Apple car isn't necessarily a bad thing; plenty of carmakers offer high-priced vehicles, and Tesla has certainly proven that electric vehicles in that price range can sell.

But the potential pitfall here is that Apple is used to selling high-end devices for the mass market, but a $75,000 electric car is aimed at a small market. Apple isn't used to selling tens of thousands of products -- it's used to selling millions. 

And that's the difference between Tesla's Model S price tag and Apple's car. Tesla built its business by releasing expensive vehicles that subsequently help pay for increasingly affordable ones. Tesla CEO Elon Musk even thanked Model S and Model X owners at the Model 3 launch for "helping to pay for" the $35,000 Model 3. Apple, on the other hand, is accustomed to immediate (and high) profitability from its devices. It's not building a car company -- it's releasing a new product. And I don't think consumers will buy into a high-priced Apple car the same way they've bought into Musk's vision of mid-priced electric car for the masses.

If Apple sets the price too high, then car buyers may wonder why they shouldn't just buy a Tesla instead (more on that later).

Problem No. 2: The leap from iPhone maker to carmaker is huge
I know this may sound a lot like the automakers who think Apple is way in over its head in building a car, but they do make a few good points. 

Apple has a very strong brand and pretty loyal customer base, but those are mainly for much cheaper products like tablets, computers, and iPhones. Even for Apple, converting users from a $750 phone to a $75,000 car will be quite a leap.

Releasing a car would not just challenge Apple's ability to market its products, it would fundamentally change the type of company Apple is. Apple successfully adapted from being a computer company to a devices and services company, but that's arguably a much easier shift than moving from a devices company to automobile company. 

Additionally, there have been recent reports that Apple is having problems finding an automaker that'll manufacturer its vehicle. Talks with BMW and Daimler have recently broken down, and Apple is supposedly looking to Magna-Steyr to possibly build the car.

Problem No. 3: Tesla is a formidable opponent
Let's stick all of the Apple's-going-to-buy-Tesla arguments aside for right now and just stick with the two companies competing in the automotive space. 

Commenting on an Apple Car, Tesla CEO Elon Musk welcomed new all-electric cars into the market. About the Apple Car Musk said, "It will expand the industry." 

But while Musk may want others to join him on the EV train, there's no way he doesn't still want to be king of it. Tesla has been busy upending the electric car market over the past several years, and its unlikely that Apple will be able to steal Tesla's thunder with its own car. 

I envision that Apple will release a beautifully designed car that reflects the simplicity and functionality of its other products. But Tesla's vehicles are magnificently designed and well-built, too, which means Apple will have a much harder time setting itself apart in the automotive market than it has in the past in the mobile and PC markets.

And then there's the experience problem. Apple will bring its car to the market in 2019 at the earliest. By that time, Tesla will have launched four separate electric car models, created multiple electric battery configurations, will have set up an extensive Supercharging network, and will have been running its own massive battery-producing factory for two years. Apple won't just be entering a new market -- it'll be competing directly with one its most formidable opponents ever.

Foolish final thought
Though I've been skeptical about Apple car in the past, I'm starting to come around to the idea. But I still think the hurdles facing Apple in the car market are huge, and they shouldn't be glossed over. If Apple decides to launch a car in the next three years, it'll likely be one of the most difficult products it's ever built and one of the most challenging products it's ever sold.

Apple Watch 2 fans have a happy news here: At last, the brand has opened the box and confirmed its launch date which will be during the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 13!

International Business Times has reported that Apple will have its WWDC at San Francisco. At this June event, the brand will announce updates to its software platforms. In addition to these, you will find Apple launching its Macbook as well as the Apple Watch 2.

“We walked away with the sense that the Apple Watch refresh will not occur in September with the iPhone 7, but is more likely to occur within the next two to three months, and thus we believe an unveiling at WWDC in June makes sense. We believe Apple Watch 2 could be 20 to 40 percent thinner than the current Apple Watch,” Apple analyst Brian White revealed.

Apple Watch 2 Price

Mac Rumors says that Apple is bringing out a new model which will be cheaper than the Apple Watch Steel model. The brand is targeting those customers who can afford to pay £1,000 and £8,000. It’s also reported that Apple Watch 2 is carrying the new ARM A32 processor. This processor will double up the watch’s performance.

If Watch 2 carries a wireless chipset, then we can expect a feature called  “Find my Watch” which will work like “Find my iPhone.” Apple will use new premium materials such as titanium, tungsten, palladium and platinum for some models.

Apple Watch 2 is going to feature new woven nylon bands which will be available in seven colors: gold/red, gold/royal blue, royal blue, pink, pearl, scuba blue and black.  A  front-facing camera, built-in cellular GPS, a  powerful battery which can stay up to 48 hours will make the device worth buying. The  International Data Corporation (IDC) has predicted that Apple’s watch as well as Google’s Android smartwatch will have a big turnover in 2016.

Stay tuned to Bitbag for more updates!

Early this week, Apple announced its refresh of the 12-inch MacBook without much fuss nor fanfare. It wasn't really that unexpected, considering the new line simply bumped up the specs a little but offered nothing extraordinarily different. But that silence almost hints at something brewing underneath, a sign that few picked up: the death knell for Thunderbolt. Once one of the apples of Apple's eye, the connector is silently absent from its latest MacBooks. With the rumors of another standard connector to be absent from a future iPhone, we begin to wonder why Apple is suddenly abandoning the very standards it tried to push hard.

Mini DisplayPort

Apple's dance with connectors actually started with the Mini DisplayPort. Born back in 2008, Apple developed the connector to become a smaller, more compact version of the DisplayPort interface, which was more or less established before that time. Thanks to Apple's clout in the market, the Mini DisplayPort quickly became more than just an Apple innovation. VESA, the association behind the main DisplayPort specification, adopted it in just a year's time. Countless devices, especially laptops and mini PCs, have started to support the connection. Even Microsoft put it in its Surface Pro tablets. Mini DisplayPort became a de facto standard in connectin computers to displays, at least in the enterprise. In most consumer devices, however, HDMI, in all its size incarnations, was more prevalent.

In just three years, however, Apple would partner with Intel to introduce Thunderbolt to the world. Given the duality of its capabilities, not to mention the fact that it uses a Mini DisplayPort connector, it was pretty clear that Apple meant for Thunderbolt to supplant Mini DisplayPort, leaving it to VESA and other OEMs to decide the latter's fate.

Thunderbolt

Thunderbolt actually has two parents. On the one hand, it traces its roots to Intel's fiber optic Light Peak. On the other hand, its copper-based version, as well as its name, came from Apple. Like Mini DisplayPort, it could be used to connect computers to external screens. In fact, for two generations it used the same connector as Mini DisplayPort. Unlike that older standard, however, Thunderbolt transfered more than graphics data. It could ferry data and even power for other devices, pretty much the USB standard. However, it boasted significantly faster speeds than any USB standard could provide at that time.

Unlike Mini DisplayPort, OEM uptake on Thunderbolt was noticeably slower. Despite being actually owned by Intel after Apple the trademark to the chipmaker, it has generally been seen as an Apple-oriented technology. It doesn't help that many of the accessories, particularly external storage solutions, sold in Apple Stores used Thunderbolt, usually in addition to plain old, slow USB. While accessory makers were more than happy to cater to Apple's needs, other OEMs were more keen on keeping USB as the industry standard. Today, very few brands continue to advertise Thunderbolt as a defining factor, LaCie being one of the most prominent.

For its latest MacBook, and so far only on its latest MacBook, Apple has chosen to go with USB Type-C, or USB-C. USB has one a long way and provides decent speeds, and the latest USB 3.1 spec boosts both speed and power to levels perhaps acceptable to Apple. It perhaps didn't make sense for Apple to continue rooting for Thunderbolt's fat connectors, especially when it is aiming for a super thin device like the MacBook. That factor, however, might also play an important role in a still unconfirmed rumor about the next iPhone, or at least next year's iPhone.

3.5 mm Audio Jack

One of the most persistent rumors about the iPhone 7, or, barring that, the iPhone 8, is that it will ditch the 3.5 mm audio jack that has become the standard for connecting wired headphones in almost any device these days. The reason? Supposedly because Apple wants to slim the iPhone down even further. Looking at just the iPhone 6s, it is evident that the circular hole of that port is the tallest among the iPhone's connectors. So yes, maybe Apple's reason, if that were really the case, does have merit. It won't be the first, however. The OPPO R5 launched late 2014 with a ridiculously thin 4.9 mm profile, perhaps thanks to sacrificing the same jack. Just yesterday, Chinese OEM LeEco unveiled a trio of smartphones that used only a USB-C port for a headphone connection. Sadly, it doesn't get that same thin body.

While it is certainly possible for Apple to abandon the 3.5 mm audio jack, there is still some debate on what it will use to replace it. The most obvious candidate is, of course, a lightning connector, the very same that Apple already uses for data connection and charging on both iPhones and iPads. It's a proprietary connector, for sure, but it is also well known and perhaps easy to adapt. That said, given recent developments, another alternative is certainly possible as well: USB Type-C.

USB Type-C

Rumor has it, Apple created USB-C and then donated it to the USB spec group. Even if you don't buy that, it's not hard to see Apple's touch in its development. The reversible connector has long been the Lightning connector's superior feature over USB. The fact that Apple was so quick to jump at USB-C for its new MacBook, to the exclusion of any other port save the headphone jack, perhaps hints at that as well. It is certainly heartening to see Apple solidly back, in word and in deed, a standard connector that isn't proprietary to it (like Lightning) or not so adopted by the industry (like Thunderbolt). It is, however, still surprising in some cases, puzzling in others.

That it didn't support Thunderbolt 3 on the new MacBook is, for example, strange, considering the latest Thunderbolt 3 spec ditches the bulky Mini DisplayPort connector for a slim and reversible USB-C, just like how Apple would have liked it. That Apple still snubbed it perhaps speaks to the company's desire to really move away from Thunderbolt. After all, USB-C fulfills all those functionality as well and is at least poised to be a wider standard than Thunderbolt can ever hope to be.

Ditching the Lightning connector on the iPhone and iPad might be a bit too much, however. Like the initial uproar over the MacBook's lone USB-C port, such a move will immediately make obsolete any accessory that depended on Apple's proprietary connectors for years. By now, there are definitely more USB-C accessories available than last year and Lightning to USB-C adaptors will most likely be easy to sell. It will, however, require another round of certification for accessory makers and will be disruptive to the market to say the least. But that is perhaps exactly what Apple is aiming for.

Wrap-up: Conflicting Standards, Orphaned Products

The funny thing about all this is that these connectors are, or claim to be, industry standards. Popoular geek webcomic XKCD perhaps illustrates the situation best:

The situation is probably never going to change and we can only hope that at least majority of the key players rally behind the same set of standards. But that is something that will take time. In the meantime, however, the market could very well be thrown in disarray, with both consumers and manufacturers uncertain, if not exasperated, about the future. Imagine if the somewhat pricey but high quality accessory that you purchased suddenly became useless because a manufacturer dropped support for a connector that, for years, has been a staple on any device of its kind. It's not going to be a pretty picture. Sure, there will be adaptors of all sorts that will flood the market to meet a need, but not all of them might deliver the same fine-tuned quality as a direct connection provides.

That might actually be what Apple is aiming for. By forcing the issue, accessory makers will have no choice but to adapt quickly or be left out. And no one really wants to be left out of Apple's parties. Just look at how USB-C accessories suddenly burst into the seen, in no small part thanks to the new MacBook, itself a desirable product, sporting one and only one USB-C port. Of course, we've also seen the emergence of poorly made accessories, but that has only made consumers and retailers more acutely aware of the need to properly follow the standards.

And if Apple follows the same path regarding 3.5 mm jacks, whether the replacement will be Lightning or USB-C, we are bound to see the same thing happen all over again. And this time, tempers might rise higher, as the accessories the ingeniously utilize headphone jacks are usually not only expensive but also carefully designed for headphone jacks. Of course, Apple, as well as other big proponents of USB-C should Apple go that route, could use its clout to "encourage" big brands to jump in quickly.

Needless to say, companies abandoning standards, especially the ones they themselves promoted, is a discouraging and confusing situation to be in. This time, we might be lucky that it could be for a good, hopefully long-term cause. There is definitely going to be some negative vibes in the beginning, akin to teething pains. One can only hope it passes by quickly.