On face value, the answer to that question is obvious. If it is unpredictable, then by its nature, you can't predict it. But as a motorcyclist, I can assure you that there is nothing that is truly unpredictable.
When I lived in Upper Hutt, I worked in Wellington and thus rode the Hutt Highway every day. As a motorcyclist, I could predict with roughly 90% accuracy what a driver would do. That sounds far-fetched, right? But it's actually true. The reason is that drivers give off tells, in the same way poker players often have a tell. Learn to read this tell, and you can benefit greatly.
Anyone who knows Apple knows that Apple likes to keep things close to their chest until release day. Sure, there are many predictions, and some come true, but most of the accurate predictions come just before release and are often the actual details sent by whistleblowers. But can you predict Apple a long time in advance?
The simple answer is yes, and I've done it twice already with 100% accuracy. I have no link to Apple other than using their products. I have no insider that can give me information at the drop of a hat. So what were my predictions, and how was I so accurate?
Let's answer the first question. What were my predictions?
2006 - Apple moves to Intel.
When I worked in Wellington, I did so as a Systems Engineer. As a Mac user, I was getting ribbed on a daily basis. Apparently, I'm a sheep listening to my master, Steve Jobs. The people who told me that were part of the 98% of computer users who use Windows for no other reason than it's what everyone else uses. But YEP, I'm the sheep.
So when Apple moved from the PowerPC processor to Intel's offerings, man did the ribbing go up a notch. But I said to them words along these lines:
“Mark my words. Within 10 years, Apple will realise that Intel isn’t giving them what they want, and so they’ll start designing their own chips to use in their Macs”.
Of course, the scoffs of those idiots were immense. But what happened? In 2019, Apple announced that starting in 2020, they were going to transition all their Macs to a newly designed M Series processor of their own design. On release, Apple stated it had taken them five years to design and build these processors. So if you took it from release, then five years comes to 2015. In other words, one year before the end of my prediction in 2006. Only you don’t take it from 2020; you take it from 2019 when they made the announcement because they had made the announcement and given themselves a year to have enough production. That means in 2019, the chips were already designed and built. That means five years from there brings us to 2014, two years before the end of my prediction.
Then we look at Apple Vision. The markets were spouting the same dribble that Apple needs to build a VR headset; otherwise, it was going to die in five years. Spoiler alert, it hasn’t.
The rumours kept building to the point I felt like I had to be the voice of reason:
“Apple will not release a VR headset. If they go this route, they will release an Augmented Reality (AR) headset. In true Apple fashion, though, it will be a full computer system that will allow developers to make whatever apps they want for the platform, of which there will be those who will develop VR apps”.
In 2023, Apple released that headset, and it was exactly what I had predicted.
So how did I predict those developments when the entire market got it so blatantly wrong? The answer is found in the words of George Satayana:
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
All the baseless predictions about Apple are all due to the fact that no one looks at what Apple has done.
Take my prediction about Apple moving to their own processers. Bear in mind that that was made before the iPhone existed and certainly before the iPhone 4S, which showed us that Apple can design chips really well.
Was there anything in Apple's past that made me confident that Apple would go down that route? Ummm, how about the fact that when I made the prediction, Apple was in the process of moving from PowerPC to Intel? Why did Apple make this move? Because IBM was not providing Apple with what they needed and asked for. Add to that, IBM decided to partner with Microsoft to supply PPC processors for the original Xbox.
Apple had literally just set a precedent. If Apple can’t get what it needs from 3rd parties, they’ll develop it themselves. Knowing Intel, they’ll go gangbusters initially (the introduction of CORE processors started on the Macs), then it will become nothing more than speed bumps and minor developments.
Apple wanted high-speed but low-power consumption chips for their products, and Intel was never going to give them that. So Apple developed them themselves.
What about the Apple Vision Pro? How did I get that right, but everyone else got it wrong?
Once again, think if there is a decent business case for Apple to go VR. There’s nothing that VR (Virtual Reality) has that would fit in with the work Apple was already doing. NOTHING.
AR (Augmented Reality), however, does make sense. Apple’s been working on AR for many years, developing APIs that allow developers to implement AR into their products as well. Moving this to a headset makes a lot of sense.
But what about making it a full ecosystem?
Contrary to what people believe, Apple is not a hardware company. They are a software company that makes hardware so they can release the software they envision. As a software company, they have time and time again shown that they want others to get in on the game as well and thus develop the programming tools to allow developers to get onboard. So making a headset that Apple only can develop for is not in Apple’s business interests. The only natural thing would be for Apple to open this system up to all developers. Naturally, this is going to have some developers wanting to make VR applications.
A folding phone may or may not be on Apple’s agenda. I suspect it won’t be at all. I could be wrong, but there’s nothing a folding phone can do that an iPhone already can’t do. Given the problems with the current tech, a folding phone doesn’t yet make sense for Apple to make. It will just pollute the range.
Making Siri work like Copilot does make sense to a small degree, but it’s not going to kill Apple if Siri falls by the wayside. Personal AI assistants aren’t actually being used by the masses anyway. I think it will happen, but not until Apple has fully developed the underlying platform for it to work well. That’s why Apple is trying to get as much AI stuff done on the device rather than use constant connection to the cloud. In fact, how do you even make AI work if you don’t have a great cell signal? You do what Apple does and make it all work on the device.
If you look at history and the present together, you can make accurate predictions for the future. Why many choose to make wild predictions that make no sense is a mystery to me, but I feel it has more to do with stock manipulation than living in reality.
Never be blind to the past; your future depends upon it.
