Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's Supply Chain Secret

businessweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 153 posts

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#91

Post by Tloewald »

philwelch wrote: post #34
ars wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment is fiction. Suppliers love walmart because walmart doesn't play those games with them, and walmart pays immediately, not after 90 or more days. Do a little research next time. The only people who really hate walmart are unions. Both consumers and suppliers love them. Small businesses have mixed feeling - yes walmart eats some of their business, but having a store near a walmart is great for them.

The employees never seem happy to me, and as far as customers go, I think most of them see Wal-Mart like the phone company or Facebook--the offering is too good to refuse, but "happy" doesn't really describe the experience.

That's the kicker for me with any store. Walmart employees seem dispirited and miserable. Trader joe, target, whole foods, costco, all seem to have pretty happy employees.

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#92

Post by thematt »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #68
nailer wrote: post #17

> Most of Apple’s customers have probably never given that green light a second thought Most, I'm sure. But personally the first time I saw light shining through my metal laptop, I was amazed, a little delighted, and slightly confused about how they were doing it (because, as the article mentions, the holes are too small to see).

"Each machine typically goes for about $250,000. Apple convinced the seller to sign an exclusivity agreement and has since bought hundreds of them[...]" That's ~$25 million for just 100 of those lasers. If they bought hundreds of them, that means they paid tens of millions or even over $100 million just for that light effect.

Maybe just for the light effect at first, but I'm sure that has sparked lots of new ideas on how to leverage them.

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#94

Post by nobody3141592 »

gbog wrote: post #84
nailer wrote: post #17

> Most of Apple’s customers have probably never given that green light a second thought Most, I'm sure. But personally the first time I saw light shining through my metal laptop, I was amazed, a little delighted, and slightly confused about how they were doing it (because, as the article mentions, the holes are too small to see).

Frankly, this little magic trick is worth the high price paid?

On it's own no. As an example of the 1000s of tiny details that make it a fantastic product - yes.

Is the magnetic power supply attachment worth $10 more (actually yes it is!)

Or the lack of 'Intel' inside 'designed for blah' stickers all over the case - these cost Apple $5

Or the way the lid fits to the case when closed with no gap, or the rounded corners of the windows on MacOS?

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#95

Post by yoos »

idspispopd wrote: post #63
nailer wrote: post #17

> Most of Apple’s customers have probably never given that green light a second thought Most, I'm sure. But personally the first time I saw light shining through my metal laptop, I was amazed, a little delighted, and slightly confused about how they were doing it (because, as the article mentions, the holes are too small to see).

The first time I saw it I pulled out a triplet magnifier to see what was going on. I've got a few great shots of the laser pattern if anyone is interested.

Interested as well!

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#96

Post by binarray2000 »

tptacek wrote: post #77
binarray2000 wrote: post #65

OK...I cheer to so many things Apple does regarding operations. But when I read Apple [..] sometimes doesn't pay until as long as 90 days after it uses a part [...] I think only "lame". With $80B and 40% margin, company with that reputation... Manufacturing is hard. And very expensive. Organize processes, buy machines and raw materials, pay the labor. And then comes Apple and gives itself a loan (basically, it's a lo…

Welcome to business in the real world. Try consulting for any Fortune 500 company sometime, and see how long they take to pay you after you invoice them. If 90+ days is the norm for paying small consultancies, it's hard for me to feel too sorry for multi-billion-dollar electronics suppliers.

Well, I AM talking about the real world (note my post scriptum). Also, when you talk about small consultancies and Fortune 500 companies: I have worked for a small consultancy and, later, as a freelancer for German top companies (Deutsche Telekom, Deutsche Post, Munich Re - to name a few) and they all have paid, both that consultancy and me, within a month of which the consultancy/I have sent the invoice. USA is, judging from your comment, different... I see that now.

Aside from being (in my opinion) a bad business practice, it's also lying to the shareholders. You see, that $80 Billion figure would be smaller if they'd pay the manufacturers in a reasonable timeframe.

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#97

Post by CoffeeDregs »

These kinds of articles were novel 10 years ago when Apple was coming back and was doing so while beating Dell at supply chain optimization and that was, justifiably, a huge story. Ironically, I read them in BusinessWeek back then, too.

Now, the ODM/OEMs have become brands and the folks who once were the main participants in Apple's supply chain are now directly competing with Apple. Breathless articles aside, are we really sure that Apple's supply chain is much shorter/faster than those of Lenovo, Dell, HTC, Sony or, holy hell, Samsung?

I also have a hard time seeing how $25M worth of lasers is a supply chain innovation; most other manufacturers would probably prefer to make the laptop for $6 (amortization) less. I have a ThinkPad T520 [with Linux] because it's rugged, comfortable (no wrist razor), has a TrackPoint (I know, I know, but I love it) and about $1200-$1500 less than a comparable Macbook Pro. Clearly, the majority of hackers disagree with me, so I'm convinced that 90% of Apple's incredibleness is their marketing (not ads, but understanding how to design and build excellent products which are very well targeted at their audiences).

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#98

Post by bunderbunder »

padobson wrote: post #62

I think Apple's supply chain management is a greater competitive advantage than their product design. There are many factors beyond the quality of product that go into a purchasing decision - things like hype, accessibility, and most importantly, price. Apple never had much a problem with great design or building hype, but the real reason for their success over the last 15 years has been their ability to provide cust…

The same ethos provides similar results on the customer service side. For example, letting users go to the website and schedule a 15-minute window of time in which Apple calls them is huge. Letting users go to the website and schedule an appointment to go talk to a real live human is huge. And making them walk all the way through a retail outlet full of your products to get there doesn't hurt, either.

Every other company in their space is still stuck on figuring out how to distribute tech support resources to customers by asking them to wait on hold for an hour. That's an hour worth of time doing absolutely nothing productive that shows up on the 800 number's bill. That's a bunch more call center hardware to maintain in order to manage the queue of people on hold. That's less productivity per operator, because customers who are pissed off about being on hold for an hour are harder to work with, and because dealing with that for 8 hours a day is an excellent way to lose your own motivation. Let alone that a bad support experience is a good way to make sure a customer doesn't become a repeat customer.

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#99

Post by tptacek »

binarray2000 wrote: post #96
tptacek wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to business in the real world. Try consulting for any Fortune 500 company sometime, and see how long they take to pay you after you invoice them. If 90+ days is the norm for paying small consultancies, it's hard for me to feel too sorry for multi-billion-dollar electronics suppliers.

Well, I AM talking about the real world (note my post scriptum). Also, when you talk about small consultancies and Fortune 500 companies: I have worked for a small consultancy and, later, as a freelancer for German top companies (Deutsche Telekom, Deutsche Post, Munich Re - to name a few) and they all have paid, both that consultancy and me, within a month of which the consultancy/I have sent the invoice. USA is, jud…

All I can tell you is that in the US, very long delays before invoices are paid out are absolutely the norm.

I didn't jump in because I particularly care how Apple pays vendors, but because many people on HN are considering freelancing and bootstrapping, and they should know: big companies are never going to pay them on time. Keep cash in the bank.

Your comment about Apple's balance sheet is pretty silly.

Re: Apple's Supply Chain Secret

#100

Post by schrototo »

bigiain wrote: post #64
kgermino wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that, while it would be cool and notable (and maybe worth it for that alone) making the logo invisible when the computer is turned off eliminates a marketing opportunity. The simple Apple logo against a plain backdrop provides a clean advertisement for Apple. Removing the logo removes the distinctiveness of the computer when it is turned off. Also, I'm not sure how the computer would look without a log…

"The simple Apple logo against a plain backdrop provides a clean advertisement for Apple. Removing the logo removes the distinctiveness of the computer when it is turned off." It still took them a while to put them on the right way up. The first few laptops they sold with the Apple logo on the lid, they were oriented so they were "right way up" for the user when the lid was closed. That made them all upside down in a…

It could also be a reflection of how laptop usage has changed over time. Maybe a couple of years ago laptops were closed most of the time, hence the decision to put the logo up that way.
Post reply on HN