backtop


Print 179 comment(s) - last by Dorkyman.. on Jun 2 at 5:31 PM


Brand image has been a key reason for Apple's success. Apple has successfully portrayed itself as the fresh, hip, outsider scoring many young buyers.   (Source: List Phobia)

Apple's rise to the top has been partly fueled by slick packaging.

Apple's CEO Steve Jobs has been a final key to his company's growth and success. Under his guidance five wildly successful products have been launched, establishing four monopolies. And he has helped revive the almost-dead Mac brand of computers as well.  (Source: Mac Rumors)
Apple has gone from rebel outsider to corporate shark in no time at all

Apple has at least brief briefly become the world's largest tech company in terms of market cap.  That spot has been held for over a decade by Microsoft, makers of the Windows operating system.

In trading Monday, Apple Inc.'s shares slipped $1.11 to close at $244.11, making its market cap about $222 billion.  Microsoft's shares dipped even more, falling to $1.06, or 4.1 percent, to close at $25.01, for market cap of about $219 billion.  Market cap is the dollar value of a company's outstanding shares, and is commonly used to compare companies in terms of size.

While yesterday's figures may not indicate that Apple has truly passed Microsoft to become the world's largest tech firm, they do indicate that it is on the verge of doing so.  And that revelation alone is somewhat amazing, considering the veteran brand was on the verge of bankruptcy when Steven P. Jobs returned to the company in 1997 to serve as CEO.

Apple has long thrived on a rebel-outsider image, but when it comes to business it has long shown itself to be as cold and calculating as Microsoft, if not a bit more ruthless.  Under Jobs guidance, Apple released several tremendously successful flagship products -- the iPod, the iTunes Music Store, the iTunes App Storethe iPhone, and the iPad.  All of these products, with the exception of the iPhone, have gained a dominant position in the market.

Many companies could never dream of having a monopoly in one market, let alone four, but that is what Apple has achieved through a mix of brilliance and ruthlessness.  

Make no mistake, Apple is not the tech world outsider; rather it's an elitist of the highest order.  A major part of Apple's climb has been its large profit margins.  While Microsoft makes a small profit on each copy of Windows sold, Apple often pockets from $50 to $500 (at least) per iDevice sold.  No tech company has been able to convince customers to swallow massive profit margins quite like Apple.

A major reason why Apple has been able to do so boils down to two factors.  The first is psychological -- brand image.   Even as the elderly Apple was beginning to become one of the world's most powerful companies, it portrayed itself as the cool young rebel firm in ads such as the "Get a Mac" series that ran from 2006 to 2009.  In doing so, it won over a lot of young customers who are less concerned with price than getting what is considered the "cool" product at any given time.

A second key factor is packaging.  While Apple products have held no key advantage over competitors, and often lack features their competitors had (for example, iPods long had no FM tuner -- until very recently), they had unparalleled packaging.  The ability to pack hardware into a slick slender package has led to overheating issues at times, but it was undeniably one of the two factors that made Apple's sales even hotter.

Apple will likely reign at the top for some time thank to its dominant position in several markets.  However, threats to its empire loom.  Android is beating up on the iPhone in U.S. market share and recently passed it in sales.  Apple's decision to stick with just one U.S. carrier and one phone model threatens to cause it to fall quickly into Google's rear view mirror, much as PC sales left Macs behind in the 90s.

And its growing size has prompted increased scrutiny from antitrust regulators in the EU and U.S.  While Apple has yet to be formerly investigated for any wrongdoing, there are at least four antitrust inquiries into Apple in the U.S. (inquiries are the precursor to a full-fledged investigation).

Also, there's the problem of Apple's thirst for control.  Apple has long insisted that it knows what its customers want better than they do.  Apple's recent decisions with the iPhone and iPad -- such as banning Flash -- have upset both developers and consumers alike.

Finally, there's the problem of Apple's polarizing, yet brilliant CEO Steve Jobs.  Some analysts believe that Apple will survive and thrive after Jobs, but that's much more questionable than say in the case of Microsoft and Bill Gates.  Perhaps no company in modern history has been more driven by one man than Apple.  Jobs' focus and demand for absolute obedience borders on tyranny and has driven many engineers away; yet at the same time, it has allowed his company to launch products like the iPad that critics said would never happen.

Without Jobs, Apple seems unlikely to be able to grow its business the same way.  And without truly new products Apple will still remain powerful -- but it won't expand as fast. 

For now Apple can enjoy the news of its achievement, though.  Its future may be uncertain, but in the present it's making a whole lot of money.


Updated: May 27, 2010 11:15 a.m.
--
Some commenters raised some excellent points about the nature of this victory for Apple, which were worth appending here.  First, as some point out, market cap is only one indication of size.  A better indicator perhaps is net operating income, which is a measure of a firm's profitability that excludes interest and income tax expenses.  Microsoft currently has almost twice ($20.363B USD) the net operating income of Apple ($11.74B USD). 

IBM also has more operating income.  IBM ($17.012B USD) also has more operating income the Apple.  Google ($8.312B USD) and HP ($10.136B USD) both come close to Apple's operating income as well.

However, the picture is slightly more complex than that.  As mentioned, Apple holds virtual monopolies in four key markets.  HP arguably does not hold enough marketshare to constitute a monopoly, despite making massive earnings in the PC sector.  Google (internet search, internet advertising) and IBM (servers, supercomputing) both do hold virtual monopolies in a couple of critical sectors.  And Microsoft obviously holds numerous effective monopolies (operating system, browser software, office software).

Ultimately, it's highly subjective and open to debate to say any of these companies is "the biggest".

Also, it should be noted that today Microsoft's stock significantly rebounded and its market cap is now at $230.25B USD versus Apple's $227.94B USD.  Thus Apple's reign as the biggest market cap tech company in the world was as brief as we guessed.  However, it's unlikely to be the last time we see Apple in this position.

Those comments aside, it is important to recognize Apple's transformation from a failing firm into a superpower.  This event -- if merely a market blip -- provided the perfect opportunity to do so.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Sigh...
By amanojaku on 5/27/2010 9:52:37 AM , Rating: 5
Market capitalization is just funny money. It's what the public THINKS a company's stock is worth. I prefer REAL money, and MS has more. MS beats Apple hands down in terms of what's in the bank, or what could be in the bank.

Apple, Inc.
Revenue - $42.91 billion
Operating income - $11.74 billion
Total assets - $47.50 billion
Total equity - $31.64 billion

Microsoft
Revenue - $58.437 billion
Operating income - $20.363 billion
Total assets - $77.888 billion
Total equity - $39.558 billion




RE: Sigh...
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/27/2010 10:00:12 AM , Rating: 5
quote:

Apple, Inc.
Revenue - $42.91 billion
Operating income - $11.74 billion
Total assets - $47.50 billion
Total equity - $31.64 billion

Microsoft
Revenue - $58.437 billion
Operating income - $20.363 billion
Total assets - $77.888 billion
Total equity - $39.558 billion


That's a good point. You're right, Apple hasn't passed MSFT in terms of financials, yet.

And I certainly agree that Apple stock is somewhat overvalued at this point (one reason why I don't own any).

That said, for better or worse, Microsoft and Apple are undeniably the top two tech companies in the world in terms of money, investment dollars, and power.

As I point out, Apple's reign in that position may be short lived. Of course you could make similar arguments for Google, Microsoft, etc. No one knows exactly what the future will hold -- we can only make intelligent guesses.


RE: Sigh...
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/27/2010 10:03:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:

That said, for better or worse, Microsoft and Apple are undeniably the top two tech companies in the world in terms of money, investment dollars, and power.


Though Google is pretty darn close too, I must add, before anybody interjects with that comment...


RE: Sigh...
By reader1 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By cochy on 5/27/2010 12:26:10 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
He's not trying to make the most money


Your jokes are starting to get a bit old already. He's the CEO of a publicly traded company. By law he is required to try to make the most money.


RE: Sigh...
By sebmel on 5/27/2010 2:14:40 PM , Rating: 2
Jason Mick yet again shows his compete mastery of stupid journalism:

"Apple released several tremendously successful flagship products -- the iPod, the iTunes Music Store, the iTunes App Store, the iPhone, and the iPad. All of these products, with the exception of the iPhone, have gained a dominant position in the market.
Many companies could never dream of having a monopoly in one market, let alone four..."

iTunes = 30% of music sales
iPod = 70% of mp3 player sales
iTunes app store = serving roughly 11% of worldwide smartphones by sales last quarter
iPad = what on earth are you claiming here, Mick? The iPad is a computer! Apple have about 5% worldwide share!

But the Mick saves his greatest stupidity for this comment:

"A major part of Apple's climb has been its large profit margins.  While Microsoft makes a small profit on each copy of Windows sold, Apple often pockets from $50 to $500 (at least) per iDevice sold."

Annual revenues: Microsoft $58.4bn, Apple $36.5bn
Annual net profits: Microsoft $14.6bn, Apple $5.7bn

Microsoft's profit margins are far higher than Apple's... roughly 25% to Apple's 15%.


RE: Sigh...
By reader1 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By FaceMaster on 5/27/2010 3:40:05 PM , Rating: 5
...how much are Apple paying you?


RE: Sigh...
By Danish1 on 5/27/2010 9:00:39 PM , Rating: 2
Judging by his ratings he should be paying Apple.


RE: Sigh...
By B3an on 5/28/2010 2:17:52 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah if anything Reader1, Pirks and all the other usual iSheep make Apple look bad. If they really loved crApple so much, they should just STFU.


RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/28/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By ClownPuncher on 5/27/2010 3:46:58 PM , Rating: 4
This has been a Public Service Announcement paid for by Mothers Against Giving Apple Consumers LSD.

Think about the children.


RE: Sigh...
By Iaiken on 5/27/2010 4:07:09 PM , Rating: 5
Gonna take -1 hit on this one, but reader1, you are an idiot.

Apple, like all other companies, puts the needs of the stakeholders first. Since Steve Jobs is also one of the companies largest stakeholders and it's CEO and creative director, it stands to reason that Jobs puts his own interests and needs first.

Further, your "fragmentation" of the old fashioned Android OS statement leaves me baffled and wondering if perhaps you have special needs. That is the nature of an OPEN platform.

With Android you have an OS that will run on a wide array of hardware as manufactured by many different companies with diverse and differing features. All of these devices have access to the same growing pool of applications. This also puts the onus of OS support on the manufacturer of that specific phone and not Google.

I also think it's funny that the Android is free under the Apache license and yet Google is the greedy monster.

Seriously, go fly a kite...


RE: Sigh...
By piroroadkill on 5/28/2010 3:56:28 AM , Rating: 3
"reader1 you are an idiot."

Like that ever needed saying. I'm pretty sure he's just a massive troll.


RE: Sigh...
By MikeO on 5/28/2010 7:39:11 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Seriously, go fly a kite...


He can't, Apple doesn't make kites.


RE: Sigh...
By Quadrillity on 5/28/2010 9:39:53 AM , Rating: 5
I'm pretty sure there is a kite flying app out there somewhere. But if there isn't, iSheep will explain such benefits as:

1. you don't have to go outside
2. your iKite can never break since it's an Apple product
3. it's vastly superior to any other kites available
4. there is plenty of hot air to keep it floating


RE: Sigh...
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:06:22 PM , Rating: 3
Yep, Apple's closed-platform iPhone OS protect developers. That's why they can just deny your app for no rhyme or reason. They can do it even after the app hits the iPhone.

That's some amazing protection there.


RE: Sigh...
By Phoque on 5/27/2010 5:39:06 PM , Rating: 2
Does Steve Jobs have a son? I mean, is reader1 Steve Jobs's son?


RE: Sigh...
By nikon133 on 5/27/2010 6:11:58 PM , Rating: 5
I don't think Steve has any mentally challenged children.


RE: Sigh...
By Dorkyman on 6/2/2010 5:31:26 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, he has a daughter. Never married the mother, never financially supported either of them, from what I recall. Denied paternity for years but finally admitted to it. Great guy, eh?

Remember Apple's Lisa computer? Named after the daughter.


RE: Sigh...
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:04:01 PM , Rating: 3
Apple hasn't invented anything either.

Mac? Already computers out before it.
iPod? Already mp3 players before it.
iTunes? Already other music stores before it.
iPhone? Already smartphones before it and also touch based ones.
iPad? Already tablets before it and even slates.

Seriously, is that your argument there? That Google hasn't invented anything?


RE: Sigh...
By Jellodyne on 5/28/2010 12:30:55 PM , Rating: 4
Sure, but none of those were white and glossy before. Apple invented the white and glossy computer, mp3 player, phone and tablet.

Duh.


RE: Sigh...
By The Raven on 5/28/2010 3:13:44 PM , Rating: 1
Google is more or less a service company. Mail service, search service, etc. And don't forget the advertising! So, no, they are not the new Menlo Park. I'll give you that. But to imply that Jobs is doing this all for charity? Bro, if it was for charity, he would open source the code of all of his programs and offer music w/o DRM. He would also give some clothing away to the poor, but do you ever see him part with damn solid black 3/4 sleeve mock turtleneck of his? No.

He's trying to make the best product in order to make the most money per personal man hour like the rest of us. You can sell a couple of great products and make a ton of money, or you can sell tons of crap and make a ton of money. Either way you are doing it for the money.


RE: Sigh...
By themaster08 on 5/29/2010 4:41:17 AM , Rating: 2
We all find that comment extremely amusing.

However, I've never heard of Jobs giving to charity (unless of course, he does it annonymously).

Gates is the biggest philanthropist this world has ever seen. He has changed for the better. People like Jobs never change.


RE: Sigh...
By BigBitch on 5/28/2010 4:04:00 PM , Rating: 1
if you don't know what you're not talking about, don't talk at all.


RE: Sigh...
By nafhan on 5/27/2010 10:35:50 AM , Rating: 5
A few more reference points.

HP:
Revenue US$ 114.552 billion (2009)
Operating income US$ 10.136 billion (2009)
Total assets US$ 52.539 billion (2009)
Total equity US$ 38.942 billion (2009)

IBM:
Revenue US$ 95.757 billion (2009)
Operating income US$ 17.012 billion (2009)
Total assets US$ 109.023 billion (2009)
Total equity US$ 22.637 billion (2009)

Google:
Revenue US$23.651 billion (2009)
Operating income US$8.312 billion (2009)
Total assets US$40.497 billion (2009)
Total equity US$36.004 billion (2009)


RE: Sigh...
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/27/2010 11:38:41 AM , Rating: 3
Thanks! I appended and update where I discuss operating income, which I believe is the most significant of the figures you listed. As you point out, when it comes to operating income Apple is probably in third place.

Which makes it all the more astonishing that its stock has risen so incredibly high...

And as the op below pointed out, Microsoft bumped it back to second in terms of market cap today, so its reign was indeed short lived.


RE: Sigh...
By reader1 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By sebmel on 5/27/2010 5:51:42 PM , Rating: 5
Here again the Mick demonstrates why Daily Tech should not be asking him to write financial stories:

"Which makes it all the more astonishing that its [Apple's] stock has risen so incredibly high"

Mick, it's a basic necessity if you are going to put yourself forward to write this stuff that you actually understand it... and are not astonished. There is nothing what so ever astonishing about Apple's price.

Here are two pieces of information that ought to have been in your story:

Apple's market cap growth over the last decade: over plus 3000%
Microsoft's market cap growth over the last decade: minus 50%

Price/earnings ratios: Microsoft 12.8, Apple 24

Now share price reflects demand for the shares. Demand for shares is generally a function of dividend per share and potential share price growth. Microsoft has offered it's long term investors losses in terms of share price and they have had to make do with divided payments. They are responded by giving Microsoft a value that is in line with long term historical averages of 10 times earnings.

Apple have offered shareholders perhaps the highest growth rate in the Nasdaq... and investors have responded by betting they can continue. How much have they betted... only twice what they are betting on a company that has shrunk over a decade... that's because Microsoft is very profitable. Contrary to your inaccurate story, Microsoft are more profitable than Apple... their profit margins are famous for being some of the highest of any company.

I suspect that Mick isn't as stupid as he makes out here. I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and to consider him a paid troll... click baiting.


RE: Sigh...
By jbwhite99 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By Treckin on 5/28/2010 1:07:25 AM , Rating: 3
Wait, software companies have NO cost?!?

WTF why dont I start one or three right now? Its like a magical machine that makes money from nothing! The best part is that the nothing is FREE!!!!!

Seriously though, WTF are you smoking? Component cost and labor cost and operating cost and sunken cost...

FUCK


RE: Sigh...
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:10:42 PM , Rating: 2
I'm curious to know. I know that Apple's stocks went above MS's stocks, but how many shares are out there?

If Apple's got 1 billion shares out there and MS has like 50 billion, then I don't see Apple winning much of anything.


RE: Sigh...
By Iaiken on 5/27/2010 10:35:50 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
And I certainly agree that Apple stock is somewhat overvalued at this point (one reason why I don't own any).


Really?

The reason I don't own any is because you're limited to making a capital gain since they don't pay dividends on common stock.

This basically makes it impossible to make a profit off Apple unless you bought in a long time ago or are constantly churning the stock on it's highs and lows.

The one brewery I'm invested in has paid out 9-11% dividends for the last 8 years like clockwork. As such it would have to lose just over 50% of it's value to send me back to square one.

Technology stocks are for early adopters, day traders and chumps (in that chronological order).


RE: Sigh...
By mcnabney on 5/27/2010 11:39:53 AM , Rating: 3
Apple's stock has been bid-up by institutional investors.

Why?

Because Apple has accumulate a huge horde of cash (something like $50B) and since Apple doesn't have a history of big acquisistions the equity stakeholders are trying to get Apple to pay it back to the company owners in the form of a dividend. The exact same thing happened to Microsoft. That is why Apple's current P/E ratio is so high.


RE: Sigh...
By sebmel on 5/27/2010 6:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
"Apple's stock has been bid-up by institutional investors. Why? Because Apple has accumulate a huge horde of cash"

Wrong, ignorance like that is what you get for reading Jason Mick. Apple's stock price has been bid up because it has offered stellar stock price growth over the last 5 years.

Take a look at a graph of Apple's growth since 2000:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/05/27/micr...

Microsoft is there on the same graph.... and, yes, it is split adjusted for both companies.


RE: Sigh...
By Mitch101 on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Sigh...
By mcnabney on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 12:02:28 PM , Rating: 2
Why did you forget Xbox? It's profitable now, isn't it?


RE: Sigh...
By MrPickins on 5/27/2010 12:26:47 PM , Rating: 3
What a terrible position for a company to be in...

With only Windows and Office they're sure to fail!

/sarcasm


RE: Sigh...
By Mitch101 on 5/27/2010 12:34:39 PM , Rating: 3
When did Microsoft have this great and glorious Mobile phone market that they no longer possess? Everyone talks as if Apple somehow stole Microsoft's mobile phone market when Microsoft never really had a mobile market to begin with. If anything Microsoft learned that you can make a lot of money in the Mobile market with the right device.

Microsoft made mobile devices but they never really caught on so you cant steal market share from an area they never had a foothold on.

Mobile 7 is a complete recreation and abandons all previous versions of the Mobile OS. It hasnt been released yet. Blackberry needs to worry about Windows Mobile 7 but I think consumers will also find the device to be Microsoft's best mobile work. If there is money to be made there Microsoft will find its way in.

I think the only company that can claim a win over Microsoft if Intuit/Quicken. The rest just seem brag until they no longer exist.


RE: Sigh...
By omnicronx on 5/27/2010 12:34:54 PM , Rating: 4
Lets see..

OS - Never have had to play on a level playing field, and probably won't have to for the forseable future. They have corp/business support and its not going anywhere anytime soon.

Xbox - What exactly do you call this? Not only were they on a level playing field, but they were at a disadvantage. Now here we are today and they are number two in console sales, and #1 in software sales.

Windows Phone - PPC existed before pretty much anything else, they were never on the same playing field as their competitors (they had pocket pc phones 6 years before the iphone was released), so I don't see your point here. Until the new phones are released and fail, you cannot make this statement.

Zune- Once again, playing catchup and thus not on a even playing field. Terribly unsuccessful for sure, but they were going against an iTunes entrenched market in which Apple had gained a large percentage of the market.

So really the only time MS has been on a level playing field, they were successful.

Lets face it, many companies become successful by finding a away to get ahead of their competitors.. i.e you are not trying to play on a level playing field, instances in which you are could be considered higher risk.

Its never an easy task to enter any market, regardless of who you are. Apple for example had to innovate in order to set themselves apart from the competition. To say the iPhone was on a level playing field in the smartphone market upon release is just plain incorrect. They were leaps and bounds ahead of their competitors, so its no wonder they have been so successful.


RE: Sigh...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/27/2010 3:18:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
To say the iPhone was on a level playing field in the smartphone market upon release is just plain incorrect. They were leaps and bounds ahead of their competitors, so its no wonder they have been so successful.


HUH? That's funny. Aside from the touch screen, I recall the features and options available to it utterly LAUGHABLE compared to a Blackberry or Nokia smart phone.


RE: Sigh...
By Motoman on 5/27/2010 3:25:48 PM , Rating: 2
Yes. And those of us who actually want to "type" on our smartphones were never dumb enough to buy one anyway.


RE: Sigh...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/27/2010 3:36:47 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. I hear there is this revolutionary technology called "tactile response", where you actually get feedback on what you are doing. Amazing!

Anyway, nobody can honestly say the original iPhone was blowing away the competition. But their advertising sure did.


RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 3:32:08 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Sigh...
By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2010 9:49:41 PM , Rating: 3
And in the first sentence you see the word marketing. It's been obvious since the first iPhone was a "success" that Apple was all about marketing.


RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 9:23:18 AM , Rating: 1
yeah, Apple marketed at least SOMETHING new... unlike others

good point Alex, thanks


RE: Sigh...
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2010 11:33:53 AM , Rating: 2
Ahhh, twisting my words. Good ole Pirks is back. :)


RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 11:39:41 AM , Rating: 2
ya I'm twisting them in order to make them reflect what this article actually said. why are you against this Alex? are you afraid of something? ;)


RE: Sigh...
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2010 2:26:00 PM , Rating: 2
Only of your stupidity. Apple hasn't really made anything new. They've made DIFFERENT products, but not really new ones. New products would require inventing something.... of which Apple hasn't done.


RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 4:04:55 PM , Rating: 2
new==different


RE: Sigh...
By nafhan on 5/27/2010 12:46:33 PM , Rating: 2
MS will be done when they run out of money, and right now they are still making money.


RE: Sigh...
By reader1 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By chrish89 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:26:48 PM , Rating: 1
I don't think any of these Android phone makers care. They just want to mass produce any kind of phone and sell it. Whether it beats Apple or not, doesn't matter to them. As long as they profit. Hence why you see a company like HTC push out a bajillion different kinds of phone. Nokia, a lot of different phones. Motorola, same thing.

Limiting yourself to a single phone is not all that good of a market decision. Hence why Android phones are selling quite a lot and will surpass the iPhone in no time.

Why they didn't go the iPod route, is beyond me. Lots of different iPods, for lots of different users.


RE: Sigh...
By themaster08 on 5/29/2010 4:48:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Limiting yourself to a single phone is not all that good of a market decision. Hence why Android phones are selling quite a lot and will surpass the iPhone in no time.

It fits in line well with Apple's business practices.

Their market share will take a hit due to Android, but their product will stil be as profitable as ever.

That then gives Apple the ability to abuse their market influence without any backlash because of their small market share, so governing bodies turn a blind eye to it.


RE: Sigh...
By lukasbradley on 5/27/2010 10:02:16 AM , Rating: 4
Agreed, agreed, agreed. Apple is over-valued compared to other technology companies, and (in my humble opinion) can not continue that trend. There are too many competitors biting at their heels. And brands go out of style at some point.


RE: Sigh...
By reader1 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By Iaiken on 5/27/2010 11:27:19 AM , Rating: 2
I find that funny because I've been building my own computers from quality components for 10 years and over the life of 5 computers I can count the number of crashes I've had on both hands. This discounts things like physical hardware failures that would have likewise gibbed a Mac. I sold each and every one of them when I was done with them and they are ALL still happily chugging along for those friends/family/co-workers that bought them.

I think the REAL problem with the retail PC is that box PC's are made out of the cheapest components the builder can get their hands on. Every time I have handled a Dell or an HP motherboard I couldn't help but think "well there's your problem".

However, the "boutique PC" has never really been able to gain traction because of the consumer perspective that PC's are all the same. I'm often called upon by friends, family and colleagues to help them pick out a PC and it's quite obvious to me that most of them have NO idea what they are paying for or how to compare products "value".

This is what Apple is capitalizing on. Hell, they ARE boutique PC's as the only tangible differences between a Core i7 PC and a Core i7 Mac is the motherboard controller and the use of EFI instead of BIOS. With Windows 7-64 being EFI aware and PC motherboards with EFI, people have actually been able to dummy OS-X into installing on generic EFI hardware along side Windows 7.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/08/26/efix_os_x_...

This stupid little dongle that convinces OS-X that it is indeed being installed on a Mac is all that really separates PC's from Macs. That and the Mac's sorely lacking driver support for devices, but that is another argument entirely when it comes to building a FrankenMac.


RE: Sigh...
By mfed3 on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Sigh...
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/27/2010 11:35:13 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
as of right now, microsoft just passed apple back again anyway so jason mick you can stfu


Its good to see that people these days are learning to express their opinions in an eloquent and technical manner.

I unfortunately, for you did not "stfu", rather I added an update to the piece to reflect some of the additional information raised in this thread. I believe you will find the update to the piece much to your liking.

Ultimately, I know it may anger you that Apple has such a high market cap, but don't lash out at me, take your issue up with the investors that see it fit to value a company with such a lagging operating income so highly.

I feel your pain, I really do, I don't agree with a lot of how Apple has conducted itself as a business lately. And not just from an ethical/consumer protection standpoint -- some of business decisions (like keeping the iPhone AT&T exclusive) have been downright boneheaded.

That said, it is most definitely worth profiling how Apple got to where it is, what its strengths have been, and what its trouble spots are.

Whether Apple is first, second, third, or fourth in terms of the true "biggest" tech company is open to debate, but at the end of the day, it is making massive profits, thanks to the huge margins it enjoys on its electronics. And it has forged monopolies in several key sectors.

That is most certainly worth discussing.


RE: Sigh...
By mcnabney on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh...
By nafhan on 5/27/2010 1:10:35 PM , Rating: 2
Things like mathematical formulas, data from financial reports, or a companies current market cap are facts. Your thoughts on the superiority of a closed device ecosystem are certainly not facts or "truth". Those are opinions. Truth is an interesting term to use. It seems to pop up a lot when opinion and fact get confused.


RE: Sigh...
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 1:15:02 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Your thoughts on the superiority of a closed device ecosystem are certainly not facts
reader1, this guy talks to you! pelase reply :)


RE: Sigh...
By nafhan on 5/27/2010 4:10:23 PM , Rating: 3
reader1's posts are hilarious. I look forward to them! Generally, I'll come back a few hours after an Apple related article comes up just to see what he has to say.
He's very consistent in knowing exactly what to say to upset people. To me, that says he's a lot more intelligent than what you'd think from taking his posts at face value. He's definitely crafted an interesting online persona...


RE: Sigh...
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 4:14:07 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
He's very consistent in knowing exactly what to say to upset people.
He's also very easy to find, which is all the better when you need a few laughs :)

Just follow the red light.


RE: Sigh...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/27/2010 3:40:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Whether Apple is first, second, third, or fourth in terms of the true "biggest" tech company is open to debate


No it's actually a very quantifiable statement. The title of the article sure sounded concrete to me.


RE: Sigh...
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:34:11 PM , Rating: 2
It's quantifiable, but only when looking at only a single set of data. When combining all data, it's all up for debate.

Is like those debates on "What's the deadliest snake?" Is it what snake has the most poison, which poison is more potent, which actually kills more humans, etc.


RE: Sigh...
By sebmel on 5/27/2010 6:16:09 PM , Rating: 2
"Its good to see that people these days are learning to express their opinions in an eloquent and technical manner."

It certainly would be good, if you demonstrated that instead of the trolling, click baiting, and occasional Microsoft cheer leading, you generally indulge in.

"Ultimately, I know it may anger you that Apple has such a high market cap, but don't lash out at me, take your issue up with the investors that see it fit to value a company with such a lagging operating income so highly."

There you go again, Mick. That's not technical, it's stupid. See my other posts for an explanation why. I suspect that you knew the answers, Mick, but you play for the adolescent rants that your post is criticising.

"I feel your pain, I really do..."

Tell us, Mick. That's intelligent? Informed? "Technical"? Take off the Microsoft branded grass skirt, Mick, and prove yourself competent.

"I don't agree with a lot of how Apple has conducted itself as a business lately. And not just from an ethical/consumer protection standpoint -- some of business decisions (like keeping the iPhone AT&T exclusive) have been downright boneheaded."

Now I'm wondering if in fact you really don't understand this stuff. Perhaps you should suggest that your readers head over to DaringFireball for more informed comment than your own.

"it is making massive profits, thanks to the huge margins it enjoys on its electronics. And it has forged monopolies in several key sectors."

As Alice said: "Curiouser and curiouser". you don't understand this stuff at all, do you. Apple has no monopoly, Mick. The general rule of journalism is that journalists need to understand the vocabulary they use. You clearly don't.

Apple's margins are the best in the hardware industry but they are much lower than the software industry's. I've decided your writing is so poor I'm not going to read anymore of it. I suggest that any readers equally disappointed check out Daring Fireball, Slashdot and Ars Technica for more intelligent comment.

Daily Tech in Jason Mick's hands is no more than a contrived red rag to adolescent angst.


RE: Sigh...
By T2k on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Sigh...
By T2k on 5/27/2010 3:09:53 PM , Rating: 2
PS: MSFT pays regular divident, AAPL never. MSFT operates by proper corporate guidelines, APPL is borderline criminal when it comes to corporate governance, let alone JObs' pathetic stock backdating tricks few years ago.


RE: Sigh...
By blamb18 on 5/28/2010 2:39:25 PM , Rating: 2
boy, you're so smart


Anti-trust
By therealnickdanger on 5/27/2010 9:48:36 AM , Rating: 3
With so many restrictions and lawsuits on Microsoft over the years, this isn't exactly shocking. I wonder when the table will turn? Apple is the "big fish" now.




RE: Anti-trust
By quiksilvr on 5/27/2010 9:55:39 AM , Rating: 1
The tables will never turn. Windows and Office are still practically engulfing the entire global market and will continue to do so.

Apple's biggest market is its mp3 and phone division, but thanks to iPhone, we are seeing a vast integration of the two. Furthermore, Android beat OSX in the US just recently. If anyone is going to be turning tables, it's Google and not Apple.


RE: Anti-trust
By reader1 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Anti-trust
By frobizzle on 5/27/2010 10:53:47 AM , Rating: 4
Now, this explains it all!
quote:
I have to agree with you here, reader1. Don't pay attention to all the -1 ratings from your haters, prophets should not care about their rating.

Pirks considers reader1 and himself as profits because they have heard the calling of their lord, Jobs and will follow him to greener pastures where all their wants and needs will be provided to them via their iPads.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Anti-trust
By Anoxanmore on 5/27/2010 11:42:59 AM , Rating: 3
You know, I could correct your grammar and spelling in each post but I won't.

Before you call down someone for their spelling make sure your own is up to par.


RE: Anti-trust
By MamiyaOtaru on 5/27/2010 4:35:23 PM , Rating: 2
please. That was obviously a joke. Your sense of humor is on the same level as your grasp of reality


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Anti-trust
By frobizzle on 5/28/2010 10:22:50 AM , Rating: 2
The funniest thing is your over the top reaction. You really are a loser, aren't you?


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 10:41:08 AM , Rating: 1
clown learned to spell, good. now if he learns to post something besides drivel but I wouldn't hold my breath :)))


RE: Anti-trust
By frobizzle on 5/28/2010 10:57:03 AM , Rating: 2
Uh oh! Now Pirks is going to hold his breath until he turns blue! I think this is an admission that he has the maturity of a six year old!

BTW, Pirk-y, let's try to improve that grammar and again, start using capital letters and punctuation!


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 11:44:32 AM , Rating: 2
stop lying idiot and learn to read, I said I would NOT hold my breath. see word "NOT" now ya mutated ape?


RE: Anti-trust
By frobizzle on 5/28/10, Rating: 0
RE: Anti-trust
By acase on 5/27/2010 11:44:51 AM , Rating: 2
And they placed their two iPads together and Steve Jobs magically appeared in front of them saying, "Now my sons; you have brought the 2 sacred tablets together. I will now bestow upon you 10 commandments for the Apple follower:"


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Anti-trust
By Anoxanmore on 5/27/2010 12:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
Do you and reader1 call Jobs 'daddy'? ;)


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Anti-trust
By Anoxanmore on 5/27/2010 1:57:50 PM , Rating: 2
<insert witty retort referencing your mother>


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Anti-trust
By HoundRogerson on 5/27/2010 4:53:05 PM , Rating: 3
You two should stop inserting things into each other, the others might get the wrong idea :P


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 2:21:10 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, you have a shi1tload of non-Microsoft OS's around (I like Ubuntu the most for now, but PC-BSD and Linux Mint aren't bad either) and Internet is flooded with free non-Windows apps, non-Free too if you want (Xandros OS etc) ;)

And if you want you can buy Windows and run another OS along with it, even inside it. Or you can load another (non-Microsoft/Windows) OS on your computer, or do pretty much whatever you want.

This is totally different from a Microsoft monopoly, I have to disagree with you here, Pirks. Microsoft do not abuse their position with patent lawsuits, incites of hatred and locked down functionality. Continue with your asinine posts, the pair of you. You're both idiots.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 2:55:17 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Except that the pain of using them IS NOTHING LIKE using non-Apple mp3 players
Yeah, cause it's SO hard to double-click the Firefox icon in Ubuntu and do other tasks similarly to those in Windows. You're thinking of configuring them. An entirely different story altogether.

quote:
yeah fuck you too
Calm down, my friend. You're too passionate on the subject.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 3:14:03 PM , Rating: 2
besides configuring there's a question of available software, both of these make experience DRASTICALLY different compared to very similar mp3 players, do you get this now?


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 3:22:12 PM , Rating: 2
It's incomparable. Besides, Most alternative OSs use package managers for software distribution, similar to that of the App Store and Android Market.

This ultimately makes it easy for users to get their hands on software for their operating system, just as they find it easy to do so for their smartphones.

Do you get this now?


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 3:38:49 PM , Rating: 2
if you think it's as easy to download and run any piece of software you want for your average linux distro as to download any kind of music for your mp3 player then we have nothing to discuss further, you'll have to understand distinction between software and music files first

then also think about configuring/installing your linux distro versus configuring/installing win7. might help.


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 3:53:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
if you think it's as easy to download and run any piece of software you want for your average linux distro as to download any kind of music for your mp3 player then we have nothing to discuss further
Going too far into the subject. The subject was consumer choice, not ease of use. Bottom line - Microsoft do not have a stranglehold on the market. Competitors are free to distribute their own OSs (whether that OS is inferior is irrelevant and a matter of opinion).

quote:
then also think about configuring/installing your linux distro versus configuring/installing win7. might help.

To install - Insert CD/DVD > run installation wizard > finish.

To configure - System > select what you want to configure > perform your configurations > done.

Alternatively, you could get a competent professional to perform the installation/configuration for you, just as you would if you were to have your Apple device repaired.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 4:22:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The subject was consumer choice, not ease of use
Sure. Choose between easy to use Windows or very much _not_ easy to use Linux (from the point of view of an average Joe). Versus mp3 players that are all the same, Apple-made or not.
quote:
To configure - System > select what you want to configure > perform your configurations > done
Not very likely in case of Linux. Very likely in case of Windows though. See difference?


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 4:34:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sure. Choose between easy to use Windows or very much _not_ easy to use Linux (from the point of view of an average Joe)
It's very easy to use depending on the distro. Ubuntu is extremely easy to use and requires about the same learning curve as switching from Windows to OSX.

quote:
Not very likely in case of Linux. Very likely in case of Windows though. See difference?
Only if the last Linux distro you installed was about 5 years ago. Try installing and configuring Ubuntu today and get back to me on that one. Then you'll see that there's not really any difference.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 4:49:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's very easy to use depending on the distro
Doesn't solve the problem of missing software on Linux side.
quote:
Then you'll see that there's not really any difference.
What if Linux driver for my piece of hardware does not exist? You know those modern GPUs especially from AMD whose Linux driver support is laughable? Don't pretend Windows and Linux are even remotely equal here.


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 5:07:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Doesn't solve the problem of missing software on Linux side.
That's it, shift onto yet another subject. What missing software? To each piece of Windows software, you will find an alternative for Linux (with the exception of games). It might be inferior, just as you might find an inferior lossy MP3 from another distributor. The bottom line - the choice is still there.

quote:
What if Linux driver for my piece of hardware does not exist? You know those modern GPUs especially from AMD whose Linux driver support is laughable? Don't pretend Windows and Linux are even remotely equal here.
What if it doesn't? We're talking about average Joes here. Most average Joes will be using Intel decellerators and the like, which are fully compatible with Ubuntu. Support for drivers has excelled vastly amongst Linux distros.

In the worst case scenario, it will probably use a generic driver, which will be perfectly adequate for average Joe computing tasks.

Stop delving too far into the topic.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 5:45:08 PM , Rating: 2
You can get better quality music but you can't get better quality software because it doesn't exist.

And with configuration first step for an average Joe is to pick from 1000000 of Linux distros, usually the process ends right there :)


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 7:36:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can get better quality music but you can't get better quality software because it doesn't exist.
Proof?

quote:
1000000 of Linux distros, usually the process ends right there :)
As opposed to picking from 100000 of MP3 players?


RE: Anti-trust
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:45:11 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know how you're going to show proof that quality software that they said doesn't exist, is going to exist. That's just me though.


RE: Anti-trust
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:42:25 PM , Rating: 2
How come OSX isn't on that list? Is OSX too much for your average Joe? Obviously, the consumer has the choice to get a Mac.


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/28/2010 3:30:42 AM , Rating: 2
Right, they do. As well as having the choice of purchasing the Adobe Creative Suite for the Mac, which is considered superior to its Windows counterpart.


RE: Anti-trust
By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2010 10:09:51 PM , Rating: 2
Well, we got Pirks to say Windows was easy to use. I'm calling that a win. Congratulations, it surely was a team effort.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 9:34:43 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Windows was easy to use
Yeah, Windows is easier to use than Linux, cheaper than Mac and has more software than both of these together. So what? You can't find any of my posts that contradict what I just said. Good luck trying, Captain Obvious :o) Congratulate my ass, hahaaa :)))
quote:
How come OSX isn't on that list?
It is, but it's expensive and has less software and appeared only recently, so doesn't count either. Hopefully it matures enough in 5-10 years that Windows share will drop down to 50%, then we all shall stop talking about Windows monopoly. Now it's too early, today Windows is still a monopoly.


RE: Anti-trust
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2010 11:37:07 AM , Rating: 2
Hmmmm, you might be right on that, but IDK. It was either you, Reader1, or Tony Swash that said it. All you guys get rated to -1 pretty fast so you three blend together. I'm not going to look through the myriad of posts to check. I wouldn't be surprised if you did say Mac OS X is easier to use than Windows.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 12:17:09 PM , Rating: 2
ya, Windows is easier than Linux and OS X is easier than Windows, when we talk about average Joe kind of user, you got it right Alex


RE: Anti-trust
By rdeegvainl on 5/28/2010 3:36:21 PM , Rating: 2
You say OSX only appeared recently.... That is quite the laughable claim. It's been around for 8 years. In the tech world that is a VERY long time. When you get a clue, post again.


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 4:27:33 PM , Rating: 2
Crap before 10.5 doesn't count


RE: Anti-trust
By rdeegvainl on 5/29/2010 1:32:38 AM , Rating: 2
Oh, so you get to conveniently ignore that which disagrees with you, AKA reality.
Job's reality distortion field is strong with this one indeed.
I guess you are right, Windows is a total monopoly if you ignore all the competition... Just like apple would be if you did the same.


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/29/2010 5:18:19 AM , Rating: 2
Market dominance != monopoly. Their excuse that Microsoft has a monopoly is due to the failings of other OSs. It's easier to blame Microsoft than it is to blame the others for lesser products.

To say that Microsoft has a monopoly, is to say there are no viable alternatives to Windows. They claim that OSX is superior, yet Microsoft have a monopoly. That alone is a contradiction.

OSX would have a far bigger market share if it was open. Apple's vertical monopoly is what allows Microsoft to have market dominance. The potential to grab market share is there. Better products can exist because Microsoft do not have a stranglehold on the market.

So there you have it. You can blame your precious Apple for Microsoft's so-called "monopoly". If they cared for consumers they wouldn't allow this to happen. Instead they're happy to sit at 5% market share making a stack of money. Because that's what it's all about. Money, and nothing more. Apple are free to do as they please because of Microsoft's non-existent monopoly allows them to be free to do so.

Non-coercive. Non-monopoly.

Granted that if Apple had a monopoly, things would be quite different. Heck, they abuse their position with 5% market share, never mind 90%!


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/29/2010 4:56:30 AM , Rating: 2
What's the difference between crap before 10.5, and 10.5 itself?


RE: Anti-trust
By Pirks on 5/31/2010 1:27:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What's the difference between crap before 10.5, and 10.5 itself?
10.5 at last got basic functionality that XP had for decades like copy pasting file name from the property dialog, hence 10.5 is the version where OS X really became an OS not a POS for pussies
quote:
there are no viable alternatives to Windows. They claim that OSX is superior, yet Microsoft have a monopoly. That alone is a contradiction
Yeah, there are no alternatives for most people since OS X lack of software/hardware choice and high price don't make it a real alternative to Windows. Although technically OS X may be superior to Windows such as much earlier implementation of 3D desktop compositing and lack of idiotic archaic registry, it's still has problems with software and hardware choice. Anyway you should realize that technical superiority means nothing when talking about monopoly. Technically inferior product CAN be a monopoly, why not?
quote:
You can blame your precious Apple for Microsoft's so-called "monopoly"
Yeah, Apple is responsible too for dropping the ball in 90s and allowing MS to grab the whole market but this does not change the fact that Windows is a monopoly.
quote:
they abuse their position with 5% market share
That's some common wintroll bs, not a fact. You may elaborate though and try to prove this, I don't mind


RE: Anti-trust
By themaster08 on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
Markup FTW?
By LedHed on 5/27/2010 11:00:00 AM , Rating: 2
So by charging god awful prices and receiving huge profits makes you a market leader? Rather than a hugely inflated Market cap why not look at percentage of tech industry products.

Take this example, Banana Republic has a larger market cap than Old Navy; however Old Navy has a higher percentage of people actually wearing the clothes.

Since when did charging outlandish prices receive praise?




RE: Markup FTW?
By Steve1981 on 5/27/2010 12:12:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Take this example, Banana Republic has a larger market cap than Old Navy; however Old Navy has a higher percentage of people actually wearing the clothes.


Do you understand what a market cap is? Old Navy and Banana Republic are brands, not corporations. And they're both brands of Gap, Inc.


RE: Markup FTW?
By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2010 10:19:59 PM , Rating: 2
Even so, I think you understand his analogy. You could look at Ferrari/Lambourghini/(insert luxury auto maker here) vs Toyota/GM/Honda if you'd like a more accurate analogy.


RE: Markup FTW?
By Steve1981 on 5/27/2010 10:42:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Even so, I think you understand his analogy


Sure. I mean, does it really take a genius to figure this out:

quote:
receiving huge profits makes you a market leader?


I don't know about you, but I like owning stock in companies that produce a huge profit.


RE: Markup FTW?
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2010 11:40:40 AM , Rating: 2
Well, huge profits are nice if they pay out dividends, but Apple has never done that. Since they don't do that having huge profits isn't as good as it seems. As it's been pointed out already, if you didn't get in on Apple when it was cheap then there isn't much of a reason to get in now.


RE: Markup FTW?
By Steve1981 on 5/28/2010 11:53:04 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, huge profits are nice if they pay out dividends, but Apple has never done that.


Dividends are nice, sure. But lets presume that Apple isn't just stuffing that cash in a really big mattress. Suppose they're actually using the profits to expand and grow their business. That certainly tends to make the stock price go up, which is just fine by investors.

quote:
As it's been pointed out already, if you didn't get in on Apple when it was cheap then there isn't much of a reason to get in now.


Well that depends on what you think the future holds for Apple. Are they at their apex or is their room for them to grow further, thus making your stock more valuable? Jobs presumably believes so, otherwise there isn't much reason to deny shareholders dividends.


RE: Markup FTW?
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2010 2:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
Apple might grow, but they aren't going to grow near as much as they already have. Even if they doubled, which isn't likely, that's still far less than the growth they've already had. It's not that money can't be made, it's just not the best place to make money unless you're already in on it.


RE: Markup FTW?
By Steve1981 on 5/28/2010 2:45:58 PM , Rating: 2
Now we're getting into the world of speculation. I don't have my crystal ball handy, but suffice it to say there are people that would disagree with your assessment.


Simply amazing
By Denigrate on 5/27/2010 11:42:17 AM , Rating: 3
The flaws in this article are so many and so far outside of reality, it's had to address them properly.

Simply put, the author has no understanding of how companies are judged on size in the business world. Even his update fails to demonstrate that he understands that his blog piece is completely wrong.




RE: Simply amazing
By iFX on 5/27/2010 11:53:09 AM , Rating: 2
Well Said!


RE: Simply amazing
By symbiosys on 5/27/2010 7:56:20 PM , Rating: 2
Very well said mate.


making all the blood worthwhile afterall
By blackdogdailo on 5/27/2010 11:03:39 AM , Rating: 2
lucky that compensation in developing country isn't gonna dent the stock price.

Go JOBS! ;)




RE: making all the blood worthwhile afterall
By FaceMaster on 5/27/2010 3:45:43 PM , Rating: 2
You're misinformed and naive if you have the idea that Apple's terrible and that other companies are angels in this area. Why don't they just leave Apple and work elsewhere? Oh- that's right. There IS no where else! Those poor people, having a job when otherwise they wouldn't have. Apple probably treat them the same as other firms do any way. But I wouldn't expect you to understand this stuff.


By blackdogdailo on 5/28/2010 9:13:11 PM , Rating: 2
this kind of attitude is exactly why the evil empire will keep growing and growing and those lucky ones who got a job will keep jumping off the building.

go apple go!! ;)


Of course their market cap is high...
By Motoman on 5/27/2010 10:19:58 AM , Rating: 3
...they've cornered the market on the largest consumer market segment in the world. The gullible.




RE: Of course their market cap is high...
By reader1 on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Of course their market cap is high...
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 2:40:20 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If Apple's customers were all stupid or "sheep", they would be buying products from other companies just as often.

Huh? That's a contradiction in terms.

Sheep follow eachother. The sheep follow Apple. Make sense?


By Motoman on 5/27/2010 3:27:36 PM , Rating: 2
He's retarded. No point in asking him anything that has anything to do with "sense."


Here is how the headline should read.
By 2bdetermine on 5/27/2010 1:27:40 PM , Rating: 2
"Apple deposes Microsoft at the expense of others suffering"




RE: Here is how the headline should read.
By mellomonk on 5/27/2010 4:47:17 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, the average Mac user is anything but 'suffering'.

It seems the only suffering is by the nerds on here who bitch about how superior their points of view are to the evil Apple. At times it is a one note chorus. They expound apon how Apple's number one rating in customer service, and millions of rabid fans are products of the 'reality distortion field'and their users are getting ripped off left and right. It's deja view for this long time user of Macs and PCs. In the mid to late 90s as Apple was circling the drain for trying to out PC the PC, Apple zealots bitched and bemoaned ever business move MS did and talked of how Windoze users where lemmings headed for the cliff. Fanboys on whichever side, are annoying.

Apple folks, I will not say Mac users anymore for their are many Apple fans who don't use the Mac, are by and large very happy and satisfied with their products. Period. It's a walled garden for sure, but a very nice one. You can say it is hype and marketing, but that can only get you so far. Apple has been firing on all cylinders since Steve took control in 98'. By focusing on the user experience, customer service, design, and diversifying into markets where it's strengths make sense, they have built a powerful tech company and brand image. What is wrong with that? Its a case study for business schools.

Personally, I revel in the success of Apple, Google, and Microsoft. I use and enjoy products from each. The only thing I am a fanboy of is seeing American tech companies succeed.


By 2bdetermine on 5/27/2010 10:01:00 PM , Rating: 2
Had you been following news lately regarding foxconn?

I guessed not.


Most valuable CEO
By Funky Santa Clause on 5/27/2010 11:53:29 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah... Steve can go to bank in a cheerful mood to debosit his 1 dollar year salary, after all he earns less than child labours in Foxconn, AMAZING..=)




RE: Most valuable CEO
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:52:34 PM , Rating: 2
Last I checked, those child laborers at Foxconn don't get millions of dollars from their Board of Directors either, unlike Steve Jobs.


Lol what a joke
By dsumanik on 5/27/2010 10:10:48 PM , Rating: 2
This article is retarded, written by an obvious apple fanboy looking to toot a horn... The fact you have to write an article saying yay were bigger than Microsoft says it all.... E peen envy anyone?

If this were true, we would already know it.

All apple has done is design a few products that match well with ikea furniture keeping the goal of making computing easy for the computer illiterate handicapped starbucks drinkers.

The products are good, but not the best...and overpriced. And I'll tell you what every single apple product has systems of control Built into them to

a) corner markets/monopolize
b) steer consumers into further profitability for apple and it's partners
c) limit your fair use and functionality if products and media you PAYED FOR AND OWN.

You would have been Better off licking jobs' balls in a leg humping email... Time to read a new tech site, anand/daily tech has officially hopped aboard the crap train.




RE: Lol what a joke
By icanhascpu on 5/27/2010 10:50:46 PM , Rating: 2
Cry more. If they were really overpriced Apple would not sell products.


Apple Bubble
By torpor on 5/27/2010 10:12:43 AM , Rating: 3
I like to refer to Apple's stock price as the Apple Bubble.

A sane ratio of price to earnings is usually in the low teens. Apple has been hovering around 22.

A lot of internet companies lived in that range in the late 90's. Most of them don't exist today.




By wushuktl on 5/27/2010 11:09:42 AM , Rating: 2
It's easy to make big profits when you'll only settle with absolute rock bottom production costs forcing production line workers (which we can all agree affects Apple WAY MORE than it does Microsoft since most of Apple's revenues are hardware based and most of Microsoft's is software) to work in awful conditions with ridiculous amounts of unpaid overtime.




And the winner is...
By bupkus on 5/27/2010 12:50:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A major reason why Apple has been able to do so boils down to two factors. The first is psychological -- brand image.


quote:
A second key factor is packaging.


I would like to take the opportunity to nominate the "Bupkus" award for Huckster of the Year to Steve Jobs for his unsurpassed efforts in redefining the American entrepreneur.




let's look way back...
By 2bdetermine on 5/27/2010 1:10:09 PM , Rating: 2
We might be looking at a very different picture regarding MP3 market if not for Sony stupidity sticking with it proprietary rubbish format.

Just looked how success it was with it original Casette Walkman.




New revolutionary Apple app
By plowak on 5/28/2010 3:21:49 PM , Rating: 2
the iCroak - a Dr Kevorkian assisted suicide device. plays all the Steven Jobs keynote addresses till the listener escapes blissfully into eternity, while the 10" screen (dia)portrays the smiling face of Barbara Boxer.
Should top iPad in sales.




Apple is a big company...
By descendency on 5/28/2010 4:36:49 PM , Rating: 2
I thought their entire premise was small, light, and sexy. They're just a big fat ugly company though.

Steve Jobs should get working on downsizing his company.




By Ristogod on 5/27/2010 9:57:18 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, and it's customer base is like lambs to the slaughter. Completely unaware of what is to become. I have no doubt though that Apple will continue to be successful as there are plenty more sheep to blindly follow.


By inperfectdarkness on 5/27/2010 3:27:15 PM , Rating: 2
it's clear to me that jobs shares philosophy with PT Barnum....

...and a customer base which mirrors N. Korea's system of government.


By Phoque on 5/27/2010 8:40:09 PM , Rating: 2
That reminds me of the Jesusland in the US. They follow the republicans like sheep.

Or is it the other way around? Hmmm.

Either way, it makes for a degenerative political power to reckon with.


By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2010 10:24:46 PM , Rating: 1
Well, if they make their own web then perhaps they can finally get out of the actual web. I could do without having to see Apple on every web site I go to. I could also do without having to deal with illogical/irrational people like yourself.


Oh my - life is good!
By Tony Swash on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 12:53:59 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Watching my friends and family being disempowered and dispirited by the awful experience of using Windows PCs over the last decade
You're too dramatic Tony, maybe XP was crap, I can't say much here but I have two PCs with Vista and 7 on them with my relatives who don't know computers at all, both machines are rock stable and my relatives enjoy them very much, they watch videos, listen to music, surf the net, use skype video etc etc. Not a single problem in two years. Besides those PCs are small, quiet mATX boxes and very cheap as well, while being ultra fast (dual core 45W athlons inside, 4GB ram, x64 Windows versions, full service ya know :)

So let me take your drama about your poor Windows using friends with a grain of salt. Either these guys are dumber than a dumb bell or something else fishy is going on. More likely they have admin password for their PCs or they use XP without service packs, and they open every email attachment they get. THIS kind of users do suffer from Windows, I agree they should move to Macs ASAP. If you don't know basics about online security - just pay up and don't use cheapo Windows computers. Reasonable thought, agreed 100%.
quote:
Microsoft, having won the browser wars, just sat back and did nothing with its dominance
So what? Other better browsers sprung up, and Windows users didn't suffer at all, we have Opera, FF, Chrome and what not. We have REAL HUUUGE CHOICE, and this is something you Mac guys don't have :P

Please note that unlike your Jobs idol, MS NEVER tried to suffocate independent developers with their Web browsers for example, MS gave them full freedom of development for the platform while Jobs was suffocating them with his mindless "I don't want you damn apps in my store" nazi policy :P

So who's more user friendly in this case, Tony? Some Californian Nazi who doesn't let alternatives and choice for his customers? Or a freedom loving company from Redmond WA? ;)))

P.S. this is for you: http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=18535...


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Tony Swash on 5/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/27/2010 1:27:29 PM , Rating: 1
nah, I'm talking about my post there where I asked you and others to speak up, read my questions there


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2010 10:29:53 PM , Rating: 2
Or you could use the power button..... as I've done for years.

Anyway, I only replied to say that that guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He wants to talk about how Microsoft didn't stifle web browsers..... just wow. I don't even know where to start with that one. I guess he just came out of his rock/cave.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 9:29:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft didn't stifle web browsers
If MS really did stifle web browsers we wouldn't have Chrome, Opera, FF and many other browsers around


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2010 11:44:23 AM , Rating: 2
All of which came out, or at least got big, after the whole MS debacle. I was in no way suggesting they still do that practice, but they did back when IE 6 was out. Just look at how they pushed Netscape out of the picture back then.

Sometimes arguing with you is fun, but when you say stuff like this it's just sad.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 12:41:28 PM , Rating: 2
They killed Netscape by making better free browser, then they sit and did nothing for a while, but they DID NOT stifle competition either, and eventually competition matured to the level where it is now. I have no idea where does you fantasy about MS stifling competition come from. Stifled competition means NO browsers, and we have MANY of them, so go figure.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2010 2:28:23 PM , Rating: 2
Sigh, there is no sense in using logic when talking to you. The fact that it's been documented must mean nothing to you. And your lack of knowledge of English is astounding.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/28/2010 4:31:34 PM , Rating: 2
What's been documented? Show me something. If you can ;)


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Alexstarfire on 5/29/2010 2:17:41 AM , Rating: 2
Well, you could start by reading this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Micr...

I know it's only Wikipedia, but it's a good place to start. You can Google for more links if you want, that's just the first site that popped up.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/31/2010 12:14:50 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, DOJ alleged that MS stifled competition in browser market but all the competing free browsers from Google, Mozilla, Opera and others proved DOJ wrong since then. old news Alex, I thought you'd be able to do better ;)

btw BG was right when he called web browsing a feature, not a product, DOJ was all focked up idiots for stating that idiocy, haha "product" my ass :))) good thing they don't attack MS anymore, must have learned from their epic failure in 90s.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Firebat5 on 5/29/2010 12:54:31 AM , Rating: 2
i never thought i would type this but.... i agree with Pirks... huh, go figure...


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Helbore on 5/27/2010 2:18:38 PM , Rating: 2
I'm confused. Did Pirks just stick up for Microsoft?


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 2:37:53 PM , Rating: 2
He has bi-polar disorder.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oh my - life is good!
By themaster08 on 5/27/2010 2:57:15 PM , Rating: 3
Take your pills and be quiet.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Pirks on 5/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oh my - life is good!
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 10:47:30 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't think XP was crap. I loved XP and still use it. I have a Win7 box, but it's not my main machine.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By Firebat5 on 5/29/2010 12:58:13 AM , Rating: 2
i switched to 7... but i still think xp was a great OS.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By afkrotch on 5/27/2010 9:59:18 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, cause having Apple is so much better. I love how their are almost no games on Apple. Flash runs like a turd on it. If Steve Jobs had his way, I wouldn't get to play my porn games.

All the freedom and choices available on Windows. Ya, I don't want to give that up.


RE: Oh my - life is good!
By rburnham on 6/2/2010 4:01:00 PM , Rating: 2
Windows just allows me to do more things than OSX. I like OSX at work, though.


"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki