or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple market cap tops Microsoft, is now world's largest tech company
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple market cap tops Microsoft, is now world's largest tech company - Page 5

post #161 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Of course. even those who are supposed to be "sophisticated investors", and for those who don't know, that's an official term, legally, get caught in this. Look at the banks and investment firms who got caught buying those products from Goldman Sachs, that were being sold, without telling the investors in them, on the bet that they would go down in value.

Yep, and don't forget the rating agencies, Moodies and Standard and Poors both complicit in this mess.

But as you say, probably due more to ignorance than calculated shenanigans! But either way it all boils down to greed.

When did Wall Street stop being a means to invest in companies and solely try to make money on money?

When did banks stop doing what banks do and become hedge funds? And when did AIG want to be a hedge fund or Porsche for that matter.

Sounds like our hedge funds need hedge funds!
post #162 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Yep, and don't forget the rating agencies, Moodies and Standard and Poors both complicit in this mess.

But as you say, probably due more to ignorance than calculated shenanigans! But either way it all boils down to greed.

When did Wall Street stop being a means to invest in companies and solely try to make money on money?

When did banks stop doing what banks do and become hedge funds? And when did AIG want to be a hedge fund or Porsche for that matter.

Sounds like our hedge funds need hedge funds!

We definitely need regulation of hedge funds and derivatives. There must also be transparency in the investment vehicles, as there is little now. It's like buying a pig in a poke, whatever that means.
post #163 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I know it's so corny to say that Jobs was right, and that it is magical. But it is!

Some people want to focus on what it doesn't (yet) do, or on what it doesn't do as well as we would like. But that really doesn't matter. What it does do, is pretty amazing. Really, sitting down and going on the internet with this as a much more absorbing experience that would be expected. Using a finger here is liberating. It really is.

The screen size, as Goldilocks would say; "It's just right." smaller, and there's not enough reason to use it the way you can. Bigger would be too clumsy and too heavy.

There was a time we were discussing what Apple might come out with in a tablet, and many of us were saying that we wanted a 7" screen, not much bigger than the one from the Newton, so we could keep it on our belt. But, I must admit, this is much more usable.

Hear that Ireland? This is much better!

Lots to agree with you there...just want to say, I've had the first gen. intel iMac, first gen intel Macbook and the first gen iPhone (now a 3Gs) and they are well worth the price of admission! As you say, it's all about the experience and the quality of life (how's that for corny?) But it's true. I am more productive with Apple products in my business life which leaves me not only more time in my private life...but also in a better mood, too! Oh well...i'm probably stating the obvious now!

Best
post #164 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

We definitely need regulation of hedge funds and derivatives. There must also be transparency in the investment vehicles, as there is little now. It's like buying a pig in a poke, whatever that means.

Is it a 'pig in a poke' or a 'pig AND a poke?'

Good chatting with you...but got to get to bed...maybe I can get a 'poke' with my girlfriend! She actually calls me 'Mr. Pokey'

Doubtful, though!

She was out most of the night with her best friend. I never did like that guy!

Just kidding!

Best
post #165 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Google wouldn't, unlike Apple, care that Adobe produces software for several platforms. That's the biggest problem for Apple with this deal. Apple would have been better off buying Macromedia when they put themselves on the block. Then they would own Flash.

Nothing wrong about selling software for Windows. Selling plastic CDs is very lucrative business. Apple would just build [Adobe] software more Mac centered with more features for Mac.

This would make a boost to Apple desktop/laptop sales.
This would also prevent Google from controlling major set of creative software.
This will allow Apple to control Flash destiny.

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #166 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post

Nothing wrong about selling software for Windows. Selling plastic CDs is very lucrative business. Apple would just build [Adobe] software more Mac centered with more features for Mac.

This would make a boost to Apple desktop/laptop sales.
This would also prevent Google from controlling major set of creative software.
This will allow Apple to control Flash destiny.

As I said earlier I like your idea Mercury! But I have to believe Stevo looks at Adobe more as an albatross than good venture. Let Google take it on and make a mess of it and apple continue with
Aperture and god knows what else Apple has up their sleeve.
post #167 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Is it a 'pig in a poke' or a 'pig AND a poke?'

Good chatting with you...but got to get to bed...maybe I can get a 'poke' with my girlfriend! She actually calls me 'Mr. Pokey'

Doubtful, though!

She was out most of the night with her best friend. I never did like that guy!

Just kidding!

Best

Who remembers? That's like the investments, who knows?
post #168 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post

Nothing wrong about selling software for Windows. Selling plastic CDs is very lucrative business. Apple would just build [Adobe] software more Mac centered with more features for Mac.

This would make a boost to Apple desktop/laptop sales.
This would also prevent Google from controlling major set of creative software.
This will allow Apple to control Flash destiny.

I don't think Apple wants to sell Windows software anymore. Safari is different, they're really giving away enabling software, like with itunes. But those help to sell Macs and other Apple hardware. Selling CS5 to Windows customers (60% of that market) isn't what Apple wants to do.

Do you remember Appleworks? It was cross platform. When Apple had a majority share in education they sold it for PC's. When they discontinued it for iWork, they dropped the cross platform capabilities. So what happened? Here in the NY public school system, everything moved over to the Office Student/teacher Edition. And Apple didn't care!
post #169 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Who remembers? That's like the investments, who knows?

Yep, I was right, no luck with her tonight!

later

Best
post #170 of 237
Yeap, but the ms courrier and these prototype mice that moronic site engadget "leaked" will put ms right on the map in no time.

Balmer is a marketing genius, and an innovation guru. You look at this guy having more money than the gdp of some eurozone countries, and you wonder, how did this incompetent fat f. get there? It's an accomplishment to his cretin, oh sorry, slip of the tongue, I mean credit.

And let's not forget google, and all the companies they've bought, they have the potential to burn every single one of them.

Apple is doomed for sure.
post #171 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

As I said earlier I like your idea Mercury! But I have to believe Stevo looks at Adobe more as an albatross than good venture. Let Google take it on and make a mess of it and apple continue with
Aperture and god knows what else Apple has up their sleeve.

I agree, but for now Apple can't match Adobe portfolio of professional creative software. Besides taking over Adobe Apple would control Windows market of creative software which would boost Mac hardware business:

Dreamweaver CS5
Fireworks CS5
Device Central CS5
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5
After Effects CS5
Photoshop CS5 Extended
Illustrator CS5
Soundbooth CS5
Encore CS5
Bridge CS5
Dynamic Link
Photoshop CS5 Extended
InDesign CS5
Acrobat 9 Pro
Flash Catalyst CS5
Flash Professional CS5
Flash Builder 4
Dreamweaver CS5
Fireworks CS5
Contribute CS5
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5
Adobe OnLocation CS5

Plus Adobe owns Flash/Flex/Air and PDF technologies. Integrate it with QuickTime and you would have some interesting products including for iPod.

I believe Adobe market cap will drop further to 10-12 billion making it a very attractive target for acquisition by Apple or Google.

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #172 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't think Apple wants to sell Windows software anymore. Safari is different, they're really giving away enabling software, like with itunes. But those help to sell Macs and other Apple hardware. Selling CS5 to Windows customers (60% of that market) isn't what Apple wants to do.

Do you remember Appleworks? It was cross platform. When Apple had a majority share in education they sold it for PC's. When they discontinued it for iWork, they dropped the cross platform capabilities. So what happened? Here in the NY public school system, everything moved over to the Office Student/teacher Edition. And Apple didn't care!

Sure, Apple could gradually stop selling [adobe] Windows software forcing all creative pros to buy Macs since on PC side there is currently no good alternative to Photoshop, ILL, DreemW, Flash, Acrobat Pro.

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #173 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post

Sure, Apple could gradually stop selling [adobe] Windows software forcing all creative pros to buy Macs since on PC side there is currently no good alternative to Photoshop, ILL, DreemW, Flash, Acrobat Pro.

That would be tough. You can do this when you buy one program, as Apple did with Logic, but to do it with every program in the catalog would simply engender too much bad will.

It would also destroy the value of the purchase of Adobe. It would result in a drop of Apple's market value. Overall, not a great idea.
post #174 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Early gadflies' SWAG estimates of 2010 tablet sales were mostly:

Total 10.5 million units total, with iPad sales at 5 million units

I joked that it would be more like iPads = 10 million, everyone else = .5 million.


Today, we know:

Apple has sold 1 million + iPads

Apple cannot keep iPads in stock

Apple is producing 1.5 million iPads a month (est.)

In September Apple will ramp up production to 2.5 million Pads a month (est.)

Lets be conservative:

Code:


. 2 Million iPads sold thru Jun Q 2010
+ 3 Million iPads sold thru Sep Q 2010
+ 5 Million iPads sold thru Dec Q 2010
----------------------------------
=10 Million iPads sold through YE 2010



That's what I'm talkin' about!


.

OK. I'm feeling pretty smug at the moment, since I called 10 Million iPads sold in YE '10 immediately when it was announced... regardless of it's "missing features".

I fully expect the 3rd and 4th Q's demand to far exceed supply... but Apple will surely sell 10Mil. Sept./Oct. is when I plan on buying the 3 for my family. OS 4 is gonna get a lot of kinks out, and add some great new features: "I/You/We won't be disappointed"

If you're a shareholder as I am, it's a doubly pleasant situation for the Holidays.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #175 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel001 View Post

Steve Jobs must be over the moon. Only a deluded halfwit would have thought this possible in the late nineties.

Well, thanks!
post #176 of 237
One area where Apple badly lags Microsoft (and IBM and probably more than a few other tech companies) is investment in basic research. For many years it probably made sense to run lean in order to insure that Apple had a future. But tech companies like Bell Labs and IBM made Nobel prize level contributions to society. Now that Apple has performed so well I hope they do more than just product development. When Jobs was recruiting Sculley he asked him if he wanted to spend the rest of his life selling sugar water to kids (he was a rising executive at Pepsi). I guess the question now might be if Apple's ambitions are beyond selling media devices to kids.
post #177 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Heh! The first time I ever waited in line to get an Apple (or any other) product. Happy I did too!

Even in its first incarnation, it's an amazing device.

When I first told my daughter, the photo major, that Apple was coming out with a tablet, she asked if it would replace her Wacom. Well, I told her that it wasn't that kind of tablet.

But you know, it is! A small company just came out with software (Air Display), an app on the tablet, and software for the computer, that allows the iPad to be used as a second monitor. You can mirror, or extend. What is so amazing about this is that it responds to touch!!! Yes, not everything responds, as would be expected, but much does. I found that with Photoshop (CS5) and the pogo stylus, you can work on the image from the tablet, just as you can from your main screen. If you keep a full image on the main screen, and a smaller window of a magnified section on the iPad, you can work on that. Yes, it's a bit slow, and jerky right now. The software is ver 1.0, and so is the iPad. But that's the speed we had a few years ago on our higher end machines, so I'm not concerned.

The point is; it WORKS!

The iPad is very well worth waiting for. I'm finding more amazing stuff all the time for this. The cynics who say it's only good for consuming content are so very wrong.

Ohhh....

OMG, Thanks for posting that (Air Display)... I didn't see any announcement fot it.

When the Apple Tablet was only a rumor, I dreamed that it might be used as a co-peripheral to a Desktop Mac. I posted this to AI and some other forums (see below).

I bought the app and have used it successfully" with Photoshop, Steam, Pages, and FCS Motion.

* Performance is surprisingly good, though the dueling UIs are a little difficult to get used to.


... now, we have these 2 iPads...



Seriously, this is something that Adobe and Apple, AutoDesk and Apple, etc. should work together to co-implement. I was not planning to upgrade to CS5, but I would if they had a good implementation of an iPad co-peripheral UI.

Dick

Here's part of a post I made to TUAW last December:

http://www.tuaw.com/2009/12/18/tuaw-...al-apple-tabl/

Quote:
Below are some more techie thoughts (wishes).


Dick


* Tablet can be used as a co-peripheral with a desktop/laptop:
-- tablet gets a larger screen (optional mouse, kb, scanner, etc)
-- the desktop/laptop gets touch I/O & multiple virtual kbs

Drag and drop is similar to using a computer with 2 displays

* Tablet can use finger-touch and/or BT pressure-sensitive stylus i.e. graphics tablet

* Tablet could have touch-sensitive back-- use as split full KB and cursor, with optional Heads Up kb/cursor displayed on front

* iWork/iLife reworked to run on tablet and tablet/computer co-peripheral

iWork/iLife available for Windows PCs

One potential market is "Slim Client" for large percentage of PC & Mac install base that do not do heavy computing:

-- office cubicle-dwellers running web-like apps to feed data to/from a LAN/WAN;
-- homies who surf, schedule & stay in touch, play a few games, do the iLife stuff
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #178 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I know it's so corny to say that Jobs was right, and that it is magical. But it is!

Some people want to focus on what it doesn't (yet) do, or on what it doesn't do as well as we would like. But that really doesn't matter. What it does do, is pretty amazing. Really, sitting down and going on the internet with this as a much more absorbing experience that would be expected. Using a finger here is liberating. It really is.

The screen size, as Goldilocks would say; "It's just right." smaller, and there's not enough reason to use it the way you can. Bigger would be too clumsy and too heavy.

There was a time we were discussing what Apple might come out with in a tablet, and many of us were saying that we wanted a 7" screen, not much bigger than the one from the Newton, so we could keep it on our belt. But, I must admit, this is much more usable.

Hear that Ireland? This is much better!

...what the iPad doesn't do:

-- it doesn't make you wait
-- it doesn't confuse you
-- it doesn't get in the way, between you and your stuff

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #179 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

OK. I'm feeling pretty smug at the moment, since I called 10 Million iPads sold in YE '10 immediately when it was announced... regardless of it's "missing features".

I fully expect the 3rd and 4th Q's demand to far exceed supply... but Apple will surely sell 10Mil. Sept./Oct. is when I plan on buying the 3 for my family. OS 4 is gonna get a lot of kinks out, and add some great new features: "I/You/We won't be disappointed"

If you're a shareholder as I am, it's a doubly pleasant situation for the Holidays.

Yes, long AAPL.

Well, I'll take your 10 million iPads and raise it....



Lets not be conservative:

Code:


. 3.5 Million iPads sold thru Jun Q 2010
+ 4.5 Million iPads sold thru Sep Q 2010
+ 7.5 Million iPads sold thru Dec Q 2010
----------------------------------
=15.5 Million iPads sold through YE 2010




The killer iPad app: whatever you've always wanted [a computer] to do, but have never been able to do it, before [sic]!

oh... I'm getting dizzy[er]!


.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #180 of 237
I'm half expecting Steve Ballmer saying that those figures are "a rounding error"
post #181 of 237
This is very odd..

I am running Air Display, mirroring the display of an iMac 17" (Developer System),

What it illustrates in spades, is that a desktop OS on a tablet is a complete fail... All those nay-sayers insisting that an Apple tablet needs a "proper" OS (desktop OS X), were/are so wrong.

iPhone OS X (better, Mobile OS X) is not yet perfect, but it sure outshines a desktop OS for this class of device!

SJ is soo right!

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #182 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Oh didgit, You have hit the nail on the head, so to speak. I can't tell you how many times I've heard, 'we are losing losing money on every item we sell...only to hear, that's OK, we'll make it up on volume!' It's such a short sighted business model, as you say, a la GM!

The "losing money on every item" isn't the GM theory... it's the pets.com theory.

Having loss leaders to bring in sales on other stuff...there's another very large corporation that goes with that - Wal-Mart. It seems to work quite well for them.
post #183 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

it's not semantics. You can't interchange terms when largest is being applied to the market cap. Apple's market cap is larger therefore it must be, by definition, the most valuable. There is no ambiguity in the article about what "largest" refers to .

It IS semantics. Bloomberg knows to phrase things correctly:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...pWQ&refer=home

Note where they say in the headline "most valuable" They don't say "world's biggest."

Or better yet this: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/18/...2000_Rank.html

Berkshire Hathaway has a market value of $122 billion.
Toyota has a market value of $102 billion.

Toyota has higher income, higher profits and higher assets.

Would you SERIOUSLY argue that Berkshire Hathaway is a LARGER company in your headline? Seriously?
post #184 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

... But my feeling about this has been that Google doesn't care. Google makes 95% of its income, both gross and net, from advertising. They aren't, despite what most people think, primarily a search company. That's not their business. They are an Ad placement company. Their search function is just there for the purpose of making money from Ads. The better the search, the more Ads they get.

Actually, they aren't primarily an advertising company either, they are primary an information collection and control company. Advertising is but one application of the information they collect on individuals. So, yes, they don't care if they make any money directly with Android, or gmail, or gdocs, or any other gservice. It's all about collecting more and more personal information, which, among other things, may be used for targeting ads. This is why they can dump these products on the market below production costs, undermining competitors, while at the same time increasing their information collection and control capabilities.

Of course, one advantage of their dominance in search is that it gives them tremendous ability to control and manipulate information access, which, again, they use to funnel money to their bottom line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

I consider the reluctance of Google to immerse into more active coordination of the Android project and its reluctance to invest in the infrastructure (not just the software) as a major stumbling in the development of the Android, as a more effective system, as much as the Apple integrated ecosystem it has built with the iPhone OS.

They may think that the fragmentation of Android actually serves them best. They don't actually care how good it is, or how good the user experience is. What they want is for Android to win, or do very well in, the checkbox wars, so that it looks like it outfeatures other phones and attracts users on that basis. However, since they want to create the appearance of a separation between themselves and the android ecosystem (this promotes the illusion of openness, among other things) they can't actually overtly control it like Apple does, and it would not suit their interests for any one handset maker to become the predominant supplier of Android handsets, as this could result in Google loosing some degree of control of Android.

So, what serves their interest best is to create this state of confusion and fragmentation in the Android universe by alternating latest features and releases among various handset makers, allowing no one to get the upper hand.
post #185 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Your data is different from Google Finance. Do you really think that is Wolfram|Alpha is the best choice without backing it up or noticing that the latest trades data is recent but the other areas are based on older data? Or how about reading what AI and other tech and finance sites are measuring?
http://www.google.com/finance?q=aapl+msft

* Market Cap (currently) Apple just ahead of MS (fluctuates daily, but trend is certainly in Apple's favour)

* Market Cap is based on investor confidence & market coditions (and can chanfe rapidly and dramatically) - Apple has the tail wind of strong recent performance with great profit growth and continued storng product introductions. That said, it's also exposed (just as Microsoft is) to competitors - notably Google in Phones (where Google is gaining ground on Apple fast)

*In terms of Profit - Microsoftt is STILL more profitable than Apple, both in Margin ($ on sales after costs) and in terms of total profit (having a higher Market Cap doe not equal higher profitability)

* R&D investmenr - Microsoft is still the lager (that's not as visable to most consumers bacuase much of Microsofts business is in Enterprise & servier technology that is not 'headline' consumer press material.

In terms of breadth of Customer base & range of products, Microsoft has a clear lead, Apple is highly sucessful in a few core markets (iPhone being it's number 1 now), but remains exposed by only haveing a few business lines & key products (one of the reasons they are so profitable as a HW company).

in short - for those of use with more interest in the reality of the technology industry (rather than name calling) it's a very interesting time, where Apple, Microsoft and Google are locked in many major battles for different markets - some for share at no revenue (Google = free software and services as long as you click their advertising), some for premium margins driven by high prices on few products (Apple), and others (Microsoft) via broad market share, using lower pricing, and licencing software to a many different markets (business, consumer, etc).
post #186 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsftMacMan View Post

R&D investmenr - Microsoft is still the lager

R&D investment, as a number, is probably the most meaningless stat that's been mentioned in this discussion. It's easy to throw away tons of money on "R&D", so, as a number, is it contributing anything to the future bottom line, or simply draining from the present? There's no way to tell from the number alone.
post #187 of 237
I for one welcome our Apple overlords...
post #188 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzExige View Post


AI's mention of PE ratios is really quite pointless (BTW a higher PE sort of indicates 'over-valued'), why? Amazon's PE is 55!

A stock with a high P/E ratio may or may not be overvalued. Investors accept higher ratios if they think that the earnings will (continue to) grow quickly .

The value of a stock can be calculated many ways, but one way is to compare price not to static earnings, but rather, to earnings growth. This is called the PEG Ratio, and some folks think it is a better than a static P/E as an indication of whether a stock is cheap or expensive.
post #189 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

This happened faster than I expected,


Didn't it take the better part of 30 years?
post #190 of 237
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



Stop sensationalizing.
post #191 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

As long as other people are free to innovate no monopoly is safe. The government should remember this next time they embark on their next antitrust case.


Monopolies often erect barriers to entry into a market to preserve their status. This reduces other people's freedom to innovate. It is a major factor in antitrust analysis.
post #192 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

Didn't it take the better part of 30 years?

One article on this I read said that the last time AAPL had a higher market value than MSFT was in 1989, so really it's more like 20 years. This sounds about right, considering that in the late '80s Apple wasn't doing tremendously well and Microsoft was entering into their fastest growth phase.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #193 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

So where are we? Only the iPhone and Android based phones are showing smartphone growth.


Conclusions cannot be more reliable than the data they are based upon.

May 19 (Bloomberg) -- Smartphone manufacturers sales rose the most in four years during the first quarter as Research in Motion Ltd., Apple Inc. and makers of Android-equipped phones extended gains, market-research company Gartner Inc. said.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...-update1-.html
post #194 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

And with MS on the ropes,

Reality check: Microsoft is nowhere near being "on the ropes".
post #195 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

Reality check: Microsoft is nowhere near being "on the ropes".

Maybe not, but they are within the vicinity of the canvas...
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #196 of 237
and again:

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


Stop sensationalizing. Still a huge gap.
post #197 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by gescom View Post

and again:

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


Stop sensationalizing. Still a huge gap.

This article is about valuation, not about any of the other areas you mention, which are all out of date, by the way. Each one of those areas will be a milestone achievement, just like with the company that will eventually overtake Apple. You can hate on Apple all you want and ignore the facts of the article, but at the end of the day Apple is most valuable tech company in the world and is (based on current trends) likely to be the most valuable company in the world in short order.


PS: I have no idea why these asshats are so offended that Apple has achieved a goal and broke a record. We're they also on tech blogs saying how Google's victory was nothing when they bested Apple's valuation? I'd like to round these people up and make them learn the basics of economics and logic.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #198 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdbryan View Post

One area where Apple badly lags Microsoft (and IBM and probably more than a few other tech companies) is investment in basic research. For many years it probably made sense to run lean in order to insure that Apple had a future. But tech companies like Bell Labs and IBM made Nobel prize level contributions to society. Now that Apple has performed so well I hope they do more than just product development. When Jobs was recruiting Sculley he asked him if he wanted to spend the rest of his life selling sugar water to kids (he was a rising executive at Pepsi). I guess the question now might be if Apple's ambitions are beyond selling media devices to kids.

Oh, yes. And we can see how much money those Nobel prizes have earned.

It is rare that a Nobel prize discovery turns into revenues in a reasonable investment timeline. I'd rather have Apple focus on creating super consumer products than researching the color of the up quark.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tipoo View Post

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

Stop sensationalizing.

Fortunately, most of the investing public is smarter than you.

Would you rather have $39 billion of equity that's growing at 3% per year or $32 billion of equity growing at 25% per year? Basing your company valuation solely on assets on hand is a huge mistake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

I would not be surprised if China would eventually overtake the US, economically. They may rely on Western technology right now, but like Japan, they will evolve their own local technology. It is not simply cheap and plentiful labor that attract many Western companies to China.

So THAT explains why Japan passed us in the 80's. Oh, wait.

You're mistaken about why Western companies go to China for manufacturing. It IS the cost of labor - nearly entirely. Every company that I know of that that is doing business in China is doing it solely on the basis of labor costs.

There are companies trying to sell in China, but that is almost entirely on the basis of the huge population.

I can't think of a single company that is doing business in China to gain access to their 'superior' technology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smurfman View Post

I STILL can't find an iPad 3G anywhere! Anyone know where I could get one online for the regular price?? It's selling on Amazon for $200-300 more than retail!

www.apple.com. Click on the tab labeled 'store'.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #199 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That would be tough. You can do this when you buy one program, as Apple did with Logic, but to do it with every program in the catalog would simply engender too much bad will. It would also destroy the value of the purchase of Adobe. It would result in a drop of Apple's market value. Overall, not a great idea.

It would not destroy value of the purchase. Key Adobe products have no alternative on the market, so pro Windows users of Adobe products would have to migrate to Mac. Now they would have to buy both Apple hardware and Apple software. The loss of Windows soft revenue would be compensated by gain in Apple soft/hardware revenue. Ownership of Flash and PDF technologies would also make Apple even bigger player.

Imagine, instead of this scenario Google buys Adobe. Imagine, Google now owns Flash and PDF, then Google ports complete Adobe Creative suite to its Chrome OS, making it secondary for other platforms, gradually decreasing support.

Which scenario do you like more?

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #200 of 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsftMacMan View Post

* R&D investmenr - Microsoft is still the lager (that's not as visable to most consumers bacuase much of Microsofts business is in Enterprise & servier technology that is not 'headline' consumer press material.

That's right. Microsoft sells plastic disks which cost pennies to burn. Lately even there are no disks at all - just download. MS basically sells air.

Apple on the other hand sells hardware. It's labor intensive, it requires high quality components, inventory, transpiration. Even if Apple sells millions of iPads and iPhones, it would probably impossible for them to match Microsoft profit margins.

BTW acquisition of Adobe who also sells air would actually diversify Apple business in addition to other strategic benefits.

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple market cap tops Microsoft, is now world's largest tech company