or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple may make more profit selling one Mac than HP does from 7 PCs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple may make more profit selling one Mac than HP does from 7 PCs - Page 3

post #81 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by bettieblue View Post

That "blog post" was written by a 15 year old.

It compares Apple to a single Windows PC vendor. Compare it to all of them and see if volume ends up making more money?

Writing a blog post off of another blog post written by a 15 year old makes the "AI staff" look like a collection of Morons.

Can you provide a link to your blog? I'm always looking for creative and interesting stuff to read!

Also, it's much easier to criticize writing you consider to be mediocre than it is to actually, you know, write better! Which is just a wordy way of saying, "Oh yeah? What you got??"
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #82 of 188
deleted
post #83 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Yes. Apple sells more and more of them EVERY. FREAKING. QUARTER., so they're OBVIOUSLY too expensive.

It couldn't possibly be because of their higher quality, better software, and ease of use. No, they sell a lot of them (and they sell MORE lots-of-them every year) because they're "too expensive".

chillout fanboi, all he said was that they're expensive, which for a computer, they are.
post #84 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Intel - gross margin of 8billion and operating income of 4.3 billion for the last quarter. That would be less.
Marvel? The comic firm? Are you on drugs?

Nah, he's correct.

INTC's operating margin is 35.30%, net profit is 26.39%. Apple's figures are 29.02% and 22.36% respectively.

He's referring to Marvell Technology (note spelling). MVRL's figures are 23.72% and 23.75% respectively.
post #85 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

This only shows how Apple makes their products too expensive.

Funny. Too expensive in my book means that I can go into a store and get help when I need it and that it lasts and holds it's value, something that HP has not done. My guess is that in the long run, Apple products are actually less expensive.
post #86 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilogic View Post

chillout fanboi

Ooh, struck down by your rapier wit and debating skills... How shall I ever counter? "Chill out" is a phrase with two words, by the way.

Quote:
all he said was that they're expensive, which for a computer, they are.

So buy something from someone else. In the meantime, you can look up the definition of "too expensive" and perhaps you'll understand how horribly wrong you both are.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #87 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations View Post

As a Stockholder, I am happy.

As a customer, I feel ripped off.

In the end, it is all about perceived value. We bought these Apple Products because we thought it was a good deal.

As a stockholder I'm happy.

As a customer/owner, I'm happy.

In the last 10 years, I've owned three Macs (iBook>17" Powerbook G4>13" MacBook). In those 10 years, I've spent $100 on repairshad to replace the superdrive on my PBG4. In those same 10 years, my parents (who never got on the Mac bandwagon) have owned about five or six PCs, and have spent on average, $500-$600 per year on repairs & servicing of those PCs.

I do not feel ripped off.

Every time I hear my friends or family complain about their Windows machine crashing or misbehaving, I wanna hug my MacBook.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #88 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Nah, he's correct.

INTC's operating margin is 35.30%, net profit is 26.39%. Apple's figures are 29.02% and 22.36% respectively.

He's referring to Marvell Technology (note spelling). MVRL's figures are 23.72% and 23.75% respectively.

That's not what he said, he said

Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

The gross profit is wrong on apple stuff.
Other companies have larger gross profit then Apple: Marvel, Intel and so on.
And of course, there are companies whit less gross profit: AMD, HP and so on.

Gross Profits != Net Profit Margin.

Net profit Margin = (Net Income / Revenue) x100
Gross Profits = Revenue - Cost of Sales.

They're about as different as different can be. Given that he's attempting to school us all on how to read a balance sheet and has absolutely no clue about it I'm not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
post #89 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

This only shows how Apple makes their products too expensive.


No, it only shows Apple doesn't make the other 6 PCs that brought HP little to no profit.
post #90 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

Funny. Too expensive in my book means that I can go into a store and get help when I need it and that it lasts and holds it's value, something that HP has not done. My guess is that in the long run, Apple products are actually less expensive.

Correct.

Value is not just adding up all the technical specifications. Apple is at the top of every single PC customer satisfaction survey. If the people who think that Macs (or iPhones, iPads, etc.) are overpriced, why aren't they any happier having saved all that money?

Half of all computers being sold at Apple's retail stores are going to first-time Mac buyers. It's not a "fanboi" phenomenon.
post #91 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoebetech View Post

That's not their niche. Apple is more interested in being a quality leader whatever form that may be....

This means they are not interested in selling their products to the poor or the underprivileged which is most likely why they never donate any of their profits.

Maybe try doing a little research before you make such an assumption. Also, many years ago, I managed a computer lab in a community center for the poor and underprivileged—using computers DONATED by Apple.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #92 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

This only shows how Apple makes their products too expensive.

Thats what a primitive mind might think.
What it really shows is that Apple makes a product that people actually want.

As opposed the other market strategy that rules the pc world- if we make it cheap enough maybe someone will buy it.
post #93 of 188
I think MACs are great because Apple makes it easy for anyone to use but for a price....how about those who can't afford Apple's price premium? It is why you'll still see Windows operated PC's and usually those who buy these computers aren't really tech savvy and can't afford to get training. I wish there were more suppliers that sold Ubutu PC's for those who can't Apples. You'd probably see less PC crashes.
post #94 of 188
Apple's products are not too expensive.

Anybody who says so most likely looks like this:

post #95 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post

Maybe try doing a little research before you make such an assumption. Also, many years ago, I managed a computer lab in a community center for the poor and underprivilegedusing computers DONATED by Apple.

Apple is well known to have very deep pockets and short arms...as is most of Silicon Valley and with very few exceptions.....
post #96 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoebetech View Post

Apple is well known to have very deep pockets and short arms...as is most of Silicon Valley and with very few exceptions.....

Corporate philanthropy is a contradiction in terms. It is management giving somebody else's money away. If Apple's owners want to donate they can easily do so themselves.
post #97 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Corporate philanthropy is a contradiction in terms. It is management giving somebody else's money away. If Apple's owners want to donate they can easily do so themselves.

wow that's a response Sarah Palin or Ron Paul would make....very laissez-faire!
post #98 of 188
deleted
post #99 of 188
deleted
post #100 of 188
deleted
post #101 of 188
deleted
post #102 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Those margins you're looking at are mostly hardware markup.

What's interesting is that MS made around 2.7bn last quarter off of windows. So given that HP is around 20% of the market that implies that they made about as much off of HPs sales as HP did.

Or to put it another way, Apple made 3.5x per unit what HP&MS made combined.
post #103 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

That assumes that the buyer runs Windows. About 30 million of us run Linux on our HP and Dell boxes.

I haven't bought a PC in years, don't they still charge you for windows regardless?
post #104 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Indeed they can, or not, as they choose:
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/com.../2006/01/70072

That story is absurd and 5 years old. Bill gates was very private about his own charity until Ted Turner started calling him out. We eventually learned that gates had already donated more then Turners net worth.

We have no idea how much Jobs does or does not I've to charity. I would guess it is more then 1000x the total giving of everyone who has posted on this thread, but it could just as easily be nothing. Maybe he gives 25% of his salary ( a quarter).

I know some people care. They like to make make investment and purchasing decisions that include personal charity of the CEOs. Most peole don't care.

What any of this has to do with the relationship between MAC and PC profits is beyond me. Bill Gates net worth is still increasing, yes his philanthropy is likely unmatched, but it is silly to say he is giving all his money away. He is still worth roughly 7 times what Jobs is. He still lives in his 30 million dollar house. Some of you make it sound like he handed all his money over to the foundation, packed up his shopping cart and found a comfy freeway overpass...
post #105 of 188
deleted
post #106 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

This only shows how Apple makes their products too expensive.

What price can you put on being able to call support in the US and get through to someone who actually speaks English as a first language. Or to get something expeditiosly repaired or replaced if something does go wrong. Or to have a place where you can take your equipment to have it looked at. Or just to have a place where you can go and talk to an actual person in person about a problem.

Yeah, their equipment is way to expensive. I am sure that is why their sales growth keeps going up even in the middle of a downturn. I could go out and buy that $650 HP but sometimes the old adage "you get what you pay for" actually means something
post #107 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations View Post

As a Stockholder, I am happy.

As a customer, I feel ripped off.

In the end, it is all about perceived value. We bought these Apple Products because we thought it was a good deal.

Exactly. Love what it's doing for the stock price. I really like the Apple products I have so far (iPod, iPad, iPhone). I need a new PC, and am strongly considering an iMac, but dang I just don't want to spend that much. Have to decide if the premium is worth it...
post #108 of 188
deleted
post #109 of 188
What any of this has to do with the relationship between MAC and PC profits is beyond me. Bill Gates net worth is still increasing, yes his philanthropy is likely unmatched, but it is silly to say he is giving all his money away. He is still worth roughly 7 times what Jobs is. He still lives in his 30 million dollar house. Some of you make it sound like he handed all his money over to the foundation, packed up his shopping cart and found a comfy freeway overpass...[/QUOTE]


In a recent interview, Bill stated that once he and Melinda passes, he is giving most of his money away. A portion will go to his children in order to get educated but they are basically on their own after that! The rest is going to his foundation or charities!
post #110 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by winstein2010 View Post

HP is giving away computers so it can get its profit from selling services, accessories, software, and inks and toners.

Erm, no it's not.

HP have to sell at the price they sell at because otherwise they would get undercut by everyone else. HP are/were in a race to the bottom. They are now at the bottom.

Apple have a very unique selling point in OSX. It is OSX that makes a Mac what it is.

(The excellent designs of cases etc is just a bonus.)
post #111 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Corporate philanthropy is a contradiction in terms. It is management giving somebody else's money away. If Apple's owners want to donate they can easily do so themselves.

Well, there's this. But, I guess if you want to find reasons to believe that people are evil and greedy, you can prolly find plenty of evidence to support your belief. In general, people tend to find what they're looking for.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #112 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post

Well, there's this. But, I guess if you want to find reasons to believe that people are evil and greedy, you can prolly find plenty of evidence to support your belief. In general, people tend to find what they're looking for.

I never said that people were evil and greedy, I said that corporations cannot be philanthropic. Corporations are not people. People who work for corporations can be philanthropes, and people who own corporations or large stakes can be philanthropes. But corporations cannot be. Clearly you found in my post exactly what you were looking for.
post #113 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoebetech View Post

Apple is well known to have very deep pockets and short arms...as is most of Silicon Valley and with very few exceptions.....

So what's your point, that Apple's greedy? That Apple's evil?

As I said to another poster, it's easy to point fingers and criticize another person's behavioreven (or especially!) if you don't really know or understand their behavior. It's much more noble to actually try and practice the kind of behavior you'd like to see in others. I.e., I don't know you, so I don't know if your a generous, ethical person, or if you're a greedy bastard or if you like to torture kittens, so I'm not gonna judge you. But I know myself pretty well, so I try to be the best person I can be. Some days I'm a better person than other daysbut I never presume that I'm a better person than anyone else.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #114 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post

Well, there's this. But, I guess if you want to find reasons to believe that people are evil and greedy, you can prolly find plenty of evidence to support your belief. In general, people tend to find what they're looking for.

For all I know all of those donations could have gone to the Church of Scientology which still qualifies for 501c! I wish there were more details.
post #115 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

Actually it means exactly that. The only judgement of whether something is priced fairly is whether a buyer and a seller agree on the transaction. Macs are too expensive for much of the market, but fairly priced for another part of the market.

BMWs are fairly priced, Hondas are fairly priced, scooters are fairly priced. They are all means of conveyance, priced very differently, but all fair.

+1
Nobody held a gun to my head to buy Macs ( currently 8 in the two households). It was a fair price for the quality. Time is money to me -- so no Windows plastic cheepo for me.
post #116 of 188
Quote:
Republishing online work without consent and wrapping it in ads is often called "feed scraping."...

http://twitter.com/#!/hotdogsladies/status/1465570303

I quote Mr. Mann because I think this post crossed a line.

Gruber got it right: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/06/24/richman. The brevity of his quote intends to pique a reader's interest enough to read the original story at Richman's site.

You've basically copy-pasted or slightly re-worded the original article in its entirety, strongly encouraging AI readers to land on this site, read the re-blog, hopefully click and ad or two, then done.

Some would say that linking to his site at all is throwing him a bone, but obviously, I don't concur.
post #117 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

I never said that people were evil and greedy, I said that corporations cannot be philanthropic. Corporations are not people. People who work for corporations can be philanthropes, and people who own corporations or large stakes can be philanthropes. But corporations cannot be.

Actually, that's not quite true. But I admit we're kinda talking past each other here, and I also admit that I'm kinda splitting hairs (just for fun though!!)

I think I was responding more to the tone of your comment than anything else. I'm not a fan of cynicism*. By which, I mean, I don't think it's appropriate to make negative assumptions about a company or individual. You said, "If Apple's owners want to donate they can easily do so themselves." To which, I provided a link showing them doing just that.

* Though I do believe that it's very important to call a company to task for bad/harmful behavior.

Also, apparently, if you're a charity in Australia or New Zealand (I couldn't find a similar page for other countries, though I didn't do an exhaustive searchbecause I'm lazy. ), and you want support from Apple, you can ask for it!
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #118 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post

So what's your point, that Apple's greedy? That Apple's evil?

As I said to another poster, it's easy to point fingers and criticize another person's behavior—even (or especially!) if you don't really know or understand their behavior. It's much more noble to actually try and practice the kind of behavior you'd like to see in others. I.e., I don't know you, so I don't know if your a generous, ethical person, or if you're a greedy bastard or if you like to torture kittens, so I'm not gonna judge you. But I know myself pretty well, so I try to be the best person I can be. Some days I'm a better person than other days—but I never presume that I'm a better person than anyone else.

http://www.businessinsider.com/10-un...ve-jobs-2011-2

No judgements!!
post #119 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post

I think I was responding more to the tone of your comment than anything else. I'm not a fan of cynicism*. By which, I mean, I don't think it's appropriate to make negative assumptions about a company or individual. You said, "If Apple's owners want to donate they can easily do so themselves." To which, I provided a link showing them doing just that.

You completely misinterpreted me then. I wasn't seeking to imply that Apple's investors weren't philanthropic, or that its employees weren't - I was trying, apparently unsuccessfully, to criticize the concept of 'corporate philanthropy' where a corporation does good by giving money.

My point here is that it's equivalent to the two of us walking down the street together and seeing a homeless man. I feel sorry for him, so I pick your pocket, take 20 from your wallet, and give it to the homeless guy.

Giving away money that isn't mine isn't philanthropy, and corporations hold their money in trust for their shareholders, so by definition it isn't theirs to give away.
post #120 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by iJedidiah View Post

http://twitter.com/#!/hotdogsladies/status/1465570303

I quote Mr. Mann because I think this post crossed a line.

Gruber got it right: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/06/24/richman. The brevity of his quote intends to pique a reader's interest enough to read the original story at Richman's site.

You've basically copy-pasted or slightly re-worded the original article in its entirety, strongly encouraging AI readers to land on this site, read the re-blog, hopefully click and ad or two, then done.

Some would say that linking to his site at all is throwing him a bone, but obviously, I don't concur.

I get your point - a link is almost moot if you paraphrase the whole blog post. On the other hand, 2/3 of Gruber's posts are made up of a title, a link and a snarky remark. Daringfireball is more like a portal now, rather than a blog.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple may make more profit selling one Mac than HP does from 7 PCs