The article says how much total profit HP made last quarter ($533 million) but does not mention how much total profit Apple made. It instead requires the reader to do the math. That's odd.
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??"
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.
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.
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.
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 repairs?had 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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Apple is well known to have very deep pockets and short arms...as is most of Silicon Valley and with very few exceptions.....
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.
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!
Comments
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??"
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 repairs?had 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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Anybody who says so most likely looks like this:
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.
Apple is well known to have very deep pockets and short arms...as is most of Silicon Valley and with very few exceptions.....
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.
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!