danox

jas99 said:

dewme

jas99 said:

greginprague said:

4.7% revenue beat and an 11.6% earning beat and the stock is just up 2.5% (at the moment) in after hours.  This is while still being down more than 12% from all time highs less than a month ago.

I agree with the sentiments. 

Apple has no competition. Microsoft makes some of the world’s worst software and hardware. 

Honestly, Apple should be at $500 per share and Microsoft should be out of business.

What does Microsoft have anything at all to do with Apple’s quarterly earnings? Apple and Microsoft have both moved far beyond the Mac vs PC television commercial era. Both companies are doing exceptionally well for their shareholders. They are the top two most valuable companies in the world. Why on earth should a company that is nipping on Apple’s heels, and sometimes surpassing them, be out of business? That’s honestly a ridiculous and nonsensical statement. Take a peek at Microsoft’s latest blowout quarterly earnings. Despite the claims of Windows being on death’s doorstep, its OEM  licensing revenue was up 25%. 

Zero sum game thinking no longer applies to Apple vs Microsoft. In fact it hasn’t applied since long before Ballmer's departure, despite Ballmer trying to keep that torch burning long beyond it having fuel to sustain the illusion. Fortunately for Microsoft’s current stakeholders, Satya Nadella harbors no such silliness and has moved Microsoft in a direction that allows Microsoft to control its own destiny, just like Steve Jobs and Tim Cook have done for Apple. 

Apple and Microsoft have moved on. So should we.

I understand why you misinterpreted my comment.

It wasn’t a zero-sum comment, it was a comparative comment.

Microsoft offers low-quality software, hardware, and services that require one-thousandth the innovation and genius of the humanity-changing products Apple makes. 

Yet Microsoft is - somehow - put in the same league as Apple. It should be viewed as the third-tier producer of mass-consumption commodity goods and services it is.

That was the meaning of the comment - AAPL should be at $500, MSFT should be, well, nowhere.

highframerate said:

YP101 said:

Well, Apple just buy Nintendo will solve the problem. Nintendo gets M1 CPU will resolve the current hardware limitation.
Apple will receive all retro games on Apple TV.

We went through this 5 years ago when people thought that NIntendo was dead (couldn't keep up with Microsoft and Sony in specs, their "family-friendly" focus meant losing out to the iPad etc.) so people claimed that Apple should buy Nintendo in order to bring the Mario, Zelda etc. games to the iPad and iPhone. Nintendo said: "We are not for sale and never will be" followed by "even if we are sold it will never be to a foreign company." 

As for Sony, yeah as if the antitrust regulators would allow that. It would give Apple:
A. a smartphone and tablet manufacturer (Android)
B. a TV (again Android), DVD and premium audio manufacturer 
C. the world's #1 gaming console platform
D. the Columbia movie studio (Spider-Man, Ghostbusters, Jumanji, Bad Boys, Karate Kid, Men In Black and a bunch of other franchises, and that doesn't even include Sony Japan's extensive film, TV, music etc. properties)

So the Japanese government is going to let the company that killed off the Walkman (and indirectly the Blu-Ray by creating the streaming era) and mobile gaming (seriously degrading Sony, Nintendo, Sega etc. in the process while creating a boom for competing Chinese and South Korean tech companies like Tencent, Xiaomi, LG and Samsung) buy Sony? Yeah, totally not going to happen. 

highframerate said:

techconc said:

This is the type of acquisition that Apple really needs to make.  Apple just doesn't get the gaming market or simply has no interest in it.  Small indie games in Apple Arcade are fine, but Apple's platforms need A list games.  Apple has great hardware with the M1 Max but a poor gaming selection.  Ironically, Mac sales are at record levels now, but gaming on the Mac is worse than any time in history.  Sad.  

The M1 Max is not "great hardware" for gaming because the GPU only performs between the level of an Nvidia 3060 and 3080, which are available in x86 machines that cost under $1000. Yes Mac sales are at record levels ... but at a market share (depending upon whether you believe Gartner, IDC, Canalys) that 7.5% to 8.6%, making it third in share behind Windows and ChromeOS. 

The only path into AAA gaming for Apple is to emulate Microsoft and create their own gaming console. The problem: the AAA console gaming market is in turmoil right now, which is precisely what Microsoft is taking advantage of by snapping up beleagured studios left and right. And - as I mentioned above - currently if you combine the efforts of Microsoft, Nvidia, Google and Amazon and you have 42-45 million cloud gaming subscriptions. It would take Apple 3 years at minimum to launch a console gaming platform; who knows how many cloud gaming subscribers there will be in that time. 

rob53 said:

mjtomlin said:

That chart (and claim) is based on a single metric from a dozen benchmarks as part of the SPECrate 2017 tests. Need to wait and see about real world tests.

Let’s also not forget, the M1 CPU cores are almost 18 months old now. Intel would be severely embarrassed if they didn’t have ANYTHING to show.

One last note, when your “mobile” CPU performance drops by 55% when the device is not plugged in… you basically failed.

Actually, I thought I heard the M1 Pro and Max were totally redesigned. 

maximara said:

danox said:

foregoneconclusion said:

gatorguy said:

Does anyone still doubt that the AppStore model won't survive as currently done? All the "It's Apple's platform and Apple's rules" comments here over the past couple of years won't make one iota of difference. It's gonna change at both Google and Apple. And they will both still be ridiculously profitable after the changes that are being forced on them.

Ridiculous comment. OF COURSE the "Apple's platform" and "Apple's rules" make a difference. Apple did create iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. Apple did create the App Store for iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. IMO, the legitimate issue per the App Store is NOT whether Apple can have control or make the rules, but more about whether Apple is living up to their public statements about how the App Store rules are applied. Are they really being enforced equally? Do certain developers get exceptions while others do not? Those kinds of questions make sense, but the stuff about "should Apple be allowed to have control of their own operating system or their own store" is ridiculous. 

In life the big people/companies ie the (RICH) get further ahead by being flavored (see Google-Apple) 15 billion per year paid to Apple, and the free, subscriptions Apps by the big boys are slowly killing most of small companies. Apple making Keynote-Pages-Numbers free pulled the rug out from under many small to medium sized companies (in word processing in particular).

I guess this person has never heard of Libreoffice which along with its variants or about GraphicConverter which are still being updated today and are insanely old (1999 and 1992 respectively) There was no "rug" to pull out from under them by Keynote-Pages-Numbers going free as OpenOffice (what LibreOffice forked from) predates all of them. Only a totally ignorant consumer or one that thinks they "need" some obscure feature (that in reality they rarely use) would get a commercial word processing program when a free option has been around for 21 years.  And one of the nicknames of GraphicConverter is "poorman's Photoshop"