Apple is now worth more than Google and Microsoft combined
Comments
-
Everyone
Member Posts: 1,661
I swear I read an article a couple years ago saying they'd never be able to do this. -
erpadmin
Member Posts: 4,165 ■■■■■■■■■■
I can sleep well at night knowing that not one cent from my pocket went to consuming an Apple product (ever.)
Unfortunately, I will indirectly benefit from Apple's success (and failure) since I do own funds in my IRA and 457(b) that buy Apple stock. I can't control that though (other than not buying those funds, but that's not a realistic option for me.)
What I find hilarious though is that Apple success did NOT come from a Mac. However, Apple revionists are going to say otherwise....that it was the Mac, and not a pretty MP3 player/phone/wifi device that beat out PCs.....
-
joshmadakor
Member Posts: 495 ■■■■□□□□□□
Apple still sucks
In all seriousness, the only thing I hate about apple is having to administer large labs filled with computers that run MAC OS. It's such a joke. Does anyone know how to implement at least LTI for OS and applications within MAC OS? Also, does anyone know how to centrally manage policy (parental controls) and permissions on MAC OS?
The day that MAC OS can hang with Windows in an enterprise environment is the day I stop hating Apple. Either that or the day I get to stop supporting Macs, whichever comes first. Don't get me wrong, Apple makes some good products, I'm just a disgruntled employee.
Edit:I can sleep well at night knowing that not one cent from my pocket went to consuming an Apple product (ever.)
This.What I find hilarious though is that Apple success did NOT come from a Mac. However, Apple revionists are going to say otherwise....that it was the Mac, and not a pretty MP3 player/phone/wifi device that beat out PCs.....WGU B.S. Information Technology (Completed January 2013) -
ptilsen
Member Posts: 2,835 ■■■■■■■■■■
Keep in mind that the trading price of a stock (Market Cap) is not the only or necessarily best way to classify the "value" of a company. Apple is more valuable than Google by pretty much all metrics, but MS and Apple are pretty comparable in revenue, assets, profit, and equity, though Apple is overall more valuable.
Still, it's a bit disturbing to think that Apple is a bigger economic force than MS or Google. Actually, that's very disturbing. Luckily that's mostly iPhones, iTunes, apps and the like -- I do not want to see a Mac takeover of corporate IT. -
ptilsen
Member Posts: 2,835 ■■■■■■■■■■
joshmadakor wrote: »In all seriousness, the only thing I hate about apple is having to administer large labs filled with computers that run MAC OS. It's such a joke. Does anyone know how to implement at least LTI for OS and applications within MAC OS? Also, does anyone know how to centrally manage policy (parental controls) and permissions on MAC OS?
There is a decent line of third-party products that allow Macs to integrate well with AD DS or common Linux directory systems. But there are caveats, and implementation is time-consuming, expensive, and still provides an overall inferior experience to a homogeneous Windows environment. -
N2IT
Inactive Imported Users Posts: 7,483 ■■■■■■■■■■
I recall reading an article a few weeks back saying that 70+% of all devices on the network were smart phones/tablets and will continue to trend that way.
More people in the world have smartphones than toothbrushes
More people in the world have smartphones than electricity
Most highend software development companies code in HTML5 and wether or not it works well on a PC is secondary to it working on tablets or smartphones.
It seems Apple has seen the future and is claiming their marketshare. -
Turgon
Banned Posts: 6,308 ■■■■■■■■■□
Amazing considering where Apple where 10 years ago. Did the other companies miss a trick with the pods, pads, phones and tablets? -
nosoup4u
Member Posts: 365
Amazing considering where Apple where 10 years ago. Did the other companies miss a trick with the pods, pads, phones and tablets?
From what I remember reading in a few article on arstechnica, IBM and other companies honestly came up with a lot of the ideas surrounding apple products but sold the patents to apple in the early 2000's if I remember correctly, I'll find some links after lunch -
Turgon
Banned Posts: 6,308 ■■■■■■■■■□
From what I remember reading in a few article on arstechnica, IBM and other companies honestly came up with a lot of the ideas surrounding apple products but sold the patents to apple in the early 2000's if I remember correctly, I'll find some links after lunch
It wouldn't surprise me. -
N2IT
Inactive Imported Users Posts: 7,483 ■■■■■■■■■■
It wouldn't surprise me.
Me either. Over here in the US some of us have the option to get a service call Uverse which is a service/product of AT&T. Microsoft was the one who sold them the technology, but AT&T scaled it and leveraged it. -
Everyone
Member Posts: 1,661
Amazing considering where Apple where 10 years ago. Did the other companies miss a trick with the pods, pads, phones and tablets?
They could catch up. RIM used to be top dog in the mobile market, then Apple knocked them out with iOS. Last year Google had gained 36% of the market with Android, Apple trailed in 2nd with 26% followed by RIM with Blackberry at 23%, and Microsoft with roughly 10% if you count both Windows Mobile and Windows Phone 7. Talking strictly smartphones here which have far more sales than tablets.
When it comes to Tablets, I believe Apple is still #1, but I don't think Google is too far off. Microsoft really isn't in the tablet game right now, but I suspect that will change when Windows 8 comes out.
As far as MP3 players go, which is what came first here, Google never had one. Microsoft had the Zune, which didn't do too well, and then of course Apple had the iPod which was enormously successful. These types of devices are on the decline and probably not so profitable these days, as all their functionality is included with every phone and tablet out there now.
For the smartphones and tablets, Apple sees more money off iPhones and iPads since they control the hardware AND software. Google doesn't make as much off Android because they do not make phones or tablets, they give the OS away to manufactures like Motorola, Samsung, HTC, etc, and make all their money on advertising. Microsoft actually makes money off Android powered device sales through some patents it owns, several companies have to pay royalties to Microsoft for the Android devices they make and sell. Microsoft, like Google, does not make phones or tablets, just the software that runs on them. They sell the rights to run that software to pretty much all the same companies that Google gives Android to.
Google and Microsoft both make money off of Apple as they both have apps in Apple's App Store for the iPhones and iPads, but Apple gets a cut of that too. -
N2IT
Inactive Imported Users Posts: 7,483 ■■■■■■■■■■
They could catch up. RIM used to be top dog in the mobile market, then Apple knocked them out with iOS. Last year Google had gained 36% of the market with Android, Apple trailed in 2nd with 26% followed by RIM with Blackberry at 23%, and Microsoft with roughly 10% if you count both Windows Mobile and Windows Phone 7. Talking strictly smartphones here which have far more sales than tablets.
When it comes to Tablets, I believe Apple is still #1, but I don't think Google is too far off. Microsoft really isn't in the tablet game right now, but I suspect that will change when Windows 8 comes out.
As far as MP3 players go, which is what came first here, Google never had one. Microsoft had the Zune, which didn't do too well, and then of course Apple had the iPod which was enormously successful. These types of devices are on the decline and probably not so profitable these days, as all their functionality is included with every phone and tablet out there now.
For the smartphones and tablets, Apple sees more money off iPhones and iPads since they control the hardware AND software. Google doesn't make as much off Android because they do not make phones or tablets, they give the OS away to manufactures like Motorola, Samsung, HTC, etc, and make all their money on advertising. Microsoft actually makes money off Android powered device sales through some patents it owns, several companies have to pay royalties to Microsoft for the Android devices they make and sell. Microsoft, like Google, does not make phones or tablets, just the software that runs on them. They sell the rights to run that software to pretty much all the same companies that Google gives Android to.
Google and Microsoft both make money off of Apple as they both have apps in Apple's App Store for the iPhones and iPads, but Apple gets a cut of that too.
Good post
Do you think PC and Laptops will go away in corporations and tablets and other devices will take over? l know a lot of the sales guys where I used to work all had IPads and Androids, surprisingly they didn't have laptops or desktops. That was their main device besides their smart phone. -
joshmadakor
Member Posts: 495 ■■■■□□□□□□
Yep, we integrate with AD DS and it sucks to say the least. When the computer can't logon to the domain for whatever reason, (broken trust relationship, invalid password, password expires, no available logon services, time desync'd, etc etc) the logon screen just does the Mac-jiggle and that's it; there's no feedback as to why you can't join the domain. Also, the trust relationship randomly invalidates itself (I'm guessing? since there's no way to tell) and we have to occasionally rebind the Macs to the domain, it's such a headache. Not to mention the startup script has to be managed locally on each computer, no centralization for that either, of course. You wanna change the startup script the Macs use? No problem, do it to all 50 of them.There is a decent line of third-party products that allow Macs to integrate well with AD DS or common Linux directory systems. But there are caveats, and implementation is time-consuming, expensive, and still provides an overall inferior experience to a homogeneous Windows environment.WGU B.S. Information Technology (Completed January 2013) -
Everyone
Member Posts: 1,661
Good post
Do you think PC and Laptops will go away in corporations and tablets and other devices will take over? l know a lot of the sales guys where I used to work all had IPads and Androids, surprisingly they didn't have laptops or desktops. That was their main device besides their smart phone.
Not anytime soon, these are still consumer devices. A lot of Corporations still have old mainframe systems like AS/400 etc. around that they rely on. Others have software that only runs on outdated versions of Windows, Linux, or Unix, etc. On the hardware side, most have a 3 to 5 year refresh cycle, I've seen some try to stretch it out to 7+ years. It will be a very slow adaptation if it happens at all.
The company I work for uses Laptops with docking stations for most employees that require a computer from what I know. I've been other places that started moving towards thin clients only to see PC prices drop to the same price or less than the thin clients cost. This tends to either make them abandon thin client projects, or put them on hold, since PC's can be had for under $300. Any tablet that would be anywhere near viable is still around $500 right now.
For tablets to take hold in the business world, they would have to cost less than $300, have the ability to dock for full size keyboard, mouse, and monitor, and function like a thin client, displaying a familiar OS (like Windows) when docked. That OS could be run in something like VMWare's VDI, or whatever Citrix's solution is for it, etc.
The other thing is security. MDM solutions are all still relatively young, but starting to take off. This has been the main thing holding tablet usage off for a lot of companies. Many can't use them if they can't have the same level of control over them that they would a PC or laptop. -
ptilsen
Member Posts: 2,835 ■■■■■■■■■■
This entire post. Yes.Not anytime soon, these are still consumer devices. A lot of Corporations still have old mainframe systems like AS/400 etc. around that they rely on. Others have software that only runs on outdated versions of Windows, Linux, or Unix, etc. On the hardware side, most have a 3 to 5 year refresh cycle, I've seen some try to stretch it out to 7+ years. It will be a very slow adaptation if it happens at all.
The company I work for uses Laptops with docking stations for most employees that require a computer from what I know. I've been other places that started moving towards thin clients only to see PC prices drop to the same price or less than the thin clients cost. This tends to either make them abandon thin client projects, or put them on hold, since PC's can be had for under $300. Any tablet that would be anywhere near viable is still around $500 right now.
For tablets to take hold in the business world, they would have to cost less than $300, have the ability to dock for full size keyboard, mouse, and monitor, and function like a thin client, displaying a familiar OS (like Windows) when docked. That OS could be run in something like VMWare's VDI, or whatever Citrix's solution is for it, etc.
The other thing is security. MDM solutions are all still relatively young, but starting to take off. This has been the main thing holding tablet usage off for a lot of companies. Many can't use them if they can't have the same level of control over them that they would a PC or laptop.
