Slashdot Mirror
Apple Reports $19 Million Profit for Q3
pinqkandi writes "Apple released it's quarter three results today, which revealed a $19 million net profit ($0.05/diluted shared). Revenue reached $1.545 billion as 771,000 Macs were shipped. CEO Steve Jobs called it 'a great new product quarter', citing the new generation of iPods, iTunes Music Store, and the PowerMac G5."
I guess that last Anonymous Coward was trying to be funny by making everyone double check Apple.com for new laptops.
However, it is unlikely we'll see G5 laptops anytime soon. The current IBM 970 chips run way, way too hot. Until a low-power version of the G5 is designed, expect G3's and G4's to continue to be the chips in laptops for some time.
Either you're a troll, or something's wrong with your system.
I've passed gigabytes from my PowerBook G4/1ghz to my LaCie 200gb FireWire drive in less time than that, and generally I've found performance of internal drives is much better than external.
I would bring your system to an Apple Store and ask the Genius Bar people to take a look at it.
That being said, in my experience, the speed of a Mac isn't much different from PC speed one way or the other, and the aesthetics are a great deal more attractive. I find it more enjoyable to use a Mac, and that pretty much closes off debate for me.
Hope that helps.
D
Your misinformed. To save face, you should check out this artical from foxnews: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92121,00.html
Your comment is so unintelligible, it makes me sick.
Prime is what banks charge their best customers if they have perfect credit. Interest on cash (required by accounting rules to be in things that mature in less than 1 year) is around 1.0%-1.5%. The idea here is to spur companies in to investing thier cash in something that generates economic returns (new business assets) becuase their cash give them so little or conversely because they can borrow at a very low rate. The scary part is when it doesn't work (see Japan) because everyone is too scared of losing their investment so they keep their money in cash and don't borrow anything new. I'd guess that between that and natural gas prices Mr. Greenspan is waking in a cold sweat regularly.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
You can see the breakdown.
The iPods are considered "Peripherals & Other HW"
The 771,000 doesn't include iPods...it's only PowerMacs, Powerbooks, iBooks, and iMacs (the eMacs are part of the iMac numbers, the server units, ie XServer is part of the PowerMac units).
The breakdown is like this (in the thousands, of course):
iMac: 256
iBook:133
Power Mac G4: 156
PowerBook: 166
This did in fact happen last quarter (the profits being all in interest on the $$ in the bank while the business otherwise would have shown a loss). THIS quarter however they did in fact run a profit off of their business of selling computers. Also to be fair they are doing some things this quarter that cost a fair amount of $$$ that are investments that will reap rewards in future quarters. Opening new stores and opening the iTunes music store - which is actually supposed to turn the corner as soon as this next quarter, and may be a real cash cow when it comes out for windows.
If you read their Financial Statement, you will see they made $17 million in interest, so interest is not the sole reason for their profit.
Really? Can you provide some real world benchmarks to back that up? Most 7,200rpm IDE drives provide around 7MB/s write 20MB/s read speeds (sometimes more for linear read / writes or cache hits), nowhere near the maximum theoretical speed of the interface. Actually, you an be glad of that, since a 32bit 33MHz PCI bus only has a little more bandwidth than that, and if a single drive could saturate it then the system can crawl. I'd expect to see a 20MB file copy taking about 2-5 seconds, not 1/20 seconds.
Mind you, the grandparent post is still a blatant and unoriginal troll...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Just a correction: you are incorrect in your assessment. Apple's Net Income may be lower, (32 to 19 mil), but revenues were up (1.55 bil) as were earnings per share ($.05/share, beating street estimates of $.03). Apple and Dell are the only computer manufacturers to actually be profitiable in this economy, so it is actually very impressive. For proof, look at their share price (+$.71 at time of post).
According to this in 1993 apples share was 10%. While this chart gives no idea on actually installed base we do know the PC market is MANY times larger today then it was 10 years ago resulting with a small % that apple can serve. ;)
But you are very right in apple still has a LONG road ahead, hopefuly apple from one side, Linux from the other and the PC market can be broken into three dominant platforms.
Hey, I can dream can't I?
Either my reading comprehension of your post, or yours of mine sucks. Or perhaps you're a troll and you have me hooked ;)
You said that profits are a waste and that the $$$ should be reinvested to grow the company. For what reason the company should grow is unclear, it appears to you to be an end unto itself. I said to the contrary that profits are the entire point and that if you do choose to reinvest it would be towards then end of having even more profits to pocket.
I am convinced that some of the problems in corporate America today is confusion over this fundamental issue. The confusion is understandable because with todays tax laws profits, real tangible honest profits, are taxed twice and at a high rate both times. Capital gains on the other hand are taxed only once and that one time at a lower rate. So, investors naturally want to make their stock price go up rather than have it pay dividends. Beyond encouraging your kind of thinking the problem is that unlike dividends stock prices don't have to be grounded in any kind of objective reality. The internet bubble and Enron amply illustrated that. The whole stock price game can become a massive, complex, unstable ponzi scheme ungrounded in reality. Enron is a perfect example of the result - it was only important to grow on paper, losses were hidden and profits were manufactured and nobody was the wiser (for a while) because nobody actually wanted to get those "profits" Enron claimed to have. Everybody was happy and tax law encouraged them to "reinvest" to make the company bigger and the stock price go up. If the tax laws had been otherwise Enron would have had to be more honest, if they claimed chimerical profits investors would have wanted at least some of them to go in their pocket. Sadly, while the Bush administration made some progress they got demogogued about "cutting taxes for the rich" and didn't push this through. While it really would be a tax cut for the rich it is still the right thing to do, and with all the 401(k)'s, IRA's, mutual funds and stock investments by pension funds your average stock holder isn't exactly the top hat wearing caricature of wealth from the monopoly box.
I see that you corrrected your troll template after posting "Even SimpleText is straining to keep up as I type this." in your post in the previous Mac thread yesterday and people pointed out that you obviously didn't know what you were talking about or that you'd ever used a Mac since SimpleText is an OS 9 app, not an OS X one.
Well corrected; you even capitalised it correctly, although I suspect you just cut and pasted from one of the replies to your troll.
You really are a bizarre person, I imagine that you ride a bus that's far shorter than it is wide.