Slashdot Mirror
Apple vs. Microsoft, By the Numbers
CWmike writes "It's a matter of opinion which company makes the better operating system or is likely to grow its smartphone market share. But numbers don't lie — or exaggerate. A little less than a year ago, Wall Street reached a Microsoft vs. Apple milestone: for the first time, Apple's corporate value surpassed Microsoft's. What has happened since? With Apple due to report its latest quarterly earnings on Wednesday — Microsoft reports its numbers next week — we look at some recent numbers, as well as data over time."
But numbers don't lie — or exaggerate.
That's a lie — and an exaggeration.
And Linux has already beaten them both in server,mobile devices and embedded systems market. What's your point again?
I'm going to have to agree. I don't know anyone who is planning to get (or is excited about the possibility of getting) a windows phone. Add the fact that many (most) companies are now supporting iOS and Android on their corporate networks, and what you come up with is a market already filled with devices superior to anything Microsoft could offer. No one is going to willingly downgrade to a windows phone.
Overpriced compared to what? Compared to Microsoft? Apple has year-over-year EPS growth numbers that are over twice as high as Microsoft's. Stock valuation is based on expected future earnings growth. If you said that Google or Amazon are way over-priced compared to Microsoft you would have a legitimate argument since their earnings growth thus far has only matched Microsoft yet their P/E ratio paints a different picture. Let's focus on facts instead of vague hand-waving.
It's P/E is not extravagant or that high.
MSFT has plateaued since the early 00s because people have seen it really can't innovate beyond OS/Office line. The whole Xbox division has lost money to gain it's prominent position this generation of consoles. The Zune was mostly meh. It came out early in tablets/smartphones but despite that couldn't make anything people needed to have.
The day Steve Ballmer steps down is the day that stock will start gaining again. Even better if they get a CEO with an iota of division and the power/desire to kill the bureacracy that is stifling that company. I wonder how much of their workforce are just leeches who have a cushy job that produces little/no value to the company.
Apple would have to quadruple their revenue to make their revenue meet their market capitalization. Does that not sound overvalued to you?
Do a little research or maybe learn a bit about simple Wall Street evaluation before you spout off nonsense like AAPL being over priced. The price off the stock does not have anything to do with that.
*blink*
You don't think a company's stock price has anything to do with a company's stock being overpriced?
(I'm not saying I agree with any claims that the stock is overpriced, but your statement is ludicrous.)
... because they *like* or *prefer* it.
They will (mostly) be buying it because they don't know any better, or that it is "The OS" that is present on the phone they were sold.
Windows Mobile has been and always will be a trash OS. Glitchy, crashy, unreliable, clunky, odd..... I have multiple years of experience and wished for something akin to iOS or Android the whole time.
---I fear the only way they can predict WM will outrun iOS is because of some form of anti-trust action in business producing exclusivity and limitation of OS choices. This is par for the course for microsoft and its business model; when the consumer doesn't like it, buy up, control, and limit their choices. In the end, they know the consumer pays for MS crap rather than not have technology.
the interpretation can.
For example: $1k invested in 2000, AAPL vs. MSFT. What about 1985? 1990? 1995? Hindsight is 20/20, as the saying goes. Apple has had success with some of it's more recent Jobs products. But nobody KNEW that would happen before-hand. Apple has gone up and down; has Microsoft done the same? Was MSFT less of a gamble with a smaller potential benefit, whereas Apple was a gamble with large potential benefit? (I don't know, I'm only asking questions that could color the interpretation of these "infallible numbers" ....)
Or, how about this one: revenue vs. profits. MSFT is still beating Apple in profit. So ... which is more important? Total stock price? Profit? Total revenue? ...
Or how about diversity of revenue? If suddenly iPhones and iPads went out of style, where would Apple be? If Windows phones went out of style, where would Windows be?
Interpretation of numbers is a big deal in comparing two companies... and there's a lot more to a company vs. company debate than revenue, profit, stock price/market cap, and phone sales... especially when products come and go as trends, and when one company has already shown that it falls apart without a certain CEO.
Apple's P/E is only about 18.5, and the case has been repeatedly made that the stock is ridiculously underpriced. Case in point. I can't believe your neck fart was modded insightful.
He's as out of touch and greedy as he ever was only this time instead of storming out in a blaze of publicity he's signed up to getting an authorised biography done.
Lol, wut? Out of touch? Really? Did you happen to notice the iPod? Apple cornered the marked on portable, digital music players and everyone else had to play catch up. Which none of them ever managed to do.
Have you seen the iPad? Again, Apple has cornered the market and yet again the competitors are racing to catch up with Apple having already launched its 2nd gen iPad.
From the other side he'll be madly laughing to himself as the seeds of his own arrogance caused Apple to miss the boat on getting an affordable OS X out to the masses and someone carries the blame again.
Affordable OS X? Go to any computer store that sells Apple products. The disk for OS X costs about $30. 30 DOLLARS. How farking much does cheapest hobbled version of Windows 7 cost?
Everyone forgets about Kinect. Which outsold iPhones, iPads, iPod touchs, combined. It went on to break the Guiness World Record for the fastest selling consumer gadget of all time. Mod me down as a troll or whatever but: Thats Pretty Fucking Impressive. Frankly Apple's wonderously profitable, despite having nothing like the market share of other players, that is all.
We're all still so besotted with shiny iThings and Microsoft bashing groupthink that we've kind of ignored this revolutionary human computer interface. Things being done with Kinect by hackers are seriously cool and ultimately this is the technology that is going to be the technology that the forthcoming consumer robot revolution will see the world with.
Microsoft is hardly old news, it just isn't a news media and Wall Street darling like Apple. Microsofts been sinking billions into user interface R&D over the last little while, too much criticism, yet they now have something pretty revolutionary and record breaking to show for it.
As soon as they stick Kinect in a smartphone they'll have a hit on their hands.
""It's a matter of opinion which company makes the better operating system or is likely to grow its smartphone market share. But numbers don't lie â" or exaggerate."
Yeah numbers don't lie - Apple still has a niche desktop install base, and a smaller market share of mobiles than Android, and growth has plateaued in each area. Tablets are where Apple will inevitably dethroned, but I'd bet they hold out longer since their lead in this area is bigger. Historically Apple having any kind of lead has been a temporary thing.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
I mean, these are the guys selling toxic mortgage backed securities as "AAA" while simultaneously shorting the securities as junk
Wall Str is where one number can come out, and suddenly a company is worth 10, or even 20% less then yesterday
I could go on, but this blind faith in the "market" - which is really a relatively small # of conservative white guys who all live suburbs that are the same across the country - this faith is silly.
But according to Apple, you also have to own/buy apple hardware to install that $30 OS on.
Considering Apple went out of their way to stop people from installing OSX on netbooks, the AC has a point. If Apple had to support OSX on every type of Intel and AMD platform I am not so sure their "smooth OS experience" would be there across the board.
P/E is not everything. Compared to GOOG or MSFT, AAPL's margins are horrid.
AAPL's gross margin is currently at 38%. GOOG is 64% and MSFT is 79%.
That is just one example.
Apple's margins are bad for a software company. Apple's margins are exceptional for a hardware company. (HP, HTC, and RIM's margins are all in the 10-20% range. They would kill for a 38% margin.)
Judging purely from the financials, it's almost as if Apple were a hybrid software/hardware company or something.