Microsoft: That's OK, We Still Make More Profits

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]beergoggles[/nom]@SchizoFrob (and others with this sentiment): Apple isn't the market leader, they aren't stifling competition, and multitudes of options from other vendors are available for anything they offer. What, exactly, do you want the DOJ to get involved with?[/citation]

1. mobile safari.
2. Dictating what programs you have to use to create iphone apps.
3. No screen asking which browser you would like to install on osx
4. Cutting deals with distributors that hurt the competition (kinda like the intel rebates when they were screwing AMD)

Thats just off the top of my head
 
I've been telling people all along that Microsoft has a better P/E ratio than Apple, which means that Microsoft's earnings are nearly 60% greater than Apple's.

What the market cap numbers mean (other than perceived value) is that if the companies ever wanted to go private, they'd have to pay through the nose to buy back their stock. Apple has no chance on Microsoft if they ever wanted to make that move.
 
Bill Gates is the largest share holder of Apple so I think it does not really matter.
 
[citation][nom]Stry[/nom]I just read, while going #2, a shampoo bottle that sounded a lot like Apple. 9 out of 10 people PERCEIVE a thickening EFFECT.Notice those distinct key words? Apple is a closed minded company, with a holier than thou attitude. Like god blessed the ground they walk on. Microsoft releases Software (and peripherals [minor hardware]) and Apple is OS and Hardware (overpriced I might add), and iTunes store... And Microsoft still makes more money than them. Suck it Apple.[/citation]

Nah - Balmer the Hutt maybe?
 
[citation][nom]ethanolson[/nom]I've been telling people all along that Microsoft has a better P/E ratio than Apple, which means that Microsoft's earnings are nearly 60% greater than Apple's.What the market cap numbers mean (other than perceived value) is that if the companies ever wanted to go private, they'd have to pay through the nose to buy back their stock. Apple has no chance on Microsoft if they ever wanted to make that move.[/citation]

This is what I was trying to figure out...thanks for posting the clarification

[citation][nom]eklipz330[/nom]as much as i dislike apple's business practices, most uneducated consumers love them and their high prices, they're just a ball of success right now[/citation]

I'll agree with that...Apple makes an integrated product that works well for most basic tasks. I think they've done a fantastic job in the design department and in the marketing department. I still can't stomach the limited system (less programs and applications, no games, etc) and the price, but for some people, it obviously works.
 
apple can suck **lls till they bring competitive product at right price rather than brainwashing people to purchase fancy looking out dated piece of technology...

if there was no Microsoft OS, and their marketing strategy of making computers cheaper, nobody in the 3rd world would be able to pick up hardwares and build cheap computers with pirated copies of Windows... But as a result, they dominate the market and people love em.
 
[citation][nom]averagejoe_1984[/nom]Its not surprising for a company that charges $100+ for a product every computer has to have. (if purchased separately from the PC, it is cheaper for lower priced retail PCs) Sure you could use Linux, but not if you want to actually use your computer to do things like play games and run popular software.[/citation]

New games cost $50. That's either 2 games or an operating system. Where's the problem?
 
[citation][nom]tokenz[/nom]1. mobile safari. 2. Dictating what programs you have to use to create iphone apps. 3. No screen asking which browser you would like to install on osx4. Cutting deals with distributors that hurt the competition (kinda like the intel rebates when they were screwing AMD)Thats just off the top of my head[/citation]


You are really confused about a lot of things.

First, I am not an Apple fan, and don't own any of their modern products (I DO have antiques, like Apple IIs, Lisa, etc...).

You don't seem to understand it would be fine for Microsoft to not offer choices, were they not considered a monopoly. You don't understand that very basic fact.

So, sorry, everything else you do falls apart on that. You can buy a phone besides the iPhone, and it's not even close to being a monopoly in that area, so you can use something besides mobile Safari. You were actually doubly wrong there - Opera is available.

As long as Apple doesn't fall into the category of monopoly in any sector, they have a lot more freedom to compete aggressively. If they do, they'll be judged in the same way Intel and Microsoft are.

 
I don't think Microsoft has anything to worry about... yet. Besides, Apple might not even be considered a technology sector stock for much longer. They really belong in the retail sector.
 
Its because of Ipods,Itouches,etc.Look at just the PC market and Microsoft still rules that territory. Not saying I love Microsoft.I have a love hate realtionship with them.
 
[citation][nom]Zingam[/nom]First of all Windows does not cost $100. In some parts of the world it costs something like $300-400 which is a month or two salary. Also Windows gets sales in the hundreds of millions and games at most 1-2 million but most don't sell that well.Also games are luxury items and not must have as an OS.You've just made a bad comparison. Windows shouldn't cost more than $50 for a full version and M$ will still make huge profit.[/citation]

I could make the argument that computers are a luxury. Or even that Windows is a luxury. So if you think gaming is a 'luxury', you should be using Linux.
 
Lets see just shows investors like apple more becuase they come out with the "must have products" for duchebags, while microsoft still makes a ton more profit then apple ever will. Just means they stock market thinks they can make a quicker buck off apple.
 
[citation][nom]jjtoson[/nom]I still believe bill gate is more talent leading microsoft than this guy. he look fat and greedy. sorry about that. does he really care about technology beside money?[/citation]

Well show you're really smart. He "looks fat and greedy". Which means he must be because we all know that judging people on how they look is wholly accurate. I mean look at Steve Jobs, he skinny, that means god loves him and he farts roses and water lillys.
 
Apple has another thing thats keeps them down (besides price, and the egomaniacal Steve Jobs)is they're always a year or two behind in hardware. By the time Macs start using the i series processor or the nVidia GTX 400 series or the ATI 5000 series GPUs both Intel, nvidia, ATI and us PC users will be on to something new, faster and better.

Sure now Macs have games, but we'll still have better graphics in those games.
 
Once Apple stops ripping off Xerox, they are done for. From the OS, the mouse, to even the over-hyped iPad, came from Xerox. One of the biggest reasons for their "success" comes from sales to schools & universities. They give great deals to the schools to buy their equipment. We had two labs full of iMacs and other Apple systems, but nobody wanted to use them. But, the three PC labs were always jammed with students.
 
Really as usual the comment section is filled with the most ignorant comments possible (and yes there are exceptions).

Why the hate ?, without the other one would seize to innovate at least till some one else steps up. And to you?, what does the success of a company who's products you don't use do to you?

I feel sad that people who are bright enough to surf the web and read an article (or at least they tried to do so) are not bright enough to realize they are not rational.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom