Apple's Stock Price Breaks Through $700, Sets New All-Time Records for Price and Market Cap

[flottenheimer]

Originally Posted by bungiefan89

When last I checked, there's only about 60 trillion dollars in the world (that's supposedly the total value of everything) so 1 trillion market value would be pretty huge.

Couldn't find any serious sources for "the value of everything" but all those I could find suggested a value way, way above 60 trillion dollars.

I would be very interested in any serious maths on this. Where did you learn about the 60 trillion?

[TsunamiTheClown]

Holy Capitalization Batman!

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by article

Apple is now worth more than $650 billion, which is $225 billion -- or approximately one Google -- more than second-place ExxonMobil.

I just like the idea of a new unit of measure called a "Google" to represent a certain value of wealth. I am amused there are several Googles, or IBM's or Microsoft's or Exxon's to an Apple.

Rocketman

[Rennir]

That's pretty impressive. I wonder how high Apple can go with its stock price and what the ramifications of it are.

[Badandy]

Originally Posted by BC2009

That is just the hardware improvements. The software improvements in iOS 6 are awesome and there are about 200 of them. What did Jelly Bean bring to Android? Two things: decent UI performance with project butter (finally) and Google Now. Somehow adding 3D vector-based maps with turn-by-turn and fly-over and an incredibly useful "Passbook" software to carry all your tickets and coupons and updating Siri to do a ton of new functions is less innovative than the competition?

Yes. Apple maps is nowhere near what Google Maps is and Google Now is perhaps one of the most innovative computing ideas of all-time. Siri is as well, but we shouldn't have to wait for yearly software updates for Siri, which is all processed on Apple's servers and not the iPhone, to get a few sports scores.

[warfed]

Originally Posted by BC2009

Secondly, lack of real innovation? Seriously? I could buy a parrot if I wanted to hear that garbage any more. Let's put it to rest right here:

1) In-cell touch-screen technology for which Apple has related patents is brand new and amazing.

2) A6 processor is a custom design from Apple (not the A9 or A15 from ARM). A15 was designed for servers and not optimal for smartphones, so Apple designed their own while everybody else uses the licensable designs from ARM. The result: the fastest mobile processor in any smart phone. Twice as fast as A5 and benchmarks exceeding all competitors.

3) Thinnest lightest smartphone in the world while packing LTE with great battery life. Part of this is on Qualcomm for delivering a chip to handle LTE, GSM, and CDMA all in one, but part of it is on Apple for (1) refusing to compromise on power-hungry chips and (2) making the whole package exceed the battery life of previous models and competitors while supporting LTE.

4) iOS has continued to out-perform competitors with half or sometimes one-fouth the RAM that competitors use in their devices. With iPhone 5, you get double the RAM of last generation which means the performance is going to skyrocket.

5) iPhone 5's screen has perfect color reproduction. The next closest mobile display is that of the retina iPad 3 which was almost near-perfect. The iPhone 5's display can be used for color reference it is so good.

6) The lens cover on the camera on the iPhone 5 has a sapphire crystal to allow it to be thinner to allow slightly more room for the optics beneath, and yet with a thinner design they have produced a camera that takes better pictures and especially better pictures in low light.

7) They created an all-digital connector that supports the basic charging and syncing that you would get with standard micro or mini USB port from competitors, but also supports HDMI output, VGA output, and a host of other functions while making it reversible as well. Meanwhile the connector is 80% smaller than their previous 30-pin connector.

That is just the hardware improvements. The software improvements in iOS 6 are awesome and there are about 200 of them. What did Jelly Bean bring to Android? Two things: decent UI performance with project butter (finally) and Google Now. Somehow adding 3D vector-based maps with turn-by-turn and fly-over and an incredibly useful "Passbook" software to carry all your tickets and coupons and updating Siri to do a ton of new functions is less innovative than the competition?

Any idiot can build a giant screen smartphone and shove in a separate chip for LTE and one for 3G and shove in more battery to compensate for power usage while increasing the weight of the device and giving it a crappy pentile display with cruddy color reproduction.

Only Apple can build an incredible smartphone like the iPhone 5.

Haha yeah seriously...

1. Fancy name... no difference to user.

2. Some Androids have faster CPUs hands down.

3. Thinnest? So what? I hate how thin my android is,I had to buy a case to make it comfortable. Also great battery life? How do you know? Chances are it still doesn't come close to some of the Motorolas.

4. That's not iOS... That's up to the software developer. And since when is lack of ram a selling point?

5. Apple doesn't make the screen. Credit goes to Samsung or which ever other Korean company does their screen.

6. A $200 canon will take a much better picture than an iPhone

7. You can do HDMI and everything you mentioned over micro USB... the competition has had it for a while.


... so yeah I'm serious. Sure the iPhone 5 is a nice phone but far from innovative just an incremental upgrade to an already nice phone.

edit: to cover the last few points. Google Now is very useful. You have no idea how convenient it is to get reminders to leave the office early to meet a client because of a traffic jam on the way. Google earth has 3D maps and turn by turn navigation has been around for a while now... but "finally" iOS got it too.

[brauliojr]

Samsung`s CEO must have been a stroke reading this. kkkkkkk

[jrswizzle]

Originally Posted by Badandy

Yes. Apple maps is nowhere near what Google Maps is and Google Now is perhaps one of the most innovative computing ideas of all-time. Siri is as well, but we shouldn't have to wait for yearly software updates for Siri, which is all processed on Apple's servers and not the iPhone, to get a few sports scores.

Saying Apple Maps is "no where near what Google Maps is" is bold considering we haven't seen the finished Apple Maps.

What are you basing that claim on? I've heard it other places too and I'm just curious as to what makes it superior.

I will admit my experience with Google Now has been better than with Siri although if Siri can produce specific results as opposed to simply taking me to a google search with the most relevant link at the top I'd prefer Siri - which looks like it's becoming the case.

[liavman]

Originally Posted by Meandmunch

Good thing I bought it back when it was like $12 something... Oh wait, I didn't.

: (

Well I did back in 1993 and held on through thin and thick, but I did not buy much.

[fixmymac]

Google + ExxonMobil = 1 Apple
1 Apple = $656,374,482,000

1 Samsung = $174,255,080,000
1 Apple = 3.76 Samsungs

and... I am not a Genius ;-)

[scottsjack]

Originally Posted by danielwsmithee

Many of us follow MacRumors because we are investors that have a financial stake in the company. it is not just about using and buying their products, it is also about managing our investments.

OK, I'll go with that.

[Liquorpuki]

Originally Posted by warfed

Well for one thing declining market share in both phones and tables and lack of recent innovation. Buying Apple stock is a gamble it could pay huge or you could lose everything... there really is no way to tell. A few years ago people would have called you a fool if you said that RIM is going to plummet.

Since they have a limited number of products there is very little room for failure.

You could earn money on AAPL but it's far from a safe investment at this point.

You can't judge this company based on current market performance because every few years it strategically blows up a new market. That's what makes it special. Originally Apple was just personal computers. Then it added MP3 players, then smartphones, then tablets, and now everyone's waiting to see what it does with TV's. For every market expansion, Apple didn't just become another player - it became the market leader. It also used the new market to grow its ecosystem and strengthen its existing marketshare.

RIM meanwhile just sat in the same market for a decade until it got edged out

I agree with LagunaSol, there's no bubble here. Low P/E says a lot. And their track record shows what they're capable of

[Ochyandkaren]

: You guys read The BBC online, HuffingtonPost or the Guardian online NOT.
: Yeah, i am forever doomed!

[fixmymac]

Originally Posted by Liquorpuki

You can't judge this company based on current market performance because every few years it strategically blows up a new market. That's what makes it special. Originally Apple was just personal computers. Then it added MP3 players, then smartphones, then tablets, and now everyone's waiting to see what it does with TV's. For every market expansion, Apple didn't just become another player - it became the market leader. It also used the new market to grow its ecosystem and strengthen its existing marketshare.

RIM meanwhile just sat in the same market for a decade until it got edged out

I agree with LagunaSol, there's no bubble here. Low P/E says a lot. And their track record shows what they're capable of

This statement is spot on and is what sets Apple apart just now. Jobs made it very clear that Apple would only enter a market when they had a product that the knew would revolutionise it.

If the Apple TV is coming, it will rock the industry. Invest now!! But, what is there after TV???

[Glideslope]

Originally Posted by wickerman1893

I am very curious if 1 trillion can be reached. If so, wow is all I can say.

Q3 2014.

[warfed]

Originally Posted by Liquorpuki

You can't judge this company based on current market performance because every few years it strategically blows up a new market. That's what makes it special. Originally Apple was just personal computers. Then it added MP3 players, then smartphones, then tablets, and now everyone's waiting to see what it does with TV's. For every market expansion, Apple didn't just become another player - it became the market leader. It also used the new market to grow its ecosystem and strengthen its existing marketshare.

That's speculation. Like I said nobody knows, you might be right... you got a 50/50 chance. But if you're so sure, how much AAPL will you buy tonight? I'm betting it's 0, probably because you don't like to gamble with big amounts

[jrswizzle]

Originally Posted by warfed

Haha yeah seriously...

1. Fancy name... no difference to user.

2. Some Androids have faster CPUs hands down.

3. Thinnest? So what? I hate how thin my android is,I had to buy a case to make it comfortable. Also great battery life? How do you know? Chances are it still doesn't come close to some of the Motorolas.

4. That's not iOS... That's up to the software developer. And since when is lack of ram a selling point?

5. Apple doesn't make the screen. Credit goes to Samsung or which ever other Korean company does their screen.

6. A $200 canon will take a much better picture than an iPhone

7. You can do HDMI and everything you mentioned over micro USB... the competition has had it for a while.


... so yeah I'm serious. Sure the iPhone 5 is a nice phone but far from innovative just an incremental upgrade to an already nice phone.

1. It's not a fancy name - In-Cell touch tech give the display a thinner design (leaving more room for things like battery and such), is more efficient given there is one less layer between the display and the outer glass - which also leads to clearer and more accurate colors.

2. Some Androids have faster clock speeds but that doesn't mean they are faster. This is really pretty arbitrary in that each OS runs differently. But given Apple has essentially designed the entire chip as opposed to Androids buying off the shelf, I'd say innovation goes to Apple.

3. There is a Motorola that is 0.5 mm thinner. Thinness is a preference. Personally I like my devices with a sleek thin profile. Some don't which is why there are third party cases (one reason). You can always bulk up a phone, you can't make it thinner after the fact.

4. It has EVERYTHING to do with iOS. Apple tunes everything to run as smoothly and efficiently as possible. Putting in only the necessary amount of RAM leads to battery life increases and efficiency. Adding RAM for RAMs sake shouldn't be a selling point....

5. Apple doesn't manufacture the screen (neither does Samsung on the iPhone 5) but they designed the tech that goes into them (in-cell and what not). Fact is iPhones have a PPI of 326 - there's only 1 phone on the market that exceeds that - the Nokia Lumia 920.

6. For a vast majority of users, professional quality photos aren't necessary. the iPhone takes photos that are pretty damn good (better than most phone cameras) and you dont have to carry around another $200 device. What you did to counter his argument that Apple made the smartphone camera better was to say the smartphone camera is useless....which is completely asinine.

7. The lightning connector has a higher power output than micro-USB. 8 pins vs. 5 pins. And no, microUSB - HDMI haven't been around for a while. Only recently did MHL come about allowing audio and video playback through the microUSB port. Hence why everyone clamored for an HDMI port on their tablets.

In summary, do some research before you post and look like a fool.

[BC2009]

Oh....I did not know I was talking to somebody who did not understand technology. I will try to explain and use small words if that helps.....

Originally Posted by warfed

Haha yeah seriously...
1. Fancy name... no difference to user.

In-cell touch screens are an extremely innovative technology. Where the was three layers in the screen there are now only two. Apple's method combines the touch layer with the LCD itself. By reducing layers of glass the clarity of the screen also improves. You can read about it here. And yes, Apple does indeed own patents on it.

Originally Posted by warfed

Haha yeah seriously...
2. Some Androids have faster CPUs hands down.

Oh... you think the clock speed determines how fast a processor can do something. It's okay.... lots of ignorant folks think that. There is this thing called "bench marks". You can read this article about how the A6 bests everybody in bench marks. What is funny is that iOS is far more efficient than Android so it has never taken as much processing power to match the performance a user perceives in Android on iOS. Android has only needed power-sucking CPUs because of how inefficient it is.

Originally Posted by warfed

3. Thinnest? So what? I hate how thin my android is,I had to buy a case to make it comfortable. Also great battery life? How do you know? Chances are it still doesn't come close to some of the Motorolas.

Like I said, anybody can shove a bigger battery in a bigger phone. Innovation is what you do when you don't ease the constraints and try to produce the same or better result. I'm sure the UPS attached to my computer has better battery capacity than my iPhone, but I would rather not carry it around. Taking known technologies and shoving more of them into a bigger box is not innovation.

Originally Posted by warfed

4. That's not iOS... That's up to the software developer. And since when is lack of ram a selling point?

We are not talking about selling points -- we are talking about innovation. If you can run better and more impressive software on the same or less RAM than your competitor than your software is more efficient. That takes effort to do it right. Anybody can brute force something by throwing more RAM at it.

Originally Posted by warfed

5. Apple doesn't make the screen. Credit goes to Samsung or which ever other Korean company does their screen.

Actually... Apple designed the entire screen. The folks who manufacturer it (LG, Sharp and Japan Display) are just doing assembly according to Apple's design and specification. Your comment is like saying that the guy on the assembly line of a Ford factory is the one who invented the fuel injection system because he is the one bolting it on. If any one of Apple's suppliers owned the intellectual property that goes into Apple products then Apple would not be able to use multiple suppliers. If a supplier like Samsung owned the IP then they would force Apple to buy from them. None of Apple's suppliers have that power because Apple does their own designs and just chooses to hire out the manufacturing.

Originally Posted by warfed

6. A $200 canon will take a much better picture than an iPhone

I own a couple of Canon cameras. My iPhone is always on me. A DSLR will take better photos too. None of those cameras are in a tiny portable package. Again, we were talking about innovation and you are throwing up straw men. This is a pretty pathetic argument.

Originally Posted by warfed

7. You can do HDMI and everything you mentioned over micro USB... the competition has had it for a while.

I will concede that MHL allows for HDMI over USB, however, the 5-pin connector is less than desirable. Even Samsung used an 11-pin connector in the Galaxy S3 which pissed off the MHL standards folks. Further, you cannot push enough power over micro USB to charge a tablet and hence every Android tablet has a proprietary charger.

Originally Posted by warfed

... so yeah I'm serious. Sure the iPhone 5 is a nice phone but far from innovative just an incremental upgrade to an already nice phone.

What is "incremental" and unimportant innovation are things like "face unlock" or "nfc mobile payments" which nobody uses. They look cool and sound cool and demo well, but in reality it is nothing that matters to anybody. Android manufacturers are just slapping features in to add to a checklist without making a cohesive play in the market to make sure those features matter to users. "Tilt to zoom" is about the stupidest thing ever and Samsung actually touts it.

[Liquorpuki]

Originally Posted by warfed

That's speculation. Like I said nobody knows, you might be right... you got a 50/50 chance. But if you're so sure, how much AAPL will you buy tonight? I'm betting it's 0, probably because you don't like to gamble with big amounts

What speculation? You trying to argue they DIDN'T blow up the MP3 player, smartphone, and tablet markets? That stuff already happened

Everything else you said is nonsense. Nobody is claiming stock trading has 100% certainty because that would be utterly stupid. Why do you think traders diversify, hedge and perform risk assessment?

All people are doing is debating whether that $700 share price is merited or sign of a bubble and I just gave you a huge reason why it's merited.

[AlexJaye]

Originally Posted by Veinticinco

Higher it rises, harder it falls is the conventional wisdom. But I'm not so sure it applies to Apple anymore.

They could suspend a ***** on a stick in that glass cube on 5th Ave and there'd be queues lined up round the block to buy it, with a global media frenzy proclaiming it the company's best product ever.

$650bn. Insane.

It applies.

[jmgregory1]

Originally Posted by jrswizzle

Saying Apple Maps is "no where near what Google Maps is" is bold considering we haven't seen the finished Apple Maps.

What are you basing that claim on? I've heard it other places too and I'm just curious as to what makes it superior.

I will admit my experience with Google Now has been better than with Siri although if Siri can produce specific results as opposed to simply taking me to a google search with the most relevant link at the top I'd prefer Siri - which looks like it's becoming the case.

Not to give away what isn't supposed to be discussed, but the new iOS Maps is really nice. At least in the 3 major population centers I've used it in - Chicago, Minneapolis (I know, it's not exactly considered "major") and Vegas. Turn by turn now has 3-D modeled buildings on the road you're traveling when using turn by turn and road construction and back-ups are well marked. I won't say it's better than Google Maps, but it's different and certainly has worked as well for me so far.

[warfed]

Originally Posted by jrswizzle

1. It's not a fancy name - In-Cell touch tech give the display a thinner design (leaving more room for things like battery and such), is more efficient given there is one less layer between the display and the outer glass - which also leads to clearer and more accurate colors.

2. Some Androids have faster clock speeds but that doesn't mean they are faster. This is really pretty arbitrary in that each OS runs differently. But given Apple has essentially designed the entire chip as opposed to Androids buying off the shelf, I'd say innovation goes to Apple.

3. There is a Motorola that is 0.5 mm thinner. Thinness is a preference. Personally I like my devices with a sleek thin profile. Some don't which is why there are third party cases (one reason). You can always bulk up a phone, you can't make it thinner after the fact.

4. It has EVERYTHING to do with iOS. Apple tunes everything to run as smoothly and efficiently as possible. Putting in only the necessary amount of RAM leads to battery life increases and efficiency. Adding RAM for RAMs sake shouldn't be a selling point....

5. Apple doesn't manufacture the screen (neither does Samsung on the iPhone 5) but they designed the tech that goes into them (in-cell and what not). Fact is iPhones have a PPI of 326 - there's only 1 phone on the market that exceeds that - the Nokia Lumia 920.

6. For a vast majority of users, professional quality photos aren't necessary. the iPhone takes photos that are pretty damn good (better than most phone cameras) and you dont have to carry around another $200 device. What you did to counter his argument that Apple made the smartphone camera better was to say the smartphone camera is useless....which is completely asinine.

7. The lightning connector has a higher power output than micro-USB. 8 pins vs. 5 pins. And no, microUSB - HDMI haven't been around for a while. Only recently did MHL come about allowing audio and video playback through the microUSB port. Hence why everyone clamored for an HDMI port on their tablets.

In summary, do some research before you post and look like a fool.

I'm not going to repeat myself so I will only respond to some points.

2. Innovation? This has been around for decades... nothing innovative about that approach. Being integrated has its pros and cons.

4. Now you're talking about the OS before it was comparing Apps. Since Apple doesn't create all apps on their phone it is up the the developer to make them efficient. Before iOS 5 there was no garbage collection and developers needed to manually free up RAM... lazy developers could create really inefficient RAM. Apple provides a set of APIs as does Google its up the developer to implement them appropriately.

5. So you agree Apple isn't innovative, it's been done by Nokia... point here is I'm not sure we have the same definition of innovation.

6. Where is the INNOVATION?

7. That's weird my Android had usb-hdmi last year... I'll take mini-usb over proprietary any day.

Don't call people fools just because they disagree with you, makes your argument look weak.

[flopticalcube]

Originally Posted by LagunaSol

Sewing FUD and shorting the stock?

LOL! No. Nothing anyone says on any board can affect AAPL. Just selling into strength. Too much enthusiasm and not enough fear.

[Lancer]

Someone worked out the other day that if you had bought $2000 worth of shares 10 years ago, they would now be worth $1 million!

So $2k on a Mac in 2002 or $1 Million in the bank today?

[HangmanSwingset]

After the first iPhone was released in 2007, I was thinking I should buy a few shares...
But people advised me otherwise, and I decided to take their advice.


Worst. Idea. Ever. Of all time.