Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Briefly Becomes World's First $3 Trillion Company
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For those who don’t understand market capitalization:
The “3 Trillion” number is not how much revenue or profit Apple brings in.
It is the function of the market value of an Apple share times how many shares there are.
We are in a big bull market right now, stocks of every kind are up bigly. Tech stocks especially so, and as far as big tech stocks, Apple is seen as the “safest bet”.
So for those up in arms over this headline, untwist your panties.
The “3 Trillion” number is not how much revenue or profit Apple brings in.
It is the function of the market value of an Apple share times how many shares there are.
We are in a big bull market right now, stocks of every kind are up bigly. Tech stocks especially so, and as far as big tech stocks, Apple is seen as the “safest bet”.
So for those up in arms over this headline, untwist your panties.
It’s impossible to participate in a capitalist society without companies making profits so might as well go with the one that makes the best products, until a socialist revolution fixes thingsRight here.
I'm not a shareholder so Apple becoming a $3T company is nothing for me to celebrate. But it does confirm my previous decision to make a steady and progressive departure from Appleland. IMO, Apple has jumped the shark from being a company that made money by doing the right thing for their customers to one that is laser-focused on profits and value at the expense of customers.
They're not unique in that regard and they are free to continue down that path... it's simply that I choose not to contribute to that effort.
@ all the people that say “they should donate half of that”
Ah yes, can’t wait for after the socialist revolution when I’ll be able to use my all new яблоко айфон (with the amazing build quality of a 2011 $40 toy tablet, of course) and talk to Comrade Сири on the HomePod I installed in my commieblock apartment
The value of such failures is in their randomness. No one wants scheduled failures!
Curious then which company will you give your business to for your computer, smartphone, services, etc, as all public companies have an obligation to their shareholders to maximize profit.They're not unique in that regard and they are free to continue down that path... it's simply that I choose not to contribute to that effort.
If it's always crashing, you must expect it to crash, so therefore it's not unexpectedly crashing. Sounds like your expectations are being met.
As for why it's crashing, have you checked the Crash Reports? There's endless logs available that can help to shed some light on why it's crashing. It may have nothing at all to do with macOS or the hardware, but could be some 3rd-party buggy kext (kernel extension) that you installed at some point. Does it crash when in Safe Mode? Does it crash when logging into another user account?
It's easy to pass blame to Apple for a "buggy" crashing Mac, but quite often that's an over-generalization of the situation. What does your troubleshooting and reading of log reports reveal?
No, it did not imply anything of that sort. I just wanted to highlight the economic disparity.
How is an Apple run society any worse than ones that exist now?
I'll tell you what it would be:
It would be fiscally more successful, it would care about sustainability, performance, design beauty, and so many other great qualities that Apple does today.
Right here.
I'm not a shareholder so Apple becoming a $3T company is nothing for me to celebrate. But it does confirm my previous decision to make a steady and progressive departure from Appleland. IMO, Apple has jumped the shark from being a company that made money by doing the right thing for their customers to one that is laser-focused on profits and value at the expense of customers.
They're not unique in that regard and they are free to continue down that path... it's simply that I choose not to contribute to that effort.
Of course you're free to have that opinion, but I continue to believe that Apple continues to be laser-focused on the customer experience. I just also feel that technology is getting more and more advanced, and consumer expectations are also getting higher and higher. That's an immense challenge for any company to face.
When you look across all of Apple's platforms (macOS, iOS, iPad OS, watchOS, and tvOS ... and the unspoken homeOS), they are delivering an extremely immersive experience where devices work seamlessly with each other. Slow and steady progress forward, not huge, massive changes from one version to the next (which consumers quite often equate to "better").
Apple's financial success is directly tied to their focus on a great user experience, not a focus on profits. Profits is just the reward for their commitment and hard work. That's my opinion.
I just retired a MacBook Air from 2013 (8 years of daily use), and it's still runs like a champ. I replaced it with a M1 MacBook Air to stay with the times, but the 2013 Air will continue to work for another 5 or 6 years easy.
Just because consumers choose to replace their devices every year doesn't mean that it's Apple's business plan for them to. They have long-term support (of at least 5 years) for all of their devices.
If their cell phones are found to give brain Cancer from holding the phone to a persons ear over a long period of time via RF Radiation. They won't be a 3 Trillion dollar company for long.
That would be a good trick for non-ionizing radiation, but if fake science is ones thing, this is as good a fairytale as any.
I think you don't understand capitalism or socialism. Neither affect an individual's ability to innovate using their own limited resources, they govern the flow of resources through a society.
Capitalism directs societies resources toward endeavors that the society indicates a preference for through their individual allocation of scarce resources. Socialism directs societies resources toward endeavors identified by a few powerful decision makers.
Purity is the death of either system, and there are a lot of markets where capitalism leads to worse outcomes generally because consumers in those markets lack complete information or generational thinking, but consumer electronics is a ideal market to be driven by consumer choice and thus a capitalistic approach subject to government management of negative externalities.
In short, capitalism ensures that if Apple continues creating products people value at a cost sufficiently below that value, society will direct additional resources in their direction allowing them to further innovate and provide future products. Socialism would mean that Apple's market position would be protected by the government, making it more difficult for shifts in consumer sentiment to restrict the operations of the company, or they would face a government sanctioned alternative that isn't subject to consumer approval and would deny society the benefits of the Apple development and business models.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
In my experience, Apple devices do not work well together (here's just one example that's plagued me and others over many OSes --just getting a Mac to recognize an iPhone: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/image-capture-not-seeing-photos-on-iphone.2144651/ ) and that has gotten worse over the years.
Or just getting iMessages to sync.
Or with the multiple OSes you mentioned, I've never seen anything as cartoonish as Big Sur (and now Monterey) with so many terrible built-in apps as they've had since Catalyst.
But in the years before they had multiple platforms and they embraced open standards, I actually thought Apple products performed beautifully with other companies' products—back when the Mac was the digital hub for all vendors' digital video cameras, still cameras, PDAs, mobile phones, etc. I remember using iSync with mobile phones that were not Apple phones. Yes, I actually do believe macOS synced better with non-iPhones using iSync and standard tech like vCards. I can remember clearly in 2001 with an iBook somehow using Bluetooth to send a vCard to another person's laptop. And iPhoto and all that--it all just worked. And they were good programs. As you can see in the thread up above, I can't even get my Mac to recognize my iPhone's videos and photos now.
Syncing in general was better in that it warned you when it was going to make changes and when there were duplicates. Now things just happen, whether you want them to or not.
They are selling a story that products have to be from the same company to work well together, and it's not true. They used to work better in my experience when the Mac was part of a heterogeneous mix of various company's products.
I remember the good old days of using iChat for Facebook Messenger, Google Chat, AIM, and being able to send text messages without having an iPhone forwarding messages to do so. In fact, I think that feature existed before the iPhone did. They've regressed on all of that and more.
Edit:
If people don't remember, this is what I am talking about:
It was great technology that just worked with tons of different manufacturers. It didn't have to be all Apple to work well, and this was when Apple had far fewer resources, and it really did just work back then. Tim Cook has artificially made this story that it has to be all Apple to work well to sell more Apple stuff, and yet it still doesn't work as well together when it's all Apple products as Apple and third party products used to work together.
Last edited:
Apple Fined $11 Million in Italy for Employing 'Aggressive Methods' in Commercial Use of Private Data
Apple and Google were today fined 10 million euros ($11 million) by Italy's Competition Authority for allegedly using user data for...
www.macrumors.com
The first sentence is a common, and correct, statement but are you sure about the second sentence ? AAPL has repurchased hundreds of billions in their own stock to date and $20B just this past quarter. AAPL stock is a cash equivalent used for business expenses like paying employees and acquiring companies. AAPL stock is seeing great appreciation while actual US treasury cash has lost 6% last year alone. By converting free cash flow to a more valuable cash equivalent, like AAPL stock, the company increases purchasing power with increases in market cap.
Not one word in that article about apple selling any personal data. Just using it. And “it fails to provide examples or evidence that Apple has partaken in such activities.”Apple Fined $11 Million in Italy for Employing 'Aggressive Methods' in Commercial Use of Private Data
Apple and Google were today fined 10 million euros ($11 million) by Italy's Competition Authority for allegedly using user data for...
So it’s just an accusation that Apple uses personal data for its own commercial activities, without any actual explanation of how it does so. And it’s being appealed.
Yeah, they really got caught. *eye-roll*
If Google's web services are found to be powered by puppy blood, they'll never reach $3T.
I’ll bite. If that’s the case, then what smartphone do you use, if any?Right here.
I'm not a shareholder so Apple becoming a $3T company is nothing for me to celebrate. But it does confirm my previous decision to make a steady and progressive departure from Appleland. IMO, Apple has jumped the shark from being a company that made money by doing the right thing for their customers to one that is laser-focused on profits and value at the expense of customers.
They're not unique in that regard and they are free to continue down that path... it's simply that I choose not to contribute to that effort.
By no means do I think Apple is right all the time. The issue I have — especially with the smartphone duopoly with Google — is that in almost every case it’s the best option available.
