Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You know, if they fired every single one of their software developers and replaced them with children in a sweat shop, it would still have nearly zero effect on their profits comparatively. The two things you're trying to put together here do not relate in any way that could be anything but coincidence. Also, what software is ungodly bad?
You dont really think the software is getting better do you?
 
If I own 5.5% of a trillion dollar company, I’m going to tell you its the best thing since sliced bread even if we are killing baby pandas behind closed doors.
Probably for the best that you don’t then because if you owned that much of a company and didn’t believe in it, the smart thing to do would be to sell it.

Frankly, you don’t get to the position munger and buffett are in by trying to prop up weak companies with PR statements. I’m honestly baffled anyone thinks that’s how this stuff is done.
 
98 year old Charlie Munger has some "interesting" views on a number of issues.

- it is perfectly ok to build student dormitories in which none of the rooms have a window
- he compares bitcoin to a venereal disease
- stated that the gentleman in charge of a certain country when some students had unfortunate encounters with tanks was one of the world's greatest leaders

Probably best if Charlie moves into a "facility". Windowless to keep him happy...
Well, he's right on bitcoin anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gund1234
Some of those 1 billion are certainly settling. Many many people have posted here and on other forums that if it wasn't for the fact that they would become social outcasts and in some cases shunned by family and friends and colleagues if they stopped using iMessage, they would happily be using an Android phone.
People bought an iPhone because it was best for them. The reason doesn’t matter . A bad home run looks the same as a good home run.
 
Probably for the best that you don’t then because if you owned that much of a company and didn’t believe in it, the smart thing to do would be to sell it.

Frankly, you don’t get to the position munger and buffett are in by trying to prop up weak companies with PR statements. I’m honestly baffled anyone thinks that’s how this stuff is done.

Positions change. If I lost confidence in it, and intended to get out, makes sense I might bolster it a bit. Like that has never happened in the history of publicly traded companies….give me a break.

And I’m sorry but, in part, yes that‘s exactly how you get and STAY in those types of positions. Apple itself has a spotty history of being open and honest with shareholders. It’s a matter of record.
 
By focusing soley on money and not the customer. Thats a bad thing, fyi.

But Apple is still focused on the customer. The only difference is, their customer today is an upper middle class person, non-demanding, loyal to the brand beyond comprehension and will accept everything coming from the company on the annual base. Excitingnewfeatures™ and stuff.

Tim has inherited very good foundation from Steve, and had to do literally one thing - keep high profit margins along with focus on consumer products (walled garden phones and gadgets for technically illiterate and semi-literate) and playing safe. Thus the poor QA and half-baked products - because average Apple customer doesn't care.
 
Last edited:
Except where they took the lead is where a millimeter error takes you to four galaxies off course.
It’s not true: all those companies have made several mistakes (they are lead by humans after all) and some of their products or services failed. A couple of examples for Apple are the HomePod, the Touch Bar, the 2013 Mac Pro, Music Memos, Maps app at its launch etc.
 
If I was someone people listened to and had invested in Apple, I’d say good stuff, too.
In my experience they are not managed too well, otherwise Apple Support wouldn’t be in the dark so often.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
I think the difference with Tim vs Steve is that Steve was a bit of a snob whereas Tim has made Apple less elitist. Tim isn't too proud.. And I think that rubs some people up the wrong way. You have people who want Apple to be the cosy "we are different" club and they sort of internalise it as part of their personality. I think those people are pretty upset with Tim because they aren't unique anymore.. everyone has a damn Apple product somewhere lol!

Agree with you partly. Apple was always a bit of the snob company. But the difference is - Steve's snob customers were techies, and Tim's are those who die by taking selfie on the cliff or with wild animals.
 
Tim is a visionary. Getting apple to where it is today in 11 years was no small feat.

He gave the people what they want. (And unlike the poster above who claims to use apple because it’s the best of the worst)

iPads Pro
Ditching Intel
Apple Watch
Fitness
AirPods
HomePods
Apple TV+
Apple Music
Beats acquisition
Privacy drive

Nah…… he’s not a visionary ?
 
But Apple is still focused on the customer. The only difference is, their customer today is an upper middle class person, non-demanding, loyal to the brand beyond comprehension and will accept everything coming from the company on the annual base. Excitingnewfeatures™ and stuff.

Tim has inherited very good foundation from Steve, and had to do literally one thing - keep high profit margins along with focus on consumer products (walled garden phones and gadgets for technically illiterate and semi-literate) and playing safe. Thus the poor QA and half-baked products - because average Apple customer doesn't care.
Very condescending post. You grouped the entirety of apple customers in one bucket.
 
You assume that being an Apple user equates to being a happy Apple user. Just because I can't find a good phone, and I have to use an inferior iPhone, doesn't mean I think it's a good design or a good OS. Yet I'm one of those users that you cite as evidence of approval of Apple's product.
If its an inferior phone, then how can't you find a better one. It's either inferior and you can find a better one. or Its not inferior and there isn't a better one, it can't be both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: w7ay and I7guy
If I own 5.5% of a trillion dollar company, I’m going to tell you its the best thing since sliced bread even if we are killing baby pandas behind closed doors.
Love the fools downvoting this.

No, this isn't saying your favorite company is badly managed. And obviously Berkshire Hathaway doesn't think so either, or they wouldn't have so much money invested.

But ask yourself, why is a large institutional investor sharing this opinion now? Do you think it's for your benefit? Do you think it's because they're planning to increase their position in AAPL in the near future?

What you need to do is watch what they're doing, not what they're saying. Their position in AAPL is a sign of confidence. Coming out and saying how much they just love Apple, though? There's always a motive.
 
Ironic. I bought an iphone last year to see what all the fuss was about as my last one was an iPhone 4. I lasted about 2 weeks before I got annoyed with all the limitations and returned it. People might give their right arm, but thats only because they don't know better.
Cue the condescending Android lovers in 3..2.. oh never mind
 
If its an inferior phone, then how can't you find a better one. It's either inferior and you can find a better one. or Its not inferior and there isn't a better one, it can't be both.


There could not be a phone that meets their approval ergo they are all inferior. Said types of consumers aren’t statistically relevant though. No business caters to that person beyond token gestures.
 
Love the fools downvoting this.

No, this isn't saying your favorite company is badly managed. And obviously Berkshire Hathaway doesn't think so either, or they wouldn't have so much money invested.

But ask yourself, why is a large institutional investor sharing this opinion now? Do you think it's for your benefit? Do you think it's because they're planning to increase their position in AAPL in the near future?

What you need to do is watch what they're doing, not what they're saying. Their position in AAPL is a sign of confidence. Coming out and saying how much they just love Apple, though? There's always a motive.


Well said. Money talks bull**** walks.
 
Two days ago I posted on MR that Cook is the best CEO, and numerous people went bananas. I said it before, he's not a product visionary or genius, but he sent Apple into the stratosphere as a company.
At the end of the day, Steve Jobs selected him for a reason.

Surely Jobs knew that Cook wasn't a product visionary, but he was enough of an artist/visionary/businessman to know that Cook's skillsets were superb, he had 13 years in the company and was all-in on the culture of Apple. There were enough talented professionals around Cook to raise the corporation to even greater heights. He has.
 
You know, if they fired every single one of their software developers and replaced them with children in a sweat shop, it would still have nearly zero effect on their profits comparatively. The two things you're trying to put together here do not relate in any way that could be anything but coincidence. Also, what software is ungodly bad?

Ungodly well managed enough to put profits into orbit, but not well managed enough to keep a lid on spiralling bugs and bad design choices on every device I own.
 
Yes. He is an incredibly good CEO; he excels at managing as nobody else does.

Steve Jobs was a products guy. He was a visionary. And he cared deeply about the products. He made products that would make him happy, and he had an incredible sense of design and ergonomics. Steve Jobs was absolutely against a stylus for the iPad and a touch screen for the Mac; he had strong feelings about this and never let those features into the final product. He put Apple's products at his sky-high standards and made the company really innovative.

Tim Cook cares about the company. He does not care so much about each product. He wants to make products that will make customers happy. He is not really interested in the features of a given product. He does not care whether the iPad uses a stylus or not. What he wants is to see the wheels turning. And that is what a company is in the end.

Although Tim Cook is not an innovative genius, his great management skills compensate for that. As a result of good management, Apple has more resources to invest in things such as its own chip. Tim Cook's Apple may not come up with the next iPhone or iPad, but it can make a better iPhone or iPad.
"he had an incredible sense of design and ergonomics"
The man insisted on a one-button mouse and small phone screens for how long?
iu
 
Frankly, you don’t get to the position munger and buffett are in by trying to prop up weak companies with PR statements. I’m honestly baffled anyone thinks that’s how this stuff is done.

You get in the position of these investors by being a cold-hearted jerk. Nobody is making billions by being honest and polite to people. They BS their way into their money and often to the detriment of those they encounter on their way up the financial latter.

I have to wonder why this is even a story. Like someone else said. There is a motive behind this information being disseminated like this. Likely back-end deals of some kind that benefit the investor. This sure as hell didn’t come out and a story to make people feel good about Apple.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.