Apple Jumps 13 Spots in Glassdoor's Annual List of Best Places to Work, But Remains Far Behind Facebook and Google

[Gudi]

I'd like to see the data on this because Dell, HP, and Lenovo sell and lease huge numbers of PCs to businesses, and many of those PCs that businesses buy are $1,000+

The opposite is true. Businesses are responsible for the race to the bottom, buying the cheapest Windows boxes they can get for their underpaid employees. Only when people buy computers for themselves, they begin to value user experience more than price.

Windows PCs are all essentially the same, even the $1000+ ones have razor thin profit margins. Software developers need to write code with the average PC hardware in mind. You can’t assume a joystick, so most PC games are controlled with mouse and keyboard.

Only Microsoft (Windows 8) and Intel (Ultrabooks) are powerful enough to force innovation within this ecosystem. Usually only after they’ve seen Apples flawless implementation (iPad, MacBook Air). OEMs are unable to differentiate from competitors and make a profit.

The value of the OS X monopoly

With the Mac the story is that Apple’s OS X is primarily responsible for delivering quadruple hardware margins vis-a-vis the most successful PC vendor.
— Horace Dediu
[doublepost=1544102226][/doublepost]

Sounds like it "impresses" more than plenty of others for Facebook to be a fairly established business in the tech world.

In the advertising world.

You really don't think advertisers care about the ingenuity of how they can effectively tailor their advertisements on the FB platform?

No, I just think that’s not an impressive new technology, but a network effect of the available data. If you could make everyone in your area tell you who they are and what they like, you could start selling the same kind of ads without licensing any tech from Facebook. The art is in keeping people on the site and annoy them with ads and privacy scandals just enough without making them leave and delete their data.

Social engineering, in the context of information security, refers to psychological manipulation of people into performing actions or divulging confidential information.

There is (criminal) value in this skill, but I don’t consider it a technology.

 

[C DM]

In the advertising world.

Certainly how some might see it, not quite how most see it.
[doublepost=1544107214][/doublepost]

The opposite is true. Businesses are responsible for the race to the bottom, buying the cheapest Windows boxes they can get for their underpaid employees. Only when people buy computers for themselves, they begin to value user experience more than price.

What shows that that opposite is true, that macOS has over a 90% share when it comes to $1000+ computers in business?

 

[Gudi]

What shows that macOS has over 90% share when it comes to $1000+ computers?

If You Buy a Computer That Costs Over $1000, It's Probably a Mac

 

[Stella]

If You Buy a Computer That Costs Over $1000, It's Probably a Mac

That article is from 2009.

It's now 2018, almost 2019. Most people would consider it "out of date", which it most definitely is.

 

[C DM]

If You Buy a Computer That Costs Over $1000, It's Probably a Mac

"It should be noted, however, that these numbers are for retail—not for business purchases or PCs people built themselves."

 

[Gudi]

That article is from 2009. It's now 2018, almost 2019.

And in the meantime the PC market began to shrink rapidly while Mac sales stayed stable at increased prices. Can you guess what that means for Apples profit share?

 

[Stella]

And in the meantime the PC market began to shrink rapidly while Mac sales stayed stable at increased prices. Can you guess what that means for Apples profit share?

That article in 2018 is totally and utterly meaningless. First off, its way out of date, the PC landscape has changed considerably in 9 years. Secondly, right at the bottom of the article - it quite clearly states:

"It should be noted, however, that these numbers are for retail—not for business purchases or PCs people built themselves."

Yet, quite unbelievably, you still try and back up that article, when its statistics only show a subset of > $1000 PC purchases!!! ( from 9 years ago )

This sub thread started because you refused to acknowledge that Facebook is a Tech company.

And what is the tech Facebook is supposed to work on? They’re not building computers or hardware of any kind. They don’t build an operating system or even their own browser. Their Facebook branded phone flopped. All they have is an app and a website like every other company on this planet. By that standard McDonalds is a tech company.

 

[Gudi]

"It should be noted, however, that these numbers are for retail—not for business purchases or PCs people built themselves."

Nobody has numbers for DIY PCs, because individuals don’t report on whether they buy a component to build a new or upgrade an existing PC. But this market is also believed to shrink rapidly.

 

[sw1tcher]

The opposite is true. Businesses are responsible for the race to the bottom, buying the cheapest Windows boxes they can get for their underpaid employees. Only when people buy computers for themselves, they begin to value user experience more than price.

Windows PCs are all essentially the same, even the $1000+ ones have razor thin profit margins. Software developers need to write code with the average PC hardware in mind. You can’t assume a joystick, so most PC games are controlled with mouse and keyboard.

Only Microsoft (Windows 8) and Intel (Ultrabooks) are powerful enough to force innovation within this ecosystem. Usually only after they’ve seen Apples flawless implementation (iPad, MacBook Air). OEMs are unable to differentiate from competitors and make a profit.

The value of the OS X monopoly

If You Buy a Computer That Costs Over $1000, It's Probably a Mac

SMH. Old outdated articles.

And none that I can see that shows that

A) macOS has an over 90% market share for $1,000+ computers,

and/or

B) on which Apple makes more profit than all Windows OEMs combined

And in the meantime the PC market began to shrink rapidly while Mac sales stayed stable at increased prices. Can you guess what that means for Apples profit share?

PC sales have actually been growing again since late 2017/early 2018.

https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/12/pc-market-grew-in-q4-2017/

driven mainly by business PC upgrades

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/13/17567760/pc-sales-growth-idc-gartner-july-2018


And Apple computer sales have been on the decline this year.

> https://www.patentlyapple.com/paten...ve-to-underperform-the-market-in-q3-2018.html

In April Patently Apple reported on PC sales and Apple was shown to be in the cellar's fifth position with Growth being non-existent and in fact down by close to 5%. Today IDC posted their PC statistical chart for Q3 and we're able to see that Apple is once again in the cellar position with even a higher negative growth factor of -11.6%. The industry as a whole was down 0.9%.

For the USA market, IDC reports that "The U.S. PC market had yet another growth quarter with a total of 17.2 million units shipped. The boost in PC volume was a result of growing demand for notebook PCs in the enterprise segment and increasing popularity of gaming systems that supported the consumer segment."

In respect to Apple, IDC added that "Apple finished the quarter in 5th place, declined over 11%, and was the only top 5 company to underperform the overall market."


> https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-are-pcs-sales-growing-while-mac-sales-are-crashing/

For the first time in six years, PC sales are showing clear signs of growth. But the Mac just had its worst quarter in seven years.

While they differ on methodologies, both Gartner and IDC agree that the PC market is growing, claiming 1.4 and 2.7 percent growth respectively. But the Mac just had a bad quarter.

A really bad quarter. One that amounted to a 13 percent unit shipment decline year-on-year. Shipments are now at a level not seen since Q3 2010.

 

[C DM]

Nobody has numbers for DIY PCs, because individuals don’t report on whether they buy a component to build a new or upgrade an existing PC. But this market is also believed to shrink rapidly.

Probably doesn't really need to be said, given the obviousness of it all here, but the focus has really been on the business side of things.

 

[sw1tcher]

This sub thread started because you refused to acknowledge that Facebook is a Tech company.

And when I pointed out that Facebook actually does make hardware (Oculus and Portal) which Gudi felt was a requirement to be a tech company, he moves the goal post by dismissing them as "niche products."

Niche products totally unimportant to their core business.

And when I also pointed out how Facebook sells networking equipment they created, he stays silent and shifts the conversation to $1,000+ computers and market share which he tries to support with old out-dated articles.

LOL

 

[Gudi]

This sub thread started because you refused to acknowledge that Facebook is a Tech company.

You act as if that’s an undisputed fact which needs no proof cause every ***** already believes it. Nothing is true until proven.

For the first time in six years, PC sales are showing clear signs of growth. But the Mac just had its worst quarter in seven years.

So what? Instead of outdated data you want to mislead us with current data. There is no doubt that Apple creates plenty of innovative technologies which are unique to their platform and allow them to charge a premium and earn the highest profit margins of the entire industry.

Show me the technology that drives Facebook? From a users point of view it’s an ordinary website. The only hindrance for competition is that you can’t make your entire circle of friends switch to an competitor and reenter all their data again.
[doublepost=1544115100][/doublepost]

And when I pointed out that Facebook actually does make hardware (Oculus and Portal) which Gudi felt was a requirement to be a tech company, he moves the goal post by dismissing them as "niche products."

Stop lying! I never said something about hardware as an requirement. In fact software is the requirement to make a contribution in information technology. Oculus and VR in general are failing, because of a lack in software and content.

VR is in a tailspin, and the sales numbers prove it

And when I also pointed out how Facebook sells networking equipment they created, he stays silent and shifts the conversation to $1,000+ computers and market share which he tries to support with old out-dated articles.

No, I shifted the conversation to Xerox PARC, who created all these amazing technologies and failed to turn them into products. As far as I know Facebook hasn’t become a Ciscokiller yet. And they’re also not a VR company yet. These are all dreams of a future that might never come. Apple transformed itself from the Mac company to the iPod company to the iPhone company.

Facebook is still Facebook. They use information technology to build their advertising business, but they don’t successfully create IT products.

 

[Stella]

I posted one definition of what a "Tech Company" is already. If you don't consider Facebook a tech company then that's up to you. Simple as that.

I consider (and not limited to ) these other companies to be "Tech companies":
Twitter, Uber, Shopify,Netflix, Ebay, Airbnb, Adobe, LinkedIn, and my current employer ( who provides a web based service and integration APIs to it's customers, and does not sell it's own software ).

Also, I believe the Earth is a globe and not flat.

You act as if that’s an undisputed fact which needs no proof cause every ***** already believes it. Nothing is true until proven.

Show me the technology that drives Facebook? From a users point of view it’s an ordinary website.

Others have given you examples of the technology that drives Facebook. You choose to ignore them.
"An ordinary website". Does not reflect the complexity and range of technology that is used to drive Facebook's business.

Stop lying! I never said something about hardware as an requirement.

You implied it, here:

And what is the tech Facebook is supposed to work on? They’re not building computers or hardware of any kind. They don’t build an operating system or even their own browser. Their Facebook branded phone flopped. All they have is an app and a website like every other company on this planet. By that standard McDonalds is a tech company.

 

[C DM]

Facebook is still Facebook. They use information technology to build their advertising business, but they don’t successfully create IT products.

Tech is not limited to just creating IT products. Perhaps some particular limited and/dated definition that someone might choose would have it laid out that way, but that isn't how tech seen in the world overall (at least certainly not for some time now).

 

[Stella]

100%.


I'm finding this thread to be quite bizarre, and gets more bizarre as Gudi posts more.

And what is the tech Facebook is supposed to work on? They’re not building computers or hardware of any kind. They don’t build an operating system or even their own browser. Their Facebook branded phone flopped. All they have is an app and a website like every other company on this planet. By that standard McDonalds is a tech company.

And when I pointed out that Facebook actually does make hardware (Oculus and Portal) which Gudi felt was a requirement to be a tech company, he moves the goal post by dismissing them as "niche products."



And when I also pointed out how Facebook sells networking equipment they created, he stays silent and shifts the conversation to $1,000+ computers and market share which he tries to support with old out-dated articles.

LOL

[doublepost=1544120023][/doublepost]

Facebook is still Facebook. They use information technology to build their advertising business, but they don’t successfully create IT products.

WTF? Really?

What do you think Facebook is ( a platform - or what you describe cutely as a 'website' ), if its not an IT product that has a user base of over 2 billion that helped Facebook company to generate $4 billion profit in 2017?

 

[Gudi]

Others have given you examples of the technology that drives Facebook. You choose to ignore them.

Using technology (including those you created yourself for your own use) isn’t the same as being a tech company. Every restaurant, hotel and hairdresser uses IT.

"An ordinary website". Does not reflect the complexity and range of technology that is used to drive Facebook's business.

It’s just scaled up to serve millions of users.

You implied it, here:

I deleted a paragraph about Adobe, because I thought software companies being IT companies wasn’t a point worth to make.

 

[Stella]

You really are entertaining. Loving this thread.

LMAO at your responses below, which are comparing apple vs oranges, or totally out of context.

Using technology (including those you created yourself for your own use) isn’t the same as being a tech company. Every restaurant, hotel and hairdresser uses IT.
It’s just scaled up to serve millions of users.
I deleted a paragraph about Adobe, because I thought software companies being IT companies wasn’t a point worth to make.

 

[Gudi]

Tech is not limited to just creating IT products.

Yes it is. Otherwise every company would be a tech company and the distinction is useless. There are millions of lines of code and dozens of ARM processors in every car. Most of it is mechatronic without any user interface like Airbag and ABS. At most the driver can switch the system on and off. Why isn’t BMW on that list, if any kind of technology could make a tech company? Chemical and Pharma companies work with computers. Every kid doing their homework uses computers.

 

[Stella]

Gudi, you have a lack of understanding of what a "Tech company" is.

Using technology (including those you created yourself for your own use) isn’t the same as being a tech company. Every restaurant, hotel and hairdresser uses IT.
It’s just scaled up to serve millions of users.
I deleted a paragraph about Adobe, because I thought software companies being IT companies wasn’t a point worth to make.

Yes it is. Otherwise every company would be a tech company and the distinction is useless. There are millions of lines of code and dozens of ARM processors in every car. Most of it is mechatronic without any user interface like Airbag and ABS. At most the driver can switch the system on and off. Why isn’t BMW on that list, if any kind of technology could make a tech company? Chemical and Pharma companies work with computers. Every kid doing their homework uses computers.

 

[Gudi]

What do you think Facebook is, if its not an IT product that has a user base of over 2 billion that helped Facebook company to generate $4 billion profit in 2017?

Facebook is an advertising company. Like every product today it is created with the use of lots of IT. Airbus creates a profit of €4.3bn and uses tons of data to build planes. 3 billion people fly every year. Hypertext was created so that a few dozen particle physicist at CERN could better communicate with each other. The usage of IT is everywhere, its creation for others to use is not.

 

[C DM]

Facebook is an advertising company. Like every product today it is created with the use of lots of IT. Airbus creates a profit of €4.3bn and uses tons of data to build planes. 3 billion people fly every year. Hypertext was created so that a few dozen particle physicist at CERN could better communicate with each other. The usage of IT is everywhere, its creation for others to use is not.

So all the software, infrastructure, AI, etc. that Facebook used to create, update, modify, and add on to its service has already existed somewhere and they simply took it all and just used it?

 

[Stella]

LOL. Out of context response.

Your response below:

Facebook is an advertising company. Like every product today it is created with the use of lots of IT. Airbus creates a profit of €4.3bn and uses tons of data to build planes. 3 billion people fly every year. Hypertext was created so that a few dozen particle physicist at CERN could better communicate with each other. The usage of IT is everywhere, its creation for others to use is not.

Was a reply refuting your claim that Facebook "don't successsfully create IT products" here:

[doublepost=1544120023][/doublepost]

Facebook is still Facebook. They use information technology to build their advertising business, but they don’t successfully create IT products.

Refuting:

WTF? Really?

What do you think Facebook is ( a platform - or what you describe cutely as a 'website' ), if its not an IT product that has a user base of over 2 billion that helped Facebook company to generate $4 billion profit in 2017?

So, do you think Facebook still haven't created a "successful IT Product"?

 

[Gudi]

So all the software, infrastructure, AI, etc. that Facebook used to create, update, modify, and add on to its service has already existed somewhere and they simply took it all and just used it?

Every company creates infrastructure, technology and workflows for itself. What Facebook creates as a service for others is advertising.

 

[C DM]

Every company creates infrastructure, technology and workflows for itself. What Facebook creates as a service for others is advertising.

And as service for users that use it?

 

[sw1tcher]

So what? Instead of outdated data you want to mislead us with current data.

*facepalm*

Current data is more pertinent than 10 year old data. Particularly data that excludes business PC sales.

There is no doubt that Apple creates plenty of innovative technologies which are unique to their platform and allow them to charge a premium and earn the highest profit margins of the entire industry.

No one is disputing this. But this doesn't mean that

A) macOS has an over 90% market share for $1,000+ computers

and

B) on which Apple makes more profit than all Windows OEMs combined

Show me the technology that drives Facebook?

I already did. Multiple times. Can't help you if you choose to ignore the facts.

From a users point of view it’s an ordinary website.

Like you, these people are clueless.

Stop lying! I never said something about hardware as an requirement.

Yes, you did. You said Facebook isn't a tech company because they don't build any tech like "computers or hardware of any kind". . . right here:

And what is the tech Facebook is supposed to work on? They’re not building computers or hardware of any kind. They don’t build an operating system or even their own browser.

As for the part about them not building "an operating system," they built the system that powers Facebook.

In fact software is the requirement to make a contribution in information technology. Oculus and VR in general are failing, because of a lack in software and content.

So now the requirement to be a tech company is software? Moving the goal post again, I see. Fine. So, who do you think created the software that powers Facebook?

Answer: Facebook

Facebook is still Facebook. They use information technology to build their advertising business, but they don’t successfully create IT products.

Facebook, the users, and the ad platform are the product.

But maybe you're right about them not being successful. Facebook only managed to grow their revenue of $153 million in 2007 to a paltry $40.7 billion in 2017, and where net income during the same period went from a loss of $138 million to a profit of $15.934 billion.

Revenue growth of 2,560% is pathetic.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/277229/facebooks-annual-revenue-and-net-income/