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 Tops Fortune's 'Most Admired Companies' List for Seventh Consecutive Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
thats one take on it.
Nobody doubts Google collects copious amounts of Data. its' their business model. But "EVIL".
what has google done evil with your data? They do not sell personal data to 3rd parties or advertisers
They sell targetted ad space based upon your data to focus advertisements and services towards what they believe (based on that data) you are most interested in.
I Do agree that google doesn't need to know everything about me. its a little too much and it gives them a great deal of leverage to be evil should they choose to be (who knows, maybe it's how skynet gets started).
But right now they are not really doing much "evil". Depending on whose "hat" (stake holders) you are wearing, they could be considered doing the "robin hood" of the mobile business.
its a different business model. That is all. Google is able to make devices extremely affordable for their users by having a business model where we don't pay for google's profits. Google takes the profits from their ad and databusiness, and uses those profits to provide affordable devices.
Don't be fooled though. Apple also collects personal data for similar activities. They have just been far less succesfull at it because Apple's model, at premium pricing would piss us off to no end. Think about it. Apple charges us premium high end pricing on their phones and earns profit (est 50% profit on iphone sales) and THEN turns around and makes more profit off that by advertising and the like. Many Apple users would be quite upset.
However Apple does have a data collection and advertising arm. http://advertising.apple.com/. Calling google evil for it needs to have similar applied here too. don't apply double standards. they're not good. At least googles, Apples and even Amazon's track record for privacy of personal data far exceeds that of Facebook!
however on top for "desired" companies. It makes a lot of sense having Apple #1. they're extremely profitable. Extremely influential and extremely relevant to our current world. They're an American icon of technology and as a business, they should be extremely proud of just how far they've managed to come in 30 years
Last edited:
Not to the extremes these companies do, no. Why should they be any different?
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jul/19/oecd-tax-reform-proposals-amazon
Vic... buddy. I'm not sure if you know how it's supposed to be done, but this ain't it. 1st, you have to go "all in". Google, Samsung, Microsoft, heck any company without this
, yeah they're all bad. You have to be totally with us or you're totally against us. There is no room for personal use case. Evil incarnate= all others. 2nd, logic and common sense are not allowed. Your comments must contain: gratuitous hyperbole, completely unrelated deflection, useless anecdotal "facts", or a horrible car analogy using Ferrari, Mercedes, or BMW. Personally I'd prefer you use a combination, but that's just me. 3rd, realize if Apple and another company are doing the exact same thing, Apple's motives are altruistic, the other company is greedy.Follow those simple rules and we can turn MR into appleinsider in no time at all. Please edit your comment to reflect a change in your behavior.
<- better put this, someone might actually agree with this dribble
Since I have worked with quite a few... I don't. But then again, I see what you are saying, in a general all around sense yes, I agree.
i don't see Samsung on that list, well done Apple
Really...?
I see Starbucks on the list.... I suppose I have to admire the way in which they overcharge me for a coffee in a paper cup, which usually is half filled with luke warm froth and then pay little to no viable Tax to my government.
However, I have more admiration for a Company like Samsung than Starbucks.
Did anyone notice that Google has a "overall score" of 8.07? I wonder what that means.
Also, the "Nine key attributes of reputation" ranking isn't really a ranking if multiple company can be "ranked"#1.
This whole thing is kind of weird.
No.2 at Global Competitiveness while No.5 at Social Responsibility? Are they really so shallow and so easily manipulated by the news pieces? Obviously even the corporate executives and directors are stupid enough at this regards.
Apple should definitely get a very low rank at Global Competitiveness, since it emphasize on profit margin much more than on sales volume, while at the same time their products often carry a high production cost, so their products often have a low value/price ratio.
But on the other hand, Apple should definitely get THE No.1 at Social Responsibility. There is no any other big businesses do things remotely close to the level of effort and money Apple spends regularly for this purpose, instead of economical reasons.
Apple should definitely get a very low rank at Global Competitiveness, since it emphasize on profit margin much more than on sales volume, while at the same time their products often carry a high production cost, so their products often have a low value/price ratio.
But on the other hand, Apple should definitely get THE No.1 at Social Responsibility. There is no any other big businesses do things remotely close to the level of effort and money Apple spends regularly for this purpose, instead of economical reasons.
IT'S A PEER SURVEY as the article to which you have posted made clear: "The ranking was based on a survey taken by corporate peers including executives, directors, and industry analysts..."
Believe me, they have all heard of Berkshire Hathaway.
Laughing at anyone who takes this seriously.
American company does a "world" survey and finds American companies take 18 of the top 20 places.
America =/= World
It's like the saying goes about your sports leagues. Only one country is pompous enough to call themselves 'World Champions' without inviting the rest of the world.
If you think I am being anti-American, go to the website. You can sort it by 'States' instead of 'Countries'. Most of the American states are there; and the bottom one is that insignificant other 95% of the world, home to 7 billion people known as "Outside U.S."!
8 non-US companies in the top 50.
American company does a "world" survey and finds American companies take 18 of the top 20 places.
America =/= World
It's like the saying goes about your sports leagues. Only one country is pompous enough to call themselves 'World Champions' without inviting the rest of the world.
If you think I am being anti-American, go to the website. You can sort it by 'States' instead of 'Countries'. Most of the American states are there; and the bottom one is that insignificant other 95% of the world, home to 7 billion people known as "Outside U.S."!
8 non-US companies in the top 50.
Then you should look for a list of the top charities. Businesses are out to maximize profit for the stakeholders. Plain and simple. Charities are out to help out a specific cause/group of people. They have different purposes.
its an american group of companies effectively patting themselves on the back for a job well done and really doesn't take into account worldwide companies.
Most "admired"?
The values of Fortune magazine are pretty apparent. That's not a list I'd want to be on.
The values of Fortune magazine are pretty apparent. That's not a list I'd want to be on.
Here is their ridiculous methodology for the "World's Most Admired Companies":
I'd like to see the list 3,920 respondents of executives and analysts... they probably just setup a web page and blasted out an email to Fortune subscribers asking them what their job title was and if they wanted to fill out a survey.
.
