This argument of saying anyone could make massive revenues is just ridicoulous. Answer me this who is growing faster and who has more cash?
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 Microsoft in Third Quarter Revenue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This argument of saying anyone could make massive revenues is just ridicoulous. Answer me this who is growing faster and who has more cash?
OF course you would miss the point... getting the point would mean Apple isn't making more money then Microsoft.... Oh no!
What I gave was an example... in case your not familar:
ex·am·ple
n.
1. One that is representative of a group as a whole
2. One serving as a pattern of a specific kind
3. A similar case that constitutes a model or precedent
The third definition is closest to what is applicable here. Now, go back and read my post.
Who is growing faster and who has more cash wasn't the subject of this article or my post, so...
Yeah i amazed at how much money that division has burned. Perhaps a modest market share gain by Bing will turn that around. Someone told me that 1% of the search market is worth $1B in revenue.
No kidding. Linux is that stable as well as OSX. I am three years plus without the need for a server reboot except for when Linux requires a reboot after a kernel update. I can't say the same about windows. When our office was on windows I cannot tell you how many times windows machines froze especially during the busiest days of the week. Also, Apache has never let me down. Can't say the same about IIS - gotta love that yellow screen of death LOL !
No other company makes products quite like Apple does. No mystery. Apple actually gives a damn about what they put their name to. Hence, Apple's control of the hardware + software. Who else does that? No one.
Uncommon attention to detail = uncommon success.
Well obviously they don't charge too much because you still bought into their system, just as they wanted you to. It makes zero sense for anyone to make blanket statements about Apple as I called you out on and you spend money on them still. It's hypocritical, period. To say their products are "expensive" makes sense, because I feel they are too at times, but to say they consistantly charge a premium for lesser hardware specs and then say you still buy them anyway is well......I can't use that word here sadly. The Vista argument is nonsense. You just said you bought a Macbook and installed XP. Every PC that had Vista installed on it could easily have been reformatted with XP so don't go there.
LOL... Reasons made me go for Mac that time are:
1. Most laptops have Vista per-installed. I have tried several laptops (include my cousin who asks me to install XP on his vista laptop) , they either not recognize my Windows XP disk or i can't install or give me some error.
2. I figure since some of my friend recommend Mac OS X and Apple laptop, i thought maybe i could give a try.
3. I can install XP on it. If i don't like Mac OS X, i will just install Windows on it.
4. Price. Since i got some money from my parents and i had a job. So i have enough cash for a entry-level Macbook.
I haven't bought a single Apple computer afterward, i also brought a PC laptop and run Windows on my Macbook at most of time. I wouldn't see myself going for another Mac anytime sooner. I feel iPod touch is OK, except i fee pretty bad for the build in 0.7M camera. If i can buy a Microsoft Zune HD in Canada, i would buy it. I couldn't find anywhere sells it in Canada.
All i can say is that ALL OS and software will have error in some point of time. Sadly some people still think Windows would make BSOD like Windows 98. In fact is that Windows 7 hardly give me (not sure for other people) any BSOD. NOT a single one since i brought Windows 7. So... i can pretty confident say, Windows 7 is just as stable as Mac OS X. I feel sorry Windows let you down and i won't deny your statement. So, i really feel good for you, since you found a good alternative solution.
OSX is based on FreeBSD. It doesn't get any more stable and reliable than that. Sorry, but no way I am trusting my business to Windows servers. I laugh at my associates that run Windows Servers 2003 and up in their offices when I hear of their headaches. Too bad they trusted the sales pitch of Ballmer and Co and never realized the reliability of *Nix servers. I also run a lot of custom web based applications in house. Apache is robust. In comparison I have worked in a Microsoft shop developing .NET apps and I wish I had a dollar for every time I saw a yellow screen of death with IIS.
I am glad you are happy with Windows 7. Now if Ballmer and Co can just get more of you to buy Windows 7 then we might have a different ball game in the 4th quarter, but I doubt it.
Hmm, now might be a good time for me to experiment with SL server. Ahh, that mini is looking nice. Who wants to bet that mini running SL server will outdo a Windows server in performance, security, and reliability?
Just because somebody can force a square peg into a round hole does not make it the correct way of doing things. If you are using the existence of a specialist mini co-lo facility to prove its worth as a server, surely the millions of Windows shops out there do the same for that platform?
Well, there are many different financial numbers on which Apple and Microsoft could be compared. And for many years, Microsoft was ahead in all the numbers (except share price, which everyone should know _is_ quite meaningless). Important numbers would be market caps, enterprise value, revenue, profit. And Microsoft was far, far, far ahead all the time. But in the last years, Apple has been gaining.
About a year ago, Apple for the first time went past Microsoft in market caps and enterprise value. This quarter, Apple overtook Microsoft in quarterly revenue. In a quarter or two Apple will be ahead in annual revenue. Yes, Microsoft is still ahead in profits. But Apple is gaining there as well, and remember that the enterprise value directly measures how the stock market believes future revenues will be developing, so the stock market believes strongly that Apple is going to overtake Microsoft there as well.
So this news doesn't mean that Apple is ahead of Microsoft today, not at all. What it means is that Apple has just passed another milestone on the way of overtaking Microsoft, and Ballmer hasn't demonstrated that he has any idea what to do about it.
You took my post out of its context. I replied to a post in which it was claimed that Steve Jobs was as thin as Twiggy and that was supposed to be a bad sign. With no mentioning of any health problems which I found underhanded and which is why I replied. Proving an underhanded and disingenious argument wrong. So what exactly are you saying? Do you wish Steve Jobs good health, do you wish him bad health, do you find him attractive / unattractive because of his weight, or what?
Obviously not. They were in 2000, but not today. Today they are #3 in the USA, behind (dare I say it) Apple, and Exxon Mobil. And Berkshire Hathaway is on the way of passing them as well.
Apple has tremendous potential in the PC market. They could capture another 30 or 40 percent in the home market and they haven't even started touching the enterprise market. (Not predicting how this will go, but you'll have to agree this is something "left to grow"). The iPod market seems saturated, especially as for example the 14 million iPhone 4 buyers are not very likely to buy an iPod Touch anytime soon. The iPhone has huge potential. The iPad has incredible potential. And I can't see why Apple can't go into search engines? They just started selling ads. There is the Macintosh app store, why shouldn't Apple create a Windows app store? What about music publishing, or building their own map database and supplying their own GPS solution?
I'll take a *Nix server any day over a Windows server. I will take VMware or Xen any day for virtualization over Hyper V. I'll take iOS any day over Windows Phone 7 and Android. The bottom line is SJ was correct in stating that Microsoft makes third rate products and its reflected in this quarter's earnings results.
None of that rant addressed any part of my post. But I dont think we will see eye to eye on any part of this subject. I'm happy to use Windows when it fits the job, and you see anything coming out of Redmond as the damned offspring of a drunken trist between Skeletor and Hitler. I think I'll leave it at that.
I suppose it didn't. But don't under estimate those minis. I am going to replace a big and loud Dell ( PowerEdge 1600SC) running Xen in my home office with a 2010 mini SL server running VMWare Fusion to host a variety of VM's and a production web server running Apache.
Anyways, I am glad you are able to find a use for Windows. I am sorry that I cannot say the same although I have used Windows for over two decades as an end user and .NET application developer before jumping ship.
Surely a cheap Dell/HP desktop running a bare metal hypervisor (the free ESXi for example) would be a much faster and cost effective solution. With Fusion, not only do you have the OS layer taking valuable memory and CPU resources, but your chosen hardware platform only has an out of date Core 2 Duo, performance is going to be.. lacking. OK, so you cannot host OS X, going by the letter of Apple's license agreement, but then again hosting OS X as a guest within Fusion on a Mini is going to be painfully slow.
I do have a spare Dell box around here that I could experiment with ESXi (free version). You've ignited my curiosity. Thanks for the suggestion.
I didn't mean that I was going to run OSX as a guest within SL - Yikes! My plan with the mini server is to have SL as the host OS with Linux guests ( SLES and Ubuntu). These VM's will essentially be my development and testing environments (for my web applications) in addition to a low traffic web server. I like the compactness of the mini server and I am curious to see the impact on my electrical bill by running the mini 24/7 versus my loud Dell boxes.
Can't take Windows CE to the bank.
Microsoft is a least two software renewal cycles behind Apple. Microsoft has not improved Windows significantly since the IBM OS/2 partnership broke up 20 years ago. The new 7 devices run on the craptacular Windows CE kernel.
Microsoft is a least two software renewal cycles behind Apple. Microsoft has not improved Windows significantly since the IBM OS/2 partnership broke up 20 years ago. The new 7 devices run on the craptacular Windows CE kernel.
Just remember, you didn't get there by yourself... lots of loyal customers help build it. My dad was one of them & always to this day spoke highly of apple.
Microsoft is a least two software renewal cycles behind Apple. Microsoft has not improved Windows significantly since the IBM OS/2 partnership broke up 20 years ago. The new 7 devices run on the craptacular Windows CE kernel.
Would love to see a source on this
I am an old time Apple fan and why the heck doesn't Apple get into printers again? We can make a ton of money on ink jet cartridges.
I liked the old 4x4 model in the old days with iMac, iBook, Power Mac, and PowerBook, but I am glad Apple has offered iPad, iPod, iTunes, MBA, Apple TV, large LCD screen, and the mini I am typing on.
I would like to see a mid-priced netbook not actually trying to go against Acer, but making something in that size range but with the durability Apple is known for as well as having OS X on it. Something in the $499 dollar range would be great and I don't think it would compete against iPad.
I think Apple can expand their offerings and it's probably a smart thing to do in this recession. When other companies are down, it's the opportunity for Apple to tap into them and become a more wide ranging company.
I am not sure about search engines, however, but who thought the iPad would take off like it did? I think the consumer has finally gone with what works better, regardless of what company we are talking about, and it's why Apple has gone up and can one day catch Microsoft on every level.