Microsoft Passes Apple to Become Most Valuable U.S. Company

[Tiger8]

Yes, Microsoft-free IT. Like the people who get all-Chromebook setups (usually for schools) or deploy Macs in businesses without Office or Windows and the cost and long-term pain that comes with it. It's pretty common.

It is the IT people who decide what tech a business will use. 90s-2000s they've all been buying Microsoft. This has been in steady decline since.

Even the most anti Microsoft corp IT have to cave and allow a small Microsoft app called ... Office. You know, the one both google and Apple have been trying for years to catch up to?

With services and cloud offering, software, hardware, and of course dozens of strategic alliances, Microsoft is indeed a force to be reckoned with.

I don't know why some Apple fanboys still can't move on from the 80s and 90s rivalry, and take every opportunity to undermine MSFT

 

[ftaok]

Nice summary. It wasn't until after the subsidy ended that I realized who benefitted the most from them. If you didn't get the subsidy then, you were basically subsidizing those that choose the subsidy because you and the other subsidy person paid the same rates. (ATT) I often wonder if / how much such pricing took advantage of poor people who couldn't take advantage of the subsidy. Especially if they were a family with a couple of children. They paid full rates and had to use less the great phones. Or, where there subsidies on other phone brands that poor people could get that were of similar quality that were subsidized by ATT? Say Samsung or Motorola.

Back in those days, anyone could get the subsidy, provided they passed a credit check. Around the time of the iPhone3GS (2010??), you had a choice of a "free", $100, or $200 phones. Free phones probably cost the carriers about $350 to $450. The more expensive phones were probably in the range of $500 to $800. For iPhones, at least, the typical subsidy was $450.

People who couldn't put $200 up front, were able to choose other phones. Let's say a mid-tier Samsung or Moto or LG and walk out with a "free" phone. They probably ended up with a $350-ish subsidy. More if the carrier was trying to clear inventory of a particular phone model. In the end, rich or poor, you got a subsidy. Now, the issue of credit score could affect a poor person from being able to get a plan, but as long as they could put a cash deposit, the carriers would let them in.

I am also wondering who benefits and who loses with Amazon Prime. Do the people NOT using Amazon Prime subsidize the Prime members? If I save $500 on shipping and Prime cost me $100 then, this seems like an unsustainable model if all or most of the Prime members cost Amazon more than Amazon receives from Prime membership. Thus, how is it being sustained. Price increase across the board including those that don't subscribe to Amazon Prime?
Ugh! This post is poorly written but I had to get it out.
Take care.

Another example would be credit cards. Folks who use credit cards incur a cost for folks who pay cash. There's a transaction fee for every credit card purchase that the retailer has to pay for. This fee is passed onto the consumers, but not just the ones who use credit cards. Retailers don't want to (or have agreements with the CC companies) list two prices (one for CC and one for cash) so everyone pays a little more. You can make an argument that this is fair or unfair. But it just is.

In society, there's always people who will benefit more than others. This is just the way it is and it's not necessarily unfair. Homeowners pay school taxes. If I have 7 school aged kids, I pay the same taxes as someone that doesn't have kids (or perhaps their kids are grown). There's tons of examples of this kind of thing. I think, as with most things in life, that it balances out.

 

[Baymowe335]

From a sales perspective, you have a point. But that is all you have. The problem is Apple's sales are tied directly to their hardware. Apple services are bigger in sales when compared 1:1 with a singular company, but not in scope or global impact.

If you count how many companies use AWS and the revenue they are generating in addition to what AWS is generating itself, Apple is a spec of sand. Apple has absolutely ZERO impact on external businesses day to day. They don't provide services or anything outside of their ecosystem. They don't even host iCloud themselves nor scale/run it well. Sure when it comes to sales they are a beast because they have a consumer device that a lot of people want, and people purchase products tied to the platform.

If you want to say Apple's services are bigger in sales, that's fine. I'll give you that. But if you are claiming they are bigger than AWS by scale, I think you should do less financial reading and more case studies on tech.

It's the same model for the overvalued Netflix. Apple has more paying subscribers than NFLX, which is valued at 100X earnings. RPU is coveted by Wall street and Apple's RPU is extremely valuable. Apple can also roll out new services, subscriptions, and other revenue streams in the future. People have their smartphone/watch CONSTANTLY. Netflix is only when you're watching TV.

I don't buy your argument about Apple somehow having subpar services. I'd rather be Apple, with more money and profit, than any other company. Apple reaches a TON of people...like well over a billion.

 

[Defthand]

Android is a platform but again, its open source so everyone owns it really.

In principle, that's the philosophy and definition of 'open source software'. However, in Android's case, the reality is that Google develops it and shares it with others. To my knowledge, the embellishments that Samsung and others include with Android, aren't officially added to Android. Nor does Samsung, for example, share their embellishments with other Android brands. If not Google, who would develop or manage Android? Handset manufacturers would be reluctant to fund/develop new features that competitors would profit from.

 

[sirozha]

Fixed it for you.

Oh yeah, USB-C on an iOS device requires vision.

 

[MacBH928]

In principle, that's the philosophy and definition of 'open source software'. However, in Android's case, the reality is that Google develops it and shares it with others. To my knowledge, the embellishments that Samsung and others include with Android, aren't officially added to Android. Nor does Samsung, for example, share their embellishments with other Android brands. If not Google, who would develop or manage Android? Handset manufacturers would be reluctant to fund/develop new features that competitors would profit from.

But why Google does it for free then?!
My Only guess is that if Google quits on it, other big cellphone company will carry on with it because they need software to sell their hardware be it Nokia, Oppo, Huewei, Samsung, or any one else.

 

[fairuz]

Even the most anti Microsoft corp IT have to cave and allow a small Microsoft app called ... Office. You know, the one both google and Apple have been trying for years to catch up to?

With services and cloud offering, software, hardware, and of course dozens of strategic alliances, Microsoft is indeed a force to be reckoned with.

I don't know why some Apple fanboys still can't move on from the 80s and 90s rivalry, and take every opportunity to undermine MSFT

There are plenty of places that don't use Office. Everyone caught up to Word and Outlook years ago, so you really only need Office if you need Excel. I haven't used Office in a very long time.

And btw, I was born in 1996 and had no idea what Microsoft was until like 2001, so idk what the 80s was like, and afaik Apple was a piece of garbage in the 90s anyway (and I consider them lame now too). I can tell you that people my age don't touch MS stuff unless it's the Xbox, and people in the tech industry uniformly consider MS a "dinosaur" among the likes of IBM and Oracle. So as time passes, they lose loyalty.

 

[aaronhead14]

Oh yeah, USB-C on an iOS device requires vision.

Yes, it does. A vision of the future where the plugs on all your devices are the same. Not just the same size and form factor, but truly the same. So you don't have to keep buying dongles and adapters. So you don't have to buy different dongles for different devices. So you can actually plug your phone into your laptop without having to buy an additional cord. So you can plug your phone into your laptop without having to worry that you're plugging the wrong end in. USB-C made Lightning obsolete on day 1. So yes, vision. Keeping Lightning is an objectively inferior method. It results in a poor user experience. You may be fine with the janky user experience, but it's still stupid. Lightning has to go.

 

[Defthand]

But why Google does it for free then?!
My Only guess is that if Google quits on it, other big cellphone company will carry on with it because they need software to sell their hardware be it Nokia, Oppo, Huewei, Samsung, or any one else.

Google doesn’t sell it (license it), but they don’t do it for free either. It’s a platform for Google to market its services, without Google having to pay for the access or preferential status, like they do in order to be the default search engine in Safari.

 

[ipponrg]

It's the same model for the overvalued Netflix. Apple has more paying subscribers than NFLX, which is valued at 100X earnings. RPU is coveted by Wall street and Apple's RPU is extremely valuable. Apple can also roll out new services, subscriptions, and other revenue streams in the future. People have their smartphone/watch CONSTANTLY. Netflix is only when you're watching TV.

I don't buy your argument about Apple somehow having subpar services. I'd rather be Apple, with more money and profit, than any other company. Apple reaches a TON of people...like well over a billion.

You’re living in a closed minded world of your own doing. Apple reaches a ton of people in their own ecosystem and that is about it. Subscribers means nothing here in pure scale. I don’t think you will ever understand this until you look at this from a global scale perspective.

You are ignoring every global fortune 100 company that uses AWS to reach customers globally. You are ignoring the many data centers operated by Amazon centered around the world that allows their clients to operate their global services at scale to customers world wide.

Again, you make absolutely zero sense here. We are talking scale, and you keep bringing up earnings. Apple mostly btw has static content which is trivial to scale compared to linear dynamic content.

 

[jeremiah256]

I never understood all the Apple is doomed nonsense on this site. Apple is still in a great position moving forward. The smartphone market is saturated and iPhone's are being held onto longer, but once they are replaced - it'll likely be with another iPhone. Recent Mac's have been good options for professionals, the new iPad Pro is a beast of a machine, Apple Watch and Airpods are market leaders, HomePod and HomeKit are still the best implementation of a smart home in my eyes, Apple TV keeps getting more popular, services business is growing and will only continue to do so. They seem more balanced today than they did 5 years ago. Prices are high right now, but I never thought Apple products were cheap to begin with. When the biggest investors in the world keep buying Apple, you should take that into consideration.

Why the doom and gloom? Because Apple is one of the few luxury models that everyone could not only afford but also defend buying. As you stated, you get your money's worth with Apple. Now, while you may still get value from your Apple device, it can be argued that over the last few years, they have been slowly pricing a certain segment of the market out of being able to afford and/or justify the latest Apple product.

 

[sirozha]

Yes, it does. A vision of the future where the plugs on all your devices are the same. Not just the same size and form factor, but truly the same. So you don't have to keep buying dongles and adapters. So you don't have to buy different dongles for different devices. So you can actually plug your phone into your laptop without having to buy an additional cord. So you can plug your phone into your laptop without having to worry that you're plugging the wrong end in. USB-C made Lightning obsolete on day 1. So yes, vision. Keeping Lightning is an objectively inferior method. It results in a poor user experience. You may be fine with the janky user experience, but it's still stupid. Lightning has to go.

You calll this vision, and I call this common sense. To me, vision is something much more profound.

 

[I7guy]

Why the doom and gloom? Because Apple is one of the few luxury models that everyone could not only afford but also defend buying. As you stated, you get your money's worth with Apple. Now, while you may still get value from your Apple device, it can be argued that over the last few years, they have been slowly pricing a certain segment of the market out of being able to afford and/or justify the latest Apple product.

Absolutely agree. Apple’s top tier phones are getting more pricey. Seems like Apple has taken a page from cars. I don’t know the demographics of the “only buy the biggest size maximum memory phone” segment but that constituency has to wrangle with the price.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I think it’s about time Apple were brought back down to earth with the silly price increases they’ve been introducing recently. Hopefully they’ll focus on a device around the price of the XR and put more effort into reassuring consumers they are not a greedy corporation who put profits before product going forward. I’m pleased to see my predictions from 2017 are looking to be correct in the long term. Come on Apple, listen to your consumers!

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I never understood all the Apple is doomed nonsense on this site. Apple is still in a great position moving forward. The smartphone market is saturated and iPhone's are being held onto longer, but once they are replaced - it'll likely be with another iPhone. Recent Mac's have been good options for professionals, the new iPad Pro is a beast of a machine, Apple Watch and Airpods are market leaders, HomePod and HomeKit are still the best implementation of a smart home in my eyes, Apple TV keeps getting more popular, services business is growing and will only continue to do so. They seem more balanced today than they did 5 years ago. Prices are high right now, but I never thought Apple products were cheap to begin with. When the biggest investors in the world keep buying Apple, you should take that into consideration.

I think many iPhone users/fans/enthusiasts around the world were put out by the fact Apple finally listened to the demand but released the long awaited product with what felt like a big 2 fingers up for good measure. ‘Here’s what you’ve been waiting for, but there’s a huge catch.. You have to pay over a grand for this beauty and fit a certain demographic’... Gee thanks.

Going forward they either sell fewer iPhones at a huge premium and hope despite less consumers owning the latest device, they will maintain profits. (Not working currently). Or, they develop an iPhone at a lower price and sell many more of them whilst offering the standard specs the smartphone industry is used to. They make roughly $650 profit on each X series iPhone and can afford to lower their margins to repair dwindling interest by offering it to more people. Lower margins but more units sold will mean a healthy profit can still be achieved. It’s a very different market to a few years ago now smartphones have got so good. Apple need to change with it and start appealing again, not go in the opposite direction.

 

[I7guy]

I think it’s about time Apple were brought back down to earth with the silly price increases they’ve been introducing recently. Hopefully they’ll focus on a device around the price of the XR and put more effort into reassuring consumers they are not a greedy corporation who put profits before product going forward. I’m pleased to see my predictions from 2017 are looking to be correct in the long term. Come on Apple, listen to your consumers!

People keep saying price increases. I keep asking what price increases. Apple sells a Xs max 512 for what? $1,500. What should that model sell for? Should apple cap the highest end model at $849 and then spec the tech to the price? How does apple put an MSRP on how it values it's technology?

People say price increases? In 2012 the iphone 5 ranged from $649 to $849. Today in 2018 you can buy a phone from $449 to $1,500. The Xr costs less than the iphone 5.

 

[DNichter]

Why the doom and gloom? Because Apple is one of the few luxury models that everyone could not only afford but also defend buying. As you stated, you get your money's worth with Apple. Now, while you may still get value from your Apple device, it can be argued that over the last few years, they have been slowly pricing a certain segment of the market out of being able to afford and/or justify the latest Apple product.

That’s true. I think they are trying to further differentiate between an everyday buyer tier and more of a premium tier, allowing them to serve both ends. You see it with the iPhone 7/8 starting at I think $499 and the XR at $749. Also, with the iPad at $329 and the 10.5 at $649. All of these products provide good value and still have the quality Apple is known for. We have more options today than we ever did.
[doublepost=1543677557][/doublepost]

I think many iPhone users/fans/enthusiasts around the world were put out by the fact Apple finally listened to the demand but released the long awaited product with what felt like a big 2 fingers up for good measure. ‘Here’s what you’ve been waiting for, but there’s a huge catch.. You have to pay over a grand for this beauty and fit a certain demographic’... Gee thanks.

Going forward they either sell fewer iPhones at a huge premium and hope despite less consumers owning the latest device, they will maintain profits. (Not working currently). Or, they develop an iPhone at a lower price and sell many more of them whilst offering the standard specs the smartphone industry is used to. They make roughly $650 profit on each X series iPhone and can afford to lower their margins to repair dwindling interest by offering it to more people. Lower margins but more units sold will mean a healthy profit can still be achieved. It’s a very different market to a few years ago now smartphones have got so good. Apple need to change with it and start appealing again, not go in the opposite direction.

I consider the recent higher prices kind of a blip and Apple will recognize that they need to level it off a bit to get back in the good graces of a lot of consumers. It reminds me of the original MacBook Air. Advanced at the time, very high cost that’ll come down over time. You’re already seeing that with the XR. Speaking of it, I’m surprised that the XR doesn’t hit that balance really well for a lot of people. I expect the same thing with the iPad line, probably closer to the $499 price point though. Obviously there’s more that goes into overhead costs than just components so that $650 number isn’t accurate, but yes they make good money on every iPhone sold.

 

[tromboneaholic]

Another one of the 'my daddy is better than your daddy' types on this forum. There are millions enjoying their Surface devices as we speak here, are their experiences invalid because there are 10x more iPads?

Great example of taking a quote out of context.

@Ramchi said

"Just imagine Microsoft comes back with a surprise move by releasing Surface Mobile! Right now their potential is restrained a lot in the mobility space."​

@Sabelonada said

"Do you mean the Surface Go with LTE? Because that's a thing."​

@tromboneaholic said

"And no one is buying them."​

@smoledman said

"Cite"​

@tromboneaholic said

"Compare the past 12 months of iPad unit sales to all Surface devices during the same time period and get back to me."
​

 

[chatin]

People keep saying price increases. I keep asking what price increases. Apple sells a Xs max 512 for what? $1,500.

Plus AppleCare & Theft $200 & Tax - The better part of $2G. High for a phone designed to last a year.

 

[tromboneaholic]

Plus AppleCare & Theft $200 & Tax - The better part of $2G. High for a phone designed to last a year.

My iPhone X still feels like new after a year. I plan on keeping it 2 more years, for a total of 3. I'm sure it will still have plenty of processing power.

Some people buy insurance, some don't. It's not required.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

People keep saying price increases. I keep asking what price increases. Apple sells a Xs max 512 for what? $1,500. What should that model sell for? Should apple cap the highest end model at $849 and then spec the tech to the price? How does apple put an MSRP on how it values it's technology?

People say price increases? In 2012 the iphone 5 ranged from $649 to $849. Today in 2018 you can buy a phone from $449 to $1,500. The Xr costs less than the iphone 5.

I think £1500 for an iPhone is obscene and I don’t doubt the £1k is difficult to break but not by that much. I used to be enthusiastic about iPhone releases and look forward to getting the best most latest iPhone. Now I buy last years device or compare them to a mid tier offering with stifled specs to keep it cheaper and less appealing than their ‘premium range’. That for me has really killed my enthusiasm and support for Apple. I only have to look around at the people I know with older devices and iPhone 7’s and 8’s with no intentions of upgrading to see interest is not what it was.

Right now whether you’ve got a 6S or an XS Max you are pretty much getting the same experience. Where’s the excitement and pull for upgrading because you can? It’s blocked by silly high prices and I’m glad it’s starting to be seen by Apple. Let’s have an XS Max for £899 and make the iPhone range more appealing again. It should be a no brainer to want to upgrade, not a financial hole putting you off.

It could also be that smartphones are now just boring items these days. They all do the same thing and people don’t need them to be current in order to do what they need to do of course. Whatever, Apple should be scratching their heads as things are starting to change.

 

[I7guy]

Plus AppleCare & Theft $200 & Tax - The better part of $2G. High for a phone designed to last a year.

That didn't really address my original comments. The term being thrown around "price increase" is so nebulous. A high price does not mean a price increase. An S Class goes for $120K, is that a price increase, or the car priced at the value Mercedes believes people see in the product?

If people between $1,700 is too high, let them not buy the phone. But don't propagate misinformation about price increases.
[doublepost=1543678812][/doublepost]

I think £1500 for an iPhone is obscene and I don’t doubt the £1k is difficult to break but not by that much. I used to be enthusiastic about iPhone releases and look forward to getting the best most latest iPhone. Now I buy last years device or compare them to a mid tier offering with stifled specs to keep it cheaper and less appealing than their ‘premium range’. That for me has really killed my enthusiasm and support for Apple. I only have to look around at the people I know with older devices and iPhone 7’s and 8’s with no intentions of upgrading to see interest is not what it was.

Right now whether you’ve got a 6S or an XS Max you are pretty much getting the same experience. Where’s the excitement and pull for upgrading because you can? It’s blocked by silly high prices and I’m glad it’s starting to be seen by Apple. Let’s have an XS Max for £899 and make the iPhone range more appealing again. It should be a no brainer to want to upgrade, not a financial hole putting you off.

It could also be that smartphones are now just boring items these days. They all do the same thing and people don’t need them to be current in order to do what they need to do of course. Whatever, Apple should be scratching their heads as things are starting to change.

I agree about one thing. Any phone north of the 6s is essentially the same experience on the apple side. Samsung has the same issue.

There are people who will parse those words and it's true there is tech on the Xs that is new. The Xs mirrors the increment from the X in the same way the 6S mirrors the increment from the 6.

Apple in 2018 has a broader range of tech available to the customer than in 2012.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I consider the recent higher prices kind of a blip and Apple will recognize that they need to level it off a bit to get back in the good graces of a lot of consumers. It reminds me of the original MacBook Air. Advanced at the time, very high cost that’ll come down over time. You’re already seeing that with the XR. Speaking of it, I’m surprised that the XR doesn’t hit that balance really well for a lot of people. I expect the same thing with the iPad line, probably closer to the $499 price point though. Obviously there’s more that goes into overhead costs than just components so that $650 number isn’t accurate, but yes they make good money on every iPhone sold.

I hope you’re right. I think the problem with the XR is the fact you can get an iPhone 8/8+ on better deals. I know so many friends and colleagues who have bought 8’s in the last couple of months and many more who have kept their phones and gone sim only. People used to automatically upgrade and be excited about doing so and unfortunately these companies need to realise high prices aren’t encouraging people to run out and buy new phones.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Apple in 2018 has a broader range of tech available to the customer than in 2012.

That’s true but it’s priced uncompetitively and this makes it unappealing to a mainstream buyer. When we are getting reports of sales lower than expectations across the range, it’s time to re-evaluate whether the current pricing structure is viable in a market where people are upgrading less and keeping phones longer than 2 years.

 

[I7guy]

That’s true but it’s priced uncompetitively and this makes it unappealing to a mainstream buyer. When we are getting reports of sales lower than expectations across the range, it’s time to re-evaluate whether the current pricing structure is viable in a market where people are upgrading less and keeping phones longer than 2 years.

The note 9 is pricey but Samsung can’t sell them. The “reports” of sales lower than expectations are rumors that can’t be proved with any certainty.