[Ben]

The Cupertino cash machine continues to erupt. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8633782.stm

I don't have like-for-like results, but I reckon Apple generates about half the profits that Microsoft does, despite its minute market share in most markets bar MP3. Apple is valued at $240bn, Microsoft $275bn. :eek:

[DBMandrake]

This is something that always puzzles and frustrates me when I hear or participate in Microsoft vs Apple arguments - Windows fans always roll out the "Microsoft has 90% of the computer market and Apple has less than 10%" and use that to make it sound like Microsoft is this huge profitable company and Apple is a tiny minnow 1/10th the size of Microsoft.

It completely misses the the point that Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company (and doesn't even make computers!) while Apple is a HARDWARE company. They are literally comparing Apples to Oranges when they compare the Market penetration of Mac OS X and Windows.

A fairer comparison would be to compare Apple with Dell or HP, and when you compare the companies revenue, profit, market cap etc, then Apple is very close to either of them, if it hasn't already overtaken them.

Hardware is a much higher revenue market than the OS in either Mac or Windows worlds - while retail versions of Windows are grossly inflated in price and give the appearance of high profit for Microsoft, the vast majority of Windows licenses are sold OEM to manufacturers like Dell at very low prices (well under $100 / machine) and make up a very small proportion of the total cost of the machine, unless it's an ultra cheap netbook.

Apple gets the revenue from both the hardware and the OS in every Mac sold, Microsoft only gets the revenue from the OEM sale of Windows - potentially only 10% of the sale cost of the machine. So Apple gets 10x (or more) revenue per hardware unit than Microsoft.

As well as this, Apple don't sell any models in the low end of the market, and operate at high margins so their total profit per machine is far greater on the hardware side than someone like Dell.

Then you have the juggernaut which is the iPod and iPhone, and it's easy to see why in terms of revenues and profits Apple are closing in on Microsoft rapidly and will soon be the bigger company. I would say within the next 2 years or so Apple will actually overtake Microsoft in revenue, profit, cash on hand, and market cap, and be the single biggest manufacturer of retail PC hardware (if you consider a Mac to be a PC, which it is nowadays, since it can run Windows) despite the fact that OS X may still only have a 10-15% market share by then.

To see a company like Apple claw their way back from the brink of bankruptcy only 12 years ago to their position now seems nothing short of unprecedented.

[Ben]

True, though Microsoft do sell various hardware items, just not PCs. I think the point is that they're both companies catering to computing requirements, but coming in from completely different angles.

Incredible to be sure.

[Hands0n]

Just to be completely and utterly pedantic for a moment - a PC is a sufficient descriptor of any of our small computers, not just Windows devices. PC, remember, stands for Personal Computer with no mention of the OS that is run upon it. That colloquially we call a PC something that runs Windows should not deflect from that.

Apple has indeed done very well for itself for all of the reasons described above and then some. As has Microsoft with what has become the worlds most successful OS despite the shedloads of brickbats that are often aimed at it. It is also the most pirated OS in the world. It's Office product is also the most prevalent "office suite" globally. There can be no doubt that MS have changed the world, can Apple claim that?

Well, yes, of course, Apple can indeed make that claim but not for the same reasons. Apple have revolutionised the mobile handset paradigm - forcing manufacturers the world over to imitate.

So, here we have two companies, mortal enemies some would have us believe, who have done more to change and impact the humans across this globe than any other. That they are similarly successful financially is no wonder.

I applaud them both and have to wonder if we'll see the like again. It was, after all, a very unique time in man's history.

[Ben]

It's a rags to riches success story to be sure. But, despite Steve's attempts to put more faces front and centre and the successful period during his absence, there'll always be a strong concern that no Steve = no Apple.

It seems like they're building and investing for the future, and they've stockpiled enough cash to buy a small country, but when one man makes such a distinctive impact on not just a company but the computing and mobile industries also one does have to consider the continuity implications when he departs.

[3GScottishUser]

Just proves there are too many people with too much money.

Apple are masters at packaging mediocre technology in nice user friendly packaging.

Maybe that is what folks want but it's far from cutting edge and appalling value for money.

Then again, millions fall for the retailers costly extra product insurance.....

I don't like to celebrate rip-off companies and the more one looks at Apple products the more they fall into that catagory.

If I had bought an Apple product I don't think I'd be comfy with them bragging about a 90% profits increase... rubs salt into the wound.

[Hands0n]

Just proves there are too many people with too much money..

Is that really so? By what possible measure is "too much"? And even if it were, what would you have them do? Give it away? Burn it? Hand it to our glorious chancellor to squander? It is their hard earned, surely they get to do what they like with it. Having earned every single penny that I have ever spent - I rather fancy that its my choice as to what to spend it on :D

Trying to equate Apple product with extra product insurance is surely being quite specious. There really is no comparison at all.

The worth of the Apple product is entirely in the domain of the purchaser. To be sure, it is solid and robust, highly efficient kit. We have shed loads of Apple Mac Pro in the office performing relentlessly, flat out, five solid days of the week. In the three years I've been there we have only ever added to the number. Not one has failed or required any maintenance at all. Would that then be "appalling value for money"? Again, by what measure?

Compare that to the Wintel PC equipment that is on the general desktops - these are constantly paying visits to the internal IS support team for endless reasons. Not restricted to hardware, these systems have all manner of OS issues arising. And the sheer maintenance required to keep these protected from all manner of malware and virus beggars belief. Almost daily, certainly weekly it seems, there is required Windows update after Windows update.

In fact, it is a comical comment to hear from our IS team that they never get to "play" with the Apple kit. They simply unpack it, power it up to check it, bring it to the IS floor and hand it over, never to be seen again. Yes, you're right, what absolutely appalling value for money!

This is not a rant against Windows but lets keep this completely real, Windows based PCs do not compare favourably against the rock solid proposition that are the integrated Apple Mac computers. Yes, Mac is generally more expensive - but not exclusively. And you really do get what you pay for. Quite apart from the hardware and OS there is an unparalleled support structure around Apple product.

I, for one, am quite happy for the preferred supplier of my equipment to be successful and not go Chapter 11. Remember, Apple plough a significant amount of their profits back into the company. It doesn't all go into the shareholders divvy. Now that is value for money!

[Ben]

Apple are masters at packaging mediocre technology in nice user friendly packaging.
Or, as I believe, masters of using technology effectively and efficiently to create a superior user experience.

Just because Blu Ray and USB 3.0 exist doesn't mean they're required in order to create a superior computer.

But then perhaps I would say that, my 6 brand new 27" iMacs arrived yesterday.

[DBMandrake]

I think it's pretty disingenuous to call Apple hardware "mediocre technology in nice user friendly packaging", yes Apple hardware tends to be more expensive than "equivalent spec" PC hardware, but there is no way that it could be called mediocre. Apple laptops in particular regularly get top notch reviews from reviewers who are comparing them side by side with PC laptops. Yes, the PC laptop is often "better value", but only if you compare them on the basis of tickbox feature lists such as number of ports, switches, flashing lights, cpu / ram / screen size etc. Compare the build quality and industrial design and they are light years apart.

I was painfully reminded of this a few days ago when I fixed an HP pavillion laptop for a friend - it was overheating and shutting down all the time, and after fully stripping it down I found the internal heatsink fins completely choked with dust and fluff that looked like someone had emptied a vacuum cleaner bag into it. Why ?

Because the vent where the fan (all one of them) sucked in air was on the bottom face of the laptop, where its sure to suck up any dust from the floor/tables etc which the laptop is placed on. There is NO fine particle filter across the vent, which is just large slots in the plastic case, so rather large particles of crap can be sucked in by the fan and blown directly into the enclosed tubular heatsink, where it will then wedge against the fins and get stuck. Terrible, terrible design.

Furthermore, there is only one vent and one fan, and due to it being on the bottom you can't put the laptop on anything other than a hard flat surface, or the vent will be completely blocked off and the CPU will overheat. You can't put it on a cushion (not a good idea in general I'll admit, but people do it) or on carpet, or even on *gasp* a lap while wearing long trousers, without blocking the vent. The thermal margin of that laptop is so poor that if the fan is blocked for just a few minutes with the CPU idle it overheats to the point where it shuts down the machine. Pathetic.

Every single thing about the way the laptop was put together inside is cheap, plastic and tacky, and feels like it will snap off with the slightest provocation. The screen quality - like most cheap PC laptops is god awful - maybe a 20 degree vertical viewing angle if you're lucky before the contrast inverts or washes out, tons of backlight bleed, poor washed out colours, low contrast, only 1280x800 in a 15" size etc.

If this thing is a "bargain" because it has a similar on paper CPU/ram / screen size spec to a more expensive Macbook, I'll take the Macbook thanks very much :p

You won't find a fan vent on the bottom of a Macbook to suck in dirt and dust or be blocked when you sit it on your legs, you won't find a case and internal construction made of cheap flimsy plastic, you won't find a low resolution low quality screen, you won't find a million switches, flashing lights and oddball connectors and ports you don't need sprouting from every angle of the case, you won't find stupid things like the audio output ports sticking out the front edge of the laptop etc... (real handy that when plugging a laptop into a stereo or external speaker to have a cable sticking out right towards you! :p )

Nowadays computers are so fast compared to the typical uses they're put to (internet, word processing etc) that specsmanship is pretty meaningless, and build quality, design, and reliability are where value is to be found, and Apple knows this. They're certainly not perfect, but the current Macbook Pro's, iMac's etc all ooze quality and design, as anyone who has worked inside one of them knows.

Do you complain if a 4 cylinder BMW costs more to buy than a 6 cylinder Toyota ? Just because the Toyota might be faster in 0-60 time and has more tickbox features does that automatically make it the better car to drive ?

[Ben]

I suppose other computer manufacturers should be applauded for bringing the price of computing down as low as it has gone. It's clearly evident from most widely-used web applications today, i.e. Facebook, Twitter, that the mass adoption of computers is a reality. Though, as DBMandrake points out, this hasn't happened without sacrifice, and in my experience of high-end generic PCs and laptops the sacrifices can unfortunately be seen in the higher margin products, too.

It looks like, for the time being, the iPad is Apple's new low cost portable. Perhaps low cost computer full stop. Ok, so it's not netbook territory low cost, but they also seem to have gone out of their way not to be in direct competition with anyone. Give it 6 months and it'll be very interesting to see if it's making an impact on web browsing stats, as it seems to me that touch-browsing is the iPads killer feature.

[DBMandrake]

That's a good point, there is still a place in the market for low end cheaper computers, otherwise there would be people that simply couldn't afford a computer. Or you may want something really cheap as a non-critical secondary computer, like a netbook. I have no issue with that, as long as people are aware of the fact that they ARE buying a lower quality computer for the lower price.

Where I take issue is the idea (promoted both by companies selling their wares, and individuals) that the cheaper computer is just as good as the more expensive one, based solely on tick box specifications such as cpu speed, ram, hard drive size, and screen size, as if those were the only things that mattered. This takes no account of industrial design, component quality and reliability and so on, which I believe are just as important if not more so, now that minimum hardware specs (apart from netbooks) are quite high.

I've seen it time and again with friends and relatives - they'll go to buy a computer, have really no idea what they're looking for, have no brand familiarity, and no idea what is or isn't a good quality brand, will see two computers with apparently the same "specs" and will choose the one that is cheaper - and to be honest, how are they to know any better ?

Then months later they are ruing the day they purchased it. Blue screen crashes, sluggishness, virus scanner demos that have expired, hardware failures that have required the machine to be sent back for repair under warranty, random plastic bits breaking off, keys not working on the keyboard, you name it. Depending on where they bought it (often a large retail store that is not computer specific, and also sells beds and white goods) they typically have no support or advice available at all, only a return to base warranty for hardware faults. Then they ask me for help and I see the computer for the first time and there is no polite way for me to say that they've bought a piece of crap, and that no matter what I do to it, it's always going to be unreliable and problematic. So I do what I can to patch it up, smile, and let them go on their merry way...

That is the reality for a lot of people when it comes to computers - although there ARE good quality PC's out there, and us geeks know how to find them (or build them ourselves from parts) for the average person this is not possible. They get a poor taste in their mouth both from the cheap hardware and the software issues with Windows, and resign themselves to the fact that that is just the way computers are - unreliable and problematic.

Where I think Apple is succeeding with Macs, especially with their Apple stores, is that while the PC market will sell at any price and quality level, Apple has set rather high minimum quality standards for the models they produce - they don't produce any netbooks, and even their cheapest laptop would be considered an expensive midrange laptop on the PC side. Because of this a lot of people have come to recognise Apple as a brand that they can trust to sell them good quality gear. They know if they walk into an Apple store they're not going to walk out with a piece of junk, so they're willing to pay a bit more. On the PC side there is some good quality hardware out there, but how does the average consumer find it or know that it is in fact good quality, and that they're not just being sold crap at a higher price ? The whole PC "brand" is diluted by the crap that is intermixed with the good stuff.

As well as that, an Apple store is a pretty friendly place to go to get advice and service, you can actually go in and ask simple technical advice questions without paying anything, and get someone who knows what they're talking about. Try and ask for help with a problem with one of the bundled apps on a PC from a store that also sells white goods! It's that end to end experience thing again - its not good enough to just dump products out in the marketplace and provide a return to base hardware only warranty...