Apple is now bigger than Microsoft

[GodlessAstronomer]

IBM still makes billions on mainframes. It's just not a growth market like mobile devices.

Silverlight is Microsoft's fastest growing client technology ever.

 

[bigrash]

Apple is not "bigger" than MS, considering the market share MS has over the OS market.

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

MS: 87.8% to Apple's 7.1%

You also have to ask yourself, if Apple is so much better than MS, why does Apple allow Windows installed on its products?

Who said anything about software? The list compares companies as a whole.

 

[vi edit]

How does OSX compare to Windows? How does iWork compare to Office? MS is primarily a software company, of course they don't compete particularly favorably with a dedicated hardware vendor in hardware markets.

And I'm just saying that Apple has been a hardware company with the OS being a perk. Trend Apple's stock with the acceptance of the ipod. That's where their money is at. Not in OS's any more.

Trying to compare the two isn't comparing...well apples to apples.

 

[jpeyton]

AOL market cap circa 1999: $222 billion

AOL...greatest tech company ever?

 

[vi edit]

Again...so that I can remain unbiased...I don't have an Apple product in my house. I'm entirely a Microsoft shop. I don't think I've even posted in the apple forum here either.

 

[dwell]

Silverlight is Microsoft's fastest growing client technology ever.

What does that have to do with anything? Silverlight has like 1/3 the install base of Flash and Flash itself is a waning technology.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

And I'm just saying that Apple has been a hardware company with the OS being a perk. Trend Apple's stock with the acceptance of the ipod. That's where their money is at. Not in OS's any more.

For Apple that's certainly the case, but not in general. There is still a shit-ton of money in OS's, it's just that most of it goes to MS and not much anywhere else.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

What does that have to do with anything? Silverlight has like 1/3 the install base of Flash and Flash itself is a waning technology.

But it's growing. The idea that there's no more growth left in the desktop market is absurd.

 

[vi edit]

For Apple that's certainly the case, but not in general. There is still a shit-ton of money in OS's, it's just that most of it goes to MS and not much anywhere else.

I'd *really* like to know what the return on cost is for MS to develop, test, market and support Window's 7 vs. what their return is in the OEM market. I bet it's no where what it was 10-15 years ago.

 

[dwell]

But it's growing. The idea that there's no more growth left in the desktop market is absurd.

Not substantial. It's not like Silverlight is breaking new markets either. It's just supplanting existing desktop technologies like WPF, Win32 apps, Java desktop, etc. Silverlight is not opening up new markets like the iPhone did.

 

[Eug]

AOL market cap circa 1999: $222 billion

AOL...greatest company ever?

Nah, that would go to Exxon Mobil.

Greatest spill? Or BP?

P.S. PetroChina is pretty big too.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

It should be pretty obvious at this point that the battle for the desktop is a thing of the past and that the industry has moved on to new markets. The same way Microsoft surpassed IBM by doing the mainframe to desktop transition, Apple is bypassing Microsoft on desktop to mobile devices.

I am not saying desktop operating systems are a dying market, but all the growth is in mobile right now. Things are even worse for Microsoft when you consider HP and Dell just dropped Windows 7 for tablet devices.

they're not bypassing shit. Its a decent analogy until we consider that their software and hardware are linked, even in the mobile space

It'd be a different story if they offered their mobile software to a multitude of mobile platforms outside their own

they've certainly established themselves and will remain relevant unlike on the desktop, however they won't utterly dominate the market-share like Microsoft has for the desktop.

 

[ShawnD1]

What does that have to do with anything? Silverlight has like 1/3 the install base of Flash and Flash itself is a waning technology.

Flash is more popular than it ever has been. It's one of those things you just expect a computer to have. Youtube definitely has something to do with this.

I'm happy to see Apple being as successful as it is. Hopefully they don't let this get to their head and try to make everything as worthless as possible ie not support flash or silverlight or mpeg4 or some other format for no reason.

 

[Deeko]

Yea, Apple's market cap as of today is larger. However, the craptastic market of the past weeks hit MS a lot harder than it did Apple. I'd expect them to rebound soon enough.

Anyway, market cap is only one measure of a business size - Microsoft still has more revenue, more profits, and a better profit margin, so I don't think they're too worried there.

 

[dwell]

Flash is more popular than it ever has been. It's one of those things you just expect a computer to have. Youtube definitely has something to do with this.

And when YouTube offers WebM video the death knell for Flash will have rung. It's a couple of years out but let's face it, HTML5 will replace Flash in UI and web video.

 

[Blackjack200]

Market cap is bullshit. Twitter is supposedly worth $1b despite never having turned a profit.

Market cap is just the aggregate opinion of investors on the worth of a company. Usually in the tech sector, this is a reflection of how the investors think the company will perform in the future. Essentially, the market is now saying that it think Apple will someday make slightly more profit than microsoft.

Do I personally agree with this? No. But to say market cap is "bullshit" just means that you don't understand it.

 

[Eug]

I think we can all agree that the business models for Apple and MS are for the most part fundamentally different.

MS's problem of late is that they have issues diversifying. They have the MS Windows and Office cash chow, but growth is suffering, as is evidenced by their need to issue dividends of late. They have tried stuff like Zune, etc., but obviously that hasn't panned out.

MS is full of smart people, and Apple seems to be getting rather monolithic of late so the directions of these two stocks could easily change, but nonetheless the market cap as of today has the monster of a stock that is MSFT being topped by AAPL.

Those who rode out the stock from the 90s until now are laughing. For the record, I didn't. I just caught the train for short rides in the 2000s. I don't like its volatility though.

 

[LegendKiller]

What's AAPL's dividend yield?

Ohh wait, 0%

What is MSFT's? 2.0%.

You do realize that in 2004 MSFT dividended out 32 BILLION in cash to shareholders in one swipe and has, since then, dividended out ~4bn/yr?

You also realize that MSFT's stock price reflects present and future dividend yield while AAPL's price reflects merely expectations of reinvestment of cash?

You also realize that GOOG is a growth stock whereby earnings are highly volitile while MSFT is a value/dividend stock with sedate earnings? This is why MSFT only reached a 52wk low of 20% less than current price while AAPL was 50% below.

MSFT is also 5% more profitable than AAPL, largely because AAPL is expending more for R&D.

Stock price is meaningless, as is market cap.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

MS's problem of late is that they have issues diversifying.

As opposed to Apple? I really hope this is a joke, because you are demonstrating a profound lack of understanding of these two companies.

 

[SlitheryDee]

If you were to sell off all the property held by each company and add that to their liquid assets, which would be the higher dollar amount?

 

[Eug]

What's AAPL's dividend yield?

Ohh wait, 0%

What is MSFT's? 2.0%.

You do realize that in 2004 MSFT dividended out 32 BILLION in cash to shareholders in one swipe and has, since then, dividended out ~4bn/yr?

You also realize that MSFT's stock price reflects present and future dividend yield while AAPL's price reflects merely expectations of reinvestment of cash?

You also realize that GOOG is a growth stock whereby earnings are highly volitile while MSFT is a value/dividend stock with sedate earnings? This is why MSFT only reached a 52wk low of 20% less than current price while AAPL was 50% below.

MSFT is also 5% more profitable than AAPL, largely because AAPL is expending more for R&D.

Stock price is meaningless, as is market cap.

The reason MS spits out dividends is because their growth slowed so much they were forced to. It's not because they're just generous execs.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here anyway. It's not as if I'm trying to say you should buy AAPL today and not MSFT. In fact, I sold AAPL a long time ago because I though it was overvalued... long before AAPL even hit $200. However, in retrospect, I obviously sold this growth stock too early.

 

[mugs]

For Apple that's certainly the case, but not in general. There is still a shit-ton of money in OS's, it's just that most of it goes to MS and not much anywhere else.

How does the point keep going over your head despite his explanations?

Comparing two companies in a single market when both are involved in several different markets is stupid. That was his point, and it was obvious from his first post.

 

[ShawnD1]

Stock price is meaningless, as is market cap.

Tru dat. Some companies have millions or billions in market cap even though they don't make money. Remember the .com crash? Lots of companies were worth billions of dollars for no reason at all then they suddenly drop to 0 when they run out of suckers investors.

Companies like Microsoft and IBM are great. They're that friend who borrows $5 and pays back $6 the next day. Nice reliable dividends every quarter.

 

[foghorn67]

What's AAPL's dividend yield?

Ohh wait, 0%

What is MSFT's? 2.0%.

You do realize that in 2004 MSFT dividended out 32 BILLION in cash to shareholders in one swipe and has, since then, dividended out ~4bn/yr?

You also realize that MSFT's stock price reflects present and future dividend yield while AAPL's price reflects merely expectations of reinvestment of cash?

You also realize that GOOG is a growth stock whereby earnings are highly volitile while MSFT is a value/dividend stock with sedate earnings? This is why MSFT only reached a 52wk low of 20% less than current price while AAPL was 50% below.

MSFT is also 5% more profitable than AAPL, largely because AAPL is expending more for R&D.

Stock price is meaningless, as is market cap.

I came in here looking for an argument. You painfully killed it. Why do you make sense?

 

[jpeyton]

And when YouTube offers WebM video the death knell for Flash will have rung. It's a couple of years out but let's face it, HTML5 will replace Flash in UI and web video.

And just a few years back, the iPhone was a twinkle in Steve's eye.

And a few years out, Android will dominate the mobile OS scene.

The tech market is fickle and fast changing.