12 ms·

Apple is Officially Worth More than Microsoft

215 points by fusionman 16y ago

melling 16y ago
Some would argue that they were always worth more. :-) It's interesting that this happened without breaking Microsoft's 90% desktop monopoly. Apple got bigger but it wasn't to the detriment of Microsoft. They just grew into new markets.
- noarchy 16y ago
  I suspect that this was just a sound bite in 1997, but Jobs himself said it: "We have to let go of a few things here. We have to let go of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose."
  - Perceval 16y ago
    Here's a video of that keynote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEHNrqPkefI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEHNrqPkefI
  - 10ren 16y ago
    I was amazed when he said "we lost, they won" with no sense of rancor, nor of defeat of self. Very growthful and in-reality. Say what you will about Jobs, he's not dogmatic; he's far from an apple fanboy. He's doing what a recent article on disruption (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1375141 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1375141) reminded me of: don't confront entrenched competition, it will "invoke a competitive response" and they'll win (or "never attack a fortified hill", from crossing the chasm). Instead, do something else.
    - elblanco 16y ago
      > he's far from an apple fanboy. I agree. In order to make great things, and then to sustain that, I really truly believe you have to grow to dislike what you made before. It's the only way to take a critical eye one what you have done and learn from it. Lots of people think Jobs is a tyrant inside of Apple (and I agree with that sentiment), but I think the motivation for that is that he simply wants to create something he doesn't hate right now. It might be bootup time, or interface delays, or screen pixel density etc. That kind of thinking, a critical review of your own likes/dislikes is healthy I think in order to grow. Fanboyism, by definition, is not a process of critical thought.
- Jun8 16y ago
  Exactly! One of the best essay in PG's H&Ps book in my opinion was the one that explains how winning doesn't have to be a zero-sum game, you can generate wealth. This seems a no brainer but a lot of people don't get it. Many predict that a similar thing will happen in the battle between Google and Apple.
  - raphar 16y ago
    It interesting view this google vs apple in: http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL+goog http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL+goog put the graph to 1y or 5y.
    - ecq 16y ago
      Apple is a monster. Google's stock price is pretty much downhill, considering they left the second biggest (and soon to be biggest) market in the world. China.
    - Groxx 16y ago
      Interesting in the similarities? Compare it with Microsoft (MSFT), the ups and downs appear to be more due to economic shifts than any connection between the two. AAPL/GOOG is definitely closer than AAPL/MSFT, but part of that could simply be due to that both are growing and changing quickly, and are less immune to economic forces than entrenched-MSFT.
      - troystribling 16y ago
        GOOG is now selling at about its mid 2005 price while APPL is about 350% above its mid 2005 price.
    - awa 16y ago
      Add MSFT and put the graph in Max, gives another interesting perspective
  - Jun8 16y ago
    Forgot to put a link to the essay, here it is: http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html
- swilliams 16y ago
  Markets change. If you are unable to adapt well, you will likely perish or grow obsolete.
mootothemax 16y ago
Wow, that happened a lot faster than I thought it would. Well, to be honest, I think I wanted Apple to overtake Microsoft more than I ever thought I'd see it happen. I wonder if in a few years from now Facebook'll overtake MS and Apple? ;)
- FraaJad 16y ago
  The problem with facebook is it does not produce any value unlike Microsoft and Apple. Both Apple and Microsoft's product help people create stuff, get things done, entertain themselves. Facebook does a tiny bit of entertaining and socializing, it is no where near MSFT or AAPL in terms of having a tangible impact on people's lives.
  - CUViper 16y ago
    We are social creatures, so products which aid that do have value.
  - jpablo 16y ago
    I'll bet facebook has more impact than Apple. Apple makes your iPod, that let's me listen to music. Facebook creates your social life (for a lot of people it does).
    - TheSOB88 16y ago
      I disagree. For me, the only way Facebook helps me socially is as a sort of phone book and with events. Catching up over Facebook seems a useless event compared to conversing IRL. Besides, an inordinate amount of people use it as a game system with a leaderboard. Facebook's value isn't really social at all. It's pseudosocial.
      - jpablo 16y ago
        It's the same to me, catching up over FB is crap. But there are a lot of RL social stuff that if FB wasn't there a lot of people would be missing.
moron4hire 16y ago
Consider that Apple's P/E is 24.5 and Microsoft's P/E is 13.4. Basically, while Apple may be in demand right now, Microsoft is earning almost twice as much. Also, Microsoft pays a (albeit small) dividend, whereas Apple does not.
- ergo98 16y ago
  Goldman Sachs has a P/E ratio of 5.94. Microsoft's P/E is heavily "discounted" because it's considered a sort of swan song of easy money (the Windows and Office empire that they've coasted on). Apple's is considered the beginning of things. Stock value today isn't based on today, it's based on "tomorrow".
  - j23tom 16y ago
    there is no "tomorrow" for apple. Tomorrow's name is Android
  - papachito 16y ago
    > Apple's is considered the beginning of things. Who says that? They could be at the top of their game right now and not see more growth and stabilizing and/or decreasing in the future. There is no way to tell, otherwise you'd be very rich already ;) > Stock value today isn't based on today, it's based on "tomorrow". Who says that? Many believe that Apple stocks are overvalued today, that's for sure. Oh, and again, there is no way to tell the future.
    - mcav 16y ago
      > "They could be at the top of their game right now and not see more growth and stabilizing and/or decreasing in the future." In the future, anything's possible. But the future is almost always a function of the past, and current trends indicate anything but a decline in Apple's growth.
      - borism 16y ago
        Trends reverse, and "this thing is going up forever" trends usually reverse with a huge drops and without a warning. Check this http://www.davemanuel.com/investor-dictionary/momentum-play-momo-play/ http://www.davemanuel.com/investor-dictionary/momentum-play-...
jacquesm 16y ago
Interesting tidbit, when you scroll down the page to the end where the logos are displayed, the apple logo looks new, shiny and modern, the microsoft logo looks old and boring. Their corporate images reflect the logos quite well. edit: funny moderation here, would you mind telling me why ? Apple logo on the page not shiny ? Microsoft logo not old and boring ? Or do you - mistakenly - take me for an apple fanboy or something ?
- norswap 16y ago
  So irrelevant. Apple logo is indeed shiny, but it's 90ies-shiny. I much prefer Microsoft logo.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Not so irrelevant. I have no dog in this fight, I prefer linux over either, but the image that those companies project is very important in their contact with their target audience. When given a choice between an ipod and a zune with twice the storage capacity the majority of teen-agers would probably pick the ipod. When you sell consumer stuff 'cool' matters. Microsoft always has to balance their business image with their 'cool' image and in most (hardware) consumer products (other than the Xbox) they seem to fail at that. Phones that run windows CE are (rightfully) seen as old fashioned, the zune was dead on arrival and so on. Cool & shiny really matter.
- dflock 16y ago
  I don't know about the moderation, but what you said is entirely subjective - and quite possibly simply your perceptions of the two companies projected onto their logo's. You could equally well say that the MS logo on that page is elegant, simple and understated, while the Apple logo looks cheap, plasticy and tacky. Either personal opinion would be equally valid, just looking at the two logo's on that page.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Apple has adapted their logo over the years - and their website - to reflect the changing times, microsoft has kept their logo the same for a very long time. Now there is something to be said for keeping your logo the same, possibly forever. But the crowd that apple appeals to and that they intend to sell their gadgets and computers to loves shiny stuff, and apple is very good at making shiny stuff. It stands to reason they'd adapt their logo to that. Microsoft has a much stronger presence in the corporate world and I think that is why their logo looks the way it does and why they don't want to change it too much. They try not to be a fashion statement, apple tries very hard to be one.
tomlin 16y ago
Also: More controlling than Microsoft.
- FraaJad 16y ago
  controlling, maybe. MSFT is not the most "controlling" tech company out there (take a look at electronics and automation companies for real tight arsed behaviour) The problem people had with MSFT is their use of market dominance to kill off competition.
  - tomlin 16y ago
    Apple is treading the same path to the same type of market dominance. Apple isn't the underdog any more. Time to take a second look.
  - louislouis 16y ago
    "The problem people had with MSFT is their use of market dominance to kill off competition." Isn't that just doing business?
  - louislouis 16y ago
    "The problem people had with MSFT is their use of market dominance to kill off competition." Isn't that just doing business?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
jedberg 16y ago
I think the more interesting news here is that Apple is now the second largest company in America (about $50 billion behind Exxon).
- dcurtis 16y ago
  This is kind of pedantic, but I think the word valuable might be better here than largest. Apple is relatively small when compared to companies like Walmart, which has 2.1 million employees and almost 8x revenue.
  - KERMIT 16y ago
    Where is the value in Apple? Its ability to trick Americans into buying very expensive, yet very restrictive, products that most of the time they really don't need? That's actually a very harmful thing, from an economic perspective.
    - jackowayed 16y ago
      iPods and iPhones are competitively priced. Sure, the Macs are expensive, but the hardware is very high quality, and when you compare them to Thinkpads and Vaios--other high-end computers--it's pretty reasonable. I'm no Apple fanboy (as of now, the only money I've ever given Apple is 30% of app purchases I've made for my hand-me-down iPhone 2G), but in a couple of days, I'm buying a MacBook Pro because it's a high quality unix system that Just Works. Given that I'm a programmer who will use it constantly, the time it will save me should cover the extra few hundred dollars by the end of summer.
      - sjs 16y ago
        This is so true. I like me some Linux, but OS X has won me over. I thought the iPod was a fad for people with money to waste, until I got a Mac and discovered how much thought Apple puts into their products. Sure I had a HDD based MP3 player (Creative Nomad Jukebox), but it took 2-3 minutes to boot if you put 2GB of music on it and it was the same size as a discman. The UI was atrocious. I went back to an MP3 discman because the Jukebox sucked. Most people don't compare Macs to equivalent systems, often because there is no comparable alternative. Even if you spec out a similar machine from other manufacturers you are almost guaranteed to be giving up something, whether that be battery life, a good case, or just the little touches that make you happy day to day like the battery life indicator or addictive multi-touch gestures. Even the Vaio-Z, which is pretty slick and only 13", isn't on par with a MacBook Pro when it comes to the little touches. Yet it costs as much as a 15" MBP. People who like to compare specs think they're getting a better deal but they rarely take into account actually using the thing for 8+ hours a day. The little things make a big difference when you use your computer that much.
louislouis 16y ago
Smells like an Apple bubble?
- Perceval 16y ago
  Actually, their P/E ratio has been steadily declining over the past five years, even as their stock price has risen dramatically. Usually a stock is considered overvalued if the P/E ratio is really high. But this chart (stock price on top, P/E ratio on bottom) seems to indicate that AAPL is not being overvalued by the market as the stock price goes up: http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/main.asp?time=12&freq=1&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&comp=NO_SYMBOL_CHOSEN&ma=0&maval=9&uf=0&lf=16777216&lf2=0&lf3=0&type=2&style=320&size=2&sid=0&o_symb=aapl&startdate=&enddate=&show=&symb=aapl&draw.x=21&draw.y=19 http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/main.asp?ti...
  - louislouis 16y ago
    But investors are putting their money in to sell high since APPL doesn't pay dividends. The price is high atm, and there are many who are waiting exit, so any kind of trigger could set off a landslide.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- wendroid 16y ago
  Yeah, they are well over their real worth. I'm looking forward to the pop. There's too many people chasing the bus.
- lenley 16y ago
  AMZN PE 53.69
apphacker 16y ago
Did MG Siegler just violate SEC laws by not disclosing if he owns Apple stock and telling thousands of his readers that Apple stock will continue to increase?
- hugh3 16y ago
  Are SEC laws that easy to violate? Hey everybody, I think Apple stock is going to continue to increase! I may or may not own Apple stock.
  - apphacker 16y ago
    Yes, I think so. People have been forced to settle with the SEC for comments made on forums for example. http://news.cnet.com/SEC,-teen-settle-Net-stock-scheme-case/2110-1017_3-933247.html http://news.cnet.com/SEC,-teen-settle-Net-stock-scheme-case/...
    - hugh3 16y ago
      Crud. Well in that case... hey everybody, I don't own any Apple stock!
    - jedberg 16y ago
      I own a fund that owns shares of every public company on the market (VTI). Does that mean I have to say "I own this" any time I talk about stock?
      - werrett 16y ago
        The diference between a managed fund, where you're just investing in a basket that someone else controls, and a self-direct investment defines went to disclose or not.
  - ekanes 16y ago
    It makes sense. Without a law like that, people with circulation/influence could manipulate the markets by buying, boosting and selling.
fusionman 16y ago
If you consider the PEG ratio of both, you'll actually see that when taking growth rate into consideration, Apple is still cheaper than Microsoft...barely. So, if you put faith in PEG ratios, Apple is still a better buy. If you don't know what a PEG ratio is, check it out here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEG_ratio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEG_ratio
ecq 16y ago
"What I can’t figure out is why he (Steve Jobs) is even trying (to be the CEO of Apple)? He knows he can’t win." - Bill Gates, June 1998 (AUDIO) http://www.cringely.com/2010/04/masters-tournament/ http://www.cringely.com/2010/04/masters-tournament/ http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/25385/ http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/25385/
herdrick 16y ago
So, when did Microsoft surpass Apple in market cap? 1992? 1988?
- hugh3 16y ago
  Good question. I couldn't find out since I can't get either google finance or yahoo finance to plot market cap, but I did get this: http://ycharts.com/search?q=MSFT%20vs%20AAPL&c=market_cap http://ycharts.com/search?q=MSFT%20vs%20AAPL&c=market_ca... It only goes back ten years but it at least shows that MSFT was vastly bigger than AAPL back in 1999.
  - herdrick 16y ago
    Wow, YCharts is pretty great, thanks!
  - elblanco 16y ago
    Wow, '99-'00 was a rough year for MSFT.
  - arethuza 16y ago
    I remember picking up an iPod in what was probably '02 and thinking "I should buy some Apple stock". Damn.
evo_9 16y ago
The thing that's most interesting about all this is the predicament that Microsoft now finds itself in. They just lost two top guys - J. Allard & Robbie Bach - and you have to wonder just how rudderless Microsoft is at the moment. They've invested heavily in their core tech - mostly a good idea - but then they have really nothing to compete with Apple or Google in the mobile space, at least until their new phone os hits (and even then it faces a serious uphill battle). Balmer is probably wishing he had bought Palm at this point. I wonder if Bach and/or Allard end up at Google... a GBox has a nice ring to it actually.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  > a GBox has a nice ring to it actually. Let's not go there ok ?
  - evo_9 16y ago
    The reality is we are going there because Google (along with Apple) are both developing 'connected tv's (aka, wifi enabled, OS running tv's). Not exactly an attempt to go right at Sony, Nintendo, etc, but Apple has shown how disruptive a sideways entry into a new market can be (or was that more of a happy accident stumble sideways?). Plus, I think the 'game companies' fail to recognize what a huge market casual games are and for most people, that's plenty enough to keep them happy.
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      Maybe I should have added that ';)' after all...
    - hugh3 16y ago
      That seems like the sort of market that google is going to win. Apple is going to want to sell you an Apple-branded piece of hardware (either a TV or a box) that lets your TV do new things. Google will simply license their technology to Samsung, LG, Panasonic and all the other existing TV manufacturers and have it built in to every TV that gets shipped. (Except maybe Sony, who will probably attempt to build their own system. It won't work very well outside Japan.)
MikeCapone 16y ago
Now it's time to see if money corrupts absolutely..
buster 16y ago
wow.. 25$ a share for MS vs. 250$ for Apple? As much as i like that Apple innovates and does produce good products, you'll have to be blind to not see the share crash in the future.. it strongly reminds me of the old startup days.. I mean (not offending) MS products are deployed in what.. 95% of all computers? office in every companies PC? Windows? Ok, Apple does have music selling through itunes, hardware (very low market share here!) and the mobile app sales. I don't know, i'd rather want to see the income of both companies per division, that'd be more meaningful to me, at least. A lot of shareholders betting insane amounts of money into a company seems to be too familiar. (Also i'm usualy not interested in shares and such, so i've probably missed something)
- ashot 16y ago
  you can't compare stock prices directly, they have no relative meaning
  - buster 16y ago
    Mh, yes, now that i think of it... my first thought was "woah, i'll have to pay 10 times as much for one apple share", but in reality i'd just say "in invest 1000$ in whatever company, regardless of how many shares".. if the share goes up 10% it doesn't matter how many shares.. well.. my bad, as i said, i've no real interest in that stuff :P So, all in all, this means that Apple is seen as much worth as MS (and not 10 times more). That's a point of view i didn't consider.. Still, i would really like to see the income sources of both and how much income is generated where, that'd be interesting.
    - steveklabnik 16y ago
      > Still, i would really like to see the income sources of both and how much income is generated where, that'd be interesting. Here you go: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=MSFT+SEC+Filings http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=MSFT+SEC+Filings http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=AAPL+SEC+Filings http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=AAPL+SEC+Filings
- rimantas 16y ago
louislouis 16y ago
If APPL, MSFT or GOOG disappeared tomorrow. Which one would cause the least damage? Which one could we live without?
- ssp 16y ago
  Would everything they ever made disappear too? If so, the loss of Windows and Office would create much more chaos than the loss of Google. The disappearance of all Apple products would not cause that much damage in comparison.
  - whatusername 16y ago
    Not to mention Windows Server / MS-SQL.
teyc 16y ago
The real question is whether Apple's growth is defensible? Talking about smart phones, Apple is a latecomer to the industry, and does not have a sufficiently strong patent pool to prevent competitors like Oracle, HP and MS from encroaching. Apple is the first to deliver to the mass market affordable tablet computing and touch computing devices. This will remain growth areas, and hence Apple's willingness to accept lower margins in return for a beachhead and a sufficiently large user-base to establish itself as a platform-play. However, further on, Apple is going to have to finely balance the tension of being the most widely used vs being "exclusive", "cool", or "different". Give a few years when competitors reach feature parity, Apple will be at crossroads whether to go mass market or boutique.
- X-Istence 16y ago
  I wouldn't necessarily say that Apple doesn't have the patent pool for mobile devices (yes, the smart phone sector included) with Apple doing a lot of innovation in the form of multitouch, OS UI design, usability and a whole other range of other things. Dismissing Apple outright is definitely the wrong thing to do.
  - teyc 16y ago
    I'm sorry, I should have said "patent barriers" instead. Apple is faced with the necessity of cross licensing their patents with their competitors in order to continue developing smartphones. I don't think Apple will be able to aggressively use their patents to prevent MS, HP, etc from copying.
- Nelson69 16y ago
  Will the competitors really reach feature parity? Really? I mean, to have feature parity with iPod, you need a top notch player, you need a very good music manager and then you need a one click store that has nearly everything. It's not the touch screen, it's not the iTunes app, it's not the store: it's all that stuff. Does the competition take away or does it help them stand out more?
dym 16y ago
Apple, unlike Microsoft, is well-positioned to take advantage of demise of high-tech industry as we know it. This demise has already happened once, with an industry that was "hi-tech" for centuries: clocks and watches. http://abandontheweb.blogspot.com/2005/11/is-hi-tech-timeless.html http://abandontheweb.blogspot.com/2005/11/is-hi-tech-timeles...
Kilimanjaro 16y ago
Ballmer MUST go!
- KERMIT 16y ago
  And be replaced by who?
  - david927 16y ago
    Anyone with vision, courage and the ability to inspire. Balmer could always execute, but that's not what Microsoft needs right now. It doesn't know where it's going, so it's meaningless how well it gets there. Microsoft, for better or worse, is still in the driver seat. In terms of market share, Apple is a rounding error. But they inspire. They are exciting people about the future. When was the last time Microsoft did that? This isn't just about share price; it's about perceptions by investors, customers, employees -- everyone. They need to inspire again.
Enlightenment 16y ago
Apple is only worth MORE than Microsoft because of all the idiots buying Apple stock, just like the housing market in California before the housing crash! The USA department of justice is going to put a real hurt on Apple soon, so you better dump your Apple stock before it crashes!
dejb 16y ago
This surprises me given that it seems pretty clear they are about to lose their projected dominance in the smartphone game to Android. I can't see how you can justify that sort of valuation without projecting them to be the dominant smartphone platform. The iPad seems to be doing well but it all hinges on the same OS as the iPhone. Is it possible that Jobs "reality distortion" field is now working on the market?
- jstevens85 16y ago
  Why is it clear that they'll lose the #2 spot to Android? It certainly may happen, but it doesn't appear to be anywhere near certain. Notice that at Google I/O, they said that Android was #2 in the US. Why didn't they say in the world, or in the US and Canada, or in the US and Europe, or even in the US and Australia? Obviously it's because the US is the only major market where they've been able to beat Apple. If Apple announces a multiple carrier version of the iPhone at WWDC, I would say it's likely that Google would lose the #2 spot in the US.
  - dejb 16y ago
    Android is growing much faster than the iPhone. The rest of the world (where I come from) is a lot more varied. RIM doesn't do so well and Nokia dominates heavily in a lot of markets. The iPhone doesn't do so well outside of the US either.
    - metachor 16y ago
      Android might be growing faster than iPhone, but how does that directly benefit Google? Apple makes money for every iPhone sold, but Android phones are manufactured and sold by other companies than Google. I thought Google gave away the OS for free (unlike Microsoft's strategy of licensing their mobile OS at a cost). Can someone explain to me how Google makes money on Android phone sales? Please don't say "future search ad revenue from having more internet connected devices in the hands of consumers." Edit: In answer to my own question, if the only profit Google makes from Android sales is search ad revenue, then according to this article (http://aseidman.com/2010/05/65000-new-android-devices-ship-each-day-how-much-are-they-worth-to-google/ http://aseidman.com/2010/05/65000-new-android-devices-ship-e...), Google makes only $8.63 per Android device sold over the entire lifetime of that device. Article was found via HN, but no one has commented on it yet. So apart from this meager search ad revenue, how does Google benefit financially from Android sales? I just can't figure this one out.
spoiledtechie 16y ago
I hate the fact that Apple is soo good at what they do. They go after the dumber people trying to be in style. They are such a closed company. If they were a government, they would be totalitarian country. I for one will never support them because of their closed mindedness.
davidw 16y ago
According to the ancient, unspoken rules of the Silicon Valley elders, this means that Bill will have to pass the Sacred Dagger of Evil to Steve in a secret ceremony with the sacrifice of a virgin. Apple fans are already lining up by the hundreds, hoping to be the "chosen one". Said one "well, yeah, stabbed to death, but...hey, it's Apple! The iDagger is so cool!"

215 points by fusionman 16y ago

Some would argue that they were always worth more. :-) It's interesting that this happened without breaking Microsoft's 90% desktop monopoly. Apple got bigger but it wasn't to the detriment of Microsoft. They just grew into new markets.

noarchy 16y ago
I suspect that this was just a sound bite in 1997, but Jobs himself said it: "We have to let go of a few things here. We have to let go of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose."
- Perceval 16y ago
  Here's a video of that keynote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEHNrqPkefI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEHNrqPkefI
- 10ren 16y ago
  I was amazed when he said "we lost, they won" with no sense of rancor, nor of defeat of self. Very growthful and in-reality. Say what you will about Jobs, he's not dogmatic; he's far from an apple fanboy. He's doing what a recent article on disruption (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1375141 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1375141) reminded me of: don't confront entrenched competition, it will "invoke a competitive response" and they'll win (or "never attack a fortified hill", from crossing the chasm). Instead, do something else.
  - elblanco 16y ago
    > he's far from an apple fanboy. I agree. In order to make great things, and then to sustain that, I really truly believe you have to grow to dislike what you made before. It's the only way to take a critical eye one what you have done and learn from it. Lots of people think Jobs is a tyrant inside of Apple (and I agree with that sentiment), but I think the motivation for that is that he simply wants to create something he doesn't hate right now. It might be bootup time, or interface delays, or screen pixel density etc. That kind of thinking, a critical review of your own likes/dislikes is healthy I think in order to grow. Fanboyism, by definition, is not a process of critical thought.
Jun8 16y ago
Exactly! One of the best essay in PG's H&Ps book in my opinion was the one that explains how winning doesn't have to be a zero-sum game, you can generate wealth. This seems a no brainer but a lot of people don't get it. Many predict that a similar thing will happen in the battle between Google and Apple.
- raphar 16y ago
  It interesting view this google vs apple in: http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL+goog http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL+goog put the graph to 1y or 5y.
  - ecq 16y ago
    Apple is a monster. Google's stock price is pretty much downhill, considering they left the second biggest (and soon to be biggest) market in the world. China.
  - Groxx 16y ago
    Interesting in the similarities? Compare it with Microsoft (MSFT), the ups and downs appear to be more due to economic shifts than any connection between the two. AAPL/GOOG is definitely closer than AAPL/MSFT, but part of that could simply be due to that both are growing and changing quickly, and are less immune to economic forces than entrenched-MSFT.
    - troystribling 16y ago
      GOOG is now selling at about its mid 2005 price while APPL is about 350% above its mid 2005 price.
  - awa 16y ago
    Add MSFT and put the graph in Max, gives another interesting perspective
- Jun8 16y ago
  Forgot to put a link to the essay, here it is: http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html
swilliams 16y ago
Markets change. If you are unable to adapt well, you will likely perish or grow obsolete.

mootothemax 16y ago

Wow, that happened a lot faster than I thought it would. Well, to be honest, I think I wanted Apple to overtake Microsoft more than I ever thought I'd see it happen. I wonder if in a few years from now Facebook'll overtake MS and Apple? ;)

FraaJad 16y ago
The problem with facebook is it does not produce any value unlike Microsoft and Apple. Both Apple and Microsoft's product help people create stuff, get things done, entertain themselves. Facebook does a tiny bit of entertaining and socializing, it is no where near MSFT or AAPL in terms of having a tangible impact on people's lives.
- CUViper 16y ago
  We are social creatures, so products which aid that do have value.
- jpablo 16y ago
  I'll bet facebook has more impact than Apple. Apple makes your iPod, that let's me listen to music. Facebook creates your social life (for a lot of people it does).
  - TheSOB88 16y ago
    I disagree. For me, the only way Facebook helps me socially is as a sort of phone book and with events. Catching up over Facebook seems a useless event compared to conversing IRL. Besides, an inordinate amount of people use it as a game system with a leaderboard. Facebook's value isn't really social at all. It's pseudosocial.
    - jpablo 16y ago
      It's the same to me, catching up over FB is crap. But there are a lot of RL social stuff that if FB wasn't there a lot of people would be missing.

moron4hire 16y ago

Consider that Apple's P/E is 24.5 and Microsoft's P/E is 13.4. Basically, while Apple may be in demand right now, Microsoft is earning almost twice as much. Also, Microsoft pays a (albeit small) dividend, whereas Apple does not.

ergo98 16y ago
Goldman Sachs has a P/E ratio of 5.94. Microsoft's P/E is heavily "discounted" because it's considered a sort of swan song of easy money (the Windows and Office empire that they've coasted on). Apple's is considered the beginning of things. Stock value today isn't based on today, it's based on "tomorrow".
- j23tom 16y ago
  there is no "tomorrow" for apple. Tomorrow's name is Android
- papachito 16y ago
  > Apple's is considered the beginning of things. Who says that? They could be at the top of their game right now and not see more growth and stabilizing and/or decreasing in the future. There is no way to tell, otherwise you'd be very rich already ;) > Stock value today isn't based on today, it's based on "tomorrow". Who says that? Many believe that Apple stocks are overvalued today, that's for sure. Oh, and again, there is no way to tell the future.
  - mcav 16y ago
    > "They could be at the top of their game right now and not see more growth and stabilizing and/or decreasing in the future." In the future, anything's possible. But the future is almost always a function of the past, and current trends indicate anything but a decline in Apple's growth.
    - borism 16y ago
      Trends reverse, and "this thing is going up forever" trends usually reverse with a huge drops and without a warning. Check this http://www.davemanuel.com/investor-dictionary/momentum-play-momo-play/ http://www.davemanuel.com/investor-dictionary/momentum-play-...

jacquesm 16y ago

Interesting tidbit, when you scroll down the page to the end where the logos are displayed, the apple logo looks new, shiny and modern, the microsoft logo looks old and boring. Their corporate images reflect the logos quite well. edit: funny moderation here, would you mind telling me why ? Apple logo on the page not shiny ? Microsoft logo not old and boring ? Or do you - mistakenly - take me for an apple fanboy or something ?

norswap 16y ago
So irrelevant. Apple logo is indeed shiny, but it's 90ies-shiny. I much prefer Microsoft logo.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Not so irrelevant. I have no dog in this fight, I prefer linux over either, but the image that those companies project is very important in their contact with their target audience. When given a choice between an ipod and a zune with twice the storage capacity the majority of teen-agers would probably pick the ipod. When you sell consumer stuff 'cool' matters. Microsoft always has to balance their business image with their 'cool' image and in most (hardware) consumer products (other than the Xbox) they seem to fail at that. Phones that run windows CE are (rightfully) seen as old fashioned, the zune was dead on arrival and so on. Cool & shiny really matter.
dflock 16y ago
I don't know about the moderation, but what you said is entirely subjective - and quite possibly simply your perceptions of the two companies projected onto their logo's. You could equally well say that the MS logo on that page is elegant, simple and understated, while the Apple logo looks cheap, plasticy and tacky. Either personal opinion would be equally valid, just looking at the two logo's on that page.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Apple has adapted their logo over the years - and their website - to reflect the changing times, microsoft has kept their logo the same for a very long time. Now there is something to be said for keeping your logo the same, possibly forever. But the crowd that apple appeals to and that they intend to sell their gadgets and computers to loves shiny stuff, and apple is very good at making shiny stuff. It stands to reason they'd adapt their logo to that. Microsoft has a much stronger presence in the corporate world and I think that is why their logo looks the way it does and why they don't want to change it too much. They try not to be a fashion statement, apple tries very hard to be one.

tomlin 16y ago

Also: More controlling than Microsoft.

FraaJad 16y ago
controlling, maybe. MSFT is not the most "controlling" tech company out there (take a look at electronics and automation companies for real tight arsed behaviour) The problem people had with MSFT is their use of market dominance to kill off competition.
- tomlin 16y ago
  Apple is treading the same path to the same type of market dominance. Apple isn't the underdog any more. Time to take a second look.
- louislouis 16y ago
  "The problem people had with MSFT is their use of market dominance to kill off competition." Isn't that just doing business?
- louislouis 16y ago
  "The problem people had with MSFT is their use of market dominance to kill off competition." Isn't that just doing business?
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

jedberg 16y ago

I think the more interesting news here is that Apple is now the second largest company in America (about $50 billion behind Exxon).

dcurtis 16y ago
This is kind of pedantic, but I think the word valuable might be better here than largest. Apple is relatively small when compared to companies like Walmart, which has 2.1 million employees and almost 8x revenue.
- KERMIT 16y ago
  Where is the value in Apple? Its ability to trick Americans into buying very expensive, yet very restrictive, products that most of the time they really don't need? That's actually a very harmful thing, from an economic perspective.
  - jackowayed 16y ago
    iPods and iPhones are competitively priced. Sure, the Macs are expensive, but the hardware is very high quality, and when you compare them to Thinkpads and Vaios--other high-end computers--it's pretty reasonable. I'm no Apple fanboy (as of now, the only money I've ever given Apple is 30% of app purchases I've made for my hand-me-down iPhone 2G), but in a couple of days, I'm buying a MacBook Pro because it's a high quality unix system that Just Works. Given that I'm a programmer who will use it constantly, the time it will save me should cover the extra few hundred dollars by the end of summer.
    - sjs 16y ago
      This is so true. I like me some Linux, but OS X has won me over. I thought the iPod was a fad for people with money to waste, until I got a Mac and discovered how much thought Apple puts into their products. Sure I had a HDD based MP3 player (Creative Nomad Jukebox), but it took 2-3 minutes to boot if you put 2GB of music on it and it was the same size as a discman. The UI was atrocious. I went back to an MP3 discman because the Jukebox sucked. Most people don't compare Macs to equivalent systems, often because there is no comparable alternative. Even if you spec out a similar machine from other manufacturers you are almost guaranteed to be giving up something, whether that be battery life, a good case, or just the little touches that make you happy day to day like the battery life indicator or addictive multi-touch gestures. Even the Vaio-Z, which is pretty slick and only 13", isn't on par with a MacBook Pro when it comes to the little touches. Yet it costs as much as a 15" MBP. People who like to compare specs think they're getting a better deal but they rarely take into account actually using the thing for 8+ hours a day. The little things make a big difference when you use your computer that much.

louislouis 16y ago

Smells like an Apple bubble?

Perceval 16y ago
Actually, their P/E ratio has been steadily declining over the past five years, even as their stock price has risen dramatically. Usually a stock is considered overvalued if the P/E ratio is really high. But this chart (stock price on top, P/E ratio on bottom) seems to indicate that AAPL is not being overvalued by the market as the stock price goes up: http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/main.asp?time=12&freq=1&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&comp=NO_SYMBOL_CHOSEN&ma=0&maval=9&uf=0&lf=16777216&lf2=0&lf3=0&type=2&style=320&size=2&sid=0&o_symb=aapl&startdate=&enddate=&show=&symb=aapl&draw.x=21&draw.y=19 http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/main.asp?ti...
- louislouis 16y ago
  But investors are putting their money in to sell high since APPL doesn't pay dividends. The price is high atm, and there are many who are waiting exit, so any kind of trigger could set off a landslide.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
wendroid 16y ago
Yeah, they are well over their real worth. I'm looking forward to the pop. There's too many people chasing the bus.
lenley 16y ago
AMZN PE 53.69

apphacker 16y ago

Did MG Siegler just violate SEC laws by not disclosing if he owns Apple stock and telling thousands of his readers that Apple stock will continue to increase?

hugh3 16y ago
Are SEC laws that easy to violate? Hey everybody, I think Apple stock is going to continue to increase! I may or may not own Apple stock.
- apphacker 16y ago
  Yes, I think so. People have been forced to settle with the SEC for comments made on forums for example. http://news.cnet.com/SEC,-teen-settle-Net-stock-scheme-case/2110-1017_3-933247.html http://news.cnet.com/SEC,-teen-settle-Net-stock-scheme-case/...
  - hugh3 16y ago
    Crud. Well in that case... hey everybody, I don't own any Apple stock!
  - jedberg 16y ago
    I own a fund that owns shares of every public company on the market (VTI). Does that mean I have to say "I own this" any time I talk about stock?
    - werrett 16y ago
      The diference between a managed fund, where you're just investing in a basket that someone else controls, and a self-direct investment defines went to disclose or not.
- ekanes 16y ago
  It makes sense. Without a law like that, people with circulation/influence could manipulate the markets by buying, boosting and selling.

fusionman 16y ago

If you consider the PEG ratio of both, you'll actually see that when taking growth rate into consideration, Apple is still cheaper than Microsoft...barely. So, if you put faith in PEG ratios, Apple is still a better buy. If you don't know what a PEG ratio is, check it out here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEG_ratio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEG_ratio

ecq 16y ago

"What I can’t figure out is why he (Steve Jobs) is even trying (to be the CEO of Apple)? He knows he can’t win." - Bill Gates, June 1998 (AUDIO) http://www.cringely.com/2010/04/masters-tournament/ http://www.cringely.com/2010/04/masters-tournament/ http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/25385/ http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/25385/

herdrick 16y ago

So, when did Microsoft surpass Apple in market cap? 1992? 1988?

hugh3 16y ago
Good question. I couldn't find out since I can't get either google finance or yahoo finance to plot market cap, but I did get this: http://ycharts.com/search?q=MSFT%20vs%20AAPL&c=market_cap http://ycharts.com/search?q=MSFT%20vs%20AAPL&c=market_ca... It only goes back ten years but it at least shows that MSFT was vastly bigger than AAPL back in 1999.
- herdrick 16y ago
  Wow, YCharts is pretty great, thanks!
- elblanco 16y ago
  Wow, '99-'00 was a rough year for MSFT.
- arethuza 16y ago
  I remember picking up an iPod in what was probably '02 and thinking "I should buy some Apple stock". Damn.

evo_9 16y ago

The thing that's most interesting about all this is the predicament that Microsoft now finds itself in. They just lost two top guys - J. Allard & Robbie Bach - and you have to wonder just how rudderless Microsoft is at the moment. They've invested heavily in their core tech - mostly a good idea - but then they have really nothing to compete with Apple or Google in the mobile space, at least until their new phone os hits (and even then it faces a serious uphill battle). Balmer is probably wishing he had bought Palm at this point. I wonder if Bach and/or Allard end up at Google... a GBox has a nice ring to it actually.

jacquesm 16y ago
> a GBox has a nice ring to it actually. Let's not go there ok ?
- evo_9 16y ago
  The reality is we are going there because Google (along with Apple) are both developing 'connected tv's (aka, wifi enabled, OS running tv's). Not exactly an attempt to go right at Sony, Nintendo, etc, but Apple has shown how disruptive a sideways entry into a new market can be (or was that more of a happy accident stumble sideways?). Plus, I think the 'game companies' fail to recognize what a huge market casual games are and for most people, that's plenty enough to keep them happy.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Maybe I should have added that ';)' after all...
  - hugh3 16y ago
    That seems like the sort of market that google is going to win. Apple is going to want to sell you an Apple-branded piece of hardware (either a TV or a box) that lets your TV do new things. Google will simply license their technology to Samsung, LG, Panasonic and all the other existing TV manufacturers and have it built in to every TV that gets shipped. (Except maybe Sony, who will probably attempt to build their own system. It won't work very well outside Japan.)

MikeCapone 16y ago

Now it's time to see if money corrupts absolutely..

buster 16y ago

wow.. 25$ a share for MS vs. 250$ for Apple? As much as i like that Apple innovates and does produce good products, you'll have to be blind to not see the share crash in the future.. it strongly reminds me of the old startup days.. I mean (not offending) MS products are deployed in what.. 95% of all computers? office in every companies PC? Windows? Ok, Apple does have music selling through itunes, hardware (very low market share here!) and the mobile app sales. I don't know, i'd rather want to see the income of both companies per division, that'd be more meaningful to me, at least. A lot of shareholders betting insane amounts of money into a company seems to be too familiar. (Also i'm usualy not interested in shares and such, so i've probably missed something)

ashot 16y ago
you can't compare stock prices directly, they have no relative meaning
- buster 16y ago
  Mh, yes, now that i think of it... my first thought was "woah, i'll have to pay 10 times as much for one apple share", but in reality i'd just say "in invest 1000$ in whatever company, regardless of how many shares".. if the share goes up 10% it doesn't matter how many shares.. well.. my bad, as i said, i've no real interest in that stuff :P So, all in all, this means that Apple is seen as much worth as MS (and not 10 times more). That's a point of view i didn't consider.. Still, i would really like to see the income sources of both and how much income is generated where, that'd be interesting.
  - steveklabnik 16y ago
    > Still, i would really like to see the income sources of both and how much income is generated where, that'd be interesting. Here you go: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=MSFT+SEC+Filings http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=MSFT+SEC+Filings http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=AAPL+SEC+Filings http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=AAPL+SEC+Filings
rimantas 16y ago

louislouis 16y ago

If APPL, MSFT or GOOG disappeared tomorrow. Which one would cause the least damage? Which one could we live without?

ssp 16y ago
Would everything they ever made disappear too? If so, the loss of Windows and Office would create much more chaos than the loss of Google. The disappearance of all Apple products would not cause that much damage in comparison.
- whatusername 16y ago
  Not to mention Windows Server / MS-SQL.

teyc 16y ago

The real question is whether Apple's growth is defensible? Talking about smart phones, Apple is a latecomer to the industry, and does not have a sufficiently strong patent pool to prevent competitors like Oracle, HP and MS from encroaching. Apple is the first to deliver to the mass market affordable tablet computing and touch computing devices. This will remain growth areas, and hence Apple's willingness to accept lower margins in return for a beachhead and a sufficiently large user-base to establish itself as a platform-play. However, further on, Apple is going to have to finely balance the tension of being the most widely used vs being "exclusive", "cool", or "different". Give a few years when competitors reach feature parity, Apple will be at crossroads whether to go mass market or boutique.

X-Istence 16y ago
I wouldn't necessarily say that Apple doesn't have the patent pool for mobile devices (yes, the smart phone sector included) with Apple doing a lot of innovation in the form of multitouch, OS UI design, usability and a whole other range of other things. Dismissing Apple outright is definitely the wrong thing to do.
- teyc 16y ago
  I'm sorry, I should have said "patent barriers" instead. Apple is faced with the necessity of cross licensing their patents with their competitors in order to continue developing smartphones. I don't think Apple will be able to aggressively use their patents to prevent MS, HP, etc from copying.
Nelson69 16y ago
Will the competitors really reach feature parity? Really? I mean, to have feature parity with iPod, you need a top notch player, you need a very good music manager and then you need a one click store that has nearly everything. It's not the touch screen, it's not the iTunes app, it's not the store: it's all that stuff. Does the competition take away or does it help them stand out more?

dym 16y ago

Apple, unlike Microsoft, is well-positioned to take advantage of demise of high-tech industry as we know it. This demise has already happened once, with an industry that was "hi-tech" for centuries: clocks and watches. http://abandontheweb.blogspot.com/2005/11/is-hi-tech-timeless.html http://abandontheweb.blogspot.com/2005/11/is-hi-tech-timeles...

Kilimanjaro 16y ago

Ballmer MUST go!

KERMIT 16y ago
And be replaced by who?
- david927 16y ago
  Anyone with vision, courage and the ability to inspire. Balmer could always execute, but that's not what Microsoft needs right now. It doesn't know where it's going, so it's meaningless how well it gets there. Microsoft, for better or worse, is still in the driver seat. In terms of market share, Apple is a rounding error. But they inspire. They are exciting people about the future. When was the last time Microsoft did that? This isn't just about share price; it's about perceptions by investors, customers, employees -- everyone. They need to inspire again.

Enlightenment 16y ago

Apple is only worth MORE than Microsoft because of all the idiots buying Apple stock, just like the housing market in California before the housing crash! The USA department of justice is going to put a real hurt on Apple soon, so you better dump your Apple stock before it crashes!

dejb 16y ago

This surprises me given that it seems pretty clear they are about to lose their projected dominance in the smartphone game to Android. I can't see how you can justify that sort of valuation without projecting them to be the dominant smartphone platform. The iPad seems to be doing well but it all hinges on the same OS as the iPhone. Is it possible that Jobs "reality distortion" field is now working on the market?

jstevens85 16y ago
Why is it clear that they'll lose the #2 spot to Android? It certainly may happen, but it doesn't appear to be anywhere near certain. Notice that at Google I/O, they said that Android was #2 in the US. Why didn't they say in the world, or in the US and Canada, or in the US and Europe, or even in the US and Australia? Obviously it's because the US is the only major market where they've been able to beat Apple. If Apple announces a multiple carrier version of the iPhone at WWDC, I would say it's likely that Google would lose the #2 spot in the US.
- dejb 16y ago
  Android is growing much faster than the iPhone. The rest of the world (where I come from) is a lot more varied. RIM doesn't do so well and Nokia dominates heavily in a lot of markets. The iPhone doesn't do so well outside of the US either.
  - metachor 16y ago
    Android might be growing faster than iPhone, but how does that directly benefit Google? Apple makes money for every iPhone sold, but Android phones are manufactured and sold by other companies than Google. I thought Google gave away the OS for free (unlike Microsoft's strategy of licensing their mobile OS at a cost). Can someone explain to me how Google makes money on Android phone sales? Please don't say "future search ad revenue from having more internet connected devices in the hands of consumers." Edit: In answer to my own question, if the only profit Google makes from Android sales is search ad revenue, then according to this article (http://aseidman.com/2010/05/65000-new-android-devices-ship-each-day-how-much-are-they-worth-to-google/ http://aseidman.com/2010/05/65000-new-android-devices-ship-e...), Google makes only $8.63 per Android device sold over the entire lifetime of that device. Article was found via HN, but no one has commented on it yet. So apart from this meager search ad revenue, how does Google benefit financially from Android sales? I just can't figure this one out.

spoiledtechie 16y ago

I hate the fact that Apple is soo good at what they do. They go after the dumber people trying to be in style. They are such a closed company. If they were a government, they would be totalitarian country. I for one will never support them because of their closed mindedness.

davidw 16y ago

According to the ancient, unspoken rules of the Silicon Valley elders, this means that Bill will have to pass the Sacred Dagger of Evil to Steve in a secret ceremony with the sacrifice of a virgin. Apple fans are already lining up by the hundreds, hoping to be the "chosen one". Said one "well, yeah, stabbed to death, but...hey, it's Apple! The iDagger is so cool!"