4 ms·

In fact, Microsoft spends around $2-2.5b on R&D per quarter [1] while Apple spends $500-600m [2]. That certainly more than makes up for the difference. [1] htt

by orijing 15y ago

In fact, Microsoft spends around $2-2.5b on R&D per quarter [1] while Apple spends $500-600m [2]. That certainly more than makes up for the difference. [1] http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=MSFT http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=MSFT [2] http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL&fstype=ii http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL&fstype=ii

wooster 15y ago
I was on a team once at Apple with ~15 people on it. At one point, we found out the equivalent group at Microsoft had ~500 people. Most people I've talked to who worked elsewhere are shocked at how small the teams at Apple are.
- singular 15y ago
  Did you find the small team size a pleasant experience? Is it a case of many small teams adding up to a lot of people, or genuinely few small teams?
  - jballanc 15y ago
    My experience was that it was genuinely small teams...and it was fun! It's one of the ways that Apple maintains a startup-like atmosphere despite being such a large company. Oh, and Apple remains a very flat company. I was 5 degrees removed from Steve Jobs, and I don't know anyone that was more than 8...including retail staff!
    - mkramlich 15y ago
      > Oh, and Apple remains a very flat company. I was 5 degrees removed from Steve Jobs, and I don't know anyone that was more than 8...including retail staff! This sounds funny from my POV because I work mostly with startups now so I'm usually 0-1 levels away from the CEO. In the last 2 weeks alone I've ended up in F2F conversations with folks who I originally thought were some bizdev guy, perhaps a senior technical architecht, but no, turns out, that was the CEO. (... ", bitch." <--- per The Social Network) I was in a conversation the other day with a guy who was the CEO of a potential competitor, but at the time I didn't know he was the CEO, or that they were a potential competitor, and likewise in reverse. Funny stuff. So yeah, this whole "flat company" with a mere 5-8 levels of hierarchy, makes me giggle. Back to my Terminal session, which this CEO considers his office. :) (not criticising, just pointing out the humor of relative POV's)
- kenjackson 15y ago
  What group is that? From what I hear most groups at MS aren't huge either -- unless you aggregate them (for example Visual Studio, counting all of the languages, shells, debuggers, etc...). Unless you're going to say there are only 15 people on iOS. In which case I will be seriously impressed!
  - jballanc 15y ago
    When I was at Apple, I was on a team of 6 within the server group. When I told a friend in CoreOS that we had 6 people, he wanted to know what justified our team being so large! Oh, and if you want an Apples to Apples comparison...I was there when the Server group merged with the Dev Tools group...and the merged group is maybe 300 engineers total (all of server was about 70 engineers...all told OS X and iOS combined only comes to something like 3000 engineers). A fun little link: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=revenue+per+employee+at+apple%2C+google%2C+and+microsoft http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=revenue+per+employee+at...
    - kenjackson 15y ago
      all told OS X and iOS combined only comes to something like 3000 engineers That sounds about right. For Win7 about 2500 engineers (1000 devs, 1000 testers, 500 PMs). I suspect WP7 is probably 500 engineers. So Windows + WP7 is probably right around the same number. Interesting to think that in terms of products where Apple and MS compete directly, they probably have very similar headcounts. There's a mythology that MS is this huge beast that will crush you (at least in the past). But in reality MS ships 100+ different products. The company is spread a lot thinner than lay people might imagine. http://www.pc-wholesale.com/networking-news-a-small-army-of-engineers-slated-to-work-on-windows-7.html http://www.pc-wholesale.com/networking-news-a-small-army-of-...
ellyagg 15y ago
So I don't understand. Are you saying that research money is essentially a donation so that's why it doesn't "count"? Isn't the point of a company's research team to develop profit centers that not only cover their own costs but then some? Because the way I'm reading this Apple's R&D is doing it better and more efficiently.
- contextfree 15y ago
  If you're comparing short-term profits it might be significant, in that it could indicate whether the profits indicate sustainable growth or just "eating the seed corn" via R&D cost cutting which sacrifices future profits. Though over a long period (but how long? years? decades?) it shouldn't matter, since as you point out if past R&D expenses were effective from a business POV they should be reflected in future profits.

by orijing 15y ago

wooster 15y ago

I was on a team once at Apple with ~15 people on it. At one point, we found out the equivalent group at Microsoft had ~500 people. Most people I've talked to who worked elsewhere are shocked at how small the teams at Apple are.

singular 15y ago
Did you find the small team size a pleasant experience? Is it a case of many small teams adding up to a lot of people, or genuinely few small teams?
- jballanc 15y ago
  My experience was that it was genuinely small teams...and it was fun! It's one of the ways that Apple maintains a startup-like atmosphere despite being such a large company. Oh, and Apple remains a very flat company. I was 5 degrees removed from Steve Jobs, and I don't know anyone that was more than 8...including retail staff!
  - mkramlich 15y ago
    > Oh, and Apple remains a very flat company. I was 5 degrees removed from Steve Jobs, and I don't know anyone that was more than 8...including retail staff! This sounds funny from my POV because I work mostly with startups now so I'm usually 0-1 levels away from the CEO. In the last 2 weeks alone I've ended up in F2F conversations with folks who I originally thought were some bizdev guy, perhaps a senior technical architecht, but no, turns out, that was the CEO. (... ", bitch." <--- per The Social Network) I was in a conversation the other day with a guy who was the CEO of a potential competitor, but at the time I didn't know he was the CEO, or that they were a potential competitor, and likewise in reverse. Funny stuff. So yeah, this whole "flat company" with a mere 5-8 levels of hierarchy, makes me giggle. Back to my Terminal session, which this CEO considers his office. :) (not criticising, just pointing out the humor of relative POV's)
kenjackson 15y ago
What group is that? From what I hear most groups at MS aren't huge either -- unless you aggregate them (for example Visual Studio, counting all of the languages, shells, debuggers, etc...). Unless you're going to say there are only 15 people on iOS. In which case I will be seriously impressed!
- jballanc 15y ago
  When I was at Apple, I was on a team of 6 within the server group. When I told a friend in CoreOS that we had 6 people, he wanted to know what justified our team being so large! Oh, and if you want an Apples to Apples comparison...I was there when the Server group merged with the Dev Tools group...and the merged group is maybe 300 engineers total (all of server was about 70 engineers...all told OS X and iOS combined only comes to something like 3000 engineers). A fun little link: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=revenue+per+employee+at+apple%2C+google%2C+and+microsoft http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=revenue+per+employee+at...
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    all told OS X and iOS combined only comes to something like 3000 engineers That sounds about right. For Win7 about 2500 engineers (1000 devs, 1000 testers, 500 PMs). I suspect WP7 is probably 500 engineers. So Windows + WP7 is probably right around the same number. Interesting to think that in terms of products where Apple and MS compete directly, they probably have very similar headcounts. There's a mythology that MS is this huge beast that will crush you (at least in the past). But in reality MS ships 100+ different products. The company is spread a lot thinner than lay people might imagine. http://www.pc-wholesale.com/networking-news-a-small-army-of-engineers-slated-to-work-on-windows-7.html http://www.pc-wholesale.com/networking-news-a-small-army-of-...

ellyagg 15y ago

So I don't understand. Are you saying that research money is essentially a donation so that's why it doesn't "count"? Isn't the point of a company's research team to develop profit centers that not only cover their own costs but then some? Because the way I'm reading this Apple's R&D is doing it better and more efficiently.

contextfree 15y ago
If you're comparing short-term profits it might be significant, in that it could indicate whether the profits indicate sustainable growth or just "eating the seed corn" via R&D cost cutting which sacrifices future profits. Though over a long period (but how long? years? decades?) it shouldn't matter, since as you point out if past R&D expenses were effective from a business POV they should be reflected in future profits.