5 ms·

Revenue doesn't really matter, you should look at profits. Amazon makes most of their revenue from the website, but pretty much all of their profits come from c

Revenue doesn't really matter, you should look at profits. Amazon makes most of their revenue from the website, but pretty much all of their profits come from cloud. The tech giant business model is to dominate distribution and extract profits by self preferencing. Im sure apple's services division is a good portion of their profits.

JimDabell 3y ago
> Revenue doesn't really matter Grandparent is claiming that Apple aren’t a hardware company any more. Pointing out that the vast majority of their income comes from hardware is totally relevant. Apple brings in hundreds of billions from selling hardware every year. They are definitely still a hardware company.
- the_gipsy 3y ago
  The income is irrelevant if it's just a vessel to make profits from the services. In detriment of the user, who once could trust that they were buying a device, but now are getting locked in some subscription schemes. Apple has passed the event horizon of extracting profits now.
  - JimDabell 3y ago
    > The income is irrelevant if it's just a vessel to make profits from the services. It’s not though. Apple are bringing in hundreds of billions of dollars every year from hardware. That’s not a means to an end, that is the end itself.
    - the_gipsy 3y ago
      You seem to not understand the difference between income and profit.
      - JimDabell 3y ago
        I do, but unless you think Apple’s hundreds of billions in hardware revenue is some kind of loss leader, it’s irrelevant. Apple are a hardware company. It’s bizarre that you are trying to argue otherwise. They make more money from selling consumer hardware than practically every other company in the world.
        disgruntledphd2 3y ago
        > Apple are a hardware company. It’s bizarre that you are trying to argue otherwise. They make more money from selling consumer hardware than practically every other company in the world. You are definitely correct in that Apple are a hardware company. However (and I think this is the point of disagreement) much of their revenue growth (and presumably profits, but that's harder to assess) comes from services, and from a stock price perspective revenue/profit growth is what matters (you're only as good as your last quarter and all that). Understanding this is key to understanding lots of Apple's business decisions recently (my favourite was destroying the business model of their competitors using ATT and then refusing to declare their own ad business ATT compliant).
        JimDabell 3y ago
        > I think this is the point of disagreement I appreciate you trying to steel-man their argument, but you’ve gone far enough that it doesn’t reflect what they were actually saying. The thing I’m disagreeing with is: > Apple's no longer a hardware company There’s no way to spin that into anything resembling reality. If they had said what you are saying, I wouldn’t have objected. > my favourite was destroying the business model of their competitors using ATT and then refusing to declare their own ad business ATT compliant It doesn’t really make sense to do so. Apple aren’t an unseen third-party; the user has explicitly chosen to use their products and services. Why would ATT apply here?
        disgruntledphd2 3y ago
        Because it's grossly unfair and mendacious to argue that nobody except them should be able to link identities on iOS.

JimDabell 3y ago

> Revenue doesn't really matter Grandparent is claiming that Apple aren’t a hardware company any more. Pointing out that the vast majority of their income comes from hardware is totally relevant. Apple brings in hundreds of billions from selling hardware every year. They are definitely still a hardware company.

the_gipsy 3y ago
The income is irrelevant if it's just a vessel to make profits from the services. In detriment of the user, who once could trust that they were buying a device, but now are getting locked in some subscription schemes. Apple has passed the event horizon of extracting profits now.
- JimDabell 3y ago
  > The income is irrelevant if it's just a vessel to make profits from the services. It’s not though. Apple are bringing in hundreds of billions of dollars every year from hardware. That’s not a means to an end, that is the end itself.
  - the_gipsy 3y ago
    You seem to not understand the difference between income and profit.
    - JimDabell 3y ago
      I do, but unless you think Apple’s hundreds of billions in hardware revenue is some kind of loss leader, it’s irrelevant. Apple are a hardware company. It’s bizarre that you are trying to argue otherwise. They make more money from selling consumer hardware than practically every other company in the world.
      - disgruntledphd2 3y ago
        > Apple are a hardware company. It’s bizarre that you are trying to argue otherwise. They make more money from selling consumer hardware than practically every other company in the world. You are definitely correct in that Apple are a hardware company. However (and I think this is the point of disagreement) much of their revenue growth (and presumably profits, but that's harder to assess) comes from services, and from a stock price perspective revenue/profit growth is what matters (you're only as good as your last quarter and all that). Understanding this is key to understanding lots of Apple's business decisions recently (my favourite was destroying the business model of their competitors using ATT and then refusing to declare their own ad business ATT compliant).
        JimDabell 3y ago
        > I think this is the point of disagreement I appreciate you trying to steel-man their argument, but you’ve gone far enough that it doesn’t reflect what they were actually saying. The thing I’m disagreeing with is: > Apple's no longer a hardware company There’s no way to spin that into anything resembling reality. If they had said what you are saying, I wouldn’t have objected. > my favourite was destroying the business model of their competitors using ATT and then refusing to declare their own ad business ATT compliant It doesn’t really make sense to do so. Apple aren’t an unseen third-party; the user has explicitly chosen to use their products and services. Why would ATT apply here?
        disgruntledphd2 3y ago
        Because it's grossly unfair and mendacious to argue that nobody except them should be able to link identities on iOS.