MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

All together now:

"It's all about the money, it's all about the dum dum diddy dum dum..."

I'm all for it. As long as it doesn't become a lumbering giant. Since Apple doesn't have a problem sitting on a mountain of cash, let's go for it...!

As an investor, I'd like to PRESSURE Apple to _use_ some of that market capitalization and $10 per share in cash and invest it in either expanding R&D;, purchasing manufacturing facilities, or making acquisitions that strengthem market position and/or open new markets for Apple.

I would prefer Apple had some debt. It would be a tax benefit to write down the interest and mean that earnings were going into growing the company! Perhaps that will come in 2006.

I continue to believe the cash on-hand is part of a larger strategy that is yet to play out. I understand the debt argument, but...

If Apple survives the OS War of 2006

Amazing, I hope this happens than apple can brag "we are worth the most in the world" & "Bigger than M$"

That's funny twdldee. "If"...

oh god , i hope so

i really hope apple crush microcrap into the dust

If Microsoft would jettison Steve Ballmer it´s stock value would double over night....

o! Apple
o
o
o
G
G
o
o
o
o! Microsoft!

When Steve Jobs came back to Apple it was worth more dead than alive. It was in debt and was bleeding red ink. The college dropout that was run out of town by former PepsiCo CEO John Sculley (84-85) came back with the purchase of NeXT and has turned the company around through the 2000 recession, the bursting of the tech bubble and the post 9-11 economic funk.

During this time Apple has launched OS X (Rhapsody-10.4x), the iLife suite, iTMS, the Final Cut Suite, purchased eMagic (Logic), .Mac, the iPod, the iMac, iBook, the Mac mini, launched the Safari browser ( with help from KDE), launched the xCode Developer tools, the G5 line, and is now starting the transition to x86 CPUs. That's not a complete list. He has also launched the Apple Retail Chain and completely overhauled their production side, going from a high-cost to a low-cost producer of computers.

The PowerSchool and FileMaker subsidiaries are also doing great things and are moving forward. Not bad. Not bad at all.

Hell of a resume, don't you think.

The coming war is not going to occur in 2006, but in 2007-2010. Vista adoption by XP users and the continued swell of new Mac users giving up on M$ for their home use will put serious pressure on M$ as this war goes on.

If you look at the history of MS Windows (95-XP), the adoption rate by up-graders has decreased over each successive version. This is where Apple has had the advantage. They have seen an increase with each successive version of OS X in the adoption rate by up-graders.

In the consumer home user space, a user is very unlikely to upgrade the OS if there is no perceived benefit of doing so.

Apple has managed to do so by creating a perceived benefit for laying out the money.

On the Windows side it would be interesting to see if customers are more likely to upgrade the OS by purchasing a copy (not pirating) or buying a whole new machine instead.

I am specifically talking about the home user here for large institutions tend to have institution wide agreements with MS and exist in a dynamic that is quite different than the home user.

that is a heck of a resume...

and do we need to remind what the "genius" CEO said what he would do with apple?

His mindset may make good clones and marketing them well but dell will never innovate... (just like a certain redmond based co. we all know.)

HISTORY LESSON - I couldnt of put it better

me wrote:

As an investor, I'd like to PRESSURE Apple to _use_ some of that market capitalization and $10 per share in cash and invest it in either expanding R&D;, purchasing manufacturing facilities, or making acquisitions that strengthen market position

I respond:

Just this month, Apple did strengthen their market position by spending 1.5 B to partner with various flash chip OEM's to lock up supplies through 2008 at great prices.

This will prevent the copycats from securing cheap flash memory and therefore make them unable to compete with apple by selling their me-too products cheaper than Apple. Many pundits feel that iPod competitors must sell cheaper than Apple to make market advances.

Apple has effectively cut them off from that route, meaning they can only compete at higher prices (the Creative M) on interoperability, interface, and ease of use. And really, who can beat Apple at that game? I'd say it's a pretty judicious use of cash on the part of Jobs and co.

And, who knows what else, beyond iPods, the deep thinkers at Apple have planned for all those flash chips? For what other products might they want to get a two year head start on those competitors who ride the coattails of Apple design?

The future is bright .

Microsoft's current market value stands at $287,850,410,220

That's a billion dollars more than Switzerland's GNP.

Amazing that a single corporation can hold more value than a WHOLE FRIKKIN' NATION!! We're not talking about some backwater third-world bananna republic, we're talking about the banking center of the industrialized western world...

I don't think Apple was ever in debt in its entire history, even during the darkest days of Michael Spindler. Can somebody confirm or deny that?

Screw Microsoft! It's just a software developer! It should have never been allowed to get where it is and only got there illegally. The result has been to ghettoize the entire industry.

As the name implies, I am a Linux Guy. I started with the Mac, but was forced to go with Windows for practical professional reasons. Then I moved over to NeXt, at home at least, and then to Linux when NeXt became moribund.

But back in my Mac phase, I made the biggest investment bet in my life -- AAPL. I never sold, hoping that than ounce of intelligence would infect an Apple CEO to take the most creative company and make it soar.

Now I feel like Meg Ryan in that scene in "When Harry Met Sally." My wife almost fainted when I told her what the stock she wanted me to dump was worth.

I happily agree with the author. Apple might just well keep growing at a spectacular rate and blow past MS. Yes, yes, oooooooo, ooooooweeeeeeee ....

Sounds very unlikely. Much as I am a fan of Apple, for this prediction to come true, Microsoft would have to stand still, or start to lose value.

Let's assume that MS dips from 287B to 200B. Apple would have to more than triple to hit that point in two years.

Possible? Yes. Probable? Learn from history.

I used to own a lot of AOL shares that were at $95 in December 1999. I thought I was retired. I made the mistake of holding on to them. I didn't recognize the bubble.

Apple is ahead of itself. Don't assume that the stock will sustain this rate of growth. If you have shares, protect them. Don't make the mistake I made with AOL. Fortuneately, Apple is in much better hands than Case, Schuler, and the other idiots that were running AOL/Time Warner circa '99-03.

I don't think Apple overtaking Microsoft in value is all that farfetched. As Apple gains share, Microsoft, by definition, has to lose share. The loss of share, even in the face of good earnings, will cause MSFT to decline in value (perception of future value equation). So Apple does not have to gain $220 Billion in value to overtake Microsoft. The transition could happen with a gain of just $140 billion. Not unreasonable considering Apple's leadership in music, positioning in video and expanding CPU share.

Having said all that, I would be more comfortable with a forecast of 2008. 2007 is pretty aggressive.

I'm not sure about catching M$, but I do think Apple can definitely pass up Dell's market cap by 2007. And what a glorious day it will be when Mikey boy has to eat that HUGE plate of crow...

Apple did have some debt, and I recall Steve making an announcement to the employees about paying it in full while I was there. I think that was close to two years ago.

Also speaking as an investor, I'm happy to see Apple sitting on a large war chest. The deal for flash memory supplies was a great move, and it probably wouldn't have been prudent if Apple's cash balances weren't so high.

There's really no such thing as excess cash. That money makes it possible for Apple to make bold moves, like launching the iPod or the Mac Mini, or building out the server capacity to make the video store possible. I don't know what else they're developing, but I'm quite sure that Apple's future product plans aren't scaled back from what they've done already.

I'm very long on AAPL, and I just bought another 500 shares in the dip that the recent analyst downgrades caused. (bought at 70.85, and I'm already up over a dollar from that.)

As for Apple overtaking MS, I do see that coming, and the trigger for it will be Windows Vista. That product is SIX YEARS late, and they've dropped so much of the highly-touted feature set that it's barely more than XP with a couple of new skins. Once the customers discover that Vista is still the unsecureable mess that Windows has always been, we will have reached the tipping point.

MS is also suffering a brain drain. The "get rich at MS" story depended on a constantly rising stock price, and they've been flat for years now. Any top engineer who chooses MS over Google or Apple, or even any of the latest round of start-ups, is just wasting his talent.

I've read what MS's new CTO is saying, and frankly, I'm underwhelmed. XML? AJAX? RSS? Running Word and Excel as a web service? Give me a break! Those clowns are completely out of ideas, and they can't even figure out how to copy Google.

Apple worth more than MS? Hell, yes!

-jcr

The coming OS war may be the real reason that Apple is switching to Intel processors. Microsoft's Vista means a lot to all the PC makers (Dell, HP, etc) because it will trigger an upgrade cycle as all those corporate users buy newer, faster computers to run the new operating system.

This is Apple's big chance to make a real dent in the market - all they have to do is convince some of those "upgraders" to switch instead to a Mac. By using Intel-based hardware, the new switchers can taste the Mac, but still have the option to revert to MS Vista if things don't work out.

This could sell a lot of Apple hardware. Alternatively, Apple could license OS X to PC makers to compete head-to-head with MS during this upgrade cycle.

OS War? What war? That one was won a long time ago - and I give you one guess as to who won it.

Apple's fighting a guerrilla war, at most. And winning a little bit on the edges.

Step out of this echo chamber for a second and remember that the biggest growth markets for computers in the coming decade are China and India. Those are definitely not going to Macs and probably not even to Windows. Maybe some home-grown version of Linux.

" That one was won a long time ago - and I give you one guess as to who won it."

The Romans won a lot of wars too, and their empire still collapsed.

-jcr

Me again (and my song). I don't want Apple that successful. I want them strong, but lean and hungry, not bloated and corrupt. I like where they are right now - innovating, producing everything I could want or need, and looking for ways to make it better. I'll happily accept a higher price point for a better user experience (and dare I say it, perhaps a little smugness).

I don't want Apple to be the next Microsoft, Dell, or Walmart. I don't want to have to look elsewhere for the next best thing.

Linux can run on a Mac, there are several flavors for the PPC. If OS X is guerrilla, Linux is militia.

Besides, those lentil-lickers will flock to the Mac once they realize that their Macs can be powered by cow dung and/or untouchables in a treadwheel, and last 5-10 years longer than their Dells or Zeniths or ASUSs or whatever.

Unfortunately most people will probably have their computers made from scratch by some opportunistic but unemployed IIT drop out, à la "Short Circuit" (1986, dir. John Badham)

"The Romans won a lot of wars too, and their empire still collapsed."


You're comparing apples to oranges. In today's business world if a competing technology appears that could threaten your monopoly you buy it out or crush it before it can grow. Look at Intel, Cisco, etc. Microsoft can't follow that route because of government intervention in the market. When M$ loses market share the competitors won't be able to use the "monopoly" argument against it anymore and M$ can go back to doing what it does best - killing the competition. I actually want M$ to lose market share so they can get these Socialist G-men off their backs and do exactly that.

But not to Apple, of course. Too many FanBois will be crying in their soup...

Microsoft is being attacked on all fronts, so Apple is only one of their worries. Google, Oracle and Sony among others are also hot after them. Microsoft literally has too many irons in the fire. Bill Gates may end up becoming a latter day Julius Ceasar if this continues for a few more years. As the earlier post said, all empires and dictators no matter how powerful end up falling eventually...

I hate to be a nay-sayer, but Apple will never surpass Microsoft unless they license OSX to run on any PC meeting certain hardware requirements.

That's the long and the short of it...

"all empires and dictators no matter how powerful end up falling eventually..."


As I've always said - in the end China will win...

You heard it here first, on MDN

FUCKING BRILLIANT....Nothing more nothing less

(By the way, I believe it too!)

Not even the most ardent Apple fan would have dared make such a suggestion 5 years ago, and now we have a fund manager letting the very words roll off his lips.

Glad I got my AAPL when ti was way down.

that's pretty funny.. just the Dell numbers are amazing.. surpassing dell in the next couple months? Wow...

I dont know about MS tho.. it seems pretty lofty to even suggest..

If Apple stock keeps double/ triple every year...it would be 2007... oh, not for MS!!!
Well MS still only earns $$ on OS & Office - all others lose $$$, LOTS of it... WinCE, XBox, MSN, MS Music Stores, everything is a huge drain.... Monopoly Office/OS fees are the ONLY income. ( and we see Europe, India, China, lots of starving people can't afford a $100+ OS - or Office even one per village!

BUT, Apple earned a LOT of cash this year. $250 Million is x 4 = 1B - but Apple went from 5.7 to 8.3B Cash in 1 year.... What did they invest in??? Tiger -OK, and??

Apple, runs like a few small companies. Retail earns a profit selling 3rd party stuff, paying staff, leases, and expanding ( Often companies "Bet" by losing $$ and improved distribution - Gateway closed all stores & Bought by eMachines during this.)

Applications all earn a profit. FCP finances iMovie, QT pays itself on PRO & licensing (MS doesn't earn on MS media !)

iTunes music store is 2nd only to Amazon in sales! 2nd Largest ecommerce web site on earth!! ( Which Apple operates at break even - or "Slight" profit - but zero losses... )

It goes against everything Business Schools say.... Apple can invent, and earn a profit, while taking over industries.... see Media PC market swallowed by V Pod in 1 day! MS is trying...too many people... 45,000 engineers on Vista vs. 2500 on Mac OS X ( PPC & Intel every version - recouped R&D;on retail sales of OS)

Is MS lame because they finally paid a few fines for illegally exploiting their monopoly market? Sherman antitrust act says they must give back ALL ILLGOTTEN GAINS ( since without lying, cheating, stealing, no profits at all ) They have never "Done" anything, and lying to IBM to get 4 Billion dollars a year to make DOS ( Not even owned by MS ) then paying to rent each copy - since it's a hobby market.. IBM was bigger than MS too...

I don't think the OS war was ever done while Steve was at Apple, MS was a spreadsheet developer.... Skully accidentally signed away the right for MS to copy Mac OS - and ran it to the dirt....

IBM paid all that R & D so they could catch Apple...when Steve was there...It dominated ( except where Steve doesn't get to implement -fully automated Assembly plant idea - actually DID work, years after...listen to the guy!!)

If Apple stays fiscally responsible, it will begin piling on cash, every part is profitable, everyone loses $$ on Music stores...except Apple, MS Pays years of R&D;never ships in OS < Like Apple B 4 steve >

Steve lost "his" company by a boardroom back deal... So Pixar he keeps over 50% so no one can....
Steve wants the world to be a better place, Bill G only wants to own it, whatever it is, he'd invest in Apple to do it.... Who runs MS now though? 999 Managers...

If Apple Hardware competes on price with DELL, feature for feature, price to your home - Apple is cheaper - you can run your old Windows, Linux, and pretty = Mac OS X is free - and less license fees a LOT less - iPod shows how THAT works out....

After OS X runs on x86, fastest, best priced, sexy, hardware....why not use Applr PC's (Less ugly!) Then, if say..... 25% of them buy as WIndows hardware have a few security issues....try out X?

Trojan HORSE Mini*

*Makers of iPod

I've been a Mac user since 1989. let me tell you, I loved OS 6-9 but they are drek compared to what you can do with OSX. I am happy my Mini came without "Classic".

I have also been an unwilling Windows user since 1995. Let me tell you, XP is way more stable than even Win 2000. Win2000 could stay up about a day; you can go a week on XP, though it still is sluggish and multitasks poorly. But let me tell you another thing: while MSFT HAS improved the beneath-the-hodd aspects of Windows (though they get an "F" for failing to transition to UNIX when they still could have, a few years ago), the user experience is JUST as bad in XP as 95. The Window dressing is different, but the moment you try to do anything more complex than sending an E-mail, you realize that even simple things like cutting and pasting between applications is pretty hit-and-miss.

I am NOT happy about Apple moving to pokey X86 chips, but it makes it "safe" to try Mac for people. They can buy a Mac and if they really don't like it (hahhh!), they could in principal wipe the drive and install XP or "Vista". 2006 is going to be a HUGE year for AAPL.

It's a troll comment based on assumptions. If this ... then that. If market share starts taking significant chunks from Windows, then ... anything is possible.

mike wrote:
"I dont know about MS tho.. it seems pretty lofty to even suggest.."

There were times when General Motors and Ma Bell (AT&T;) were also considered too big to be eclipsed.

What's amazing is how many of MS's problems are self-made. Why aren't their products (esp. Windows) secure? Why did they over-extend into different markets? Why do so many of their crucial products still carry bloated legacy weight?

MS is killing themselves. Apple is building a better product line, and has conveniently placed it to take the spoils.

Why did the article omit Google? They're MS's biggest threat. They're worth about $140million, and I expect them to catch MS in market cap by the end of next year. Apple will be doing well to catch Dell.

As for Switzerland, you can't compare marketcap to GNP. It's not the same thing.

AMPAR : Your remark made look up an old cd I have with the band TIMBUK 3 - and now I´m singing " The future´s so bright, I gotta wear shades ! " Thank ! = )

Comparing Microsoft's market cap to Switzerland's GNP is like comparing Windows to Swiss Cheese. They both have holes, and the raw material for both comes from the after end of the cow.

jeez, Col. Angus, that's a pretty rough handle you've got on bovine anatomy ...

Yes, Geir:
"Things are going great, and they're only getting better
I'm doing all right, getting good grades
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades."

Greetings from Ampar. (Just wanted to funk with your mind.)

KenC ?

I thought the single share price for Google was $140 million? ; )

xrsdy1khl1ugw http://www.888933.com/558921.html k65y1yfkkyqs23