Editorial

Apple overtakes Microsoft to become the world's most valuable tech firm

It's official, Apple's market cap is now bigger than Microsoft's.

As of early afternoon today, Apple's market capitalization on the NASDAQ stock market is higher than Microsoft's. Market cap is one of many ways that the financial markets measure the value of a company. It is worked out by the value of the stock versus the amount issued. As it stands right now Apple is valued at nearly $227 billion compared to Microsoft's $223 billion. Although Apple's market cap is higher right now, Apple does not issue dividends to its share holders whereas Microsoft does and this affects the comparison. Companies can not be compared on market cap alone, however this is a significant milestone for the folks in Cupertino and for the industry as a whole.

What does this mean for Microsoft?

It's a clear wake up call and solid proof that Apple's gains in the mobile market and MP3 player market have turned the company around. In the past five years alone Apple's stock has risen nearly 560% whilst Microsoft's has risen a mere 4%. The New York Times names Apple the new King of Technology. Despite Microsoft's domination with its Windows and Office software the company struggles to compete in search, mobile the MP3 player market. All three markets are huge areas of growth, innovation and provide opportunities for huge profit gains. With the recent news of Microsoft's re-organisation just beginning to settle, it's clear the company has a huge task ahead to regain market share, mind share and most of all to swing consumers taste. It's clear that over the last five years consumers needs and tastes have shifted from business focussed devices and software to devices that work well, are simple to use and are good looking. Consumers also want something that works quickly with a simple user interface. Apple and Google have successfully filled a gap that Microsoft missed. Microsoft dropped the ball on Windows Mobile but will Windows Phone 7 be too late too?

Image Credit: Businessweek

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

New Facebook privacy controls begin rolling out

Next Story

New iPhone in June confirmed by AT&T to employees

101 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Yawn, of course they are more "valuable" with their prices. Its a no brainer really. And MS and Apple are not even in the same bracket really except for their OS. MS does a TON more **** that Apple has even thought of so MS is here to stay. So all you Apple fans can brag all you want...I for one could care less who is more valuable. I am more interested in the products and services provided...period. Apple is more valuable in the books...not in real work every day use.

Also, Apple better be prepared to get sued left and right...as they currently are. With being more "valuable" comes people getting ****ed at using their tech without permission. MS had to go thru it, still are, so Apple better be prepared.

Not much of a surprise. Apple's has had much success with the iPhone, MacBooks and iPad in the past few months, whereas MS hasn't done much but the same industries they've been in for years (Xbox, Windows, Office, etc). Nothing new in the MS domain and so it is only logical that Apple would come ahead with their new releases and blossoming sales.

That doesn't mean Apple is dominating. Their OS is still way behind in comparison to MS's Windows. They only think worth mentioning is the iPhone and iPad which are booming with revenue.

All this proves is that Apple couldn't make it as a *computer* company.

Their media monopoly has the DOJ making plans for an investigation.
Imagine if they had won the PC war, how tight fisted they would be with our desktops!

Oh, the magic of the pencil!!

Anyone could come up with a formula to make it sound like one company is better off than the other in some area or another.

Personally,
Have no use for any Apple products.

As long as the iphone, itouch and ipad keep their popular factor Apple will grow and they attract customers to their other products as well, but will apple be able to keep this popular factor ? They will keep it for as long as they are the leaders of innovation for phones/mp4 players and other company's don't make a music application better than itunes.

Gaffney said,
As long as the iphone, itouch and ipad keep their popular factor Apple will grow and they attract customers to their other products as well, but will apple be able to keep this popular factor ? They will keep it for as long as they are the leaders of innovation for phones/mp4 players and other company's don't make a music application better than itunes.

Mate, their computer shipments are growing at 39% per quarter - what the heck are you going on about; they have no absolute dependency on their i-devices as long as their core business is rocking along - which it is.

Apple is worth 222B and has a price per earnings ratio of 20.71. Microsoft is worth 219B and has a price per earnings ratio of 12.93. That means Microsoft is making 60% more in earnings compared to Apple, yet is worth less. Either Microsoft is grossly undervalued, or Apple is grossly overvalued. Take your pick.

sabrex said,
Apple is worth 222B and has a price per earnings ratio of 20.71. Microsoft is worth 219B and has a price per earnings ratio of 12.93. That means Microsoft is making 60% more in earnings compared to Apple, yet is worth less. Either Microsoft is grossly undervalued, or Apple is grossly overvalued. Take your pick.

Or the value is a projection of what the market believes Apple is capable of growing in the future. Microsoft right now has pretty much been flat over the last 5 years when it comes to revenue growth and new markets entered into has been met with marginal success.

sabrex said,
Apple is worth 222B and has a price per earnings ratio of 20.71. Microsoft is worth 219B and has a price per earnings ratio of 12.93. That means Microsoft is making 60% more in earnings compared to Apple, yet is worth less. Either Microsoft is grossly undervalued, or Apple is grossly overvalued. Take your pick.

Can't just look at the here and now. Investment is a long-term outlook.

May be uncle steve will have this magical thing during WWDC. Congrat!. If Apple sleeps on their success, they will lose again. It is better to lower the price and sell best products. Microsoft will wake up after this. This is like a chilling shock to them.

Anyways, stock prices do not mean much. In a second, you are so rich another you are poor. Will Apple issue more stock to capitalize this? Who knows?

Just goes to show how you can charge 5x as much for an inferior product and the mindless droves of this country will by it en masse for no good reason and make your company billions. Apple's rise coinciding with the dumbing down of the average person is no surprise and is quite sad really.

Gold Roger said,
Congrats Neowin, on starting potentially the biggest flamewar ever seen.

Its been surprisingly civil. Then again, the normal anti-Apple trolls have been quiet. Hmm...

Edited by mantis-, May 27 2010, 2:05am :

I certainly don't know of any major organizations that are looking to rip Active Directory out of their organization and replace them with "Apple LDAP"? Microsoft is not going anywhere. Wakeup call? Maybe. Is Apple going to take over the mainstream business sector tomorrow? Certainly not.

cjbeckwith said,
I certainly don't know of any major organizations that are looking to rip Active Directory out of their organization and replace them with "Apple LDAP"? Microsoft is not going anywhere. Wakeup call? Maybe. Is Apple going to take over the mainstream business sector tomorrow? Certainly not.

Microsoft is pretty safe in OS, Office, and server. One exception: Exchange, which is vulnerable to Google Apps. (That's right: as usual, the hype is all wrong. Google Apps is not going to kill Office -- but it is *very* dangerous for Exchange. Especially hosted Exchange.)

Apple is quite safe in Mac and iPod. Mac is still growing nicely, iPod has leveled off. The problem is that Apple's *really* high-growth areas are iPhone and iPad, i.e., wireless devices. And this is a *very* dangerous market to be in. Just ask Motorola, or Siemens, or Ericsson, or Palm.

Mobile devices turn over every two years because that's how long the contracts are. You might hope to lock in some people with apps, but with most apps costing 99 cents, the moat is not very wide. And Apple is not competing with RIM or Nokia or Microsoft, but with Google now. Unlike any of those earlier competitors, Google is giving away the OS for free and is perfectly content to live on the ad revenue.

And, what's worse for Apple, Android is gaining market share. Sure, Apple almost double iPhone revenue. How long will this continue as Android keeps gaining momentum? Three carriers against one? Verizon, the carrier with the best network, against AT&T, the carrier with the most overloaded data network? Will Apple keep hitching its wagon to AT&T? Or will it drop the exclusivity?

And if Apple ends iPhone exclusivity, how much margin compression will they have to accept? AT&T is giving Apple a pretty juicy cut of data plan revenues -- that was the condition for exclusivity. Before Android, the other carriers could be counted on to fall all over themselves to give Apple whatever it wants when the AT&T exclusivity ends. But after Android, they're going to be tough negotiators. And AT&T isn't going to take this lying down, either.

So yeah, Apple, kind of the hill for 2010 and 2011. But 2012? 2013? 2014? With wireless contracts rolling over every two years and consumers constantly looking for the shiny new toy?

Not surprising seeing how Apple is more consumer electronics than computers. May the iPod/iPhone/iPad continue to keep them a float.

malebolgia said,
Not surprising seeing how Apple is more consumer electronics than computers. May the iPod/iPhone/iPad continue to keep them a float.

Computer sales up 33% compared to this time last year. During a recession. But hey, whatever...

Edited by mantis-, May 26 2010, 11:48pm :

Destructoid said,

Computer sales up 33% compared to this time last year. During a recession. But hey, whatever...

During the *recovery* from a recession, compared to *bottom* of the recession, which happened to be the first quarter in many years in which Mac sales dropped.

But you raise a very interesting point, because something weird is happening in the Mac business segment right now. 33% increase in unit sales, but 26% increase in revenues in the six months ending last quarter. Margins are compressing. Desktops up 53%, laptops up 13%. It's usually the laptops that grow faster, but here we have desktops growing 4x as fast as laptops. What's causing it? Graphics design houses buying a bunch of Macs? Colleges purchasing Mac labs? Consumers tend to buy laptops.

Apple is indeed a consumer electronics company now. Again using 6-month figures form last quarter: $21 billion in revenues from iPod and iPhone, $8.2 billion from Mac. IOW, Mac accounts for only 28% of revenues.

iPod has completely leveled off. Only 4% revenue growth. 4% is what analysts usually put in for "terminal growth." Unit sales *down* by 6%.

Conclusion: For growth, Apple depends on iPhone, iPad, and Mac, in that order. iPod is no longer a consideration.

TomJones said,

During the *recovery* from a recession, compared to *bottom* of the recession, which happened to be the first quarter in many years in which Mac sales dropped.

But you raise a very interesting point, because something weird is happening in the Mac business segment right now. 33% increase in unit sales, but 26% increase in revenues in the six months ending last quarter. Margins are compressing. Desktops up 53%, laptops up 13%. It's usually the laptops that grow faster, but here we have desktops growing 4x as fast as laptops. What's causing it? Graphics design houses buying a bunch of Macs? Colleges purchasing Mac labs? Consumers tend to buy laptops.

Apple is indeed a consumer electronics company now. Again using 6-month figures form last quarter: $21 billion in revenues from iPod and iPhone, $8.2 billion from Mac. IOW, Mac accounts for only 28% of revenues.

iPod has completely leveled off. Only 4% revenue growth. 4% is what analysts usually put in for "terminal growth." Unit sales *down* by 6%.

Conclusion: For growth, Apple depends on iPhone, iPad, and Mac, in that order. iPod is no longer a consideration.

There were a -LOT- of people waiting for the Macbook Pro refresh. It was long overdue, and rumored since the beginning of this year. While that likely won't account for all of that disparity, it probably makes up a healthy portion. As to why signifigantly more people were buying Mac desktops, no clue.

Destructoid said,

There were a -LOT- of people waiting for the Macbook Pro refresh. It was long overdue, and rumored since the beginning of this year. While that likely won't account for all of that disparity, it probably makes up a healthy portion. As to why signifigantly more people were buying Mac desktops, no clue.

Same reason there will prolly be a decline in iPhone sales with the latest announcements. Everyone is waiting for the new one.

Spirit Dave said,
I wonder if 5 years from now we'll see a lot more Mac systems in homes?

Nope. This has nothing to do with that.

The only problem is that if Steve Jobs dies or leaves the company, that graph will look DRASTICALLY different.

I do not know how you can invest in a company whose entire success is rooted in the hands of a single person.

Hercules said,
The only problem is that if Steve Jobs dies or leaves the company, that graph will look DRASTICALLY different.

I do not know how you can invest in a company whose entire success is rooted in the hands of a single person.

Amen!

Hercules said,
The only problem is that if Steve Jobs dies or leaves the company, that graph will look DRASTICALLY different.

I do not know how you can invest in a company whose entire success is rooted in the hands of a single person.

Umm, you do realise that there is more than just Steve Jobs there - the problem with Apple has never been the lack of talent. What Steve Job has done is bring focus on a small number of markets and not trying to be everything to everyone. The result, what they do they do very well and ignore the parts of the market that aren't work fighting over.

rawr_boy81 said,

Umm, you do realise that there is more than just Steve Jobs there - the problem with Apple has never been the lack of talent. What Steve Job has done is bring focus on a small number of markets and not trying to be everything to everyone. The result, what they do they do very well and ignore the parts of the market that aren't work fighting over.

Investors and speculators are jittery folks. If steve jobs dies tomorrow, that curve WILL fall.

No surprise here.

Microsoft was never able to innovate. Always having a "me too" attitude. Whenever they put some serious effort in R&D and start doing great stuff, it never takes off to the real world, somehow the marketing ruins it. They just don't know how to sell something. As Jobs once said: "the problem with MS is that they simply don't have taste", something along those lines.

I feel that Microsoft is heading in the right direction with Windows and Office. Problem is, there are new markets out there.

Even though I'm saying this, I rather live in a world ruled by MS than by Apple. At least Microsoft supports all the hardware it can, gives freedom of choice to the consumer, offers more business chances for other companies area who can build up on software and hardware sells, and offers the right price/value product. Apple just rips consumers off. If they were to have a 90% market share, OSX would be in hell.

It's as Alan Greespan puts it, the stock market is an "irrational exuberance". Stock price is wild and unpredictable, meanwhile MS keeps making about $4 billion per quarter.

The trouble here, however, is a disassociation with reality because the NY Times is surrounded by liberal art intellects. This being from someone who reads the NY Times and graduated with a liberal arts degree (well, one of them at least).

According to their world. One, everyone is liberal. Two, Democratic Peace Theory is good on principle rather than by infrastructure. Three, religion does not exist. Four, everyone graduates from college. About 1/2 of those go on to graduate school. Every one has someone in their family who is a doctor and, or lawyer (or most likely both... I feel for you). You likely graduated from a Ivy League college or a nice, private liberal arts college. You may or may not be in debt. It is doubtful you know how to manage your credit wisely, but you've got your parents for that (at least until you turn 21 to 25). Five, you likely live green and drive green (or at least pretend).

Finally, while you don't believe in stereotyping people, after all you had countless sociology classes in college and of course your senior thesis was on something associated with thinking outside the box. Well, somehow you failed and grew into a life you didn't expect. You classify those who have Mac products as liberal and having wealth (never mind Rush) and those who use Windows as commodity (less educated (state college), drives an SUV, has a large family, somehow believes in a God who is not there and is not in touch with green issues).

As a company though, Microsoft is still much bigger. I still think Apple stock is greatly overvalued.

qwexor said,
As a company though, Microsoft is still much bigger. I still think Apple stock is greatly overvalued.

Exactly. Just like Google stocks when they hit $700+. Grossly overvalued.
If anything, Microsoft stocks are UNDERvalued.

And what does this mean for consumers? Healthy competition! We should expect a lot of unexpected improvements and additions in Microsoft's many products.

Meph said,
And what does this mean for consumers? Healthy competition! We should expect a lot of unexpected improvements and additions in Microsoft's many products.

Hopefully this will spur innovation at Microsoft...good things can come of this news.

the article
Microsoft dropped the ball on Windows Mobile but will Windows Phone 7 be too late too?

They also said Microsoft had no chance of catching up with Sony in the console wars, yet they managed to compete there. I believe I saw the 360 products are the 4th most profitable area for the company (behind Windows, Office, and Server stuff). Sure, WinPhone 7 is late to the party, but to discount Microsoft simply because they are a bit behind the competition isn't wise.

I'm also a bit tired of this idea that there can only be one player in any market. The phone market is big. The idea that only Microsoft or only Apple or only Google can win is absurd. They can all be profitable, and I hope they all are. If they keep nipping at eachother's heels, it will be motivation for all involved to make each platform better, making the consumer the big winner in the end.

I don't see why this article, which has shown to be misleading and wrong on multiple accounts made front page.....

shakey said,
I don't see why this article, which has shown to be misleading and wrong on multiple accounts made front page.....

Why is it misleading exactly?

Destructoid said,

Because it makes him a sad panda.

Maybe because it uses a deliberately inaccurate and old method of measure, rather than newer more comprehensive measures - probably becuase the "better" measures, don't imply the same, and therefore wouldn't create a news article and so not sell news?

Edited by lt8480, May 26 2010, 8:17pm :

lt8480 said,

Maybe because it uses a deliberately inaccurate and old method of measure, rather than newer more comprehensive measures - probably becuase the "better" measures, don't imply the same, and therefore wouldn't create a news article and so not sell news?

Then link to the data using the new method of measure, please.

(to clarify... as the article points out it does not take into consideration of dividend payouts, therefore things like enterprise values and market caps are completely off on these two companies, considering how much Microsoft pay out.

If you add i charitable donations alone to these companies (which is basically company wealth given away) then Microsoft comes out easily on top - let alone other payouts.)

Destructoid said,

Then link to the data using the new method of measure, please.

Read the forum post, we commented and already have shown this to be full of holes and misleading. News worthy it is not, except maybe for Faux Noise

shakey said,

Read the forum post, we commented and already have shown this to be full of holes and misleading. News worthy it is not, except maybe for Faux Noise

There are many ways to measure market capitialization...some include debt, some are asset based, the article does not use method that was hatched just to prove this...its been around for a long time

bdsams said,

There are many ways to measure market capitialization...some include debt, some are asset based, the article does not use method that was hatched just to prove this...its been around for a long time

+1
The fanboys are upset. They still have their precious market share that they value so much.

asdavis10 said,

+1
The fanboys are upset. They still have their precious market share that they value so much.

Not a fanboy of anything, but I don't like Apples policies and way of doing business, and I also like my news to normally take in all things when reporting on a subject, not just nitpicking values to make something look better.
Yes, this method has been used before, but it is not the best method of determining the value of a company, as it does not account for a lot of things.

bah, couldn't edit in time...
Wanted to add- Basically, if Apple does end up dominating the market, I feel we all lose. The products we buy will not be fully ours, and we will not be able to use them as we please. We will be told what we can view and how we may view it. It might be right for some, but it is not right for me.

Edited by shakey, May 26 2010, 10:51pm :

shakey said,
bah, couldn't edit in time...
Wanted to add- Basically, if Apple does end up dominating the market, I feel we all lose. The products we buy will not be fully ours, and we will not be able to use them as we please. We will be told what we can view and how we may view it. It might be right for some, but it is not right for me.

Amen to that!

Is it too late to ask for Gates to return? Bal-Bal the Monkeyboy seems to be piloting this ship straight into an iceberg.

This pretty much shows how Apple has been innovating (though I'm sure people will debate that) and releasing products that consumers are purchasing while Microsoft has been relying on Windows and Office.

AdamLC said,
What is quite interesting is that both companies peak and decline consistently at the same time!

that would be because of the recession

BlasterNT said,

that would be because of the recession

Which would explain why the most broadly-ridiculed "most-overpriced" computer company has been having record sales and revenue?

yes... is windows 7 phone to late... ... in an industry that....literally never stops moving forward. Jesus christ, Microsoft is worth 185 BILLION DOLLARS. they're NOT going away. If wmp7 fails, they will try agian next generation...or give up and move on to other things.... it's really really starting to get under my skin that people claim ________ is too late. It's the dumbest stance I can comprehend of having unless I was a desperate fan boy clinging hopefully to whatever I just bought hoping nothing will ever come out in the future to question it's dominance.

AgentGray said,
yes... is windows 7 phone to late... ... in an industry that....literally never stops moving forward. Jesus christ, Microsoft is worth 185 BILLION DOLLARS. they're NOT going away. If wmp7 fails, they will try agian next generation...or give up and move on to other things.... it's really really starting to get under my skin that people claim ________ is too late. It's the dumbest stance I can comprehend of having unless I was a desperate fan boy clinging hopefully to whatever I just bought hoping nothing will ever come out in the future to question it's dominance.

Something tells me you don't have the foggiest idea what this all means...way to focus on one aspect of all this.

Edited by mantis-, May 26 2010, 8:52pm :

Destructoid said,

Something tells me you don't have the foggiest idea what this all means...

Not bitching about the article, just the last line:

Apple and Google have successfully filled a gap that Microsoft missed. Microsoft dropped the ball on Windows Mobile but will Windows Phone 7 be too late too?

AgentGray said,
yes... is windows 7 phone to late... ... in an industry that....literally never stops moving forward. Jesus christ, Microsoft is worth 185 BILLION DOLLARS. they're NOT going away. If wmp7 fails, they will try agian next generation...or give up and move on to other things.... it's really really starting to get under my skin that people claim ________ is too late. It's the dumbest stance I can comprehend of having unless I was a desperate fan boy clinging hopefully to whatever I just bought hoping nothing will ever come out in the future to question it's dominance.

Clearly you've missed the fact that people don't care about Windows Phones anymore and that their market share in the U.S. and worldwide is declining fast. Not to mention the fact that a large majority of people own an iPhone now.

Tom W said,

Clearly you've missed the fact that people don't care about Windows Phones anymore and that their market share in the U.S. and worldwide is declining fast. Not to mention the fact that a large majority of people own an iPhone now.

Not to mention most of the Android sales have eaten severely into the Blackberry market. WMP 7 will be an afterthought, if even thought of at all.

Destructoid said,

Not to mention most of the Android sales have eaten severely into the Blackberry market. WMP 7 will be an afterthought, if even thought of at all.

except, 5 years ago iphones didn't exist, and 5 years from now, the market WILL be compleatly different than it is now. Saying Microsoft can't compete is short-sited and ignorant of the industry.

AgentGray said,

except, 5 years ago iphones didn't exist, and 5 years from now, the market WILL be compleatly different than it is now. Saying Microsoft can't compete is short-sited and ignorant of the industry.


10 years ago the iPod didn't exist... still exists and dominates that market now. Why do you think the market will be so different in the next 5 years?

AgentGray said,

except, 5 years ago iphones didn't exist, and 5 years from now, the market WILL be compleatly different than it is now. Saying Microsoft can't compete is short-sited and ignorant of the industry.

So, sitting on their hands for 5 years, while the competition completely steamrolled them, then firing back with WMP 7...which drew a resounding 'meh' from anyone even remotely interested...that doesn't concern you in the least?

Destructoid said,
So, sitting on their hands for 5 years, while the competition completely steamrolled them, then firing back with WMP 7...which drew a resounding 'meh' from anyone even remotely interested...that doesn't concern you in the least?

Well, considering that despite all this they're still earning quite a nice amount of money more than Apple, especially in areas where the holy Jobs doesn't even compete (corporate for example), I don't see them on the brink of desaster like some here do. W7 is a clear success and what they've shown of WMP7 and IE9 looks quite promising, even if you disagree. They'll survive, trust me.

Tom W said,

Clearly you've missed the fact that people don't care about Windows Phones anymore and that their market share in the U.S. and worldwide is declining fast. Not to mention the fact that a large majority of people own an iPhone now.

that last sentence is 100% completely wrong, they have a majority in nothing. in neither the u.s. or worldwide. see recent articles about android overtaking iphone in u.s. market share...

dr_crabman said,

Well, considering that despite all this they're still earning quite a nice amount of money more than Apple, especially in areas where the holy Jobs doesn't even compete (corporate for example), I don't see them on the brink of desaster like some here do. W7 is a clear success and what they've shown of WMP7 and IE9 looks quite promising, even if you disagree. They'll survive, trust me.

Oh, I know they'll survive, and profit handsomely. Having a secure corporate lock-in sorta ensures that sort of thing. Especially with a new version of their main cash-cow right around the corner.

wookietv said,

that last sentence is 100% completely wrong, they have a majority in nothing. in neither the u.s. or worldwide. see recent articles about android overtaking iphone in u.s. market share...

I hope you aren't talking about recent articles all citing NPD's report. That report was based on a survey and not any hard evidence. They surveyed 40,000 customers to base that report off of. And it didn't factor in corporate sales. There were no channel checks with manufacturers, distributors, or even retail outlets. That report wasn't based off any hard facts.

wookietv said,

that last sentence is 100% completely wrong, they have a majority in nothing. in neither the u.s. or worldwide. see recent articles about android overtaking iphone in u.s. market share...

Huh? World wide Apple is far ahead of the fragmented Android platform. I guess you got conned by the market survey data like all the other apple haters?

I never thought I would see this in my lifetime. Ever since I first heard about "Apple vs. Microsoft", I always thought of Apple to be the underdog, forever playing the catch-up game. I hope this sends a shockwave throughout Redmond and Microsoft takes this seriously. It could be a really good opportunity for us consumers to reap some really amazing products from them.

yup real depressing to know that Microsoft really hasn't done squat.. their concept of late is I want a piece of that pie too.. nothing innovative has come out.. the **** that is innovative. has disappeared into the sunset..

a good example - Courier.. .

dimithrak said,
yup real depressing to know that Microsoft really hasn't done squat.. their concept of late is I want a piece of that pie too.. nothing innovative has come out.. the **** that is innovative. has disappeared into the sunset..

a good example - Courier.. .


Well, I simply stopped being depressed and started using non-MS products.

No surprise - Microsoft are one of the has beens right now it seems. Nothing they do in these emerging markets sells well or performs well. Great work and news for Apple, about time Microsoft realised they need to do so much more.

Byron_Hinson said,
No surprise - Microsoft are one of the has beens right now it seems. Nothing they do in these emerging markets sells well or performs well. Great work and news for Apple, about time Microsoft realised they need to do so much more.

They won't. As long as they know practically every business in the world needs their Office suite to thrive, and they know that every PC on every shelf at Wal-Mart and nearly everywhere else comes pre-loaded with Windows, what is there incentive to really *do* anything except tread water?

Edited by mantis-, May 26 2010, 8:55pm :

Byron_Hinson said,
No surprise - Microsoft are one of the has beens right now it seems.

What? Market capitalization isn't everything. Actually it's a pretty useless indicator. Go to Wikipedia and compare a few of the other numbers. Palm is a "has been", MS is very, very far from it.

Byron_Hinson said,
No surprise - Microsoft are one of the has beens right now it seems. Nothing they do in these emerging markets sells well or performs well. Great work and news for Apple, about time Microsoft realised they need to do so much more.

Jobs is that you talkin out of your rear or are you someone that was paid to talk like him

dr_crabman said,

What? Market capitalization isn't everything. Actually it's a pretty useless indicator. Go to Wikipedia and compare a few of the other numbers. Palm is a "has been", MS is very, very far from it.

Its good to know at least one person understands economics.

If you wanna look at market capitalisation, why not also look at the "dot com" era companies? A high share price will lead to a high capitalisation, but if the underlying fundamentals are not in place, it is pretty useless. Sure, it would make many shareholders a quick buck, but its not sustainable in the long run.

Also, apples insistence to not pay a dividend will cause the share price to drop in the long term. I mean, whats the point of investing, if the only thing you can count on is share price growth?