Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple becomes the first $1T company

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 352 posts

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#121

Post by chatmasta »

xenostar wrote: post #114
chatmasta wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can still complain about their walled-garden approach to software distribution, particularly the extortionist 30% fee and handicapping of non-native apps. Or their kowtowing to the Chinese censors.

> Or their kowtowing to the Chinese censors. And what exactly is the alternative option for them there? They can either follow the rules in China or completely lose all of their business. That is on China, not Apple.

They can either violate the privacy rights of Chinese citizens, or not sell to Chinese citizens at all.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#122

Post by allannienhuis »

onion2k wrote: post #86
tschellenbach wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand. I think Google creates way more value for the world, they are just not as good as Apple at capturing that value. Android, Maps, Docs, Gmail, Navigation, Analytics are all (mostly) free.

They're not free. They just don't cost money . Arguably they're very expensive.

did you misunderstand the intent of the statement? It's common usage when talking about products.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#123

Post by bepotts »

chatmasta wrote: post #78
rayiner wrote: post #54

Good for it. Becoming a trillion dollar company selling quality products people love. Not data mining everything about your life and using it for advertising (Google), ruthlessly destroying competition (Microsoft), or destroying the environment (Exxon). How old fashioned.

We can still complain about their walled-garden approach to software distribution, particularly the extortionist 30% fee and handicapping of non-native apps. Or their kowtowing to the Chinese censors.

Their walled garden approach is looking smarter and smarter with every EU fine that gets thrown at Google.

As an aside: As an engineer, I dislike their walled garden approach; but I love their approach as a consumer. To be frank, most companies have bad taste and poor UX design. Apple doesn't knock it out the park all the time, but their products are consistently good and their design guidelines for iOS apps enforce some of the same quality. So yeah, I'll take a walled garden approach if the garden is beautiful.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#124

Post by ksec »

pseudonym2 wrote: post #83

This will be very controversial, especially in HN, but market cap doesn't mean shit. Apple has roughly $50B in revenue and $120B in equity. Most of it's products could be replaced in less than 5 years by a competitor. Market cap is a measure of public trust among other things but not actual worth or value to society.

>This will be very controversial

It is, and not only just on HN. Because Apple has $220B in revenue, not $50.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#126

Post by spacehome »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #74
maxshmax wrote: post #68

It's worth noting that this is the first U.S. company to hit $1 trillion, not in the world. Also, it's still intraday, so Apple has not technically reached that point yet.

> this is the first U.S. company to hit $1 trillion What's the other one?

Apple is the first public company to reach a trillion. There are arguments that Aramco is worth vastly more, but it's not publicly traded, so it's hard to put a number on it.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#127

Post by corysama »

reaperducer wrote: post #103
onion2k wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not free. They just don't cost money . Arguably they're very expensive.

They're not free. They just don't cost money. Arguably they're very expensive. This is a distinction most people don't grasp. I didn't, myself, until recently when a briefing from the legal department resulted in scouring the word "free" from eight web sites and replacing the word with "at no cost."

DuckDuckGo looking nicer every day.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#128

Post by GlenTheMachine »

weavie wrote: post #42
GlenTheMachine wrote: post #35

I went to grad school with a guy who, the day Apple stock hit $14 a share, decided to spend $500 of his grad student stipend to buy some. He figured Apple's cash on hand was worth more than $14 a share. I thought he was nuts. I was an idiot.

Does he still own the shares?

I haven't asked. But he takes his family on some pretty amazing vacations. He's doing well for himself. And he's still buying Apple products...

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#129

Post by delinka »

ryanmercer wrote: post #101
delinka wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's tax they might generate , but most of that is not tax paid by Apple. Consumers pay sales tax and duties go right into the price of the products, employees pay income tax...

>That's tax they might generate, It's tax that would not have been paid if Apple did not exist. >and duties go right into the price of the products, And if the government said "Apple must now pay 50% on every dollar they make" guess what would go right into the price of the products... >employees pay income tax. Business owners must pay the federal government 6.2% of every dollar their worker makes until that annual…

>It's tax that would not have been paid if Apple did not exist.

You can credit Apple with generating those taxes, but they don't get credit for paying that tax on their profits.

>"Apple must now pay 50% on every dollar they make" guess what would go right into the price of the products...

Yes, Apple's prices would go up to compensate, and consumers would be footing the bill.

>Business owners must pay the federal government 6.2% of every dollar their worker makes ...

Business owners must collect that amount, so my pay is reduced by that amount - I am paying that tax, the employer is just the tax man's agent.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#130

Post by sharemywin »

chatmasta wrote: post #81
jlv2 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but an investment in XEM or XRP (Nem or Ripple or Stellar Lumens) None of those is an investment in something with inherent worth. Hence, I'd not call them an investment, but pure speculation.

The worth of a share is what someone will pay you for it.

if the company were to sell you'd get paid. At some point most companies pay dividends. you possibly have a right to vote.
Post reply on HN