71–80 of 87 posts
For me, it's more interesting that Apple did this without a lot of the shady business & licensing practices that Microsoft engages in. Edit: Before downvoting me, take a look at my comment history. I'm not your typical Apple fan/Microsoft basher.
Um... you are wrong. These companies are all suing each other, and Apple is known for creating patents for every little thing they do in iOS.
Microsoft spends a significant amount on basic research, like Bell labs used to and Microsoft research publishes a lot of publications. 15% of the research budget goes to universities for research, that could keep the profits lower than Apple.
What we need to focus here is this...despite the decrease in PC sales, Microsoft managed to grow. They did not just grow a little, but they grew tremendously. 30%? that's a huge number for a company like Microsoft. Nonetheless, Apple has reached another huge milestone in their history.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 [2] http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL&fstype=ii
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.
Unless you're going to say there are only 15 people on iOS. In which case I will be seriously impressed!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
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!
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...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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!
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…
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-...
Microsoft spends a significant amount on basic research, like Bell labs used to and Microsoft research publishes a lot of publications. 15% of the research budget goes to universities for research, that could keep the profits lower than Apple.
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 [2] http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL&fstype=ii
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 [2] http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:AAPL&fstype=ii
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.