Live data from Hacker News

Ways to save Apple (1997)

archive.wired.com

81–82 of 82 posts

Re: Ways to save Apple (1997)

#81

If you'd bought $10,000 of AAPL stock when this article was published (June 1997), it would be worth about $523,000 today, excluding dividends.

Hindsight is 20/20. At that point in time buying Apple stok was akin to throwing your money away in the forseeable future. I just really wish I bought 10 bitcoins when they were 40 a pop .. Damn you, captain Hindsight!

Hah, "only" $40 a pop. Remember the first ever Bitcoin purchase? 10,000 BTC for a $25 pizza?

Re: Ways to save Apple (1997)

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not about Android or iPhone. Or Google or whoever. I'll happily acknowledge that Apple sells well thought out products. I stand by what I said earlier. There's too much of a cult of personality associated with Apple. Why do we shrink our worldview to gossipy discussions of a corporation. Tell me something interesting, something edifying that came up in this discussion?

> This is not about Android or iPhone. Or Google or whoever. I'll happily acknowledge that Apple sells well thought out products. You specifically said that I was wrong to call them influential. I think Android demonstrates that they are. That makes it relevant. > I stand by what I said earlier. There's too much of a cult of personality associated with Apple. Why do we shrink our worldview to gossipy discussions of a…

You are right about Android and Xerox's GUI. (There were others who were thinking in a similar direction (Openmoko for one), and I would argue that both of these things would have happened anyway. But Apple definitely moved the state of the world forward.)

However, my larger point is that Apple produces things of only one color -- things that you can exchange over the counter against money. Black box objects that are essentially consumer electronics -- things that die in 2, 4, 7, whatever years.

Contrast that with most other tech companies. Even if I don't care a whit about what they sell (witness IBM, Microsoft, Facebook -- I don't use any of their products directly) -- I (and the world) profit from their research and that gives them greater longevity than Apple.

So to correct what I said -- admired but not long term influential.

Post reply on HN