ie8 fix

Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Leading up to WWDC, Apple now worth more than Microsoft + Intel

By | June 4, 2011, 1:00pm PDT

Summary: As Apple prepares to announce its latest product innovations at WWDC 2011, the company closed the week with a market cap than now exceeds Microsoft and Intel combined.

When historians look back at this past decade in the technology revolution, I wonder if the story of Apple’s comeback will look and feel and surreal as it does to those of us who have lived through it? Probably not.

As Apple prepares to announce its next series of innovations at its World Wide Developers Conference on Monday (TechRepublic will provide live commentary), the company closed the week on the NASDAQ with a stock price of $343.38, which means the public values the company at $317.6 billion (what Wall Street calls “market capitalization” or “market cap”).

Meanwhile, Microsoft finished the week with a market cap of $201.59 billion and Intel closed at $115.21 billion. You know where I’m going with this. The combined market value of Microsoft and Intel = $316.8 billion. Apple is now worth more than Wintel.

Obviously, that’s significant since, during the 1990s, the Microsoft Windows + Intel combo nearly drove Apple out of business. MacDailyNews, which first pointed out this development on Friday when the market closed, dug up this quote from June 1998 from Bill Gates: ”What I can’t figure out is why he [Steve Jobs] is even trying [to be the CEO of Apple]. He knows he can’t win.”

While Apple is riding high from a string of product hits, Microsoft continues to struggle to redefine itself in technology world that is expanding far beyond the traditional PC.

Of course, Intel is now a close partner of Apple’s in the Macintosh division. But, don’t be surprised if Apple’s market cap victory over Wintel shows up in Jobs’ slide show at WWDC on Monday. Jobs loves to gloat and to poke fun his rivals — none more than Microsoft.

This was originally published on TechRepublic.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Jason Hiner is the Editor in Chief of TechRepublic. He writes about the products, people, and ideas that are revolutionizing business with technology.

Disclosure

Jason Hiner

Jason Hiner has nothing to disclose. He doesn't hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Jason Hiner

Jason Hiner is the Editor in Chief of TechRepublic, an online trade publication and peer-to-peer community for IT leaders. He is an award-winning journalist who examines the latest trends and asks the big questions about the technology industry. He previously worked as an IT manager in the health care industry.

You can also find him on Twitter, , Facebook, and at JasonHiner.com.

57
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Leading up to WWDC, Apple now worth more than Microsoft Intel
Jesster Updated - 7th Jun
@Mr. Dee

With MS it wasn't innovation or good technology it was plain mass marketing to the corporate suits and they bought it. BTW I am using my DP-800 (dual G4 cpus @ 800mhz, 133mhz bus) with 10.5.8 and it was built in 2001 (ten years ago); it runs great except for editing any HD video is slow as molasses. Of course it wasn't designed for the HD video market. I'll probably upgrade when Apple quits supporting the PPC line of processors.

How many PCs from ten years ago are still cruising along doing pretty much everything their owners want?
0 Votes
+ -
They sure do have money
Robert Hahn 4th Jun
And to think, heh heh, it's all caused by a walled garden of Apple fanbois who keep buying the same stuff over and over again.

What's more amazing is that Microsoft pays PR agencies to write junk like that and have it astroturfed worldwide.
0 Votes
+ -
@Robert Hahn Its been that way for the past 20 years, which means, its not growing (its stagnant). Its the same Apple fan boi's that are buying Apple stuff over and over again. One thing you have to credit for is the loyalty of their customers. Then again the same goes for Microsoft, or it wouldn't have a installed base of 1.2 billion Windows users and 750 million Office users.
0 Votes
+ -
Sad
ego.sum.stig@... 4th Jun
Seeing as the majority of Apple's business for quite some time has been new customers, not "the faithful." That's been a major reason for their rise. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of your very own and apparently very strong RDF.
@Mr. Dee: Apple's fan "audience", as it showed in the sales in after-dot bubble crisis 2001 year, is only about 500 thousand of people per quarter.

And now Apple has about 35 million buyers per quarter, almost none of which ever had anything from Apple: 35 million - 0.5 million = 34.5 million, that is, comparing to 2001 year.
@Mr. Dee
So you feel the need to champion Microsoft, even though they could not care one bit about anything other than your money? It is fanboys like you that make others laugh at Microsoft. You?ve bought into the BS, and are willing to spread untruths at Microsoft?s request. I only hope they are paying you to make a fool of yourself.
@Mr. Dee

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or just misinformed. Apple changed its name from Apple Computer years ago to just Apple, and for good reason. It's no longer defined as a small computer company with a small market share. And with Mac "fanboi's" that's keeping the company afloat. Apple have transformed into a massive consumer electronics company with 50 percent of their new customers being new to the platform. Not Mac fanboi's.
@Mr. Dee

With MS it wasn't innovation or good technology it was plain mass marketing to the corporate suits and they bought it. BTW I am using my DP-800 (dual G4 cpus @ 800mhz, 133mhz bus) with 10.5.8 and it was built in 2001 (ten years ago); it runs great except for editing any HD video is slow as molasses. Of course it wasn't designed for the HD video market. I'll probably upgrade when Apple quits supporting the PPC line of processors.

How many PCs from ten years ago are still cruising along doing pretty much everything their owners want?
@Robert Hahn

Maybe there is a good reason why people buy apple stuff such as they actually like it and it works better
No, I don't think Jobs will mention market cap in the keynote. Though the public is looking in, the primary audience for WWDC is developers, and so while there will be discussions about platform growth and numbers of iOS users, market cap is just not relevant, as a case for building apps for the Apple stable of products.

Besides, it may be short-lived. Isn't the pattern that a keynote happens and the stock price declines because, inexplicably, there's disappointment that Apple did not unveil the unicorns somebody was saying they expected?

Where is the unicorn this year? iCloud would be my guess. On Monday afternoon we will know what it is and isn't, yet. Somebody will say that zero-upload cloud streaming of all tracks the user has, regardless of source, was what they were counting on, nay, what Apple must do to avoid doom in this cloudy world. (When streaming and backup of my purchased tracks would be okay by me.) That's my two cents.
@DannyO_0x98

What???!!!! No Apple unicorns? But the rumors said there would be magical unicorns!! Oh nuts.
@DannyO_0x98

I suspect that all the negative pot shots at iOS devices over the years - that they are not true stand alone computers - is about to end.
@DannyO_0x98

Lion

iOS 5

iCloud
0 Votes
+ -
It's pretty impressive
LiquidLearner 4th Jun
But let's not forget that we're seeing a lot of companies overvalued right now, and I think Apple is one of those companies. Facebook, Twitter, the list goes on. It's looking more and more like the internet boom from 10 years ago. Microsoft is fairly stable, as is Intel, even if they aren't growing like crazy.

I'm not predicting an Apple collapse by any stretch. It just seems like it's value is inflated. I have a feeling the next 3-4 years will see that value bounce back. But Apple is big enough now it can weather a retraction. I could be completely wrong though and Apple could continue its current growth for who knows how long.
@LiquidLearner You have no idea what you ate talking about. Apple's P&E is 16. It has what, 60+ billion in cash? Apple is seriously undervalued, not over valued.
@His_Shadow Take a look at the value of REAL companies and you will see that Apple, IBM, Intel and even MS are priced with a realistic value. It is the other companies that are overpriced for what they provide.
0 Votes
+ -
They certainly aren't undervalued
LiquidLearner 5th Jun
@His_Shadow

You can't honestly expect me to believe that Apple, a consumer electronics company at this point, is more valuable than Microsoft + Intel. Sure Apple appeals to the consumer, but the other two appeal to large enterprise who will continue to use their products for years and years to come. Consumers are a fickle bunch, they will change at the drop of a hat. Apple has to continue to top itself going forward if it wants to maintain that momentum.

As I said, they're not going to collapse by any stretch of the imagination. But when they have a market cap greater than Intel + MS combined something is wrong. That shows that everyone "thinks" it's worth more, when the reality is that they have a few consumer devices that are very appealing but very vulnerable. Consumer space can change very, very rapidly. I'm sure Sony thought they were invincible in the consumer electronics space at one point.
@LiquidLearner - Gee, Liquid. You must be getting old. I am so surprised you did not write "Consumer space can change very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very rapidly." happy
@His_Shadow
Microsoft's P&E is around 10... It's lower than Apple. (Lower is better).
0 Votes
+ -
@ xnederlandx

Microsoft's P/E is lower than Apple's because the markets expect Apple's profit to grow at a faster rate. Microsoft's primary market, the PC market, is a mature one (in developed countries, and in developing countries like China most people pirate Windows/Office), so expected market growth is low. That means expected profit growth is also low.

Low market/profit growth expectations explain why Microsoft's P/E is low, but also mean that if Microsoft succeed in any high-growth markets (e.g. smartphones and perhaps even tablets), the share price could rocket upwards -- provided of course that their traditional cash cows remain healthy too. The same applies to Intel (who have remained successful in the mature PC market, but are floundering in the high-growth mobile market).

Right now, Apple look set to continue doing well in high-growth markets, so a relatively high P/E is warranted (but note that Apple's P/E is still below the S&P 500 average, possibly because of risks like Android, which could seriously damage Apple's profit over time). Microsoft's and Intel's low P/E ratios are also warranted, and will remain so as long as they're confined to the low-growth PC market. That's why they're so eager to break into high-growth markets like mobile phones. PCs aren't going away, but high growth requires success elsewhere.
0 Votes
+ -
Anyway we can short appl?
FADS_z 4th Jun
it is the time.
0 Votes
+ -
What strikes me as odd is this
ego.sum.stig@... 4th Jun
That Ed Bott didn't cover this story in his "Microsoft Report."
@ego.sum.stig@...
he can only cover Apple if its bad news for them.
0 Votes
+ -
Not true
wackoae 4th Jun
@doh123 When it comes to Apple he only covers manufactured bad news.
@wackoae: ... very minor -- in **reality** -- thing (I mean Defender).
Unfortunately, I fear investors will bailout at the first hint of trouble, and much of that market cap will vanish.

In refernce to many other companies, this is not the case.
@Mister Spock

Where is the logic in that statement? Grin.
0 Votes
+ -
Show me the money (er...shorts)
Bradish@... 4th Jun
@Mister Spock you are only dreaming that this will happen only to Apple and not other tech companies...if you really believe this then tell us that you have shorted their stock.
@Bradish@... I don't think he is dreaming, none of the others have a sickly Steve Jobs at the helm.
@PeterPerry@...
Good point. The reason Microsoft stock is in the tank is that they have a healthy Steve Ballmer at the helm.
0 Votes
+ -
System 9, 7 and even 6 was way more usable than anything out there in their time. The hardware was ahead of it's time too. I had a Quadra 840 AV in 93 that shipped with a built in CD ROM drive. The OS installed from a CD. It had a processor with floating point. Audio/video inputs and outputs, composite and S-Video. Speech recognition out of the box and many other cool features.

I think now people are aware.
@CowLauncher

Well, my trusty Amiga systems of that era might have a "slight" case rebutting your opinions .. But all is good. My Amigas understand your main point being Apple products of that era were good machines with a good operating system.
0 Votes
+ -
@ kenosha7777

NextStep (the ancestor of OS X and iOS) has always been a good OS, like NT (the basis of modern Windows) and Unix. Lisa OS was a decent OS too. Mac OS, like MS-Dos, was never a good OS. It was a primitive system designed for low-end hardware with limited resources and no memory protection. Classic Mac OS was hardly an OS at all -- more a set of library routines used by applications that expected to have the hardware all to themselves. It had a decent UI, but the OS was an abomination.
@CowLauncher

Ever used an Apple Lisa?

I'm still laughing after all these years wink
0 Votes
+ -
As much as in having desirable products. Microsoft, by launching what was perceived as a lame operating system (regardless of its real merits or shortcomings) created a space for people to look at alternatives. Having said that, Apple has made the most of it by the ipod, iphone and ipad. Ironically, each of these was dismissed by Steve Balmer when they were initially launched, after which microsoft scrambled to catch up (zune, windows phone 7 and whatever it is microsoft is launching with windows 8).
0 Votes
+ -
Not only Vista
wackoae 5th Jun
@BanjoPaterson It lies in the failure of Vista, Kin, Zune, Windows Phone and the stupid decision of making HUGE changes to the Office UI.
@BanjoPaterson
Microsoft has historically promised the moon and fallen quite a bit short each time. Granted they did better with the Vista service pack (Windows 7), but still their products are nothing to write home about. Steve Ballmer has no vision and is often quite wrong with his predictions. He once said that Apple would never go anywhere with the iPhone, was he ever wrong. In fact he has criticized every Apple product for the last 10 years. It is only fitting that Apple is worth more than bumbling Microsoft, as Apple gets it, and Microsoft doesn?t.
Normally I don't comment on this type of blogs, but this is different. The issue Microsoft is facing is not technology redefinition, but leadership. Microsoft has set very good servant leadership, but that is no use without having a transformational leadership, which Bill Gates truly have. On the other side Apple has transformational leadership with autocracy attributes. The transformational leadership is making it into success, but what happens to Apple if that Transformational leadership is missed over the time. It fails because it doesn't have servant leadership defined at the moment. I am not saying they won't define it, but at least from today's point of view.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes men?
Robert Hahn 5th Jun
I do not work for Apple, so I do not know what their second-level leadership is like. That said, one of the usual failings of a charismatic leader like Jobs is that he tends to drive out everyone around him who can think, leaving the place full of nothing but "yes men" when he finally departs the scene.

What usually happens next is that the board picks either the finance guy (because they are all finance guys), or the guy who "makes the trains run on time." Either is likely to be a disaster as CEO.

At Microsoft, Ballmer has done a fabulous job keeping trains running... it's just one quarter after another of meeting earnings projections. But the company has lost half its value, because it's also lost its way. Putting a bean-counter in charge is usually even worse; then the earnings projections get made by cutting R&D and marketing.

I don't know who will follow Jobs, but the odds of Apple finding another Jobs is about as high as Sony finding another Akio Morita. They never did. And Sony has been nothing but another also-ran ever since.
@Rama.NET

Not the myth of the CEO again!
And in the same way that Apple has overtaken MS, there is nothing to stop MS or another competitor rivalling or exceeding Apple in the future.
"a higher P/E ratio means that investors are paying more for each unit of net income, so the stock is more expensive compared to one with a lower P/E ratio. "

APPL P/E = 16.36

MSFT P/E = 9.48

(LOWER P/E is better)

"As owning stock represents ownership of the company, including all its equity, capitalization could represent the public opinion of a company's net worth and is a determining factor in stock valuation. "

APPL Gross PROFIT = $ 25.69B
MSFT Gross PROFIT = $ 50.09B

Outstanding shares
APPL = 924.75 Million
MSFT = 8.42 Billion

Total CASH:

APPL = $29.23 Billion
MSFT = $48.72 Billion

One is an appliance manufacturer (apple), one is an integreated circuit mangufacturer (INTEL), and one is a software development company (Microsoft).

They are NOT in the same markets.

ie, they do not sell of provide the same type of products as each other.

it is like trying to compare the oil industry with a candy bar maker, then comparing those values with Nike !

look at the 52 week share price variation that APPL has !!!
then tell me it's not over inflated and volatile ?

52wk Range APPL: $235.56 - $364.90

That is about $130 variation for ONE share in ONE year !!

when your share price is THAT high, there is little room for you to go, particularly in the upward direction.

I would be short selling APPL and not putting my lifes savings on making money from investing in APPL.

But I would have far less problems acquiring MSFT shares they appear to be a much better values and sound investment.

Or INTEL for that matter, at least MS and INTEL actually make things and not just outsource 'idea's' and shinny things.

Once MS produces it's responce to the iTHING, you will find a great deal of people will be more than happy to embrace MS's innovations and continue to use MS's products.

I have much more confidence of the long term prospects of MS and INTEL than I would ever have from APPLE.

all Apple does is 'package' things, they use software from other sources, they use hardware from other sources, and it is THOSE sources (the software houses, like MS, and hardware houses like INTEL) that make Apples packaging business work.

Without that APPLE is nothing, and to think that INTEL and MS could not 'package' as well as or far better than Apple can do, would be a mistake IMO.

at least INTEL can say we have the experience and expertise to build amazing integrated circuits, and MS can say we have the experience and expertise to write amazing software and provide a high level of support for our products.

Apple can say, "we can use others amazing IC's and amazing software' and we can package that into a shinny box.

Could MS and INTEL live without each other ??

NO, you need both hardware and software,

Could MS and INTEL live without APPLE, ?

Yes, easily

Could APPLE live without INTEL and MS ?

No,

Come on ZDnet, lets have a bit of depth from you guys, do at least some research... please..
@Aussie_Troll I don't agree with everything you're saying as I know some Apple Software is the market leader... For example, final cut pro is considered by many to be the best...

I do agree that Apple needs to split the stock to get the price down to where more people can afford it... Of course that would alter PE but you can't have everything.


I also agree that MS is under valued.
@Aussie_Troll

Apple is currently holding $60 Billion cash.

Last fiscal year their revenue was 65.2 Billion compared to Microsoft's 62.5 Billion.
@bannedagain

Not sure where you got your numbers? Aussie's numbers are accurate (go to either MSN Money or Yahoo Finance), AAPL in the last quarterly reporting had net Cash and Short Term Investments of appr. 29 Billion, compared to 50 Billion for MSFT. What I don't know is why Aussie quoted the companies Gross Profit. Gross Profit isn't really a very useful figure in comparing AAPL to MSFT since, as Aussie noted, one is hardware and the other is (at least largely) not. AAPL has a huge cost of goods sold due to manufacturing, which is above the Gross Profit line. MSFT doesn't, and so looks much more profitable on a Gross Profit basis. It would be better to compare bottom line, as AAPL's R&D and G&A are ridiculously small compared to MSFT's. Net/Net is Microsoft puts off more Net Income (and EBITDA if you want to use that figure) than Apple does with less top line revenue.

Not that any of this has to do with the innovative or market merits of the companies.

Just my (really long) two cents.
@Aussie_Troll
And if Microsoft made computers, instead of a part for one (and I use that term loosely). Microsoft would charge a minimum of $3,000 (based on their History of overcharging, for everything else). People like to complain about Apple?s prices, but Microsoft would charge far more.
@Aussie_Troll Nice Trolling!
0 Votes
+ -
Better? It depends
Robert Hahn 5th Jun
@Aussie_Troll
Lower PE is better
It's only "better" if you are nearing retirement, and the stocks you buy are intended to pay nice dividends, as opposed to appreciating in value.

A low P/E is the market saying, "this company has stopped growing, and is unlikely to start growing again any time soon." The stocks of such companies tend not to appreciate, since this almost always means that the company's best days are behind it.
Stock value is a measure of investor confidence or enthusiasm. The company doesn't actually *get* that money - they get the IPO or share offering value.

Where this benefits Apple is that they can issue new share offerings knowing they'll get a high price per share, and so can offer fewer shares for the same amount of money.

But the shares already out there don't bring them any additional funding. In fact, having such high priced shares can be a serious liability for a company since the investors will be more demanding of ROI (dividends etc) and it's harder to buy back your own shares should you need to.

The real value of a company is it's assets, profitabilty, market share and intangibles such as brand awareness or customer lists.

By that metric, Apple most definitely does not have a value greater than Microsoft + Intel combined.

Still, I suppose Apple fans have to keep pumping and pimping any way they can.
0 Votes
+ -
Don't drink it
Robert Hahn 5th Jun
Since you appear to be unaware that you are substituting the judgement of one person, the esteemed Yourself, speaking ex cathedra, for the judgement of millions of individual investors, I should caution you that without any evidence that you are The Smartest Person In The World, others are likely to dismiss your judgement as so much canal water.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix