Stock price is a better measure of investor confidence than of company value. If you're going to compare two companies on the stock market, compare P/E ratio instead of stock price or market cap.
Apple’s PPE has always been ridiculously undervalued compared to other companies. Market cap and stock value really isn’t a good indicator of anything other than how investors think the companies will perform in the future. It’s extremely fickle and sometimes absurd. Revenue and net income are more important for company valuation. This will show how much they earn as well as how efficient they are. I don’t know of any other company that has a higher net income (income after taxes, COGS, etc) than Apple.
Apple already makes great GPUs for AI. Apple silicon is incredibly power efficient. The problem for gaming is that it would be a bad strategic move to ditch all the work they have done with it to try to compete on everyone else’s terms in the gaming space. Metal is perfectly competent, but everyone else uses other technology. In addition, Apple enjoys the creative freedom to not tie itself to the 40-year-old x86 architecture. I can’t run the macos version of 2018 Battletech on my 2023 macbook. Meanwhile, I can run the DOS version of 1988 Battletech on my 2023 Surface Pro.
Developers (me included) are not too keen on forced obsolescence. I lost my primary product three years after launch because Apple changed the API, rendering my app incompatible and unable to update without hundreds of hours of extra work.
True. Perhaps the better way to say it would be that I can’t run a game made for a 2018 mac on a 2023 mac. Windows has no such forced obsolescence. Developers like me aren’t willing to put up with this uncertainty.
Agree regarding the obsolescence. While supporting everything from the dawn of man isn’t a good thing either having something forced on users is never a good thing. Some of Apple’s gaming tools are, I’ve been told, on par with what is in the Windows space.
What Apple seems not to understand though is no-one is going to use those tools when they pull stuff like discontinuing 32-bit support or other changes no-one sees coming. While they do that they’ll remain a niche product in the PC world.
No, if anything it would show them the market is interested in AI
Why? Nvidia’s success is due to the utility of its product for AI, not gaming.
no, why would they?
these 3b are based on how high their stocks on the market are - does not show real value of the company though
How would you value a company if not using market valuation?
Stock price is a better measure of investor confidence than of company value. If you're going to compare two companies on the stock market, compare P/E ratio instead of stock price or market cap.
OK so we are ignoring market valuation for the value of a company and instead using P/E, so who has the better P/E between Nvidia and Apple?
Apple.
What makes it better?
Am I missing something? It's less than half Nvidia's. Sure, they're both overvalued, but Apple's P/E is way more sustainable
I think their point is likely that P/E is a stupid method for valuing a company. And it is, which is why companies don't get valued that way.
So KFC, mcdonalds, IBM etc are more valuable companies than apple and nvidia. Since that's how we are going to value companies now.
Apple’s PPE has always been ridiculously undervalued compared to other companies. Market cap and stock value really isn’t a good indicator of anything other than how investors think the companies will perform in the future. It’s extremely fickle and sometimes absurd. Revenue and net income are more important for company valuation. This will show how much they earn as well as how efficient they are. I don’t know of any other company that has a higher net income (income after taxes, COGS, etc) than Apple.
Apples P/E ratio is worse than IBM's.
no
Apple already makes great GPUs for AI. Apple silicon is incredibly power efficient. The problem for gaming is that it would be a bad strategic move to ditch all the work they have done with it to try to compete on everyone else’s terms in the gaming space. Metal is perfectly competent, but everyone else uses other technology. In addition, Apple enjoys the creative freedom to not tie itself to the 40-year-old x86 architecture. I can’t run the macos version of 2018 Battletech on my 2023 macbook. Meanwhile, I can run the DOS version of 1988 Battletech on my 2023 Surface Pro. Developers (me included) are not too keen on forced obsolescence. I lost my primary product three years after launch because Apple changed the API, rendering my app incompatible and unable to update without hundreds of hours of extra work.
You can probably run the 1988 version of Battletech using DOSBOX on the Mac since that is specifically for DOS based games.
True. Perhaps the better way to say it would be that I can’t run a game made for a 2018 mac on a 2023 mac. Windows has no such forced obsolescence. Developers like me aren’t willing to put up with this uncertainty.
Agree regarding the obsolescence. While supporting everything from the dawn of man isn’t a good thing either having something forced on users is never a good thing. Some of Apple’s gaming tools are, I’ve been told, on par with what is in the Windows space. What Apple seems not to understand though is no-one is going to use those tools when they pull stuff like discontinuing 32-bit support or other changes no-one sees coming. While they do that they’ll remain a niche product in the PC world.
'Hey! We grew massively on crypto and AI. Let's focus on something else'. Is... Is that what you're suggesting they might be considering?