AirPods are Bluetooth. The Beats division of Apple was already profitably selling headphones before Apple bought them. You act as if it would be a great technical hurdle to make the Watch work with Android. Apple is making the Watch a more standalone deceive with every release.
There is also the iPad that gets you another 10%. If just 10% of Apple’s revenue from the Mac puts it in the top 100, what does 30% do? If Apple created the “Mac company” it would still be the most profitable computer company in the world. It makes more selling Macs than any other company makes selling phones besides maybe Samsung.
But isn’t kind of silly talking about Apple being dependent on the iPhone when after two decades and billion of dollars, Google’s profit is still 90% from ads?
> The Beats division of Apple was already profitably selling headphones before Apple bought them.
It made a few billions in revenue, that's far cry from trillions a tech giant is expected to make.
> You act as if it would be a great technical hurdle to make the Watch work with Android.
That's exactly my point. They shouldn't be making such closed ecosystem, their products will be more popular if anyone could use them. This is why they caved in on Apple Music and TV like services which are available on Android, Roku, Fire TV etc.
> There is also the iPad that gets you another 10%. If just 10% of Apple’s revenue from the Mac puts it in the top 100, what does 30% do? If Apple created the “Mac company” it would still be the most profitable computer company in the world. It makes more selling Macs than any other company makes selling phones besides maybe Samsung.
Nobody cares about "Mac Company" or "iPad Company". They don't have any clout. Hundreds of companies come and go from the top 100 but only a few can last for decades. Microsoft is still standing today even after a failed Mobile venture only because of the money they made during desktop era and still cashing in on that success. If iPhones stopped getting manufactured it's pretty much the end of Apple today regardless of their Mac, iPad or Airpods business.
> But isn’t kind of silly talking about Apple being dependent on the iPhone when after two decades and billion of dollars, Google’s profit is still 90% from ads?
Since when did whataboutism became a valid rebuttal?
It made a few billions in revenue, that's far cry from trillions a tech giant is expected to make.
Apple doesn't make trillions in revenue....
That's exactly my point. They shouldn't be making such closed ecosystem, their products will be more popular if anyone could use them. This is why they caved in on Apple Music and TV like services which are available on Android, Roku, Fire TV etc.
Why because the "open" ecosystems are doing so much better? Android manufacturers aren't exactly bringing in boatloads of money. In fact, Google isn't even bringing in boatloads of money from Android. It came out in the Oracle trial that Google had only made $23 billion in profit from Android from inception to the time of discovery. Google reportedly pays Apple $8 billion a year just to be the default search engine on Apple devices. It seems like Apple makes more on mobile from Google than Google makes from Android. That whole open thing doesn't seem to be working...
Nobody cares about "Mac Company" or "iPad Company". They don't have any clout. Hundreds of companies come and go from the top 100 but only a few can last for decades
You realize Apple lasted "for decades" - from 1984 - 2001 just from selling Macs. It lasted another 6 years selling Macs and iPods. Apple went public before Microsoft.
Microsoft is still standing today even after a failed Mobile venture only because of the money they made during desktop era and still cashing in on that success.
And Apple survived almost going bankrupt by selling desktops....
If iPhones stopped getting manufactured it's pretty much the end of Apple today regardless of their Mac, iPad or Airpods business.
We have an existence proof that Apple could survive just selling computers and one or two other devices --- they did so for almost four decades.
Since when did whataboutism became a valid rebuttal?
Apple is better diversified than most of the tech companies and they have been around for longer and pivoted better than any of the big 5.
There is also the iPad that gets you another 10%. If just 10% of Apple’s revenue from the Mac puts it in the top 100, what does 30% do? If Apple created the “Mac company” it would still be the most profitable computer company in the world. It makes more selling Macs than any other company makes selling phones besides maybe Samsung.
But isn’t kind of silly talking about Apple being dependent on the iPhone when after two decades and billion of dollars, Google’s profit is still 90% from ads?