I define companies by WHAT MAKES THEM MONEY. I can't tell if people are pedantic or dense.

Apple makes money by selling hardware. Microsoft makes money by selling software. Google makes money by selling ads. Amazon makes money by selling goods.

Graphic for the insanely dense: http://visualign.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/applemicrosoftg...

You aren't "defining" companies, you are /classifying/ them and you're classifying them into arbitrary boxes based on your strange, subjective and clearly disputed perceptions.

Let's move on from your inability to admit the silliness of classifying a large company with many different divisions as a "software company" and go back to your original contention: that Microsoft were unable to bring a new hardware device to market because they did not have a enough "supply chain dominance". Whatever "supply chain dominance means", you're wrong --- Microsoft have, in the past, released hardware products. The Xbox is an obvious example. So is Microsoft Surface. There is nothing more "whitelabel" about these products than there is about the MacBookPro.

It is different, "Microsoft Surface" is a damn Samsung product you can see on Samsung's site. http://www.samsunglfd.com/product/feature.do?modelCd=SUR40 ... and how many models do you think will ever ship, over its entire lifetime?

Apple designs its own hardware, even does some FAB work now in regards to its chips.

Microsoft doesn't move enough hardware to have anywhere near the supply chain power of Apple. Microsoft is a pathetic flee in the hardware world compared to apple. Hardware (manufactured and DESIGNED by others) makes up less than 20% of Microsoft's business.

Apple is first and foremost a hardware company. Apple is known for its incredibly well run supply chain and operations which give them amazing power to lean on manufacturers.

Apple will guarantee and lock in massive purchases removing the vast majority of risk from the hardware vendors, allowing hardware vendors to take risks on stuff like the Retina Display.

Nearly all of Microsoft's non-trivial plays have failed pushing and partnering with people. They promised to market and move tablets for years... FAIL. Windows Phone was going to change the world... FAIL. Zune... FAIL. Hardware vendors or rightfully terrified of Microsoft as a partner, even when they fully commit -- you know why? MICROSOFT IS NOT A HARDWARE COMPANY.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/apples-supplychain-secr... ... and google "Apple Supply Chain" to find literally dozens of more stories about how good they are at this.

It's also worth noting that Apple acquired Intrinsity a few years ago, a semiconductor company. They actually design ARM chips. Samsung is a customer.

That's the product that used to be called "Microsoft Surface", which was a table-sized touchscreen computer, not the new Microsoft Surface.