Bill Gates: man in the bubble.

Can I hire someone to delete my emails, please?

Anyway, Jim Allchin blogs about this whole thing today. You have to remember, in 2004 Longhorn was basically a mess, and he wanted to emphasize a point. And I think he was telling the truth. Microsoft has worked very hard on Vista since then. I don't see anything that's likely to shake users from their well-deserved loyalty to OS X, but it certainly illustrates the difference between the MS OS effort in 2004 and the state of the PC in January 2007.

And, anyway, these Mac vs. Windows arguments are pointless. Apple isn't even trying to push the kinds of volumes the PC manufacturers do. That's the reason their market share number isn't budging. But, frankly, that's probably a good thing. Anyone here remember when Apple tried dumping volumes on the market and nearly wrecked the company in the early 90s? Apple's model is different; it's not about market share numbers, and it seems to be working. I'd just like to see more Mac-based revenue growth and not just iPod, but being on all cylinders on Intel Macs should at least give them a fighting chance.

Well, Apple had been in a state of damage control from the late 1990's to early 2000's.

I'd say that they are in a stable position now and have been making a decent comeback. It's foolish to expect a company to go from less than 3% marketshare to top of the heap overnight (ESPECIALLY after getting thrashed for about ten years straight because of poor leadership). That didn't happen for Microsoft or the IBM compatible PC. Want an example of a company that doesn't play to win?

Look at SUN, Amiga or SGI...

THOSE guys didn't play to win. I mean, I actually have to search to hear something about them. I at least hear about Apple without even trying.

MS's revenues for the last fiscal year is 44 billion. It was 36 billion two years earlier. Apple's latest revenue is 14 billion, it was 6.2 billion two years before that.

It is not beyond the realm of impossibility for Apple to catch up to MS revenue-wise in a few years. They will probably never supplant Windows as the OS standard but that's not the only game in town for Apple.

And to say that Apple does not play to win is a ludicrous statement. So exactly what was Apple playing for when it put a lock on the digital player market? Honorable mention? Brownie points?

There is no way Apple could ever be as big as MS. Apple would have to make too many changes Steve couldn't bare to make. For better or for worse, Apple doesn't play to WIN, MS does. That's why each company is where they are today.

Apple has a better chance of being bought by someone than ever stepping up to MS size.

If you believe that Apple is the next Sony, that Apple will be the pace setter for the home entertainment electronics industry, that your stereo, radio, tv, cell phone, cable, camcorder, etc. (or more accurately, the future successors of those technologies) will all be running on an Apple-designed integrated platform, then Apple stock has still a looooong way to go.

I also believe that this will come about because an increasingly desperate Sony, who to this day has no clue how to write even half-way decent software, will eventually throw in the towel and totally embrace Apple's home electronics platform freeing it to concentrate it's energies on what it does best --hardware.

"Oh well, what does Smith Barney know, anyway?". In my experience not much. They recommended a buy for SUN when they were at their pek at $45. A few months later they were trading at $5. Analysts' recommendations can be overvalued too.

Not familiar with an Apple bubble. I am under the impression (from my broker and research) that Apple's stock is actually undervalued, in light of its assets and earnings. Oh well, what does Smith Barney know, anyway?

Wow, it would feel great to know that your job could be replaced by a vbs script written in 20min.

Oh well, let them waste the money.

I wouldn't say MS is the GM of the tech world, because GM has REAL competitors, of a similar size and customer base.

MS is SO absurdly huge, you can't say that Apple is the Toyota equivalent, or so on. I think Apple COULD one day get that big, but they have to decide to enter the corporate work space, and that means offering alternatives to Act. Dir., all the little server platforms, and so on. Their offerings are, by numeric comparison, pretty small.

It's a nice thing to imagine, though.

Microsoft has become the General Motors of the tech world. I say that with a heavy heart because MS was the spirit of my financial good fortune.

So, who becomes "Toyota"; Apple?