[JimDabell]

You’ve just switched out the argument for a different one.

I was saying that the difference between revenue and profit is irrelevant for the purpose of this argument. You’re now trying to draw an analogy with what I said and gatekeeping features behind subscriptions, which is not what I called irrelevant.

The analogous situation is if you said BMW were no longer a car company for doing so, and I’d disagree with that as well. Apple makes tonnes of money selling hardware, BMW makes tonnes of money selling cars. Apple is still a hardware company and BMW is still a car company.

[the_gipsy]

> the difference between revenue and profit is irrelevant for the purpose of this argument

Why?

[JimDabell]

Because you have been saying that Apple are no longer a hardware company. Apple bring in hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue from hardware, which quite clearly qualifies them as one of the most successful consumer hardware companies today. The only way revenue vs profit would be relevant to that is if you somehow thought that Apple had terrible margins on their hardware. Do you think that?