[eesmith]

I'm saying that <1% is not the right way to look at things, but the real point is "You can both pay for a service and be the product."

You won't call them an ad company until it's 50% of revenue. I understand that.

But if Alphabet were to buy UnitedHealth Group, so that Alphabet's ad revenue were under 50%, Alphabet would still be an ad company.

The newspaper which I subscribe to is also an ad company, because they sell ad space.

The radio station I listen to most is not also an ad company, because it's a volunteer-run, listener-funded station.

My company is not an ad company because it only gets revenue from product sales and consulting services.

[voidspark]

You are being weirdly pedantic and arguing to the point of absurdity. At some point you just have to accept basic logic and common sense.

Apple has never been an "ad company". They sell computers, software, subscriptions, and they take a cut of the App Store revenue. Ads are a tiny part of their revenue now. Doesn't make them an "ad company" like Google, where ads are their primary revenue source.

I bought a lot of Apple products. They made their money from the high margin in the purchase price, not ad views which I have never seen anywhere on my Macs and maybe seen a couple of the ads on the app store on my phone. They earned about 1 cent on those two ad views, and thousands of dollars from the hardware sales and iCloud subscription.