It seriously bothers me that the article is using market cap.... The value of microsoft is actually roughly equal to the of apple, the value of IBM is equal to microsoft and apple combined...<p>This is looking at assets and profits per year.<p>The article is discussing the market cap as if it is a way in which you can determine the value of the company, instead of what it is, the value of its shares. Granted it should be a representation, if lets say microsoft drops 2 Cents on its stocks over a minor scare or something the market cap drops much more than the company value which maintains the same price.