It's a bit too bad they compare revenue of resellers like Amazon with editors like Microsoft, the gross margin is really different. Resellers have to punch over their weight to get some money home where Microsoft brings almost everything to the bank.
The interesting thing about this chart is how unprofitable manufacturing is. Foxconn's profits are less than $3 billion on $115 billion in revenues (and $50-$60 billion in assets). Google has 3x the profit but less than half the revenue. When people ask why manufacturing has left the U.S., this is the reason why: it doesn't offer very good return on capital.<p>On the other hand, Foxconn provides jobs for over 1.2 million people, while Google employs less than 50,000. Also relevant to the debate about manufacturing.
Displaying profit instead of revenue would have been more interesting, "Waooo!!! This company makes more money per second than what I make working a whole month!"
Revenue is not really interesting. Take Amazon as an example, they make a lot of revenue... but that's because they pretty much give away as much money as they can sustain.
Would be cool if this had an at-a-glance view with incrementing counters for each company on a single screen, updating proportionally to their revenue.
The title is missing an important keyword. There are, of course, a lot of companies making much (much) more than this per seconds.<p>Also, how is Foxconn a technology company in the sense the others are? Don't they only (as oppsoed to Samsung for example which does that <i>also</i>) manufacture for others, what is designed by others? I really don't think they fit the description.