I've read somewhere else that Apple did not participate in wide lay-offs which means they play their own game and don't fire what they recently acquired. Hence it makes sense that other companies have worse big picture and outlook capabilities.
Old joke retold: Tim Cook is talking to his exec team about saving money. He turns to Deirdre O Brien who he has invited to the meeting to share her ideas. "We will fire 900 contractors and the one guy who works on Apple's graphical sudo product". Hands go up on all the Facetime screens, and it's clear everyone has the same question. "Why that guy?", Jeff Williams asks. Deirdre turns to Tim with a knowing look on her face.
"See, I told you. No one gives a fuck about the contractors"
[1] I was an partner in a company that nearly died, but was able to pull through and eventually do well/get acquired. Ultra conservative around hiring is a bias I know I still carry with me from the experience.
Apple has shit tons of cash lying around - 55 billion dollars at the end of Q4/22 [1] and likely three times more in investments/assets [2].
If anything, Apple can afford keeping their staff on payroll... additionally, it keeps their knowledge in-house which is valuable on its own - NDAs and non-competes (with questionable legal standing) aside, they likely don't want laid-off staff starting up companies with knowledge gained by working on now-shelved projects at Apple.
[1] https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AAPL/apple/cash-on...
[2] https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp500-compa...