IBM is best at taking over IT operations and development from companies and then outsourcing development work to locations with lower wages.
The employees transferred over to IBM are RA'd (laid off) and IBM then profits from the wage arbitrage.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and IBM Team Up For Major Enterprise Mobility Partnership
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
IBM is best at taking over IT operations and development from companies and then outsourcing development work to locations with lower wages.
The employees transferred over to IBM are RA'd (laid off) and IBM then profits from the wage arbitrage.
Dude, this is a big deal. Yeah as other people have already mentioned. They jettisoned their hardware business to focus on the services part of their business that was making good money so it might seem like they faded away to the average person, but they haven't gone anywhere.
According to Forbes Apple has ~160 Billion in liquid cash I found an article that states IBM's net worth is 114 Billion. So it sounds like they could to me...
Totally agree with all you said.
Just the mere fact that they could afford to dump off their iconic line of PCs including one of the few Windows PCs that I would actually want to own, a ThinkPad, tells you just how strong they are.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
So, like everyone else in the world, IBM has announced that one of these days it's going to make an iPhone app. That plus their consultants selling hardware seems to be the big news.
I'm not in enterprise (whatever that is), so that's my lay take on it. Apple has historically been direct, but this sounded like word salad to me that you expect from Microsoft when they talk about the future and opportunities, etc., etc.
I'm not in enterprise (whatever that is), so that's my lay take on it. Apple has historically been direct, but this sounded like word salad to me that you expect from Microsoft when they talk about the future and opportunities, etc., etc.
That would be funny if they swapped Siri with Watson on the enterprise iOS devices.
I know you were trying for the witty zinger to start the conversation off with, but it came across as expertly uninformed.
Master-stroke.
IBM is Apple's entré into the huge Enterprise market. A trusted partner of thousands of businesses around the world, that can now push Apple hardware as the preferred solution. What a great position to be in!
Google would likely love to pursue something like this with Oracle - except they hate each other. Microsoft is certainly not going to consider such a partnership. Exclusivity is grand...
IBM is Apple's entré into the huge Enterprise market. A trusted partner of thousands of businesses around the world, that can now push Apple hardware as the preferred solution. What a great position to be in!
Google would likely love to pursue something like this with Oracle - except they hate each other. Microsoft is certainly not going to consider such a partnership. Exclusivity is grand...
I can't tell you precisely why, but I am 100% certain the EU would find some reason to block the acquisition. It is their way.
If you listened to the interview, then it does make sense. apple already has the common end-user through the use of iDevices and the OSX devices. Tim even said they already use apple in the corporate world for email and other simple tasks. What Tim specifically said was going after big data and bringing it to the mobile business user. This is not 99 cent app you are going to download. This is how to make an ipad or iphone based UI that integrates well with IBM server based software. At least that is what I took from it. IBM does not have Peoplesoft Financials or SAP. What they do have is word class servers with world class analytics. They also bought Cognos which is a world class application. So common user, no this is the enterprise, the knowledge worker, the decision makers. They are the ones making the decision on million dollar investments that are required to do big data analytics. And if they can get them to buy the IBM solution that will interface perfectly and exclusively with apple products that will drive apple sales.
If you want to acquire an entire company, and a company like IBM, you will have to pay a very high premium over the actual cap
Is there a hidden animosity between IBM and Google? IBM could have struck a similar deal with Google, no?
This. When talking about Apple's cash hoard, people seem to treat it like a shopping list: "oh, I'll have this for $xBn, that for $yBn and still have $zBn for rainy days".
Actual corporate acquisitions are much more complicated. Not only is it expected that you pay a premium, but you also need to do your own evaluation of what the business is worth and what the acquisition could do to increase that value.
It makes no sense to, as some have suggested, buy IBM, take what you want and resell the rest for parts. This is a $100Bn enterprise, not a used car. The company pieces may not be viable as separate entities, or might be worth much less (making the price for the bit you want even higher).
Similarly, you just owning some part of the business might actually negatively influence its reputation. Apple is a prime candidate for that. I can't count the number of enterprise IT people I've encountered here in Germany who regard Apple with absolute disdain. They moan about how they only make products for "hipsters" and make pretty boxes full of crap. They love a bit of Microsoft and even, strangely, Google (Google have done a fantastic job of fooling the world that they support open-source software, and to a lot of IT people here that actually means something as far as reputation goes). If Apple bought IBM, or even just a part of IBM, I could see a lot of those people look for alternative providers (if there are any; I don't know the enterprise market).
A partnership would be much more palatable to these people, since they know and trust IBM as an independent entity to Apple. I'm not saying this venture will be a runaway success, but it's better than an outright acquisition and better than Apple continuing to go it alone.
Yes but even with that Apple has a huge amount of cash even with any overhead Apple wouldn't need to do much shifting of assets to pull it off if they wanted to. However as far as an investment strategy my idea is pretty stupid but I would still love to see them shutdown IBM.
I don't know, but iOS's leading position in enterprise probably helped them a lot. Why partner with Android, and deal with issues like fragmentation and a low share of the market you are going after, when you can work instead with a tightly integrated platform with high penetration in your targeted market?
I would imagine the Apple-IBM agreement also has some kind of clause preventing IBM from doing the exact same thing with Google (or Samsung or whoever).
Tim Cook must be a horrible CEO for making such a deal 
.
Time will tell, but this has the makings of a brilliant move. Apple can't be all things to all people; they can't beat IBM at their game, but they can let their hardware serve as an excellent platform for enterprise. I think the "everyone wins" motif is going to become increasingly common for those in tech. There will always be 800 pound gorillas, but the boom in tech and speed of advances make partnering more advantageous, particularly for the largest companies.
.Time will tell, but this has the makings of a brilliant move. Apple can't be all things to all people; they can't beat IBM at their game, but they can let their hardware serve as an excellent platform for enterprise. I think the "everyone wins" motif is going to become increasingly common for those in tech. There will always be 800 pound gorillas, but the boom in tech and speed of advances make partnering more advantageous, particularly for the largest companies.
This is a direct hit against Microsoft and Google. Blackberry was only relevant in email services. I wonder how Oracle and SAP will react to this.