Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Here's an odd one.......

mischief

mischief

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 1, 2001
2,921
1
Santa Cruz Ca
I heard a rumor last night that IBM may have heavilly (like in the tens of thousands of shares) invested in Apple recently and very quietly.

I have NO proof but I thought I'd share.
 
10,000 shares ~ $230,000

That's not exactly all that much.

But there was a huge spike on Friday - over 400,000 shares traded, so who knows.
 
Originally posted by dukestreet
10,000 shares ~ $230,000

That's not exactly all that much.

But there was a huge spike on Friday - over 400,000 shares traded, so who knows.
Click to expand...

Insider information?? I certainly hope the SEC doesn't get wind of anything stinky from inside Apple because that could be a monkey wrench as far as releasing the G5 or whatever is next.
 
I heard about something like this...but not really clear on the info...

but it's not a significant amount to make much difference...

actually...I think I heard that Gates sold off his shares or something?
 
a drop in a vast ocean

apple has over 353,000,000 shares outstanding so its going to take a significant purchase to make any difference. not to mention a form must be filed with the sec if anyone purchases 5% ( i think thats still correct)of any company's stock. so that's 17+ million shares or over $408 million bucks just to be a "significant" shareholder....

i think ibm would have to get shareholder approval( especially these days...) to fork over that kind of wampum.

heck, bill gates in all of his magnanimus glory didn't invest nearly that much in apple:D
 
This would be consistent with the wild prediction I made last week that Apple is moving away from the G5 (if they were ever moving toward it in the first place) and toward an IBM POWER-derived technology instead.

*drool*

Alex
 
yes, geek.com got information from an annonymous source that the G5 has been abandoned in favor of IBM power for the top line and that motorolla will continue to produce the consumer line chips. what doesn't make sense is, somewhere down the line the G4 will be dated even for the consumer line. then would motorolla be phased out? remember this is just a rumor..
 
Originally posted by ericb88
yes, geek.com got information from an annonymous source that the G5 has been abandoned in favor of IBM power for the top line and that motorolla will continue to produce the consumer line chips.
Click to expand...

I went looking for the info on geek.com, but couldn't find anything. Their search engine didn't get me too much farther.

Post a link if you have it.

Thanks
 
If IBM were to invest in Apple, it would have nothing to do with chips or the G5. IBM is losing money on OEM, and it's been that way for years. Their consumer products are a fraction of a percent of their expenditure/income. And, like I said, they're making zero on that front.

If IBM were to invest in Apple it would be for bigger reasons (i.e. Java and Unix and open source solutions). This is the mainstay of IBM's business worldwide. Java is not supported by XP, and micro$oft is seeking to battle UNIX. This currently threatens the open-source environment, and, if successful, would be the coffin nail for IBM.

I would expect that numerous technology companies are "secretly" investing in Apple right now. They have every reason to do so, and little reason not to. The .NET initiative directly threatens IBM (IBM and M$ have rarely competed before, until .NET). Java on XP could put SUN under, and the UNIX attack is threatening open source, and would make it impossible for any other company to compete with MS outside of hardware manufacturing. It makes sense.

I have said for some time that the stronger M$ gets, the more companies will turn to Apple as the only alternative. But, this simply wasn't realistic until OS X. Now all the chips are in place. Users and servers are on the same platform. I'm sure there is a great deal of cash going to Apple under the table from numerous companies. I say, "stay tuned".
 
huh

I'm sure there is a great deal of cash going to Apple under the table from numerous companies.
Click to expand...

that makes NO sense whatsoever. Apple has plenty of cash-billions in fact, why on earth would they take cash under the table? they may partner with other companies in the development of future technologies but to imply that other companies such as IBM could curry favor with apple with secret cash is just illogical.

apple has worked hard to put themselves in an independent position-why screw that up?


man, oh man .....:rolleyes:
 
duh, don't you remember the rumor about Apple buying IBM?? well it happened and they didnt tell anyone, and now Steve Jobs told them to give him money. This is so it still looks like he makes $1 a yr but gets stock benefits. I mean, its SO obvious.
 
I don't like this. At all.

We've been hearing rumors for a while now, some saying what if the G5 isn't the G5? well, this would fit in that catagory. And with all the code set up to be optimized for the G4's altivec, if its not in the IBM CPU what happens? Can Apple and IBM get away with this without everything going down the toillet? I hope so if the rumors are true. I'd also like to know more about the IBM processor thats going to replace the G4.

Too many questions and not enough answers.:(
 
Re: huh

Originally posted by 3rdpath


that makes NO sense whatsoever. Apple has plenty of cash-billions in fact, why on earth would they take cash under the table? they may partner with other companies in the development of future technologies but to imply that other companies such as IBM could curry favor with apple with secret cash is just illogical.

apple has worked hard to put themselves in an independent position-why screw that up?


man, oh man .....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

er...umm...Sorry you seem to be so misinformed about the state of contemporary computing.

"The era of the personal computer is over. The future of computing is Web-centric computing."
-Louis V. Gerstner, IBM One Voice, 1999

Yeah. He's an imbusil. I'd probably argue with the man who single-handedly turned around American Express AND IBM.

Oh, and Apple servers are taking the world by storm!! Get real. And besides, if Apple is so independent, why don't they make their own processors? Why do they rely on the existence of MS Office to be a viable platform for the masses? I'm not entirely certain what type of fantasy world you're living in.

How long do you think it would take a company like M$ to consider Apple an irrelevent part of it's C# compatibility. Computing, applications and services are moving to web-centered solutions. Hence all the "i" in front of the iMac, iTunes, iPhoto, iTools....etc. Even Webamail. It's critical that products be compatible with net-centered services in order to foster growth and the expansion of new services. Hence Apple's move to UNIX. Right now, most net-based solutions are based around either UNIX, Java, or M$ technologies. In order for Apple to be a viable platform, it has to allow the migration of its products and services to the web. It's even critical on the education front as Universities and school systems move services to net centered services. The omission of Java from XP is huge. Java cannot be considered a solution for the future until this is fixed. Which leaves SUN in a terrible position. That basically leaves UNIX. IBM knows this.

Sure, Apple could spend their billions on R&D. But that isn't what they excel at. If it was, they would develop their own chips and hardware. Even so. Say the start spending billions on R&D (which they won't), their cash on the books dwindles significantly before they see any return. NOT a good move in the eyes of the shareholders. Not a good move for a company Wall Street already loves to hate.

IBM, SUN, and others excel at R&D. IBM is THE largest research institution in the world. And it's to their benefit, currently, to see Apple and alternate technologies do well. SUN is in the same position. So how would you feel if you were a SUN or IBM shareholder and you found out that your company was investing heavily in other computing companies? I'll sum it up for you. NOT good.

So if you don't think that it's to these companies benefit to "quietly" fund the anti-establishment movement, you're completely nuts. Linux isn't capable, because they have no hand in the hardware market. In order to avoid catching the wrath and attention of M$ and their shareholders, it's the only realistic solution to invest quietly.

Read an economics book, and buy some stock before you slam other people.
 
double huh

if i'm talking about what ( i think) apple would or wouldn't do---what on earth does that have to do with the ceo of ibm? please show some logic in your debate.


you ask why apple doesn't make processors-then you state later that its not something they're good at....once again, pretzel logic.

i'd like an intelligent debate, not to write a scene from " dude, where's my car?"......


oh BTW, BA Finance with an emphasis on securities and portfolio analysis( magna cum laude) and aapl @ $14.50 12/22/00. and you?

man, oh man:rolleyes:
 
okay. look, not to burst your bubble, but no chance in h*ll you graduated magna cum laude with a degree in finance "with an emphasis on securities and portfolio analysis"...whatever.

Maybe you did, that's not the issue.

If that _was_ true, you'd be smart enough to know that "taking money", as you call it, doesn't necessarily mean a direct transfer of cash funds. It could be an agreement that a certain company would do research, at its own expenditure, that would benefit a third party. These types of things are, for better or for worse, under the table.

You also stated that Apple has worked hard to get into an independant position. They most certainly are not. They're extremely reliant upon the moves of other companies. One doesn't have to look far to find a thread with titles like "Is Motorolla Killing Apple?", or threads expressing concern about future development of MS Office on the Mac. And let's face it, if I log into the internet to check my account balance, or file an insurance claim, or run apps from a centralized system or database and they don't work because my iMac isn't compatible with M$ C# language, or wahtever the solution may be, I'd sell the computer. Most everyone would. To think that Apple is independent......anyway.

And if you knew anything about macroeconomics, you would realize that in order for Apple to grow in market share and become a realistic solution for the future beyond "hey guys, look I can make a home movie and publish a web page with my digital pictures", they have to fit into an institutional environment (especially true in education). Which means, they have to fit into where global computing is going. That is net-centered computing. And that doesn't mean hooking into a G4 box running OS X server. That means hooking into scalable infrastructure and institutional servers with net centered applications. So, yes, they would take (money, research, intellectual property - it's all the same) from other companies to ensure that their larger goals are in line with other companies with analogous technologies.

I'm not going to argue this further. I don't dislike you personally (although I don't know you) and I don't want to get into a p*ssing match with you. I just think your thoughts are naive and narrowly focused.

what on earth does that have to do with the ceo of ibm? please show some logic in your debate.
Click to expand...

BTW, IBM publishes a book called One Voice every year that is the industry leading publication about the future of computing. ALL computing. Even Mr. Jobs reads it, I promise you. It's authored by IBM as a corporation (including the CEO) and drastically shapes the strategies of all technology companies, not just IBM. My point being, the writing was on the wall years ago regarding the life expectancy of "oasis computing" (i.e. the personal computer, Apple). You should read it, it's quite interesting.
 
IBM's rebirth

Since there's a couple posts round here about IBM being the new chipset provider for Apple. I decided to look around Big Blues site. I found a few articles about they're new processor and that It supports a number of new technologies except Altivec. Yet they don't seem to have any PDF's or charts about the new chip like motorola does. I also found this pic.
 

Attachments

  • roadmap_small.jpg
    roadmap_small.jpg
    60.2 KB · Views: 586
CHILL OUT!!!!!

1. ALL companies rely on other companies.

2. Apple panic-Threads have nothing to do with Apple's future in the marketplace.

3. Apple is one of the most Net-centric companies going and it gets better every day.

4. Strategic partnerships with Sun, IBM, Motorolla, Sony, Panasonic, Adobe, and Pioneer are par for the course if you want to play the big game.

5. Compliance with M$'s .net crap would be suicide. Better to support Sun's Java.
 
Re: IBM's rebirth

Originally posted by spuncan
Since there's a couple posts round here about IBM being the new chipset provider for Apple. I decided to look around Big Blues site. I found a few articles about they're new processor and that It supports a number of new technologies except Altivec. Yet they don't seem to have any PDF's or charts about the new chip like motorola does. I also found this pic.
Click to expand...
Articles for which new processor? IBM makes a LOT of processors, and they're not limited to the PowerPC. The POWER and RS64, for example, are PPC-compatible architectures with much higher performance than their actual PowerPCs, which are relatively low-end.

I don't necessarily think a lack of AltiVec in an IBM processor would be a bad thing, as I said somewhere before (might have been in this thread - I'm not sure). Even if the lack of AltiVec resulted in lower single-precision FP performance, I think that would more than be made up for by its far superior (to the G4) double-precision FP and its more conventional architecture (so that developers don't need to write code to explicitly support a proprietary vector processor).

And there's no reason IBM couldn't implement an AltiVec-workalike, if they wanted to. AltiVec has to be patented, but an AltiVec-similar unit underneath an AltiVec translation layer would work fine if need be.

Alex
 
Originally posted by dukestreet
10,000 shares ~ $230,000

That's not exactly all that much.

But there was a huge spike on Friday - over 400,000 shares traded, so who knows.
Click to expand...

Interesting to note that Apple CFO Fred Anderson filed to sell 100,000 shares of Apple with a sale date of April 23rd. Approximate value: 2.5 million.
 
Well, if you'd call 2.5 million low....

I'd take half of that and be happy. Maybe I should start a thread, 'If every MacRumor Member sent me $1 I'd be able to buy a new Mac"

Hah, I shouldn't give Travis any ideas.....:D
 
do you guys read anything?

did any of you guys even read the website on the wwdc?

Good Lord! It tells all kinds of new things about what is going to be shown...and if you look close you may find some clues to future hardware(near future) ....i found this without even looking....." Apple offers supercomputing performance to both consumers and professionals with Velocity Engine and the PowerPC G4 processor in its entire line of desktop computers." last i checked the ibook still had a G3???
we all knew it was coming but this soon?
try reading info on what you're ranting about and you might not sound so sophemoric
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back