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.
IBM/Apple Deal?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Didn't Apple make a similar merger or JV with Canon in Japan in the 80's? That turned out to be a disaster.
CTerry said:
True dat.
All I know is that I'm sick of seeing that U2 iPod on apple's front page. I love iPods, but show a computer already...
This column just screams "deadline!"
In short, it doesn't make any good sense. Apple and IBM are partners already, on the PPC, and have been for something like 15 years now. Other joint efforts the companies have attempted have crashed and burned. Does anybody remember Taligent? The corporate cultures are just too different, and I think everybody knows it by now.
As for Darwin, remember this part of OSX is open source. Why in heaven's name would IBM want to buy Apple to get access to it? Further, IBM has already got its hand in the Linux pie, and also sells its own Unix variant. They need another?
The points about Apple's current market valuation have already been made, but this is another supposed indicator the writer of this column hasn't understood. The run-up in AAPL is directly attributed to increased profits from the iPod and the (yet to be realized) "halo effect" on Mac sales.
Guess again, brother. Guess again.
(Sorry for the cross-posting, but the original thread on this topic was closed.)
In short, it doesn't make any good sense. Apple and IBM are partners already, on the PPC, and have been for something like 15 years now. Other joint efforts the companies have attempted have crashed and burned. Does anybody remember Taligent? The corporate cultures are just too different, and I think everybody knows it by now.
As for Darwin, remember this part of OSX is open source. Why in heaven's name would IBM want to buy Apple to get access to it? Further, IBM has already got its hand in the Linux pie, and also sells its own Unix variant. They need another?
The points about Apple's current market valuation have already been made, but this is another supposed indicator the writer of this column hasn't understood. The run-up in AAPL is directly attributed to increased profits from the iPod and the (yet to be realized) "halo effect" on Mac sales.
Guess again, brother. Guess again.
(Sorry for the cross-posting, but the original thread on this topic was closed.)
AlanAudio said:
A growth division, which they would rapidly smother. IBM hasn't got a clue how to market consumer products.
I can see Apple and IBM renewing their AIM relationship, with Apple perhaps kicking in some dough to increase IBM's PPC fabrication capabilities, but that's about all the two companies have in common right now, and all they are likely to have in common in the future.
IBM dinosaur little to offer Apple
Yes- IBM have 10 times more revenues than Apple, one of top R&D houses globally (patents), yet for my money as a national highschool business-game winner with IBM prizes not followed through; as a VP and Chief Engineer at software house partner in charge of IBM relationship- these guys never delivered on their large ego and promise. At a launch of a 2000 person centre of excellence, the middle guys giving the talks didn't even rehearse with amusing amateur glitches.
Overall, the customer doesn't matter for IBM- even their suited adverts trivialise business with so-what geeks smugly zooming around the world without a clue about how to add value to business...the whole corporation is a dinosaur without connected neurons controlling the beast.
With Microsoft's large-scale dependable computing security crises, and the emergence of credible open-source alternatives, Apple is a lot stronger in this space (perhaps at the start of a moor-ish Tornado-phase).
Yes- IBM have 10 times more revenues than Apple, one of top R&D houses globally (patents), yet for my money as a national highschool business-game winner with IBM prizes not followed through; as a VP and Chief Engineer at software house partner in charge of IBM relationship- these guys never delivered on their large ego and promise. At a launch of a 2000 person centre of excellence, the middle guys giving the talks didn't even rehearse with amusing amateur glitches.
Overall, the customer doesn't matter for IBM- even their suited adverts trivialise business with so-what geeks smugly zooming around the world without a clue about how to add value to business...the whole corporation is a dinosaur without connected neurons controlling the beast.
With Microsoft's large-scale dependable computing security crises, and the emergence of credible open-source alternatives, Apple is a lot stronger in this space (perhaps at the start of a moor-ish Tornado-phase).
right as jobs announces his retirment IBM will step in. so thats why everything in OS X is blue (apple and background)
My father is a businessman, a CEO actually. He finds the IBM ads highly amusing, I think they appeal to a certain type of person- those in high end business, which is who IBMs products generally aim at. Therefore I'd say they target their customer base quite well.RealDeal said:
wrldwzrd89 said:
Yeah I tend to do that a lot...
I think I'll go have a snack...then go buy a new PowerBook...
...I wish
Macrumors said:
Given thd effort within IBM to move the biz strategy to embrace linux, it is unlikely they will push to a different hardware platform. IBM customers to use yellow dog?
wrldwzrd89 said:
Good catch - yes, the G4s should say "Moto Inside"...
In general, I think this could be huge. We know what kind of pull IBM has/had in the PC world - if they bring Apple on board as their new computer, it will benefit Apple due to obvious reasons, and also benefit IBM since they are the ones making the chips inside the things to begin with!
This could have major consequences and possibilities, I'll be following this story for sure...
Think about Apple's past.
Remember when Apple was doing great back in the late 80's and then they started going downhill because they thought things were going great and they sat on their butts? I hope that Apple is very cautious with this IBM thing. Not that I'm making sense or know anything, but I just don't want Apple to make a mistake and mess themselves up. Even though they don't have a great market share, they're doing something right with the iPod and the Music Store. It's only a matter of time before Apple takes the spotlight it once had, and if they team up with IBM, it might be good or bad, but if IBM's PC division were to take Apple over, I think a lot of great things will be squelched for the great, almighty dollar and profits.
Remember when Apple was doing great back in the late 80's and then they started going downhill because they thought things were going great and they sat on their butts? I hope that Apple is very cautious with this IBM thing. Not that I'm making sense or know anything, but I just don't want Apple to make a mistake and mess themselves up. Even though they don't have a great market share, they're doing something right with the iPod and the Music Store. It's only a matter of time before Apple takes the spotlight it once had, and if they team up with IBM, it might be good or bad, but if IBM's PC division were to take Apple over, I think a lot of great things will be squelched for the great, almighty dollar and profits.
This commentary might make people think differently about this whole thing:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20040520.html
Apple could just sell IBM the Mac division. What does IBM get?
1. A ready-made way to sell LOTS of G5 processors.
2. A way to differentiate themselves in the desktop PC business.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20040520.html
Apple could just sell IBM the Mac division. What does IBM get?
1. A ready-made way to sell LOTS of G5 processors.
2. A way to differentiate themselves in the desktop PC business.
Apple may or may not take the spotlight it once had.hothoagie said:
This speculation (not even rumour!) is based on IBM getting rid of it's PC division. So it's certainly not going to mean Apple working with IBM's PC division in any way. IBM would still have it's workstations, mainframes, and software. I guess if anything like this happened, iTunes and Appleworks has synergy with Lotus SmartSuite; and Darwin development has synergy with Linux.
people, forget about PCs...
wassup sydney australia...
okay, people... let's just step back and think about this. i agree with greg, in the sense that... ibm and apple are both avoiding that huge middle mess of dell/hp/microsoft/china/taiwan/commodity-pc-hardware. so ibm is going to focus hardcore on business side and business consulting. so apple might start to get a piece of server-side business, although it has to avoid conflict with ibm's server-side stuff. similarly, apple is kicking a** on consumer-side devices and stylish, fun personal computing... so ibm might start to get a piece of the consumer side via its embedded powerpc chips, but beyond that may require massive re-branding that doesn't mess with apple's market share...
the key might be to find synergy moving forward from ibm delivering powerpc chips to apple... without cannibalising each others market share in high-end-business servers or frontside-fun-consumer-stuff.
i would so much like to believe that ibm-apple partnership might mean that i'd walk into a bank's or big business office and see everyone using macs but not yet my friends, not unless microsoft somehow self-destructs...
GregA said:
wassup sydney australia...
okay, people... let's just step back and think about this. i agree with greg, in the sense that... ibm and apple are both avoiding that huge middle mess of dell/hp/microsoft/china/taiwan/commodity-pc-hardware. so ibm is going to focus hardcore on business side and business consulting. so apple might start to get a piece of server-side business, although it has to avoid conflict with ibm's server-side stuff. similarly, apple is kicking a** on consumer-side devices and stylish, fun personal computing... so ibm might start to get a piece of the consumer side via its embedded powerpc chips, but beyond that may require massive re-branding that doesn't mess with apple's market share...
the key might be to find synergy moving forward from ibm delivering powerpc chips to apple... without cannibalising each others market share in high-end-business servers or frontside-fun-consumer-stuff.
i would so much like to believe that ibm-apple partnership might mean that i'd walk into a bank's or big business office and see everyone using macs
but not yet my friends, not unless microsoft somehow self-destructs...
GregA said:
greg, that's like saying that a beautiful timber house has synergy with a clunky chainsaw
...sorry to rant but lotus notes is an absolute rubbish email client...