Having worked closely with IBM Global Services for several months, IMO the biggest benefit of IBM's involvement is their dominant services division. Mac OS X Server has serious potential as a high-end server operating system. However, it absolutely will not gain corporate marketshare unless there are services to support it. To corporations, the services are more important than the actual hardware/software.
This is off-topic, but did you all know that over one-third of IBM telecommutes? Their studies concluded that people are more productive when working from home. So many of their employees are allowed to work whereever they want inside of the U.S.
The ultimate irony, Apple set out to be different than the IBM faceless corporation....over time IBM begins to make chips for apple...and apple becomes more of a faceless corp. and now IBM could buy apple out.
wowie...I hope it don't happen though, and if it does I hope its less of a buy-out, and apple computers don't need to start putting "IBM" all over in ackward places.
I would be funny I would say almost insane to put Apple with the iBM name. Apple IBM and the PC users too, think of how confused they would get, maybe I would too! It would be hard to sell a name like a Mac under the IBM name tac.
Fatboy, nice to see you attempt regular English. Just because IBM would buy Apple doesn't mean it would not use the name. But don't worry, it's not going to happen.
<strong>Fatboy, nice to see you attempt regular English. Just because IBM would buy Apple doesn't mean it would not use the name. But don't worry, it's not going to happen.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am glad you think so, if IBM bought Apple I would surely go. I like Apple as is, they innovate they create they shake up the biz.
apple under jobs brings itself back to something near viability (not there yet, but getting close). the strategy being pursued is computing made easier. for people. digital hub. wonderfully designed products. in fact, extreme attention paid to design (which is rare in a USAmerican company). a completely successful transition from an antiquated OS to a u/linux based modern operating system. new iMac and iTunes and iPod getting broadbased attention.
it is all coming together (except at stock valuation level that is...).
here comes big, bad, corporate, blue, business, and ugly right into yr face. the first two people out the door will be jobs and ives.
does anybody remember OS2?? that was big blue's attempt to entice corporate america away from windows. ended in abysmal failure. apple branded products under ibm would be something like this:
1. people would finally realize their ultimate fantasy: what would a black iBook be like
2. people would be able to more easily convince their it departments to support apple now that ibm runs it: NOT!!!
3. people would be able to see X86 versions of mac software: and, since there are more windows computers in the world you will be relegated to second class status on yr own platform: drivers for hardware will undoubtedly be written for x86 machines betore they are out for apple branded products (its a clear and simple business decision, after all)
folks, the reasons why all this wont happen is that ibm is not interested in the consumer pc segment (their chairman said this 2 weeks ago: " we just want to lose less money in that area")
and, ofcourse, jobs will fight it.
if any of the rumour would end up to be even partly true, remember the mantra, think different. it makes us what we are.
(ps: if it ever did happen, ill buy the original creator of the digital hub strategy (sony), and certainly not ibm products.)
You are right though, IBM and Apple would just be two unsuited companies and a disaster waiting to happen. I dont think Apple will ever cease to exist, not tommorow not until the end of man.
Personally I think that an IBM Apple buy out would be a good thing. First of all, many of you are thinking that IBM would gobble up Apple and throw out just another PC maker. IBM could and probably would turn Apple into a subsidiary. Apple Computer, a IBM Company.
Especially of late, IBM has been focusing on the server market. Enter the Compaq-HP merger. These two could be a threat to IBM in the server market and IBM may be looking to be beefing up its servers. Enter Apple. IBM buys Apple, turns it into a subsidiary and they have access to a powerful OS. In the same process, IBM leaves Apple the way it is, but it has access to Apple technology. In addition, Apple would have a powerful player that would provide hardware to be included in their computers. Also, Apple would have access to IBM chips and not rely on Mot anymore. The AIM alliance may be destroyed, but both companies would prevail.
Don't you just love speculation? <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
<strong>Altivec doesn't mean much - there aren't many programs that take advantage of it. And without Altivec, G4s are about the same speed as G3s.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The market is closed Saturday. So if there is something to this rumor we should see a big jump in Apple stock on Monday. If it doesn't happen, likely it is not a well founded rumor, no? After reading all this, I hope the part about a possible close alliance, but not a buy out, is correct. Apple could give IBM the rights to use OS X Server in return for something else -- something related to chips? An alliance like that could be good. IBM could sell OS X server hardware, and Apple gets assurance of high performance chips. The worst part of Motorola as a supplier is that high performance does not fit in with the rest of their chip market. On the other hand, IBM wants and needs high speed PPC type chips for their servers. IBM and Apple would be excellent business partners. They complement each other. If IBM controlled Apple, I fear that could kill those qualities that make Apple what it is.
Despite my negative attitude towards an IBM buyout, I agree with you 100% about the strategic value of a closer alliance.
Mind you, I'm old enough to remember what happened to Taligent. Perhaps if Apple and IBM got back together, both parties will be somewhat the wiser this time around.
I started a thread on this subject some months ago and I will repeat the comments I made earlier.
1. Do not underestimate the power of BIG BLUE. If IBM bought Apple, Apple computers would be accepted in the corporate arena.
2. It is the share holders not SJ who would either reject or accept a bid from IBM.
3. IBM is a HARDWARE company and would have dominated the PC market had it not licensed DOS. IBM would love to be in that position again today but cannot because it cannot control the hardware. Buying Apple would allow IBM to return to it's roots.
4. The fit makes perfect sense.
5. IBM and SJ are not mutually exclusive. There is no reason to believe they would want to fix something that isn't broken. Apple has a very strong product range and an OS that just gets better and better.
6. HP-Compaq enters the equasation. IBM will be very worried about this merger should it go through. I susspect any bid by IBM will be contingent on the HP merger.
2, yr right. it is the stockholders. remember it is the board first that devises strategy to thwart a take over or not, first, however.
3. yr right, ibm IS a hardware company. ugly black hardware.
4. yr right. it makes perfect cents for ibm for the short term. until they mess it up like they have messed up all consumer oriented marketing that they have ever done.
5. i can not lie: yr wrong here: anyone who thinks that jobs and ives are compatible with blue is not listening to where apple is going these days.
6. yr right. compuk and dell (or, whatever the other computer maker's name is) DOES figure into it: if i were ibm i would pray that the deal of the century for has-been computer company models might actually pass fair trade and actually go through. when it fails, it will be very good news to ibm.
How stupid is that guy that says that about altivec. Ahhh.. Maybe working at IBM, and not wanting it. All iApps use it. The digital hub is practaly based on it. Like Steve Jobs said. You cant even encode a DVD without a G4.
The truth is "not all apps are optimised for it, but tons of apps take advantage of it" knowingly, or unknowingly it makes a huge differance. Altivec is what kept the Mac alive in the day of the G4 500MHz crisis.
G3 is a decent processor, but it's a piece of crap next to a G4.
It's like puttig an AMD K63 next to an Athlon. This is your brain, and this is your brain kicking @$$! See the difference yet you shmuck? he he
The market is closed Saturday. So if there is something to this rumor we should see a big jump in Apple stock on Monday. If it doesn't happen, likely it is not a well founded rumor, no? After reading all this, I hope the part about a possible close alliance, but not a buy out, is correct. Apple could give IBM the rights to use OS X Server in return for something else -- something related to chips? An alliance like that could be good. IBM could sell OS X server hardware, and Apple gets assurance of high performance chips. The worst part of Motorola as a supplier is that high performance does not fit in with the rest of their chip market. On the other hand, IBM wants and needs high speed PPC type chips for their servers. IBM and Apple would be excellent business partners. They complement each other. If IBM controlled Apple, I fear that could kill those qualities that make Apple what it is. bold
The rumor was posted at 10 am est friday morning and the market had no reaction. You won't have to wait till tuesday as Apple is listed in Japan which I think opens at about 6pm est sunday. (aapl.t)
<strong>Seb, although I understan what you meant, your statement made little sense. It'd be wintel incompatable not IBM compatible. I geuss it's just a common usage thing. Actually it's the kind of thing corps. like IBM spend millions of dollars a year preventing from happenning. Sorry ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I know, it doesn't make sense. But I wrote it that way on purpose. The average PC user, in my experience, still refers to PCs as IBM compatibles. I went to one print shop recently where they had a small room for doing Wintel related work and the sign outside the door said, "IBM room". There were a few microns and a Dell in there.
I guess I was suggesting that if people haven't figured out by now that a Dell has nothing to do with IBM, I don't see how they would magically, overnight, put Apples in the "IBM compatible" category.
Comments
Having worked closely with IBM Global Services for several months, IMO the biggest benefit of IBM's involvement is their dominant services division. Mac OS X Server has serious potential as a high-end server operating system. However, it absolutely will not gain corporate marketshare unless there are services to support it. To corporations, the services are more important than the actual hardware/software.
This is off-topic, but did you all know that over one-third of IBM telecommutes? Their studies concluded that people are more productive when working from home. So many of their employees are allowed to work whereever they want inside of the U.S.
[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: Brian J. ]</p>
wowie...I hope it don't happen though, and if it does I hope its less of a buy-out, and apple computers don't need to start putting "IBM" all over in ackward places.
[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: FatBoy ]</p>
<strong>Fatboy, nice to see you attempt regular English. Just because IBM would buy Apple doesn't mean it would not use the name. But don't worry, it's not going to happen.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am glad you think so, if IBM bought Apple I would surely go. I like Apple as is, they innovate they create they shake up the biz.
why would anyone think this is a good thing?
apple under jobs brings itself back to something near viability (not there yet, but getting close). the strategy being pursued is computing made easier. for people. digital hub. wonderfully designed products. in fact, extreme attention paid to design (which is rare in a USAmerican company). a completely successful transition from an antiquated OS to a u/linux based modern operating system. new iMac and iTunes and iPod getting broadbased attention.
it is all coming together (except at stock valuation level that is...).
here comes big, bad, corporate, blue, business, and ugly right into yr face. the first two people out the door will be jobs and ives.
does anybody remember OS2?? that was big blue's attempt to entice corporate america away from windows. ended in abysmal failure. apple branded products under ibm would be something like this:
1. people would finally realize their ultimate fantasy: what would a black iBook be like
2. people would be able to more easily convince their it departments to support apple now that ibm runs it: NOT!!!
3. people would be able to see X86 versions of mac software: and, since there are more windows computers in the world you will be relegated to second class status on yr own platform: drivers for hardware will undoubtedly be written for x86 machines betore they are out for apple branded products (its a clear and simple business decision, after all)
folks, the reasons why all this wont happen is that ibm is not interested in the consumer pc segment (their chairman said this 2 weeks ago: " we just want to lose less money in that area")
and, ofcourse, jobs will fight it.
if any of the rumour would end up to be even partly true, remember the mantra, think different. it makes us what we are.
(ps: if it ever did happen, ill buy the original creator of the digital hub strategy (sony), and certainly not ibm products.)
[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: niji ]
[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: niji ]</p>
You are right though, IBM and Apple would just be two unsuited companies and a disaster waiting to happen. I dont think Apple will ever cease to exist, not tommorow not until the end of man.
<strong>people would be able to more easily convince their it departments to support apple now that ibm runs it: NOT!!!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, they would, because many of their IT departments are run by IBM Global Services.
Think about how Lotus has totally gone from strength to strength since IBM bought them out. Damn near killed off M$, right?
Bringing Apple into the fold will really put the fear of God into those Redmondian heathen.
<homer>
Just in case you didn't realise, I was being sarcastic.</>
<marge>
Well, duh!
</>
Especially of late, IBM has been focusing on the server market. Enter the Compaq-HP merger. These two could be a threat to IBM in the server market and IBM may be looking to be beefing up its servers. Enter Apple. IBM buys Apple, turns it into a subsidiary and they have access to a powerful OS. In the same process, IBM leaves Apple the way it is, but it has access to Apple technology. In addition, Apple would have a powerful player that would provide hardware to be included in their computers. Also, Apple would have access to IBM chips and not rely on Mot anymore. The AIM alliance may be destroyed, but both companies would prevail.
Don't you just love speculation? <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
<strong>Altivec doesn't mean much - there aren't many programs that take advantage of it. And without Altivec, G4s are about the same speed as G3s.</strong><hr></blockquote>
you keep posting this, and i keep
Despite my negative attitude towards an IBM buyout, I agree with you 100% about the strategic value of a closer alliance.
Mind you, I'm old enough to remember what happened to Taligent. Perhaps if Apple and IBM got back together, both parties will be somewhat the wiser this time around.
1. Do not underestimate the power of BIG BLUE. If IBM bought Apple, Apple computers would be accepted in the corporate arena.
2. It is the share holders not SJ who would either reject or accept a bid from IBM.
3. IBM is a HARDWARE company and would have dominated the PC market had it not licensed DOS. IBM would love to be in that position again today but cannot because it cannot control the hardware. Buying Apple would allow IBM to return to it's roots.
4. The fit makes perfect sense.
5. IBM and SJ are not mutually exclusive. There is no reason to believe they would want to fix something that isn't broken. Apple has a very strong product range and an OS that just gets better and better.
6. HP-Compaq enters the equasation. IBM will be very worried about this merger should it go through. I susspect any bid by IBM will be contingent on the HP merger.
2, yr right. it is the stockholders. remember it is the board first that devises strategy to thwart a take over or not, first, however.
3. yr right, ibm IS a hardware company. ugly black hardware.
4. yr right. it makes perfect cents for ibm for the short term. until they mess it up like they have messed up all consumer oriented marketing that they have ever done.
5. i can not lie: yr wrong here: anyone who thinks that jobs and ives are compatible with blue is not listening to where apple is going these days.
6. yr right. compuk and dell (or, whatever the other computer maker's name is) DOES figure into it: if i were ibm i would pray that the deal of the century for has-been computer company models might actually pass fair trade and actually go through. when it fails, it will be very good news to ibm.
i agree with you on 5 out of 6 points.
The truth is "not all apps are optimised for it, but tons of apps take advantage of it" knowingly, or unknowingly it makes a huge differance. Altivec is what kept the Mac alive in the day of the G4 500MHz crisis.
G3 is a decent processor, but it's a piece of crap next to a G4.
It's like puttig an AMD K63 next to an Athlon. This is your brain, and this is your brain kicking @$$! See the difference yet you shmuck? he he
From: Portland, OR
\t posted 02-16-2002 12:26 AM Â*Â*Â* Â*Â* Â* Â*Â* Â* Â* Â*Â*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The market is closed Saturday. So if there is something to this rumor we should see a big jump in Apple stock on Monday. If it doesn't happen, likely it is not a well founded rumor, no? After reading all this, I hope the part about a possible close alliance, but not a buy out, is correct. Apple could give IBM the rights to use OS X Server in return for something else -- something related to chips? An alliance like that could be good. IBM could sell OS X server hardware, and Apple gets assurance of high performance chips. The worst part of Motorola as a supplier is that high performance does not fit in with the rest of their chip market. On the other hand, IBM wants and needs high speed PPC type chips for their servers. IBM and Apple would be excellent business partners. They complement each other. If IBM controlled Apple, I fear that could kill those qualities that make Apple what it is. bold
The rumor was posted at 10 am est friday morning and the market had no reaction. You won't have to wait till tuesday as Apple is listed in Japan which I think opens at about 6pm est sunday. (aapl.t)
<strong>Seb, although I understan what you meant, your statement made little sense. It'd be wintel incompatable not IBM compatible. I geuss it's just a common usage thing. Actually it's the kind of thing corps. like IBM spend millions of dollars a year preventing from happenning. Sorry ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I know, it doesn't make sense. But I wrote it that way on purpose. The average PC user, in my experience, still refers to PCs as IBM compatibles. I went to one print shop recently where they had a small room for doing Wintel related work and the sign outside the door said, "IBM room". There were a few microns and a Dell in there.
I guess I was suggesting that if people haven't figured out by now that a Dell has nothing to do with IBM, I don't see how they would magically, overnight, put Apples in the "IBM compatible" category.
Blame it on the ignorance of the masses...