apple and ibm - the bottom line...
?The PowerPC G5 changes all the rules. This 64-bit race car is the heart of our new Power Mac G5, now the world?s fastest desktop computer,? said Steve Jobs, Apple?s CEO. ?IBM offers the most advanced processor design and manufacturing expertise on earth, and this is just the beginning of a long and productive relationship.?
?Apple and IBM have been working together for over a decade. With the development of the PowerPC G5 we?ve entered into a much deeper partnership, and Apple now has access to a vast portfolio of IBM?s advanced technologies used in our high-performance servers and supercomputers,? said John Kelly, senior vice president and group executive, IBM Technology Group. ?The Power Mac G5 is the result of Apple?s leadership in innovation coupled with IBM?s unrivaled processor technology. It is also a preview of the type of technology innovation that our deeper partnership will continue to deliver to customers in the future.?
oh my god! ... As I allways said: finally, everything will be all right
?Apple and IBM have been working together for over a decade. With the development of the PowerPC G5 we?ve entered into a much deeper partnership, and Apple now has access to a vast portfolio of IBM?s advanced technologies used in our high-performance servers and supercomputers,? said John Kelly, senior vice president and group executive, IBM Technology Group. ?The Power Mac G5 is the result of Apple?s leadership in innovation coupled with IBM?s unrivaled processor technology. It is also a preview of the type of technology innovation that our deeper partnership will continue to deliver to customers in the future.?
oh my god! ... As I allways said: finally, everything will be all right
Comments
Apple now has access to a vast portfolio of IBM?s advanced technologies used in our high-performance servers and supercomputers
This suggests that Apple might have access to Power 4, and possibly samples of Power 5's along side the 970's.
?The Power Mac G5 is the result of Apple?s leadership in innovation coupled with IBM?s unrivaled processor technology. It is also a preview of the type of technology innovation that our deeper partnership will continue to deliver to customers in the future.?
This has me wondering what we will see come to market from this "deeper" partnership. Could this foreshadow OS X running of IBM servers and workstations? Or Power 5 Servers from Apple? The next 12 months will be interesting indead.
The new family of G5 processors from IBM is what will keep Apple ahead for quite some time. IBM has a vested interest in these wickedly powerful chips for lower end servers. Dell servers are a threat to IBM's core business. If IBM had to compete with Dell servers using x86 processors, IBM would only have 'me too' products that perform no better than Dells. Price would continue to erode IBM's server market. On the other hand, the 970 family now allows IBM to build servers that beat Dell in the performance game. It is the only way IBM can win in the lower end server market, and I believe they are out to do it. The Mac will benefit, and never be bogged down again by under performing processors.
IBM will likely keep the x86 in their server line, to give customers a broader selection. We know which products IBM will push. The ones with their own, high performance chips. Possibly, IBM will go after the embedded markets with more vigor now. Being in close partnership with Apple, this chip would likely be developed to meet Apple's need too. There may be new higher performing chips coming for the iMac and possibly new low cost products for office and home use. Mojave?
Going to General Discussion.
What do ya all think?
As snoopy said, the enemy for IBM now is Dell. As Linux gets better and better and, as some say, perhaps competes for OSX in some places - IBM will have absorbed Apple's marketing and creative savvey (sp?) to maybe create better Linux solution boxes servers to have an advantage over Dell. Could then Linux or OSX by an option on IBM's BTO sites? Not a bad idea. It's not like IBM would be a clone since they are making much fo the internally anyway and with one company to contract with, the market will never get far from Apple control.
I hope Apple lets IBM market servers with Apple software. It will give Apple so much more cred in the enterprise buisness that any loss of revenue will be worth the eventual increase in marketshare/mindshare.
Or could it be that IBM just gets to sell CPUs to apple? Why not?
I don't believe there will be any deal at all regarding business desktops. Since OS X Server 10.3 will take care of Windows PCs as well as Macs, IBM may stay in the PC desktop business.
If we're going to talk what they want in terms of how can they make money and position themselves, I think both companies want to prove they were right all along, that a controlled platform is a better proposition than an open hardware spec. Now they get to leech the benefits of open source and "standards" while controlling the platform to a much tighter degree. Both companies can have this and help each other do it, which is not to say that their "platforms" will merge into one, but useful sharing could happen.
I floated this scenario a LONG time ago, if anyone made a good merger/buyer for Apple, then it was IBM. IBM has business and back end presence. If IBM says, "use this, it's good," they can convince a lot more corporate IT managers than Steve and his turtle-necks. It could even put OSX on the business desktop, haha...
IBM could be getting money in exchange, for all we know. They've been content with that, historically. They might, however, be interested in Apple's skills at user-centric systems integration. IBM has invested years of work and gobs of money developing systems to make AIX and Linux easier to use and maintain, but Apple is still the only company to turn any UNIX or UNIX-like OS into a credible desktop system, and nobody comes close to their ease of setup and maintenance on the server side (configurability, reliability and scalability are a different matter). So there might be some exchange of Apple's high-level design wisdom for IBM's low-level engineering prowess.
Originally posted by JCG
Could this foreshadow OS X running of IBM servers and workstations? Or Power 5 Servers from Apple? The next 12 months will be interesting indead.
No. And no.
If there are going to be Mac OS X servers they are going to be based on the PPC970 and not Power4/5. Why should they?
PPC970 is cheaper, faster and offers all (and more performance) of the Power4/5 which for all intents and purposes is a small and emerging market - for (low end) Mac OS X Servers.
The deep partnership is a continued close continued relationship with IBM as Apple's preferred processor vendor.
That's all...
Originally posted by Amorph
..., but Apple is still the only company to turn any UNIX or UNIX-like OS into a credible desktop system, and nobody comes close to their ease of setup and maintenance on the server side (configurability, reliability and scalability are a different matter). So there might be some exchange of Apple's high-level design wisdom for IBM's low-level engineering prowess.
good point. Somehow i recall that old note in the past: "IBM COMPATIBLE"
History becomes one more time ironic. Nowaday IBM COMPATIBLE means APPLE COMPATIBLE, right?
best
and have a nice weekend
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
good point. Somehow i recall that old note in the past: "IBM COMPATIBLE"
History becomes one more time ironic. Nowaday IBM COMPATIBLE means APPLE COMPATIBLE, right?
best
and have a nice weekend
I think that Apple & IBM are covering each others backsides. This relationship is good for the unix community, good for switchers, good for Apple.
The only ones who may get frozen out are M$oft.
But hell, it doesn't matter how hard a flea bites an elephant, its still going to be a flea....
Originally posted by Amorph
This can be even simpler: Apple's controller ASIC is also built in Fishkill, using all of IBM's fab tech wizardry.
IBM could be getting money in exchange, for all we know. They've been content with that, historically. They might, however, be interested in Apple's skills at user-centric systems integration. IBM has invested years of work and gobs of money developing systems to make AIX and Linux easier to use and maintain, but Apple is still the only company to turn any UNIX or UNIX-like OS into a credible desktop system, and nobody comes close to their ease of setup and maintenance on the server side (configurability, reliability and scalability are a different matter). So there might be some exchange of Apple's high-level design wisdom for IBM's low-level engineering prowess.
Exactly, IBM heavily invested in AIX and lately in Linux.
There's more to that than only software and hardware. Don't forget that IBM has a wide network of resellers/business partners/consultants working with these servers, these people would have to learn new OS, and for what reason?
AIX kick ass, os/400 kick ass, linux is easy and more and more people feel comfortable using it now that is backed up by IBM support.
They don't need OS X, besides these are HUGE decisions.
IMO, IBM is interested in $$ from apple, plus they have an use for good PowerPC chips, Apple is interested in chips and are willing to pay for it. (like they have that many choices).
Apple is not a great threat to IBM, as 99% of IT decision makers would go for IBM hardware just because it's something they know and trust.
Xservers are great, but it takes a lot more than great hardware to sell to enterprise customers, they need sales force, and local mac guys are usually not good for that, as these people never worked on integration of many systems, etc.. they are good to set-up workstations, but not too good to go into server rooms.
One think i would like to see IBM doing is to release DB2 and Domino Server for OS X, like i said before and sorry for repeating myself, there is a huge potential for it, but it would cut into IBM's server market.
These things would fly of the shelves, they are cheaper than iSeries, and better than Windows boxes, add xRAID and you are happy camper.
More and more people (again IMO) will try to migrate away from Windows, because of licensing costs alone, and there are tens of reasons why having Microsoft on your back is not always good.
IBM sees that and that's why they are pushing LINUX, but they will not go to OSX, as this would tie them with apple, not to mention mountains of money needed to be invested in such a move.
Anyway, my thoughts, probably not even worth $0.02
Originally posted by piwozniak
Anyway, my thoughts, probably not even worth $0.02
Actually your points are very good.
I think you have to work for a company like IBM (as i have) to know the way IBM thinks.
Apple and IBM will continue to maintain and develop their PowerPC relationship. It is clearly in the interest of both. That is it.
The G5 is an excellent example of what the two companies can achieve together - the first 64-bit desktop computer is quite an achievement.
No Mac OS X on IBM servers.
No Power4/5 in Apple branded servers.
Originally posted by Scott
Maybe IBM gets another open standards/source advocate out of Apple? Makes IBMs wedge against MS a little thicker at the end.
Scott, IBM and Apple can wedge all they want, but until IT guys like microsoft, they will buy it.
Linux needs to stabilize and by that i mean stop the different distros madness, and get support from major players (like IBM). And not support like "Oh yeah it can run linux too", but " It runs on linux".
Apple has great product, but weak sales guys, (IMO), they need to go into enterprises customers and say"Hi i'm Bill lemme show you what can we do for you" And deliver on the promises they make.
They have to be innovative not only in hardware but in marketing too, let people test-drive Xservers, see if they like them, address all the issues, so they keep it and pay for it.
There are many kinds of enterprise purchases;
One, when you look at the biggest savings, like individual workstations, etc (that's why dell is making $$$, and IBM not so much, IBM's workstations are really quality built, but not too many customers are willing to pay extra for something that will be replaced in 3 years)
Another, when prices are not that crucial, but you need solid system to run your business, no downtime, scalable, expandable, STABLE, proven hardware. It not necessarily have to be the fastest, but it has to work.
In the last 3 years we have restarted our iSeries maybe 5 times, and it NEVER 'crashed'.
When people evaluating these systems price is important, but not the main factor.
Apple can't compete with big iron servers, but in midrange they can do miracles. They need to be more aggressive though.
Also SERVICES and after sale support is the key here. Maintenance, upgrades, etc...
There's one more thing, and it may seem stupid, but it's the IT guys' negativity against apple. IT guys are in 90% windows loving crowd.
And they are not willing to evaluate other solutions unless someone smacks them on a head. When president or CEO immediately sees benefits, it decision makers are reluctant to let new hardware into their 'domain'.
We will be replacing our aging pc file/print servers in the next 6 months, i called apple and tried to arrange a meeting with their sales rep, never heard back from them, then i used web-based form to get in touch, this didn't even worked properly wit Safari. I will try again just because i know it's good stuff and probably will do the job, but there will be no decision made until i got all my questions answered.
They should be knocking on my door, not the other way around, maybe it sounds silly, but there's a lot of $$$ lost in sales just because some dubmass is too lazy to pick up the phone.
cheers
Linux or not IBM does not need Apple for server software. OS X is not IMO better than Linux or AIX for servers. IBM has a good server business going on now. So what's your point?