This may have been in the back of IBM's mind for awhile now especially since they recently announced they are closing down their consumer PC arm. Replacing it with Apple? There's no way to tell what IBM would do with Apple or how it would be treated but, it sure would make Gates squirm! :eek:
What's that page that's linked to at the top? It looks like nothing more than some kind of post to a news group. No better than AI. Or it is some kind of offical clearing house for rumors that people might hear or read about. I don't understand that page?
IMO, IBM would bring a lot to the table. They are great at R & D (T.J. Watson Lab), and they have a dominant services division (IBM Global Services). Their involvement could turn OS X into a serious contender as a high-end server operating system. Plus, they are spending a billion dollars this year promoting Linux. Imagine what IBM would spend advertising a technology that they actually own.
What does IBM get? Profit margins. They realize that Wintel PCs are becoming commodities, and that Apple excels at creating kick ass computers that are differentiated from the rest of the PC world.
Then, the question remains, as with any potential merger/acquisition, can the companies merge and still maintain the strengths of both? Would Steve Jobs leave?
First of all it's not up to SJ to decide whether to sell Apple to IBM or anybody else. Second, and most important, it ain't gonna happen. IBM has gotten out of the desktop business (except for that ugly PC they sell on TV, the one made for them by Compaq or Dell or whoever). IBM shareholders would not want it to happen nor would Apple's. IBM is leaving all but the server business. They have regrouped and become a software and service comapny... much more profitable and without the cutthroat consumer business to bring down their share value.. At this time the company is also being investigated by the SEC for accounting practices. This is gonna be a very interesting year in that regards for many companies.
IBM has been rock-solid over the past few years despite not having a strong PC biz. Why should they endeavor to rescue it if they can do well without it?
This would be unacceptably risky for both companies.
Look at the HP/Compaq merger debacle for how nasty the investors can be these days.
<strong>First of all it's not up to SJ to decide whether to sell Apple to IBM or anybody else.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, but if you believe that Steve Jobs is the engine behind Apple's renaissance, you don't want to force Apple into a situation that would drive him off.
It's been long established that Apple is not a conventional company, and it can't be run by a conventional CEO.
<strong>IBM has been rock-solid over the past few years despite not having a strong PC biz. Why should they endeavor to rescue it if they can do well without it?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because they still are great at hardware R & D. Since they are getting out of the cutthroat Wintel PC business, they need more ways to make money off of that expensive R & D.
What a bold move this would be on the part of both companies. Certainly makes more sense than the Disney rumors. If we as Apple fans really want our platform to thrive in the years to come, we might have to accept something along these lines. Apple alone cannot swim against the MS tide, and a company like IBM can. IBM would get an incredible brand, top notch design, and a system that can scale from the smallest personal computers to the largest enterprise level systems (with some additional work). They could also license OSX without fear of destroying their own business, which could seriously grow market share (OSX on intel anyone?) I actually kind of like this idea, as far fetched as it sounds.
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 ...
Anyway, IBM would make a great R&D/ marketing companion for Apple. If they kept hands off the Apple software and product design I see little problem with chip design. It'd be a huge asset, I don't think IBM would want to stunt apple (cramp thier style) it would prevent the aple crew from doing thier job and further, it would prevent IBM from putting microsoft and intel in thier proper place. They want it bad! Jobs has little say in the matter, I don't think it would really make a difference to him who "owns" apple, stock holders own Apple not job not IBM. Apple is an asset plain and simple. MAybe good thing probably just another rumor.
It would surely be something if Apple was bought by IBM. It would be like two old enemies grouping together to fight their own child (MS would be nothing if it hadn´t been for Apple and IBM twenty years ago). It would probably mean the death of the great MS-Apple relationship.
Another thing we should remember: Everything goes in cycles. At one time in the future Apple will hit 10% marked share and at another point it will hit 1%. At one time in the future IBM will the most profitable computer company in the buisness and at another time it will have one of the worst. If the worst senario happens to both Apple and IBM at the same time I would not want to be working at Apple under IBM.
Comments
Go Big Blue, Go!!
When Apple and IBM are one, they truely would have full control over the OS and all the harware.
Apple's software, Jonathan Ive's design prowess and IBM's manufacturing plants equals Total World Domination.
A partnership between Apple and IBM would be :cool:
[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: philbot ]</p>
However, if it's about processors, and Apple would retain autonomy, I think it would be an excellent idea.
Not that I have a vested interest or anything.
[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: Belle ]</p>
It is now being reported that BSD now has 3X's the installed base as LINUX.
relavant, i don't know. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
<strong>Curious, IBM apparently has invested heavily in LINUX, right or wrong?.
It is now being reported that BSD now has 3X's the installed base as LINUX.
relavant, i don't know.
I don't know...? Maybe they are count all the flavors of BSD. Like Sun's OS could be called a BSD Unix. Also SGI's Irix is BSD derived.
What does IBM get? Profit margins. They realize that Wintel PCs are becoming commodities, and that Apple excels at creating kick ass computers that are differentiated from the rest of the PC world.
Then, the question remains, as with any potential merger/acquisition, can the companies merge and still maintain the strengths of both? Would Steve Jobs leave?
[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: Brian J. ]</p>
<strong>I don't know...? Maybe they are count all the flavors of BSD. Like Sun's OS could be called a BSD Unix.</strong><hr></blockquote>
SunOS was, but didn't Sun license the SVR4 codebase for Solaris?
This would be unacceptably risky for both companies.
Look at the HP/Compaq merger debacle for how nasty the investors can be these days.
<strong>First of all it's not up to SJ to decide whether to sell Apple to IBM or anybody else.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, but if you believe that Steve Jobs is the engine behind Apple's renaissance, you don't want to force Apple into a situation that would drive him off.
It's been long established that Apple is not a conventional company, and it can't be run by a conventional CEO.
<strong>IBM has been rock-solid over the past few years despite not having a strong PC biz. Why should they endeavor to rescue it if they can do well without it?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because they still are great at hardware R & D. Since they are getting out of the cutthroat Wintel PC business, they need more ways to make money off of that expensive R & D.
weird world
Some of the bennifits such as advertising, and more PPC attension are obvious, but I don't see this as a goods thing.
I could say a ton more, but I think the draw backs, are as obvious as the bennifits.
It would most likely put Apple to ruin.
Anyway, IBM would make a great R&D/ marketing companion for Apple. If they kept hands off the Apple software and product design I see little problem with chip design. It'd be a huge asset, I don't think IBM would want to stunt apple (cramp thier style) it would prevent the aple crew from doing thier job and further, it would prevent IBM from putting microsoft and intel in thier proper place. They want it bad! Jobs has little say in the matter, I don't think it would really make a difference to him who "owns" apple, stock holders own Apple not job not IBM. Apple is an asset plain and simple. MAybe good thing probably just another rumor.
Another thing we should remember: Everything goes in cycles. At one time in the future Apple will hit 10% marked share and at another point it will hit 1%. At one time in the future IBM will the most profitable computer company in the buisness and at another time it will have one of the worst. If the worst senario happens to both Apple and IBM at the same time I would not want to be working at Apple under IBM.