“Apple and Cisco have revealed a key partnership that promises to unleash forces enterprises seek as they engage with digital transformation – use of the world’s most popular enterprise devices, optimized for use on key global networks and backed-up with the kind of analytical chops you can expect through Apple’s other deal with IBM,” Jonny Evans writes for Computerworld.
“The big news here is that Cisco networks and iOS devices will be optimized to work together ‘more efficiently and reliably,'” Evans writes. “That’s so important when you consider how essential Cisco is to networks across the planet with a huge presence in unified communications, SDN, the data center and wireless infrastructure.”
“Put it all together and it seems likely that over the next 18-24-months Apple won’t just be in the enterprise, it will be inside the enterprise network,” Evans writes. “That opens interesting opportunities in network intelligence in combination with artificial intelligence, with implications across the future connected planet.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple is building a foundation upon which they can build into the enterprise and, from there, branch out into new areas and new markets that can transform the world for the better!
SEE ALSO:
Apple aims to boost enterprise iPad and iPhone sales with new Cisco partnership – August 31, 2015
Apple and Cisco partner to deliver fast lane for iOS enterprise users – August 31, 2015
Apple+IBM: Enterprise apps go wearable on Apple Watch – May 24, 2015
Apple+IBM’s MobileFirst strikes iPhone and iPad app partnership with China Telecom – April 2, 2015
Apple+IBM add 8 powerful new MobileFirst enterprise apps for iPad and iPhone – April 1, 2015
Apple+IBM partnership is more than a simple hardware distribution deal – February 28, 2015
UBS: Apple+IBM partnership set to expand – February 9, 2015
Apple+IBM: Apple spoils early, Big Blue’s later? – February 2, 2015
Apple+IBM seize the mobile moment to energize enterprise software – December 29, 2014
Just the world? Doesn’t string theory allow Apple and Cisco to affect multiple universes?
Only if you believe things you can’t see and prove.
So much time is wasted managing office documents and web based applications are ideal to get information to both clients and to the workforce. Implementation is typically the hardest part so getting iOS to work smoothly with all aspects of the systems will be very important for the future.
They have to be kidding. Do they really think they can persuade companies to pay for the higher cost Apple products? Companies are always buying devices from the LOWEST bidder, not the HIGHEST bidder. As flaky as this economy is I honestly can’t see a rush for corporations getting Apple products. The bean counters won’t allow for it. Small changes maybe, but changing the world is unlikely.
It’s not *just* cost as you seem to believe. IBM rarely wins on a pure cost basis. Cisco rarely wins on a pure cost basis
Apple has historically lost on when a company compares features lists versus cost. (We’ve all seen those Mac versus Windows features tables and the iOS versus Android features tables. Apple products often lose in that features-to-features direct comparisons, and almost always on a features per dollar comparison.)
IBM and Cisco have very often won, not because they are lower cost, but are a perceived better price/performance ratio than competitors when the features list is compared to cost. IBM and Cisco promise *a lot* more and charge more.
Now add Apple to that mix. If a VAR (or one of the three themselves) proposes a solution that is a combination of Apple, Cisco, and IBM as a complete system — it will possibly win based upon the combination of the feature superset from all three even though the price is likely to be higher than the “lowest bidder”.
I agree. There is an old saying from the mainframe days that isn’t as true as it once was but still give insight into MIS directors’ way of thinking: “no-one ever got fired for buying IBM”. It wasn’t the cheapest but it always worked and kept IT guys out of the firing line.
I agree with your conclusion. However I have some issues. Features tables are skewed to the writer’s needs. A person can look at the features they need without having the same conclusion as the article. A good example is that most smartphone tables include a removable battery. Usually they are considered a positive. However a CIO can look at it and see that it is a negative. The extra batteries are expensive and exclusive to one model. These are not included in the price. They also make the phone physical weaker. Blackberry was not the cheapest smartphone however it had better business solutions. Now CIO are desperate to find an alternative. Having what law enforcement considers the number one theft deterrent built in is something Android and MS can’t offer. I have never seen this in a feature table.
A lot of times logic has little baring on what is purchased. Salespeople rely on knowing who the real decision-makers are. They know their gate keepers and how to entertain them. IBM has been doing this for over a century.
Excuse me but my cheap company is buying Apple products. Closer cooperation with Cisco will only make that decision easier every year that goes by.
Networking is well understood in any company large enough of interest to Cisco and Apple. However, SECURE networking is something that eludes most them to some extent.
I recall Cisco making inroads on the security side so I believe that would be the root reason for the partnership. The Apple providing the hardware, IBM the software and services for rollout, and Cisco protection the gates (and yes optimizing the network both within and also outside the firm’s firewall makes a compelling solution.
I ee many companies would consider reducing their in-house teams and opt for the SAS model (but System As Solution instead of just software). Missing from the equation are a hardware provider so firms don’t even have to buy the hardware so they pay for ongoing service and the last item is ongoing training which is becoming easier and easier.