“Dan Gillmor has blogged The Register’s wild speculation that IBM will acquire or enter a joint venture with Apple, given each other’s mutual interest in the PowerPC microprocessor… Since I love wild speculation, allow me to embellish. Perhaps IBM needs to hedge in the event that some combination of intellectual property lawsuits ends up in the death of Red Hat. By not buying Red Hat, IBM gets to minimize its legal exposure while offering Linux-based solutions that target its nemeses Microsoft and Sun. By virtue of precedent, anything that kills Red Hat would also leave Novell mortally wounded (down, but not out). Nothing would leave IBM more exposed than a fatal blow to Red Hat. Enter Apple. As said earlier, it and IBM already share a passion for the PowerPC processor and Apple has some very slick servers and storage solutions (so slick that Oracle endorsed the storage gear). Also, given IBM’s resources, the engineering work to swap the much more legally secure OS X for Linux would be child’s play (perhaps it will also ring the cash register for IBM’s Global Services division). Finally, a joint venture between Apple and IBM could flush out the oft-rumored OS X-on-Intel skunkworks project, thus giving IBM a much stronger and fully indemnified Intel-based desktop offering than what it currently has in Lotus Workplace,” David Berlind blogs for ZDNet.
“Off the two longshot options — acquisition vs. joint venture — a JV is the more likely. I can’t imagine Steve Jobs as an employee of IBM, nor can I imagine IBM running a bunch of retail stores. Big Blue has always failed at selling to consumers (should we dredge up the history of the Lotus acquisition?) and its ownership of Apple would almost certainly kill the company,” Berlind blogs. “Isn’t speculation fun?”
Full article here.
Berlind’s last sentence is probably the key thought. Speculation.
Yes, Speculatory mumbo jumbo…
Hmmm, I own both Red Hat and Apple shares right now. Guess my bets are hedged. If IBM goes with Apple the Red Hat would probably tank but the Apple shares skyrocket. BUT if IBM stays separate from Apple, Apple will continue to do well AND the Red Hat should do well too. Yes, speculation is fun, isn’t it. (and I am probably way too much of an optimist to be buying stocks)
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cheese” style=”border:0;” />
Apple together with IBM can produce an IBM-MAC, but should stay separated as companies. As an entry into the business market for Mac OS X it would mean a revolution in computerland… Happy New Year ?!
Speculation = IBM and Apple in a joint venture
Myth = Macs are more expensive.
Fact = MDN doesn’t have solid reason for hosting its website on linux server rather than OSX.
Sam Palmissano would no more buy Apple Computer, than Steve Jobs would sell it to IBM…
Someone wake me up when MDN posts some real news.
Sigh.
You can all forget it. I’m getting IBM’s PC division for Christmas. ‘Nuff said.
Boeing777
Fact = MDN doesn’t have solid reason for hosting its website on linux server rather than OSX.
Unless you coughed up some paypal dough, I suggest you zip it on the Linux thing. Linux is a fine server tech, MDN never said they prefered it to OS X, their site has been going through growing pains. What do you know about managing a successful website through expansion and increased traffic, exactly?
As part of the old telecommunication regime of Siemens, IBM and ROLM it was quiet a cultural shock when the tree united. How could they become the tree musketeers of telecommunications? The largest privately held company in the world; maybe the strongest marketing organization in IT and the second fastest growing company next to Wendy�s in the 80s together. But the up side of IBM�s marketing organization and Siemens Manufacturing is all ROLM needed to compete with AT&T.
twilightmoon
Unless you coughed up some paypal dough, I suggest you zip it on the Linux thing. Linux is a fine server tech, MDN never said they prefered it to OS X, their site has been going through growing pains. What do you know about managing a successful website through expansion and increased traffic, exactly?
The one who should zip it is the one suggesting that OS X is an option that requires more funds; meaning that an Apple solution is a more expensive option.
If MDN keeps on writing that Apple is not as expensive as many thinks it is, than it appears that what they write has no consistency whatsoever.
A Mac fan site should use product from Apple since it has the solutions for it, or someone will proudly stand and bark his honest hypocrisy.
MYTH: IBM BUYING APPLE
POSSIBLE FACT: – APPLE and IBM WORKING TOGETHER IN SOME SORT OF CORP SERVER OR HOME ENTERTAINMENT SERVER SOLUTION.
IBM WILL NOT BUY APPLE!
The story is ‘IBM sells it’s pc business’
STICK TO THE FUCKING FACTS MDN!!!
If IBM buy APPLE then im ditching the mac platform and joining the windows masses!
Ive been using Macs for over 10 years and for Apple to be sold to IBM means that APPLE have thrown in the towel and given up!
The first thing IBM will do if ever they bought APPLE would be to breakup and destry the company – the only worse senario would be if Microsoft bought APPLE – the result would be exactly the same!
Sell your APPLE stock if IBM buy APPLE because within a week it will be worthless.
“[IBM’s] ownership of Apple would almost certainly kill the company”
I hope it never happens, because if it does the Mac will exist, if at all, only in name, but it would never be the kind of computer we know and love so well today.
When you think about it, Apple’s assets are not the same thing as what it earns the most money from.
Apple earns its profit from hardware – but anyone (these days) can throw together boxes for next to nothing – which is why IBM is selling of its division for peanuts.
What Apple owns which is of far far greater value to an outside company is the OS X operating system. It is modern, mature, stable and has bags of room to move forward. One way or another all the competition is running out of steam or running into heavy legal trouble. Microsoft Windows is a crippled, wide open and ancient wreck and the company really has nothing realistic on the horizon to replace it with. 90% of PC users have been let down as they struggle daily with just keeping their systems working. Is this REALLY what using a computer was meant to be about in the 21st century?
I wonder if a few large, visionary companies, on recognising this current bleak landscape (and its likely continuance into the future), might not be gearing up to provide a ‘new wave’, a second generation, using the only show in town – OS X.
…. and let me guess. Amelio is going to come back to run this cluster fcuk, right?
IBMac? Just kidding.
Remember the saying ‘IBM= I Became a Mac’ when W95 (or was it W98) came out?
Hey Solar Flare,
when you said If IBM buy APPLE then im ditching the mac platform and joining the windows masses!
Ive been using Macs for over 10 years and for Apple to be sold to IBM means that APPLE have thrown in the towel and given up!
Your time using Apple has been just about the length of time that Apple and IBM have been in bed together with the PPC chip architecture. Sell your stock and get your windows machine now, you are about ten years too late.
On a serious note, the article said a buyout and a joint venture were two “longshot” options. In regards to the previous crack to solar flare, the joint venture thing is now ten years old. IBM and Apple BOTH see the advantage of using strategic partnerships to meet common goals.
IBM using darwin on their servers, and offering Xserves as part of their enterprise offerings would be a huge boost for both companies. IBM could advertise BSD unix, most secure OS. (several articles and research have stated this lately) Apple could piggy back on that. Apple/IBM 1, MS 0 (They haven’t even wandered onto the field yet)