Apple and IBM Team Up For Major Enterprise Mobility Partnership

[darkplanets]

Is this the return of OSX Server?

IBM announced POWER8 this year, I think. Wondering if there will be a hardware/software collab on the power computing side of things (POWER or ARM), or whether this will be an iDevices software partnership only.

As far as my limited knowledge goes, iOS started from 10.4 which still had proper PPC support. Anyone know if similar support has been carried through as legacy? Would be interesting to see if some Apple software finds itself on POWER or ARM server stacks.

 

[swingerofbirch]

You're right that it is word salad but that's the nature of services. When you have no physical product that you can hold and demonstrate like an iPhone, you end up looking and sounding a little silly. But one of Apple's weaknesses has always been cloud and services. This addresses that in a powerful way that can only trickle down to their consumer products and services. They will learn a lot from IBM and IBM will get a lot from Apple too.

That's a good point. I mean they must be doing something. I know people from college who went into consulting, and they never seem to be able to describe what it is they do. So that whole world is sort of like a pretend world to me; although, like I said, they are obviously doing something.

 

[MH01]

No, I wouldn't. You seem to be ASSuming that I want to see a particular reaction. I'm just genuinely curious.

Nothing beats childish humour eh guess simple minds are easy to amuse !

----------

Did you read the article?

In case you have not noticed the thread has been derailed into apple entering enterprise again.

 

[msimpson]

Say hello to my new friends

"Siri, meet Watson. Watson, this is Siri - you two should talk..."

 

[maverick28]

Wow, that recalls good old days of another great partnership, AIM alliance, POWER PC and that was the first thought of mine when I read the report. Don't know about you but it did give rise to certain nostalgic feelings. Where're you Motorola? Will you rejoin us? I remember all these heated debates and emotions when Apple decided to abandon AIM in 2006...History is cyclic. Someone has suggested jokingly that maybe they finally decided to give us Powerbook G5+ Well, that would be awesome to my mind.

BTW, Virginia Rometti is very sexy!

 

[oliversl]

"I agree with Eddy", biggest bluff in the history of mankind! I love Apple BTW, but bluffing like that? come on

 

[Rogifan]

BlackBerry (BBRY) is tanking as a result of this news. Down more than 10% today.

Not impacting Microsoft though as their stock was up over 3% today. I guess Intel's good quarter trumps all.

 

[tdale]

I don't really get how this will benefit Apple in any meaningful way just yet. IBM has enterprise. What does that mean in terms of Apple's business model of selling hardware for money.

Sell more iPads and iPhones. I reckon OSX will become more relevant in enterprise, and increases mobile and desktop integration for enterprise users, makes sense. And Apple becomes more relevant than a pure consumer business. The emphasis was on security, OSX fits in nice there

 

[Quadrant4]

Where do Apple and IBM even compete, except for IBM making laptops like everybody else?

IBM doesn't make PCs anymore, they sold their laptops and desktop PC division to Lenovo in 2005. So, it's been 9 years that IBM has NOT been selling Laptops and Desktop PCs.

----------

Is this the return of OSX Server?

IBM announced POWER8 this year, I think. Wondering if there will be a hardware/software collab on the power computing side of things (POWER or ARM), or whether this will be an iDevices software partnership only.

As far as my limited knowledge goes, iOS started from 10.4 which still had proper PPC support. Anyone know if similar support has been carried through as legacy? Would be interesting to see if some Apple software finds itself on POWER or ARM server stacks.

Do you not read? It's just a deal so IBM can sell iPhones and iPads. That's ALL the deal is about.

When IBM goes to an existing client or a future client about a project, they are the top project manager, if you will, for the ENTIRE project, so they will bring into the deal whatever hardware, software, custom software, project management and other services that are necessary to complete the project. Apple doesn't do project work. What they do is sell hardware and some software and that's it.

IBM has many software companies that they've been purchasing over the years, plus they partner with other major software companies, they also sell higher end servers, mainframes, super computers, they have administrative personnel, software developers, the retail cash register systems, etc. etc. So, what IBM is doing is more projects where mobile devices are part of the project, so they are partnering with Apple, so they will be selling a solution based on iOS devices and probably not focusing much or at all on other mobile devices, unless they sign a deal with Samsung or another company that sells a competing product. Could they still do project work with Windows tablets? I don't see why not, but they don't sell those anymore. They sold off that business, so the customer would just buy that hardware directly from HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc. if they wanted a competing product.

Is this good for Apple? Sure, it helps drive more mobile devices into the Enterprise where Apple wouldn't be as successful because they now have a big systems integrator, project leader driving that business.

The problem Apple has always had is getting into the doors of large Enterprise accounts. Sometimes, they get in the door, but they can't keep the door open because they have other large companies like HP, Dell, Microsoft, IBM, etc. driving business away from Apple because they don't do much integration with Apple. That's what the problem with Apple in the Enterprise is. So having IBM is going to help drive more Enterprise business that will hopefully be long term business and maybe EVENTUALLY drive more OS X business. Maybe IBM will eventually add OS X computers to the deal, which they can do at any time, but for now, it's just iPhones and iPads.

 

[Apple Corps]

AAPL up %2.54 Pre-Market

And AAPL closes the day down .5%

 

[tdale]

IBM doesn't make PCs anymore, they sold their laptops and desktop PC division to Lenovo in 2005. So, it's been 9 years that IBM has NOT been selling Laptops and Desktop PCs.

----------



Do you not read? It's just a deal so IBM can sell iPhones and iPads. That's ALL the deal is about.

When IBM goes to an existing client or a future client about a project, they are the top project manager, if you will, for the ENTIRE project, so they will bring into the deal whatever hardware, software, custom software, project management and other services that are necessary to complete the project. Apple doesn't do project work. What they do is sell hardware and some software and that's it.

IBM has many software companies that they've been purchasing over the years, plus they partner with other major software companies, they also sell higher end servers, mainframes, super computers, they have administrative personnel, software developers, the retail cash register systems, etc. etc. So, what IBM is doing is more projects where mobile devices are part of the project, so they are partnering with Apple, so they will be selling a solution based on iOS devices and probably not focusing much or at all on other mobile devices, unless they sign a deal with Samsung or another company that sells a competing product. Could they still do project work with Windows tablets? I don't see why not, but they don't sell those anymore. They sold off that business, so the customer would just buy that hardware directly from HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc. if they wanted a competing product.

Is this good for Apple? Sure, it helps drive more mobile devices into the Enterprise where Apple wouldn't be as successful because they now have a big systems integrator, project leader driving that business.

The problem Apple has always had is getting into the doors of large Enterprise accounts. Sometimes, they get in the door, but they can't keep the door open because they have other large companies like HP, Dell, Microsoft, IBM, etc. driving business away from Apple because they don't do much integration with Apple. That's what the problem with Apple in the Enterprise is. So having IBM is going to help drive more Enterprise business that will hopefully be long term business and maybe EVENTUALLY drive more OS X business. Maybe IBM will eventually add OS X computers to the deal, which they can do at any time, but for now, it's just iPhones and iPads.

Good, well rounded post.

I am bullish on OSX appearing, but as you say, eventually. Continuity, Handover, iMessage, and SMS Texts soon to be on OSX is a great integration. I am a recent switcher, not because of Windows but to increase integration to my iPhone and iPad. I can really see the questions being asked by corporates when they are reviewing the 2 to 3 year hardware upgrades. "Can we get MBP/iMacs?. Can they run our software?" Initially via virtualisation they could run any software. Macs are a low portion of profits, it may become the sum of the whole mobile and desktop package is much greater benefits to the enterprise customer than having iOS mobile and Microsoft desktops.

 

[darkplanets]

Do you not read? It's just a deal so IBM can sell iPhones and iPads. That's ALL the deal is about.

SNIP

I did in fact read the article. I'm well aware what IBM does and how they do it, and I'm also aware how this will impact units sold for iPhone and iPad. That much is clear.

Just because a press release says one thing doesn't mean there's a deeper collaboration or agreement in progress, which obviously wouldn't be disclosed.

As you mentioned, Apple has notoriously suffered on the enterprise end, mostly do to poor software offerings and solutions. OSX Server is half baked at best, and deployment/management of macs is quite poor. It's hard to justify more then iOS offerings at this point. That said, it's also hard to ignore Apple's history with IBM and Motorola. Given that ~40-50% of all UNIX boxes use POWER chips, and how Apple used PPC before, a deeper collaboration could therefore be feasible. That is of course assuming that Apple actually wants to take a real stab at enterprise, as this article suggests, and it's not just lip-service to sell more iDevices.

 

[tdale]

I did in fact read the article. I'm well aware what IBM does and how they do it, and I'm also aware how this will impact units sold for iPhone and iPad. That much is clear.

Just because a press release says one thing doesn't mean there's a deeper collaboration or agreement in progress, which obviously wouldn't be disclosed.

As you mentioned, Apple has notoriously suffered on the enterprise end, mostly do to poor software offerings and solutions. OSX Server is half baked at best, and deployment/management of macs is quite poor. It's hard to justify more then iOS offerings at this point. That said, it's also hard to ignore Apple's history with IBM and Motorola. Given that ~40-50% of all UNIX boxes use POWER chips, and how Apple used PPC before, a deeper collaboration could therefore be feasible. That is of course assuming that Apple actually wants to take a real stab at enterprise, as this article suggests, and it's not just lip-service to sell more iDevices.

Quadrant4 more or less stated this.

"So having IBM is going to help drive more Enterprise business that will hopefully be long term business and maybe EVENTUALLY drive more OS X business. Maybe IBM will eventually add OS X computers to the deal, which they can do at any time, but for now, it's just iPhones and iPads."

 

[darkplanets]

Quadrant4 more or less stated this.

"So having IBM is going to help drive more Enterprise business that will hopefully be long term business and maybe EVENTUALLY drive more OS X business. Maybe IBM will eventually add OS X computers to the deal, which they can do at any time, but for now, it's just iPhones and iPads."

Again, yes, we both stated that. My original post was about the POWER architecture though, and none of this talk excludes such a possibility. We both agree OSX hardware sucks for enterprise. Software support is one reason. Regardless of whether macs eventually become offered hardware, they lack any good deployment solutions since OSX Server is rated as gimpy and ill conceived. Furthermore, since the rack OSX servers got nixed, there's really not a great server solution from Apple. Hence the initial POWER comment on my part in the first place, and me mentioning it again in the second comment.

Again, none of these talks exclude the possibility of the POWER architecture making a resurgence in a server-based form, especially if they want to "re-imagine enterprise." ARM is another likely option since it too is RISC.

 

[tdale]

Again, yes, we both stated that. My original post was about the POWER architecture though, and none of this talk excludes such a possibility. We both agree OSX hardware sucks for enterprise. Software support is one reason. Regardless of whether macs eventually become offered hardware, they lack any good deployment solutions since OSX Server is rated as gimpy and ill conceived. Furthermore, since the rack OSX servers got nixed, there's really not a great server solution from Apple. Hence the initial POWER comment on my part in the first place, and me mentioning it again in the second comment.

Again, none of these talks exclude the possibility of the POWER architecture making a resurgence in a server-based form, especially if they want to "re-imagine enterprise." ARM is another likely option since it too is RISC.

Ah ok, fair points. I guess we all pretty much agree more or less of the possibility. From here, IMO, it probably matters little if any, what the state of OSX server is now, as if OSX is hoped/planned by Apple and or IBM in the future, the solution you would expect is IBM will tell Apple, do "this" to the hardware and software and we can both bring OSX into mainstream for todays enterprise needs. Huge I feel, one day possibly.

 

[Quadrant4]

IT outsourcing is <25% of IBM's business.

----------



??

IBM has not made laptops in many years. They sold their PC business to Lenovo 10 years ago.

IT outsourcing is not the same as project work.

IBM stock was up $3.87 a share.

When IBM goes to a customer, they do project work in addition to IT Outsourcing. IT outsourcing is where they place Server Admin and they do the normal IT Help Desk staff functions within a company. The iPads/iPhone business might be more PROJECT work. So, if a customer needs some customized app developed, a backend server system, project management, etc. and they want the custom developed app on mobile devices, IBM can do everything including selling the iPhones/iPads and get a 20% or whatever they negotiated profit margin, but that part is only a portion of the entire project. That's how IBM is most likely going to push the deal to the customer.

IBM has lots of inroads in a lot of different businesses that would have custom made apps specifically for the iPhone/iPad and they might sell several thousand on one project. Example would be to go into some large retail chain like a Walmart or some HUGE store and custom develop their internal app for the mobile device plus whatever database resides on the servers, etc. etc. IBM is constantly working with huge accounts like this and this is easier for the customer since the customer wants one throat to choke vs having to source everything through multiple suppliers, etc. Plus this gives IBM personnel time to get fully trained on the products, and possibly get additional support equipment to do a higher level of support instead of having the employees have to go to a local Apple Store for help.

 

[Quadrant4]

Bang on.

The change to OSX is more a biggie, at least for larger corporations, but I can see it happening when Apple/IBM do it together. IBM tell Apple whats needed in Enterprise OSX, Apple adds it. OSX and IBM's services combine to give the solution

I dont think the so called premium on Macs is an issue. Percieving higher quality, businesses can justify that by stretching the hardware upgrade path by 50%, maybe 100%.

There was an article a few months back and they surveyed some Enterprise customers that have adopted OS X for employees that request them, but there was two major hurdles seen. 1. The Admin software that they most commonly use is by Microsoft which doesn't support Macs, they only support Windows. Surprise, Surprise, so if they want to track inventory, administer Macs on a network with Windows computers, they would have to buy another Admin software product in addition and that's more money, and their help desk staff is not as up to speed on Macs as they are with Windows. The other major hurdle is custom software or some standard software app that simply isn't available on OS X. Obviously, as more companies go with these browser based apps, then it's a lot easier to run on any computer, which is a trend, but it's not 100% yet. Some companies have been so used to Windows, that's it's hard to change that mindset, plus with Windows, they can change hardware vendors if they get tired with one. It's fairly common for a company to switch vendors every so many years for whatever reason. Sometimes it's because the mfg they went with simply can't afford to support them. When I was in the corporate reseller market, it was a dog eat dog world with the PC vendors and customers sometimes would either go with several different vendors OR they would kick one out to go with another over something stupid like price. Some companies help on to their customers better than others. I'm very surprised that Dell has lasted as long as they have, but they were known for dropping the price so low no one else could compete and then Dell would figure out a way to jack up the price in some of the most scrupulous ways. Now, there are only 3 major PC vendors (Dell, HP, and Lenovo) and then Apple is just hanging around picking up deals here and there, but Apple simply doesn't supply servers, storage systems like Dell and HP, which the customer typically wants. A lot of customers just one one company to do business with since it's a lot easier and less costly in the long run.

Now, I just read another interesting article that's fairly recent on the adoption of Apple products in the Enterprise, which might shed some light on the subject.

It will be interesting if IBM will pick up OS X desktop and laptops down the road, but right now, it's just iPhones and iPads, which will take them a little while to get that under control.

http://www.jamfsoftware.com/resourc...-to-boom-of-apple-adoption-in-the-enterprise/

 

[pankajdoharey]

It surely will Improve

IBM is a 100 Billion dollar revenue company, there is a reason for that, "Enterprise Loves IT"
Apple does not have much to gain in the immediate run except a deep penetration but this certainly adds to there brand value considering Enterprise also needs servers and server OS... which may run on Apple hardware in future.... "Just Speculating,... Who knows.."

 

[Quadrant4]

It's a great move for both companies. Apple get in to enterprise, IBM strengthen their reach into consumer software.

Corporations and employees win, and consumers potentially get better more powerful email and cloud services (amongst other benefits) across the board.

If you can't see the potential for Apple customers, you've got to be fairly oblivious to how things work in technology.

How is IBM going to strengthen their reach into consumer software? This deal is for IBM to cater to their Enterprise customers, which means they will be selling and customizing Enterprise class software, NOT consumer based software.

I personally would love to see IBM set up their Watson search software like a Free Search like Google or maybe have it as a back end to Siri. It's cool stuff. That's about the only thing they really do that might eventually get to the consumer level. most of their other software or what IBM does is more retail oriented POS systems, back end databases, analytics, and other Enterprise/Cloud based software for the Enterprise market. This deal just gets Apple's foot into accounts via IBM, which is already entrenched in a lot of industries. I'm surprised they didn't do something similar with Oracle, but I think this deal prevents others. I think this is exclusive. I don't know if that exclusivity is temporary or not. I haven't read the T's and C's of the deal.

Apple needs these type of partners badly. Apple can't tell the same story IBM can.

Also, I highly doubt OS X Server is going to make a dent in the space that's occupied by HP, IBM, Oracle, Dell, Cisco, Microsoft, Red Hat flavors of Windows Server, Linux (various flavors) and the various flavors of Unix that runs on these brands of servers. Apple can't compete because they simply don't want to enter that already highly competitive space, plus Apple would have to compete on Services/Support, etc. and they aren't going to do that. The only possible way Apple would make any dent into the Enterprise for servers is they would have to buy IBM, Oracle, Cisco which would be the two best choices since neither of them have desktop/laptop/tablets/phones. Cisco would be an interesting choice since they dominate in the networking environment. Plus Cisco is only a $133 Billion Market Cap. But Cisco doesn't have the same level of software the others have. Diving into the Enterprise level is a VERY serious proposition and Cook is simply unarmed. The only thing Apple can do for now is partner and make sure they LISTEN to what the Enterprise customers want and deliver in terms of hardware and software needs that falls into Apple's side of the business.

Apple has a big uphill battle in the Enterprise and their best hope are iPhones and iPads for now.

 

[danielsutton]

Bang on.

The change to OSX is more a biggie, at least for larger corporations, but I can see it happening when Apple/IBM do it together. IBM tell Apple whats needed in Enterprise OSX, Apple adds it. OSX and IBM's services combine to give the solution

I dont think the so called premium on Macs is an issue. Percieving higher quality, businesses can justify that by stretching the hardware upgrade path by 50%, maybe 100%.

You may be right about the upgrade path. Macs are built better and may last longer than PCs due to their better construction (aluminum chassis, etc.).

What I am wondering about is iCloud and OS X Server. How do these services fit into the partnership with IBM. I read that Apple will use IBM's cloud back-end for this new enterprise service, not iCloud. I am working if Apple's cloud service and IBM's cloud service will merge into something that can be used for both business and personal use. That would be a very interesting development.

And OS X Server has really grown since it was re-imagined in OS X Lion. Profile Manager has become a powerful MDM solution, and the new Yosemite version (OS X Server 4.0) adds many new capabilities to the mix. I am wondering if OS X Server may, in some way, fit into this new alliance between Apple and IBM. Again, Apple has agreed to use IBM's MDM cloud solultion for this new partnership, but Apple has its own Volume Purchasing Program and other high-end enterprise services. I cannot see Apple abandoning its own platforms, but rather can envision seeing them combining their enterprise offerings with IBM's to create a powerful end-to-end solution. Apple makes hardware too, so I could even see them re-introducing a server product for the enterprise along the lines of XServe. What are your thoughts? It is exciting to be reading about this!

 

[subsonix]

In case you have not noticed the thread has been derailed into apple entering enterprise again.

That doesn't mean that the thread has derailed, that is the premise here, which is why I asked if you read the article.

http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/15/apple-teams-up-with-ibm-for-huge-expansive-enterprise-push/

 

[Quadrant4]

You may be right about the upgrade path. Macs are built better and may last longer than PCs due to their better construction (aluminum chassis, etc.).

What I am wondering about is iCloud and OS X Server. How do these services fit into the partnership with IBM. I read that Apple will use IBM's cloud back-end for this new enterprise service, not iCloud. I am working if Apple's cloud service and IBM's cloud service will merge into something that can be used for both business and personal use. That would be a very interesting development.

And OS X Server has really grown since it was re-imagined in OS X Lion. Profile Manager has become a powerful MDM solution, and the new Yosemite version (OS X Server 4.0) adds many new capabilities to the mix. I am wondering if OS X Server may, in some way, fit into this new alliance between Apple and IBM. Again, Apple has agreed to use IBM's MDM cloud solultion for this new partnership, but Apple has its own Volume Purchasing Program and other high-end enterprise services. I cannot see Apple abandoning its own platforms, but rather can envision seeing them combining their enterprise offerings with IBM's to create a powerful end-to-end solution. Apple makes hardware too, so I could even see them re-introducing a server product for the enterprise along the lines of XServe. What are your thoughts? It is exciting to be reading about this!

Apple isn't going to re-enter the server market other than what they are currently doing unless they actually bought IBM, Cisco or Oracle or a company that's seriously entrenched in the Enterprise. It's too competitive and getting a server isn't what they need. They would have to have an entire host of servers, top end applications that actually are meant to run on it, a first rate sales team, a top notch services organization and it's just too costly to do it from the ground up. It would take them decades and billions of dollars and they still would have problems. They literally have to buy into that market and they'd have to convince whomever they bought to merge OS X and whatever Unix OS they had together.

With the IBM partnership, I doubt anything on the server end is going to happen. I think Apple is just constantly putting out OS X server just to have something available, but I don't know how many companies are actually using it on any grand scale.

 

[MH01]

That doesn't mean that the thread has derailed, that is the premise here, which is why I asked if you read the article.

http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/15/apple-teams-up-with-ibm-for-huge-expansive-enterprise-push/

This is all around iDevices entering and getting a foothold in the existing Enterprise structures.

And to be honest, frankly its blackberry that has the most to loose. Hence I replied saying Bill gates is not going to sleep over this.

This currently happens anyway, Ipads and iphones are common in enterprise, no revelation here.

For some of us old farts on here, enterprise meant something completely different to what it does to Apple these days.

From my perspective, Apple needs are cloud parter to sort out and improve that side of the business.

I can see Apple only growing and growing with thier iphones and Ipads in the Business/Enterprise sectors. Anything outside of idevices Apple wants nothing to do with Enterprise, and that is not the way it used to be.

 

[subsonix]

This is all around iDevices entering and getting a foothold in the existing Enterprise structures.

And to be honest, frankly its blackberry that has the most to loose. Hence I replied saying Bill gates is not going to sleep over this.

This currently happens anyway, Ipads and iphones are common in enterprise, no revelation here.

I'm aware that iOS is already present, at my last job we made some client software for internal systems. However, the purpose of this collaboration is to get a stronger presence in "enterprise" environments. Porting of software, and package deal sales will certainly help.

I mainly reacted to this comment, which you repeated in the last response as well:

Apple is not entering Enterprise again, they left that sector long long ago.

Because that is the complete opposite of what is happening here, albeit with the help of a partner, but also with things like AppleCare catered for this as is mentioned in that TC article.

 

[tdale]

Apple isn't going to re-enter the server market other than what they are currently doing unless they actually bought IBM, Cisco or Oracle or a company that's seriously entrenched in the Enterprise. It's too competitive and getting a server isn't what they need. They would have to have an entire host of servers, top end applications that actually are meant to run on it, a first rate sales team, a top notch services organization and it's just too costly to do it from the ground up. It would take them decades and billions of dollars and they still would have problems. They literally have to buy into that market and they'd have to convince whomever they bought to merge OS X and whatever Unix OS they had together.

With the IBM partnership, I doubt anything on the server end is going to happen. I think Apple is just constantly putting out OS X server just to have something available, but I don't know how many companies are actually using it on any grand scale.

Lets imagine Apple is going after OSX machines in Enterprise. So, the PC's are replaced one day. IBM does all the fancy stuff they are great at, with whatever fancy mainframes they make. In this example, isn't there a need for a capable OSX server to be used by the enterprise, either on the client machines or in the business doing the serving? What I am getting at is not overlapping what IBM will manage?