5 ms·
I see very little benefit for Apple. IBM makes complex expensive software that people are still trying to get rid of in the enterprise. Apple doesn't need a sa
by matdrewin 12y ago
I see very little benefit for Apple.
IBM makes complex expensive software that people are still trying to get rid of in the enterprise. Apple doesn't need a sales force for iPads, most top execs have been demanding iPads for the last 2 years already, it's just IT that's slow to adopt it because they fear loss of control with BYOD.
Only upside here is stuff like Watson and the likes. I can see IBM providing back-end services to Apple but that's about it.
- ojosilva 12y agoIBM signs juicy hardware + software contacts with large corporations and government around the globe. They don't have a (serious) mobile offering, something their customers are asking for more and more every day to be thrown into deals and EULAs. So now the IBM salesman will have a very sexy Apple brochure in the briefcase to show around. Apple taps into a large, high margin market where 200, 000 devices deals will not be uncommon and without doing much really, no new stores, no new salespeople. The technology behind this is minimal, some security improvements, maybe a Tivoli or Rational plugin. No real disruption here, people, just lots of cash.
- lnanek2 12y agoRight now, if you are an enterprise who is going to give every employee or retail store a device for some reason, you often go Android since it is so much cheaper and can be customized more than slapping a sled with a bar code scanner and a battery on it. This helps make Apple more competitive in the B2B arena. Traditionally they have been good just at getting to consumers.
- tim333 12y agoI think Apple will get to sell a lot more devices without too much effort as the "more than 100 industry-specific applications that will run on the iPhone and iPad" will drive sales. Perhaps not as sexy as an iWatch but it could be pretty profitable.