Prepare to be astounded by a nigh-unbelievable idea! Yes, thrill to the concept you’ve never heard before as ZDNet’s Jason Perlow lays out the case for…
WHY APPLE SHOULD LICENSE ONE OF ITS OPERATING SYSTEMS!
Seriously, we’ve having this argument again. No, the Macalope can’t believe it either. Yes, we do at least have plenty of gin.
“Can iPad conquer the enterprise? Only if Apple has the guts to license iOS” (tip o’ the antlers to
Guts. Stupidity. Is there really any difference? Ask anyone who’s ever said “Here, hold my beer” and they’ll answer emphatically by beeping twice for “no” on their
brainwave-operated wheelchair and life-support device.
Look, Apple’s not going to not take Perlow’s advice because he works for Microsoft (oh, he works for Microsoft, by the way) and it’s not going to not take it because he isn’t a nice guy. He seems like he really is.
No, they’re not going to take it because it’s terrible, terrible advice.
As we approach the holiday season…
Let’s ruin it by dredging up old arguments like we always do.
CAN’T WE JUST HAVE PEACE IN THIS FAMILY?
…most consumers have already made their wish lists for Santa Claus and Hannukah Harry, many of which will be topped by tablet computers.
Enterprise IT managers, on the other hand, are more like
In every respect [the iPad] is the wrong tool for the [enterprise] job.
Over the years I have advocated that Apple license their operating systems to Tier 1 OEMs…
Whoa, whoa, dude. This isn’t
Secret. Post your personal shame someplace else.
…in order to expand their marketshare into business.
Please see the Macalope’s collected works for any and all responses in regards to marketshare. Thank you for calling.
Of course, the traditional answer to this has always been “Apple doesn’t care about business, it makes plenty of money from consumers.”
No! That’s not the answer! The answer is “Apple’s never going to make money off of this.” Sure, they’d get a licensing fee from OEMs, but they’d also lose a significant number of sales, which make them far more money than a measly $50 licensing fee. Why do you think the company you work for was trying to get into the hardware business? Not to mention the hassle of dealing with OEMs and the brand reputation problems.
Perlow tries to make a case that Apple would make money off of app sales, but he has to admit that most of those enterprise apps would be distributed free through a corporate license to the overall service. So, sorry, Jason, but there is no “there” there. (There isn’t even a “here” there. Or an “r”. And you cannot buy any vowels. This game of Wheel of Fortune ended in a tragic spinning accident in which a homemaker from Duluth got her scarf caught in the wheel and was sucked into the machinery as Pat Sajak laughed maniacally.)
The other issue has always been a concern about diluting the Mac customer base with inferior products with poor support and for very little financial gain from strictly OS licensing.
But 2008 is not 2014. iOS devices are not PCs with tons of components to validate. And Tim Cook is not Steve Jobs.
Like being Steve Jobs was a bad thing. “All that stuff that made Apple the largest and most successful company in technology if not the history of everything? Time to throw that out.”
Sure, an “iPad Pro” sold and distributed to enterprises by IBM could generate some nice revenue, but not as much as if say, a known enterprise player, such as Lenovo… were permitted to produce iOS-based tablet computers under license.
This is like the
7 Layer Dip Tortilla Combos of wrong in which each of the seven layers is just another form of wrongness.
Of course, much of this falls with the “Ain’t gonna happen” and “when Hell freezes over” speculation departments. But remember folks, Apple joined forces with IBM to conquer the enterprise. At Steve Jobs’ Apple, that was practically unthinkable.
Why, it’s as absurd as the company taking an investment from Microsoft or letting HP sell its own branded iPods or working with Motorola on the ROKR! HA-HA-HAAAAA!
Actually, that last one is pretty absurd when you think about it.
OK, well, the Macalope looks forward to the next time we have this argument.