Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Mar 2012 15:09 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless I'm currently reading Jerry Kaplan's excellent book "Startup: a Silicon Valley adventure". In this book, Kaplan, founder and CEO of GO Corp., details the founding, financing and eventual demise of his highly innovative company, including the development and workings of their product. What's so surprising about this book is just how timeless it really is - the names and products may have changed, but the business practices and company attitudes surely haven't.
Thread beginning with comment 511803
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Not feeling this article
by kwan_e on Sun 25th Mar 2012 06:02 UTC in reply to "Not feeling this article"
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

As for Apple being the next IBM, who knows. Personally, I don't see it. Apple's approach (at least under Jobs) has been to "bet the company" every couple of years. IBM was never so bold.


Thomas Watson Jr bet more than the entire company on mainframes. And I think Watson, its Deep Blue and Deep Thought predecessors, and its fundamental science research is more bold than anything Apple or Microsoft or Google has done. Apple knows it can do well by selling what people want - but it can never be so bold as to invest in the quantum mechanics research that IBM does that enables Apple to make its products in the first place. IBM also contributes to cancer research and other diseases. IBM was also bold for getting rid of its PC arm. IBM was also bold for being the first company to adopt a equal opportunity policy before it became law, and they did it in the racist South.*

"Apple being the next IBM" is not saying that they will be the "next big thing". It's saying they will be the next "too big" thing.


* Of course, IBM completely mishandled the case with Lynn Conway, so let's keep it real. And IBM is a shadow of its former past in terms of boldness.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Not feeling this article
by siraf72 on Sun 25th Mar 2012 12:10 in reply to "RE: Not feeling this article"
siraf72 Member since:
2006-02-22

IBMs pedigree and achievements stand out on they're own. IBM has contributed far far more to science (if not modern desktop or mobile computing per se) than Apple. No arguments there.

""Apple being the next IBM" is not saying that they will be the "next big thing". It's saying they will be the next "too big" thing. "

That's just my point, i don't see any evidence of Apple being too big just yet. Agree IBM at it's best did far far more than Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 2

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

That's just my point, i don't see any evidence of Apple being too big just yet.


That's kind of how it is with things that are not too big but are on their way to becoming too big. Things that are not too big often don't appear too big until they become too big in hindsight.

If Steve Jobs was still healthy, I think Apple could have created a lot more. Apple could afford to be more bigger simply with him at the helm. OSX, the iPod, the iPhone, then the iPad came under his tenure and I think that variety is a key part of their success. Unless there's another Steve Jobs persona in Apple, or somewhere they can import from, the most Apple will be able to create is the next OSX, the next iPod, the next iPhone and the next iPad, but not the next iSomethingSufficientlyDifferentAndExciting. The next iSomethingSufficientlyDifferentAndExciting I think does more to boost the Apple mythology than an iPhone 6 could. And it is this potential shrinkage in Apple creativity that might be what causes Apple to become too big.

If Tim Cook manages to create* the next iSomethingSufficientlyDifferentAndExciting, I'll happily eat my words.

* Create in the Al Gore sense, of course.

Reply Parent Score: 1