Cringely Posits Adobe's Purchase by Apple 245
An anonymous reader writes to mention another Robert Cringely piece discussing Apple's future. In his latest article, he lays out some goals for Apple on its quest to desktop dominance. An important link in this chain is Apple's purchase of Adobe Systems. From the article: "Adobe has already made one feint away from Mac development that required personal pressure from Steve Jobs on John Warnock to reverse. If Apple kinda-sorta embraces Windows enough for Adobe to question whether continued development for the native OS X platform is still warranted, well, then Apple WILL just become another Dell, which isn't what Steve Jobs wants. Steve wants Windows applications to run like crazy on his hybrid platform but to look like crap. In his heart of hearts, he'd still like to beat Microsoft on the merits, not just by leveraging some clever loophole. So he needs the top ISVs who are currently writing for OS X to continue writing for OS X, and that especially means Adobe."
Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:4, Insightful)
I think Cringely's article is probable though impracticle... at least for the time being.
Microsoft isn't going to drop office for Mac... they make too much money from it... but if they ever do, Apple has a backup plan [osopinion.com] in the way of Windows virtualization.
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, if you're a journalist, paid to analyze technology trends and make wild shot-in-the-dark predictions of what might possibly happen one day, or you're writing an article of what business moves might benefit one group or another, that's perfectly fine. Cringly thinks Apple should buy Adobe, and I'm sure lots of people could write articles on why they think Apple shouldn't.
Let's just not let this get out of hand and become an actual rumor.
Starting Rumors (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, 'cuz, you know, like, they work for Infoworld and PC Magazine and stuff an' they're all corporate shills an' stuff an'...
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:3, Informative)
PBS, not NPR or Infoworld (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060427. html [pbs.org] is the Public Broadcasting Service, a completely diferent organization then Infoworld or National Public Radio.
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:2)
Meh, I never click on the links for their articles, so they don't get any advertiser revenue from me.
Re:Mod article '-1, Troll' (Score:3, Informative)
Quite ineffective, given that there are no ads on Cringely's page.
OT: Troll, Stupid, and Evil Tags are Trolls (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, how does this help classify and search the articles? It doesn't, if every third article is "evil" and "troll".
Secondly, please refresh your memory of what a "troll" is. Here is the official Slashdot definition. Just because you think an article or comment is wrong and stupid does not make it a "troll". A "troll" is purposeful malicious misdirection intended to lead the discussion astray. Just because you disagree with Cringely, Dvorak, et al (and think they are totally off the wall), it does not mean they are trolls. They may indeed be stupid, but they are not trolls. Any opinion presented constructively is not a troll, even if it is wrong.
As far as I am concerned, the "tagging beta" should filter out all the "troll", "stupid", "evil", "FUD", and other non-helpful tags, because they are not objective descriptions to classify the article, but only negative opinion (and I think we can all read and form our own opinions).
Maybe the frequency of Troll and Stupid tags . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:OT: Troll, Stupid, and Evil Tags are Trolls (Score:3, Interesting)
Tagging is about the benefit for the community, not for your personal benefit.
Re:OT: Troll, Stupid, and Evil Tags are Trolls (Score:3, Insightful)
I can see your point about "troll", but strongly disagree about your other examples. In a story about SCO trying to scare Linux users, "fud" is perfectly reasonable - the story is about FUD, which is different than saying the
Oh please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Could be.
Yeah, and it could be that the product never lived up to expectations and saw little market adoption so Apple decided it was time to cut their losses and focus their resources on something else.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
software developers (Score:2)
It seems that all this extra work would drive up the cost of a piece of software too. Any thoughts on why it would/wouldn't?
Re:software developers (Score:2, Funny)
Someone should really build something like that...
Re:software developers (Score:2)
More likely it's just B.S. (Score:2)
My guess is that a few contractors have been let go and other folks moved to other projects after helping with the product release and bug fixes. Aperture isn't going to be abandoned (go play with Lightroom Beta 2 if you want to see a crippled product).
Or it could be a fabrication (Score:5, Insightful)
Since Aperture is still being sold in the Apple store and the pages for the product are all still up, I know which theory I'd buy into!
If you must believe something a little more juicy, how about an attempt by Think Secret (or someone behind it) to discredit Apple?
It's NOT a rumor (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a prediction, not a rumor, and his record with predictions is not bad.
The Cringe of Embracing Windows (Score:5, Funny)
I have seen it and, well at least it does run like crazy... [microsoft.com]
So the logic here is (Score:5, Funny)
What do call a CEO who makes the decision to chop $400 million off his company's profits?
Unemployed.
Revenue vs. Profit (Score:5, Insightful)
Although I agree with your sentiment, it's worth pointing out that $400M in revenue -- which would be sales figures -- does not translate into $400M in profit.
Unless of course you're engaging in a little Enron-style math, that is. Software companies may have high margins, but they're not 100%.
Re:Revenue vs. Profit (Score:2)
Re:Revenue vs. Profit (Score:2, Insightful)
Not necessarily - I haven't looked at the filings you've mentioned - I gotta go soon. But a coulple of things to look for:
How much are those sales costing Appl. Yeah, they
But would Adobe makes as many Windows sales? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Revenue vs. Profit (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe. I have no way of knowing what it costs Adobe to make Mac software, but I would imagine it isn't too high: all of Adobe's Mac products are Carbon/Codewarrior: I think Photoshop CS2 is, essentially, Photoshop 7 tarted up with some new features. Certainly 7 was the last version which could be called a must-have upgrade, and there
Re:So the logic here is (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:So the logic here is (Score:5, Funny)
Carly Fiorina [wikipedia.org]
Well... And unemployed.
Hope not (Score:5, Insightful)
- Apple needs some healthy competition in this domain
- Even though I am a Mac user, having a competitor in the PC domain also helps Apple keep on their toes
- Adobe bought Macromedia, so in this field Apple would near a potential monopoly.
Gates Obliges Jobs (Score:5, Funny)
Well, it's up to Jobs to make sure of the former, but MS has already done what it can to accomplish that latter.
Dvorak/Cringely + Apple/Google (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak/Cringely + Apple/Google (Score:2)
Re:Dvorak/Cringely + Apple/Google (Score:2)
An anonymous coward write: 'Cringely has said something else monumentally stupid today. Let's all laugh at him for a bit. It was probably about Apple buying or being bought be some other company. Oh, and running Windows
Re:Dvorak/Cringely + Apple/Google (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak/Cringely + Apple/Google (Score:2)
Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak NO COST (Score:5, Insightful)
If Adobe stock were converted to new Apple shares that properly reflect the increased value of Apple + Adobe, it would cost them the amount of printing the new certificates and mailing them, which is essentially nothing. That assumes a friendly takeover/merger.
Re:Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak NO COST (Score:4, Informative)
This isn't how transactions work in public financial markets. It would cost Apple BILLIONS of dollars in stock and cash and/or debt in some combination to acquire Adobe friendly takeover or not. Adobe is a publicly traded company beholden to its shareholders. The board has a LEGAL obligation to the shareholders. They can't just hand over the company to Apple and print new certificates even if for some INSANE reason they wanted to in the interest of a "friendly" merger.
The only way shareholders would approve a buyout is if it was at a significantly higher price than where Adobe currently trades (which as mentioned is $23.65 billion). Unless the fortunes of the overall stock market, or Adobe change dramatically, it will cost Apple a hell of a lot to acquire Adobe, friendly takeover or not.
Even in an all stock transaction, existing Apple shareholders would pay for the transaction, as the value of their shares would be heavily diluted (new shares would be issued, making each existing share worth less).
Re:Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak NO COST (Score:2)
Their shares aren't diluted if, while they hold the same number of shares, there are more shares total now in a larger and more valuable company. They own less, true, but of a proportionately more valuable entity (Apple + Adobe) overall. That should be a wash, unless Apple overpays for Adobe,
Re:Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak NO COST (Score:2)
All that would be required for that to happen is for the market to percieve the value of Apple+Adobe as higher than the combined values of the two seperate companies.
Re:Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak (Score:2)
Re:Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak (Score:2)
Apple doesn't like to go deeply into debt, so it would have to be a stock swap. Adobe has good earnings, so it might be doable. With the right deal, the Apple share price would stay about the same.
Re:Cringely: The thinking man's Dvorak (Score:2)
Now, sure, the actual price paid for a company can diverge upwards or downwards from that, based on many factors. But if you don't start with market cap, how do you value a company?
Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)
Steve wants Windows applications to run like crazy on his hybrid platform but to look like crap. In his heart of hearts, he'd still like to beat Microsoft on the merits, not just by leveraging some clever loophole.
OS X running Windows apps in ugly gray, thats what he is onto. Its coming.
__
Elephant Essays [elephantessays.com] - Cover Letters, Research Papers, Editing
Re:Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, he's still missing the point.
No, "in his heart of hearts", he doesn't really care about Microsoft, because Apple compete against Dell and all the other hardware vendors. OS X is a differentiator in the hardware market, not a core product that they are competing against Microsoft with. Intel & Bootcamp fits nicely into that strategy, and I suspect he wouldn't care if 90% of the people who bought Macs ran Windows, because that 90% will have chosen Apple over Dell.
Re:Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)
Given that Vista isn't due until '07, and most orgs are still running apps from the Win2k days, being able to run Win2k/XP apps w/in a more secure OS would certainly be an attractive offering.
Re:Wow. (Score:3, Informative)
In theory, yes. In practice, the Win32 API is very, very big. If you want any kind of application compatibility, you need to implement:
- OLE / COM / DCOM
- MFC
- DirectX (DirectShow, DirectPlay, Direct3D, etc.)
- The
- Internet Explorer (many apps depend on it)
- 100s of standard controls (e.g. ListView, e
Re:Wow. (Score:2)
A monochrome Windows desktop would surely look better than all this cartoon crap they've been shoving at us since XP came out. The first thing I do with an XP machine is convert it to the 'classic' look (and turn off animations & sounds).
Don't forget the awesome 'Platinum' scheme OS 9 had - that was a nice look.
Re:Wow. (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, wait. You said he's onto something.
I first read that as he was on something.
Nevermind.
Hey Cringely (Score:5, Funny)
-Curious on Slashdot
Re:Hey Cringely (Score:2, Funny)
"There's no demand for a Windows version..." (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple co-founded Adobe and owned part of Adobe.
This would be the perfect deal. And then the sweet "sorry, we're cancelling Photoshop for Windows since there is no demand for a PC version".
They have done that before too.
We live in interesting times. And I love it.
Re:"There's no demand for a Windows version..." (Score:3, Informative)
While that would be sweet revenge, Adobe switched a while back from developing Photoshop in Code Warrior on a Mac, and then porting to Windows, to developing Photoshop in Visual Studio on a PC, and porting to Mac.
Cutting the Windows version of Photoshop would be rather painful transition of their code-base at this point.
Apple owned 20% and were first licensee to market (Score:3, Interesting)
The only other licensee that was talked about from the beginning was Linotype and, from memory, relatively obscure companies like DataProducts and QMS were next to market with PostScript printers. That is all a while before Adobe acquired PhotoShop. When we to
Crap (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Crap - Reading SJ's Mind (Score:3, Interesting)
And you've read Steve Job's mind on this. That he'd rather have tiny market share than be the biggest PC retailer (remember Apple is a hardware vendor) in the world. Yeah, that's the Steve we know -- thinking small as usual.
Re:Crap - Reading SJ's Mind (Score:2)
Yep. He's certainly content to make those tiny little "boutique" movies, and let big ol' Disney have the lion's share of the family movie market. That's our Steve -- I'm sure he would find it insulting if his movies made a lot of money.
Re:Crap (Score:2)
Well, I'm not sure "desirable" is the right word when only 3% of the market wants them (the Mac, certainly the iPod is more popular).
Re:Crap (Score:2)
Re:Crap (Score:2)
The merged company name will be . . . (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The merged company name will be . . . (Score:2)
Yes, we need another Shake / Logic Pro (Score:2)
Why Do What MS Has Done? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why Do What MS Has Done? (Score:2)
If Apple bought Adobe, then they'd effectively be pursuing a strategy similar to Microsoft's - trying to control all major app vendors for the respective OS. It'd be costly for one thing, and might discourage other vendors from building on the platform. Not a great idea, in my opinion.
Actually, buying Adobe, rather than competing directly with them, would likely encourage developers and vendors. Most companies (and employees of companies) would not mind being acquired by Apple. Most investors would lov
John C. Dvorak acquired by Robert X. Cringley (Score:5, Funny)
Morons. Why does this shit get posted here every week, clogging up my screen real estate. I want to read about motherboards.
Oh, now I see. (Score:2)
And this is why Skype added video in the last versions. See how it all makes sense?
Cringely, my man, you're on the fast track turning into a "Dvorak".
From Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen own mouth... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:From Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen own mouth... (Score:2)
It's all starting to make sense! (Score:3, Funny)
Apple buys Adobe.
Apple implements Windows API in Leopard.
Apple kills off OS X versions of Adobe products.
Apple fires OS X developers from Adobe (they can hang with the Aperture team).
Profit!
Is it just me, or is Cringley starting to enter Dvorak territory?
And Moving to Intel was the end too.... (Score:2)
All of those predictions so far don't seem to be holding up.
Apple buying Adobe? I don't think it's a matter of IF..but a matter of WHEN. Apple, financially is in better position now then any other time in their history (thanks to the IPOD). By buying
adobe? (Score:2, Informative)
How mergers work... (Score:2)
He is insane!! (Score:2, Insightful)
I finally figure out how he comes up with these illogical predictions. Cringley is in insane!!! The first line says it all.
Over the past three weeks, we've laid out in this column
He uses WE to describe himself but he is the only one writing the articles. He obviously has multiple personality disorder. There is more than one person in there and apparently no one is home. Though, he could also think he is a Borg, but that too is equally insane.
No... he works with... (Score:2)
Insightful? Sheesh. (Score:3, Informative)
Mods on LSD. That's not insightful, and it's not even particularly funny if you have any idea what the term 'the editorial we' [yourdictionary.com] means.
-fred
A better thesis: (Score:3, Interesting)
Makes more sense than a freaking acquisition.
I dunno... (Score:5, Insightful)
But I don't see why people here are pooh-poohing the idea of Apple buying Adobe so much. I mean, forgetting about what you want, and focusing on what is good for Apple.
There are two things that will really harm (if not kill) Apple: (1) no Office; (2) no Photoshop.
However, of the two, I say #2 is even more important for Apple...Apple's core market is still graphics, despite all the mainstream press they've been getting. Without Photoshop there effectively is no OS X.
Secondly, Apple bought Final Cut Pro from Macromedia, they acquired DVD Studio Pro from (who was it? some company that started with 'A'), they bought Logic. Are any of these pieces of software Apple's 'core' business? No, they aren't. I remember I was more than a little surprised to see Apple even acquire these pieces of software. Not only have they acquired them, they have redeveloped them into really nice apps. So clearly, part of their strategy is to provide extremely nice pro apps for their own OS.
One segment of pro apps they have avoided -- I am sure partially to not piss off Adobe -- is graphics. They lack a pro 3D app, and they lack a pro 2D app (though by working CoreImage into the OS, they have provided tools that programmers can use to recreate 75% of what Photoshop does easily). Further, Adobe controls the PDF format (which Apple uses fir display in their OS).
I dunno...I think Adobe would be a pretty much perfect fit for Apple. Other than Premiere (which sucks anyway), very little of their work seems to overlap, and then Apple would have a complete suite of pro apps guaranteed to run on OS X (and if they really wanted to be shitty, they could discontinue the Windows versions, and leave Microsoft high and dry).
I mean, if this became too much of a distraction for Apple, they could spin off a separate software company (a la FileMaker), but other than potential distractions, I fail to see how acquiring Adobe would be all that bad for Apple, and I can certainly see a lot of potential upside in the thought.
Re:I dunno... (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose there's even the possibility that they could then use the MS-Windows version of Photoshop as a bargaining chip to encourage Microsoft to continue the Mac version of MS-Office. True, the loss of all the Adobe products wouldn't kill MS-Windows, but it would definitely have an impact. And since Microsoft already makes money from the Mac version of MS-Office, it probably doesn't need too much encouragement to keep it going...
Cringely Crap on Microsoft Office Replacement (Score:2)
If Cringely had done a minimum of research, he might remember that Apple and Microsoft just signed a new agreement to keep Office for Mac around for a minimum of 5 new years. He might also remember that Apple is supporting Microsofts new, open XML file formats.
Apple is not going to be so stupid as to let Mac users have to rely on reverse engineering MS Office file formats, when they per da
Trust? (Score:3, Insightful)
I see. And you fully trust Microsoft to honor that agreement if it does not suit them?
Sure if there's no compelling reason not to they will honor it because they make a lot of money doing so. But if you'd looked over the Slashdot headlines you'd not
I Think He's Got Something There (Score:3, Funny)
I posit that Cringely will buy Dvorak... (Score:2)
I love Cringley to death... (Score:2)
There are many things I could say about this. Here's just one: if OpenOffice can't defeat MS Off
I like the color... (Score:3, Interesting)
Guys, Apple is just like Porsche (Score:3, Interesting)
This whole "wants to be the biggest" thing is beyond me, unless it has something to do with Freudian hangups on the part of the commentators. Get over it.
Re:PLEASE GIVE US A CRINGELY SECTION (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, it actually is :)
Re:Like 1000 monkeys typing at 1000 keyboards... (Score:2)
Re:Like 1000 monkeys typing at 1000 keyboards... (Score:2)
That has already happened, which is why you have iTunes and QuickTime for Windows.
"2) Adobe actually being willing to sell. Well, at least not without a fight."
Why wouldn't they? They're close to Apple, the corporate culture appears to be very similar, and Apple just announce major plans for a 50 acre, $700 million expansion. Why do you suppose they need all that extra space? Their business has tripled in the last five years but it certainly appears
Re:Like 1000 monkeys typing at 1000 keyboards... (Score:2)
Probably the best thing about Apple and Adobe merging might be the impact on XCode / Cocoa. The more folks inside Apple there are lobbying for Apple's development platform to serve real needs (including cross-platform development) the better those tools w
Re:Like 1000 monkeys typing at 1000 keyboards... (Score:2, Interesting)
If you drive around Cupertino, you will see that Apple is renting a massive amount of office space for their workers because they can't fit everyone at Infinite Loop. Most of the new space Apple is buying will be for their existing people, not because they need to fit in a new group of people after a merger.
If anything,
Re:Like 1000 monkeys typing at 1000 keyboards... (Score:2)
Re:Apple desktop market share: 3.1% (Score:2, Interesting)
It may be lower than 5 years ago, but the future is looking quite good...
Interesting spin (Score:3, Insightful)
And you DO realize those numbers are sales figures, not install base, right?
Not to mention those numbers are convieninetly before Intel macs were avilaible that can dual-boot into Windows, or run Windows apps directly as he was noting. That's where the real growth curve comes in, which would increase Apples figures beyond the mere 43% grown in Mac sales they enjoyed last year (again, from your own article).
Re:Apple desktop market share: 3.1% (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, Apple's goal is not to dominate the desktop.
Re:Apple desktop market share: 3.1% (Score:3, Insightful)
Who is to say that is their goal? I thought the main goal of most companies is to be profitable and to grow their sales numbers and Apple has done both. Their percentage of the market has dropped because the overall market grew faster than their sales numbers growth. You make the common mistake to assume that an increase or decrease in marketshared percentage is directly
Re:Dvorak's a douche (Score:3, Insightful)