Comments on: Apple should NOT go after the Enterprise

By: Ron

Ron — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 16:28:04 +0000

There are plenty of opensource exchange alternatives out there. Apple just needs to do the same it has with Mac OS X. Use the underlining Open Source software and tweak the user interface:

http://www.dotmedia.co.za/web/opensource/mail-collaboration/

By: Don

Don — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:14:55 +0000

There is really nothing that is done on a Mac that can’t be done on a Windows machine. The difference is that Apple has made the make clear and easy to use rather than a complex series of exercises that often end in frustration and failure.

In fact, two of Apple’s biggest hits, the iPod and iPhone are not unique at all. There were, and remain, lots of music players and cell phones. Again, what Apple did was make them solid, usable, and even elegant.

I respectfully disagree with the conclusion of Alykhan Jetha, But Apple doesn’t have to “go after the Enterprise.” All they have to do is what they always do: offer the same things offered by Windows for the Enterprise by make it solid, easy to use, elegant, and include what is needed and desired rather than plagued with feature bloat.

Then the Enterprise will move to “the other white meat.”

By: Jon T

Jon T — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:36:00 +0000

I don’t ever see Apple bowing to the enterprise.

I do see the enterprise bowing to its users.

Interesting blog – thanks.

By: Partners in Grime

Partners in Grime — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 19:57:10 +0000

Enterprise is like an anchor on innovation.

By: Marketcircle Blog » The iPhone is not built for the Enterprise - but IT will still have to deal with it

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:48:18 +0000

[...] Forrester Group analysts Benjamin Gray and Robert Whiteley illustrate my point on why Apple should stick to its knitting in the consumer and small business markets with his latest piece on why the iPhone is not for the Enterprise. This is backed up with a few well-argued qualifications, by Larry Dignan at ZDNet. [...]

By: AJ

AJ — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:39:13 +0000

Thanks Gerald,

Apple currently does not cater to the enterprise, but so many people want it to and that is what I’m concerned about. I’d like them to stay focused on the consumer and small business space.

By: Orlando Smith

Orlando Smith — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:35:43 +0000

Though I agree with the idea that Apple shouldn’t cater to the enterprise to the extent that doing so would hinder its innovation, corrupt its principles, or lessen the quality of its products, Apple can cater to the enterprise in ways that don’t hinder its innovation, debauch its principles, and/or cause it to make crappy products. And I think that is exactly what Apple has done with OS X Leopard, Leopard Server, Xserve, Xserve Raid, its client computers, and some of its other products.

UNIX certification isn’t required by Apple, SMB, or consumers. UNIX certification is for the enterprise and education markets. Apple has designed OS X Leopard and Leopard Server so that they will work well in the enterprise, but it has done so in a way that is consistent with what make Apple a great company: its focus on innovation, users’ experience, the guiding principles of its culture (e.g., not willing to make anything less than the best computers in order to maximize profits), and its insistence on top quality.

If Apple can carter to the enterprise in profitable ways, yet maintain the core values of its culture, Apple benefits, SMB benefits, consumer benefit, and yes, enterprise benefits from having available and using the best computers in the world.

By: Gerald Buckley

Gerald Buckley — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:34:30 +0000

AJ – When was the last time we saw mothership Apple cater to enterprise’s needs/wants/desires? All I’ve seen is an Apple being very selective about how and when they roll out their integration solutions. I see Apple continuing to play “their game” and adopting open standards in lieu of the proprietary ones when and where possible.

James Katt is adding a nice perspective as a fellow shareholder… why would we as shareholders want Cupertino to emulate anyone in the PC/OS business right now? We have a great thing going as it is. Why ruin it?

BTW, your shirts made it to London and consequently saw a LOT of exposure. 50 or so influential bloggers (and Edelman folk).

-Gerald, Tulsa

By: AJ

AJ — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:23:12 +0000

James, you are right – I think the mountain will come to Apple – from the inside out. People within enterprises will demand Apple products (or just buy them and bring them in) and it will force IT to adapt.

I have no problem with that. What I don’t want is for Apple to cater specifically to the enterprise in the way Microsoft does.

Apple must remain focused on the end-user.

By: James Katt

James Katt — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:01:33 +0000

It would be far better for the mountain to come to Apple than Apple to go to the mountain – as the old saying goes.

As Apple innovates and moves whole industries ahead, and developes very useful products, big business cannot help but coming to Apple because Apple’s products attact business from the inside-out – where workers and even CEOs drive the need to use Apple products.

Further, by Apple ignoring big business, it creates enormous opportunities for third party products to bridge that gap. This creates an ecosystem that supports Apple’s products. This is the opposite of Microsoft – which tries to eat third parties and take over the industry. But this works well for Apple because the ecosystem it creates supports the purchase of more Apple products – just like the iPod accessory ecosystem does.

Apple does not need to gain marketshare. The most important thing is to make profit (this is coming from an Apple shareholder). Chasing the lowest denominator like Dell is the wrong way for Apple. Far better to be itself – to create the best products it can make.