IBM Overtakes Microsoft To Be Second Most Valuable In Tech

[engine]

IBM Overtakes Microsoft To Be Second Most Valuable In Tech [businessweek.com]

International Business Machines Corp. passed Microsoft Corp. to become the world’s second-most valuable technology company, a reflection of industry changes including the shift away from the personal computer.

IBM’s market value rose to $214 billion yesterday, while Microsoft’s fell to $213.2 billion. It’s the first time IBM has exceeded its software rival based on closing prices since 1996, according to Bloomberg data. IBM became the fourth-largest company by market value, based on yesterday’s closing price, and, in technology, trails only Apple Inc., the world’s most valuable company.

[incrediBILL]

How ironic that the pecking order is now Apple, IBM and MS with Apple now being the most valued company on the planet when once upon a time MS could've squished them like a bug.

[wheel]

Apple has done what no other tech company has done. Repeated and diverse success. The IIe. The Ipod. Itunes. Macbook Air. The Ipad.

I'm not a fan of their closed source attitude, but credit where credit is due - they're not a one trick pony like MS, Google, etc.

[incrediBILL]

MS and Google are hardly one trick ponies.

Wheel, luv ya, but I always wonder where you get those big sweeping generalities like that, cracks me up. I know a bunch of people that used to work at Apple and for a long time they were more known as a niche company building computers for the 'rest of us', primarily the creative community, and not really making many inroads to the masses.

If not for the iPod, which took the imagination of the masses by storm, Apple would be a bit fat footnote of nothing. The iPod was the start of their resurrection, nothing else, and they wisely built more iCrap as fast as they could go taking them from niche to mainstream. Even luckier for them was that the iPhone was a follow-up smashing success as could just as easily have swung the other way.

IMO, MS was the big loser here as they were way ahead of the game with both phones and tablets and completely dropped the ball letting Apple run away with it. I think it's karma biting them in the butt for the whole Mac/Windows thing, hehe

[edited by: incrediBILL at 4:50 am (utc) on Oct 5, 2011]

[graeme_p]

@wheel, I do not want to split hairs, but the problem with Apple is not that the source is closed, its that the devices are locked down.

MacOS has a lot of open source in it. The kernel, webkit, etc. Even the APIs are based on a once open standard, and GNUStep (pure open source) offers a fair amount of Mac compatibility.

The problem is that the devices are locked down, especially tablets and phones. You can only install software from their store, you certainly cannot install a different OS - but you can do both on a Mac (for the moment).

Windows 8 will use signatures in the BIOS to lock each PC to a particular Windows install and vice-versa. This will leave Macs far more open than Windows PCs.

No doubt a few people will buy hardware without BIOS encryption disabled to run Linux and other completely open OSes, but that will only be a few percent of the market, at most.

With that background, Macs will be comparatively the most open, widely used hardware.

[wheel]

MS and Google are hardly one trick ponies.

Sure. Google makes money on adwords and.

You'll have to finish that sentence. I got nothin'.

[J_RaD]

apple is 1 short step away from not being cool anymore......and they are soon to be on the slide.

With that background, Macs will be comparatively the most open, widely used hardware.

really? cause you'll be able to install and upgrade hardware whenever you want and have total driver / industry support? Apple is also very pro upgrade...they even use special screws to keep people out uhm uhm i mean make it easier for you to get in.

It is a hassle that can be over came.... also this isn't 1995, with quad and hex core processors and 16 GB of ram why do i need to cold boot into another OS? just pop open a VM and keep moving. But if a person wants to run linux chances are they are smart enough to figure it out.

[graeme_p]

Yes, really Apple does not do anything to stop you installing Linux (or FreeBSD, or anything else you want.).

I did say "comparatively". Macs are not open in the way other PCs are at the moment, but they are a lot more open than Windows PCs will be once Windows 8 comes out.

with quad and hex core processors and 16 GB of ram why do i need to cold boot into another OS? just pop open a VM and keep moving.

So as a Linux user with a Windows 8 PC, I have to boot Windows and then open a VM and then boot Linux every time? Brilliant usability. That would not put anyone of using Linux, right?

But if a person wants to run linux chances are they are smart enough to figure it out.

So the effect of it is to ensure that only geeks use Linux, or any new OSes that come out. Eliminating potential competition for as long as the PC platform lasts is a huge win for MS. They will not need to kill new entrants the way they killed BeOS: it will simply not install on existing hardware, people will not buy special hardware to try out a new OS, and that will be that.

MS is not targeting current Linux users with this - most of us would be quite happy to buy special Linux hardware even if it cost a bit more. MS is targeting people who might switch in the future to EITHER Linux, or an new OS.

The courts told them they could not make deals to keep lock out competition, so they will now keep out competition by technical means/: same effect, no legal risk.

[wheel]

I suspect that neither Apple or MS are losing any sleep over linux. Linux on the desktop has been comparable to either - and arguably better - for years now. And they're still not taking the market by storm - they're still not a viable alternative. And if they're not by now, they never will be.

[J_RaD]

So the effect of it is to ensure that only geeks use Linux

geeks are the only ones that have ever used linux.

MS is targeting people who might switch in the future to EITHER Linux, or an new OS.

yea like thats really going to happen.


see anyone else cooking up a new real OS either? didn't think so

Yes, really Apple does not do anything to stop you installing Linux (or FreeBSD, or anything else you want.).

but don't you dare EVER buy a version of OS X from them and try to install it on non- applejobs approved hardware... they'll sue your pants off then burn your house down. Ask psystar.

And if they're not by now, they never will be.

*ding*ding*ding*

linux is way better now then its every been, but it has no wide spread support out of the linux guys building open source software, it just doesn't have legs.

I wouldn't mind using it but 50% of my daily usage software doesn't have a linux version and the linux alternative to them suck big time.

So here I am enjoying windows 7 :-)

[incrediBILL]

Whether the OS is locked down or not only matters to nerds, 99.999999999% of the population want a turnkey appliance that simply works when needed.

[graeme_p]

Firstly my original point was the Mac hardware will be more open than Windows 8 PCs. From the last few posts it appears that everyone concedes that.

Linux has an effect on Microsoft's revenues far out of proportion to its market share. I live in a country where MS turns a blind eye to piracy because one or two big companies told them that they would switch to Linux if MS made them pay for Windows. It is a common negotiating tactic for those big enough to negotiate with MS.

MS does not want to take the risk of Linux taking off. MS do not want ANY competition - take a look at their track record with Linux, BeOS etc.

According to the numbers Ubuntu released (based on machines connecting to Ubuntu repos), Ubuntu alone has a fair proportion of the number of installs MacOS has. Combine this with the effect on prices, and MS is losing revenue.

Desktop Linux also helps spread Linux on servers, where it is big. More people learn Linux, more people like Linux. That is why businesses that make their money from Linux on servers spend money on developing desktop Linux (e.g. Red Hat).

People do cook up new OSes. In just the last few years we have had Android, WebOS, ChromeOS etc. They are all Linux based, and two are "real" Linux (I would not count Adnroid as Linux, because it is too different - MacOS is a BSD far more than Android is Linux).

By creating a proprietary customisation of Linux, they can then provide what Linux lacks, which is marketing that will boost their own sales. That is also why Ubuntu promotes the Ubuntu brand rather than Linux (but they are too small to have much impact).

Yes, they are all mobile focused, but that is the more attractive target at the moment (its growing and the biggest player only installs on their own hardware). They have shown the way.

@J_Rad, you argument is essentially that you prefer Windows, so there is no reason for anything else to exist. Windows would be a lot worse without competition: look at how much recent versions of Windows are copying from MacOS, KDE etc.

The software you use might be better on Windows: the software I use is either virtually identical (Firefox, Opera, Sylpheed, etc.) or better on Linux (Lyx, Geany,etc.). Windows still does not have a decent software installer to install it with either. It also lacks a lot of features I want (multiple desktops, for example).

@wheel. Most people do not care about lock down because they do not understand the consequences. If it was explained that Windows 8 will mean replacing computers sooner, PCs costing more, Windows costing more, etc., then they would care. If you read Android owners forums, people are not happy when they find that their tablets cannot be upgraded.

[J_RaD]

It also lacks a lot of features I want (multiple desktops, for example).

here you go

[technet.microsoft.com...]

[J_RaD]

Whether the OS is locked down or not only matters to nerds, 99.999999999% of the population want a turnkey appliance that simply works when needed.

its also a shame to waste the full potential of a computer.

[wheel]

Waste the full potential? My computer spends most of it's life waiting for me to type stuff. It's a glorified TV and typerwiter - it's hardly something that does any actual computing. Once a month I run some reports that take a half a day to run. Other than that, nope.

[graeme_p]

@J_Rad, so Windows sort of does multiple desktops - in a completely broken and unusable way. You cannot move a windows from one desktop to another, tray applications only appear on one desktop, you cannot reduce the number of desktops without logging off, you need two clicks to swtich desktops... all that is just what they admit on the product page.

[J_RaD]

^ it sounds like you need more LCD monitors. :-)

[graeme_p]

Yes please. You paying? ;)

How do I fit the extra monitors into my laptop?