Iron Man: Steve Jobs is even tougher than you think | Hacker News Reader

Iron Man: Steve Jobs is even tougher than you think

pbs.org

36 pointsnaish12 comments

This article has little to do with Steve Jobs. It's about Apple's purported attempts to sell its professional media software businesses (Aperture, Final Cut, etc.) and, according to an existing Cringely theory, the use of this sale to enable Apple to acquire Adobe without without developing a video editing software monopoly.

I don't see any reason to believe apple is doing more than spinning off some niche businesses. They're trying to grow iPod Users into Mac users rather than invest more in strengthening the loyalty of the traditional art/media demographic. And an Adobe acquisition just seems absurd, both limited in its potential upside for both companies and highly uncharacteristic of Apple, which seems to prefer acquiring cool new technologies (e.g. touch-based controls) and developing them into its own product lines rather than merging with major stodgy companies.

Right now we are seeing (more) simple desktop apps (Word/Excel) getting competition from web apps like google docs. If MS would have sold off the Office franchise 4 years ago it may have been genius.

With Aviary, Photoshop express (?), apple may be looking long term and realizing these properties are at the height of their value. Could Final Cut have legitimate competition on the web in 5 years?

> Right now we are seeing (more) simple desktop apps (Word/Excel) getting competition from web apps like google docs.

The core profit center for Office is businesses, especially large ones. My guess is that Google Apps is having negligible impact on the profitability of Office at this point.

The people who are using Google Office are mostly people who would have been candidates for pirating Office 5 years ago.

In the future, Google Apps may be a real threat to Office, but the profit stream generated by Office is so immense that Microsoft investors would actively revolt if they even publicly considered selling it off.

Google Apps doesn't even come close to competing with Office at this point. It simply lacks far too many features that users of Office actually need. You're totally right that its mainly targeted at people who never paid for Office, and even those people aren't using it in staggering numbers.

Excluding Next has Apple ever bought a big company?

All the acquisitions I know of have been small and medium size companies and the technology has been something strategic; like coverflow.

From Bloomberg, AAPL Acquisitons since 1990:

Date * Type of Action Summary

2/ 4/97 Acquisition Target: Next Computer Inc

9/ 2/97 Acquisition Target: Power Computing Corp

4/11/00 Acquisition Target: DVD authoring software

3/14/01 * Acquisition Target: PowerSchool Inc

7/ 9/01 * Acquisition Target: Spruce Technologies Inc

4/ 4/02 Acquisition Target: Zayante Inc

7/ 1/02 Acquisition Target: eMagic.com LLC/Germany

12/ 4/06 Acquisition Target: Proximity Corp

4/23/08 Acquisition Target: P.A. Semi Inc

Even better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Apple_I....

Contains prices - biggest one was NeXT for 400M and then PA Semi for 278M

Thanks Dan,

It's interesting to note that 5 of those 13 acquisitions are for video editing software, and 1 is for DVD authoring software. It's also interesting to note that the last video editing software purchase was in 2006. Apple shopping their video division is surprising but not shocking. Apple buying Adobe seems nonsensical when looking at this list.

I misspoke about coverflow, they didn't buy the company, but bought the rights to the technology the company developed.

http://www.steelskies.com/coverflow/

Apple also bought, what was the basis of, Final Cut from Macromedia when the product was being developed to be a competitor to Premiere, but Macromedia management decided not to pursue that segment and it was sold to Apple.

Proximity isn't video editing, it's media assets management software and it's now been integrated into Final Cut Server.

Why would Apple want to buy Adobe in the first place?

"Owning Flash and merging it with QuickTime would give Apple near-total dominance of Internet video, furthering the advantages of iTunes and shoring up in the process the iPod franchise. They'd be giving up a sports car in Final Cut Pro, but end up effectively owning the road instead."

Cringely supposes that Apple is trying to dominate the internet-delivered media market. Being in control of Flash media would give them a further leg-up in that dominance.

I don't buy the QuickTime + Flash = video monopoly thing, but there are some good reasons.

If Apple owned CS3, Flash, and Reader, they would have enough control over the Mac app market that they would have the leverage to start an app purchase/management system where you could buy your apps over iTunes or something similar, and they were automagically installed and updated for you. That's a big step forward in both usability and control, which are two of Steve Jobs's three favorite things (along with design).

It would also allow them to push forward their strategy of using high-profile cross-platform apps (currently, iTunes, QuickTime, and Safari) to build awareness of Apple among Windows users to try to encourage them to switch. Flash and Adobe Reader are surely among the top 5 most popular non-Microsoft apps on Windows, and Photoshop has a lot of presence as well.

Buying Adobe is potentially an enormous win for Apple.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com