>Everyone heaps platitudes on Jobs but the reality is he has no understanding of or interest in business needs. On the other hand, you can make an argument that Ballmer has performed quite well on this front.
Yeah Apple definitely doesn't need all that cash they're raking in.
Move along please, point to something substantive and back it up with evidence before you arrogantly dismiss Steve Jobs. He has valid criticisms such as how will he be replaced? But what you said, absolutely is not backed up by all the available evidence. You then go on to praise Ballmer? Bizarre.
I think the OP is right, but you are misunderstanding. Jobs understands his business, but what products does Apple put out there for businesses? Microsoft has Exchange, Active Directory, .NET/C#/MVC, MSSql, plus many more products aimed at the enterprise. Apple makes consumer products and does it will. The iPhone/pad/pod, AppleTV, laptops, and desktops. They tried the server market with XServer, but that was discontinued this year.
I want to mention again .NET and C#. C# has become a cornerstone of the enterprise world, much like Java. You could say that Apple has XCode and Obj-c, but that doesn't really compete against .NET, except for desktop apps. But the focus of XCode lately has been iOS and .NET has been web apps. Of course this is a broad generalization.
Back to business needs. Microsoft is great at products for the businesses, and great at selling them to the businesses. They are also great at other things too, like XBox. I have had a feeling for a couple years now that there are departments with great product managers that put the product above the politics of a large corporation and upper management that shield the workers from the politics. Those departments end up with great products, like the XBox, Office (though I have heard Office just has the clout of being a big money maker to get whatever they want), Visual Studio/.NET/etc, Windows, and possibly IE (or at least the the current IE team). But reading about what happened with purchasing Danger to take on the iPhone stinks of to many people trying to tell Danger team what to do.
About the only place where Microsoft and Apple true stand toe to toe is the OS. Windows 7 looks great (I have only used it sparingly being a Mac/Linux guy) and OSX is great. I guess you could say the browser is another place. Both IE9 and Safari are good, but really, I think Firefox and Chrome have them beat.
How Microsoft can use this to their advantage is for someone else to figure out. Maybe splitting up would be good, or maybe they just need to say to hell with completing against Apple when in comes to consumer gadgets.
what products does Apple put out there for businesses
That's the beauty of it - they don't have to target businesses, because businesses buy their shit anyway.
doesn't really compete against .NET
Apple doesn't have to compete against .NET - Microsoft shot itself in the foot years ago by not building a Unix and by not taking advantage of the open-source ecosystem.
You may say what you want about .NET, but go to any software or web-related conference, and you'll see more than half the room filled with Apple computers.
Apple doesn't compete with .NET because it doesn't have to.
A huge percentage of crud business apps are .NET. That might not seem important (the 'boring' part of software development), but that just hooks a huge amount of business to the whole Windows platform.
I don't care for MS, but I do grudgingly respect .NET from everything I have seen. And while it is hip to use Apple and run RoR, Django, Erlang, or any other next big language and stack, .NET is huge in the corporate world where the stack is decided based upon politics and who plays golf with who instead of by the developers.
And yes, Apple doesn't compete with .NET, that was sort of my point. They different products to address different needs—iOS/desktop apps vs web based CRUD apps for insurance companies (example corporate industry).
Why does Apple need to worry about B2B? They sell consumer products--iPads, iPhones, iPods, Macbooks--that's where they make the bulk of their revenue/profits.
The idea that it's valid to criticize Apple for not having enough B2B is like complaining that Fender doesn't make flutes. It just isn't their business.
I wasn't criticizing Apple. I think it is the opposite. Apple is great at consumer products, while MS fumbled recently with consumer products, but MS has had success with B2B.
It's a pretty ignorant criticism to complain that Apple doesn't do enough B2B, that's like complaining General Electric doesn't do enough pharmaceuticals--it's not even in Apple's business scope to worry about B2B, they make consumer and prosumer products. I treat idiots with the respect they deserve.
You get my point thought regardless of the example, Oracle doesn't make phones, and Samsung doesn't make game consoles.
Here is a quote from Jobs: People think focus means saying yes to the thing you’ve got to focus on. But that’s not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully.
And can you give an example and cite how Apple tried and failed to enter B2B?
I am not saying Apple isn't doing well, just that they are great at consumer products but "meh" at business products. That is not a problem though. They are great a consumer products and I admire their ability to release a product without what would be essential features to others because they are not satisfied with it. For example, cut and paste was missing from the iPhone until v3.0.
Apple is great a certain things and at deciding to focus on those areas, such as dropping XServe and WebObjects.
Yeah Apple definitely doesn't need all that cash they're raking in.
Move along please, point to something substantive and back it up with evidence before you arrogantly dismiss Steve Jobs. He has valid criticisms such as how will he be replaced? But what you said, absolutely is not backed up by all the available evidence. You then go on to praise Ballmer? Bizarre.