7 Reasons The Next Web doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
With everybody falling over each other to come up with reason for Apple’s tough talk I decided to add my own conspiracy theory: I think Steve wants to own Adobe and Apple will acquire Adobe somewhere in 2010.
Sure, my close, personal friend Steve Jobs is going to acquire a company he hates. Good call, Boris.
I agree it seems a far stretch that this will happen.
No kidding. Why didn’t you think of this before you wrote this article?
To make his case, Boris cites 7 reasons why Apple will buy Adobe at some point in 2010, rather than, you know, making them obsolete by doing what he’s already doing, without having to spend extra money on anything.
Here are Boris’ 7 reasons why Apple should buy Adobe:
1: It is cheap and affordable
Adobe hasn’t been doing too bad in recent years but certainly not as well as Apple. It has a market cap of about 18 billion and change. Apple has $25 billion in cash in the bank and a market cap of 190 billion. Apple could buy Adobe with stock and some cash and not even blink. Imagine the power, influence and freedom it would get them.
Right away, Boris has lost me. He seems to be thinking that spending a good chunk of Apple’s war chest on Steve being pissy is something he’d do, rather than use his normal tactic, which is just tell people to do something else, then get more money when they do it. Hey, Boris, do you remember when Steve thought floppy drives were stupid and so he bought all of the floppy drive makers and shut them down so he could get his way? Oh, that’s right, he didn’t, because that’s goddamn insane.
2: It would give them Photoshop and Illustrator
Photoshop and Illustrator are so called killer Apps for The Apple Macintosh. Without it a lot of designers, architects and other creative professionals would have no reason to buy a Mac. If Apple owned these applications they could redesign their flawed interfaces, optimize them for the Mac Pro and iPad and make sure they work seamlessly with all the other Professional Apple Apps.
First of all, I know lots of designers who just like the Mac experience better, and would be willing to run Windows in Boot Camp or Parallels if they had to. So that argument doesn’t really hold water. Also, you seem to be making a false dichotomy here, as though if Apple doesn’t buy Adobe, or if Flash dies, then Photoshop will, too. That’s completely wrong.
Second, Adobe, despite their massive faults, are writing CS5 versions of some of their apps in Cocoa. Knowing this would require research, which isn’t as fun as vodka and circus bears, but it’s useful for not talking out of your butt (which is something I’ve never done a single time).
Third, do you really think anything remotely resembling Photoshop could run on the iPad? It may be a fantastical, revolutionary device, but it’s meant for the common user to consume media, not for professional designers to create with. That’s what we adults call a different market, comrade.
3: So Apple could fix Flash, save the day and look smart
Steve contents that Flash sucks and is outdated technology. What if he suddenly owned that technology? I’d like to believe that Apple has a fix ready for Flash that would suddenly make it reliable, power efficient and secure. They would launch this new iFlash version (built into Quicktime no doubt) within a month or two and also add it to the iPhone and iPad. How cool would they look by not only adding a perfectly working version of Flash customized to Apple’s own products but also to desktops Macs and PCs.
Here Boris reveals either that he is amazing at writing completely dry satire, or that he has a complete lack of understanding of software development.
Lookit, Smirnoff: Apple engineers are amazing, and routinely create tremendous work, but do you imagine that Steve has a few hundred sitting around with nothing better to do? No, of course not. If he bought Adobe, he’d ask the Adobe team to build it better and would threaten them with their paycheques. If he decided to can the staff and start over, do you think he’s going to get the iPhoto team to make a new Illustrator while at the same time working on the next iPhoto? No, he’s going to hire more engineers, and if he did that, well, crapdamn, there’d suddenly be a bunch of people in the market for a job with extensive experience working on the systems that’d need rebuilding. Who do you think he’d hire?
As long as we’re talking about impossible “wouldn’t it be cool” scenarios, wouldn’t it be cool if my penis was 5″ long and I had access to Stephanie Seymour and if I could also fly and had the power to shutdown Microsoft?
4: Because they told us they would
Apple has made no secret about its desire to use its cash reserve to do acquisitions. It also stated that it won’t just do that to add revenue to their bottom line but also for strategic reasons. Adobe is a healthy company and would easily bring in a few billion a year. Especially if Steve would fire everybody as he morphs the company into Apple. And besides the cash it would bring in there are all the other reason that make it logical to own Adobe.
I suppose it wouldn’t make any sense for Steve to want to spend his vast savings on a massive new data center to support his long-term plans for content streaming on the iPhone, iPad, and the devices that come after (which I have and are fantastic!), right? Because those kinds of things cost a lot of money, and while he’ll make a lot of it back, that massive data center — which he’s building — has a bit of an upfront price-tag.
5: To become less depending on third parties
Once upon a time Apple took a small investment and Microsoft’s assurance that it would keep developing MS Office for the Mac. You could argue that if Microsoft would have stopped offering Office for Mac it would have seriously hurt the platform. Without the main applications (the Adobe and Microsoft applications) the Mac would be a lot less useful. The same goes for Adobe. If it would stop offering its applications for the Mac a lot of designers and photographers would HAVE to switch to the PC to do their work. Apple has alleviated some of that risk by developing iPhoto and then Apperture but it still needs Photoshop and Illustrator. Basically it depends on Adobe to keep making great versions of its software for the Mac. And Steve doesn’t like to depend on anyone and had made it clear he has little respect for Adobe.
Hey, Perestroika, by this logic Apple should be buying up every single developer of software for Mac OS X, because without them, you know, there’d be a heck of a lot less consumer interest. And maybe Apple should consider buying every website so they don’t have to rely on anyone else to make nice sites for Safari. And, hell, maybe they should hire every customer of Apple, because they’re reliant on them actually purchasing and using their products in order to stay profitable.
Dasvidanya, this hurts my head.
6: To fix Adobe’s crazy pricing
I have an official Adobe package which includes Photoshop, Illustrator, DreamWeaver and a few more Adobe Apps. If I want to upgrade it I am charged € 906.29. Yes, that is JUST for the upgrade. Now I know that these applications are really great, but seriously, € 906.29 for just an Upgrade? Apperture is $199.00 for the full package. That is not the Upgrade price but the full package. Just the Photoshop upgrade price is € 296.31! I imagine Apple would offer Photoshop for $199 with upgrades priced at $99. At € 906.29 I’m seriously considering just pirating the software. At $199 I am sure a LOT more people would avoid the hassle of illegal downloads. Once upon a time the Adobe prices were defendable. In the age of $1 Apps and sub $1000 laptops this is no longer the case. As an independent company Adobe can’t just slice the prices of their flagship applications. But as a part of Apple it can.
Okay, Boris, you may not realize this because you’re just, you know, a blogger, and you don’t actually do any real crapdamn work, but there are these things called professionals, and software built for them costs more than software built for average consumers, because there are fewer professionals than consumers, and typically professionals use the software more than the goddamn average consumer does. Fewer customers for a product or service typically means that you need to charge more per unit in order to recoup the money you spent building the thing.
I agree that the price of CS4 is high, but you’re smoking something I’d like a lot of if you honestly think Photoshop would just be $199 if Apple sold it. This is a company that starts with a 50% markup, and you think Steve’s going to change that? Why, out of the goodness of his heart? I’m pretty sure he doesn’t have one. If he did, and if that were the case, why would Steve be selling Final Cut Studio for $999? Oh, right, because it’s a tool for professionals, and quality costs.
7: Because Steve is crazy
Okay, I agree with this one completely. Steve’s definitely crazy, but he’s the best kind of crazy: he’s a megalomaniacal CEO who’s stolen might heart.
I should point out that I’m not slagging The Next Web as a whole; the blog is cool. Daddy digs it. But, man, this particular post is nutty.