- Dejay Davison
- Christchurch
- New Zealand
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
What IF Apple & Microsoft united?
This baffles me, is this is a simple, clear indication of corporate greed or is there more to it?
Please share thoughts, or enlighten me to something I may be missing.
I don't just mean Apple vs Microsoft either, I mean all large corporations. Ford & Holden, Internet Explorer & Google Chrome.
Wouldn't only positive things come from this? e.g.:
1. Have a wider audience.
2. Their products would most likely be better as they have more people developing them
3. They can't 'claim' an opponent 'stole' an idea or prospect.
4. No competition.
I'm sure there's many more, but I can't think of them off the top of my head.













Bence Nagy
And the other part is that they'll never TOTALLY unite. Either they won't let them or they won't do it. The reason is simple: if they'd have united, they'd get LESS from the total income (if the 2 companies income/person is about the same) as leaders get the most and the leaders would become semi-leaders. More income in total, however, way more employees=way less percentage.
Steven Hsieh
I don't believe in competition
I believe in cooperation.
http://www.ted.com/conversations/12616/we_need_more_cooperation_than.html
Dejay Davison
I feel silly that I haven't seen this before.
This sums up everything, and more.
Thank you! :)
peter lindsay 30+
Barry Palmer 50+
Scott Armstrong 50+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Is massive always best for efficiency of operation, innovation, variety of choices for consumers, and so forth?
(You can find research on this, by the way)
Chetan Somani
I may be wrong..
kim kyeongmin
Dejay Davison
No passion, no innovation.
James Zhang 30+
pat gilbert 50+
That is crazy talk.
Competition is the cornerstone of raising the standard of living.
This video explains:
http://www.ted.com/talks/niall_ferguson_the_6_killer_apps_of_prosperity.html
Dejay Davison
While competition may be a part of raising the standard of living, I do not believe it is the prominent cause of it.
For someone who pioneers into the unknown, and revolutionizes, what has driven him or her? Passion
pat gilbert 50+
Dejay Davison
pat gilbert 50+
Dejay Davison
pat gilbert 50+
Dejay Davison
Tanka Poudel
The reason people go separate ways is not always greed. However at least one form or human emotion suppressing the bigger objective might be the case. In all cases we will see that it's our own choice backed up by one form of intense emotion. But the question is are we really capable to over come emotion and unite for a bigger prospect. I think still a great deal of evolution in term of thinking is needed to reach this day.
James Zhang 30+
Now as for why they wouldn't fuse, there are a ton of reasons why they wouldn't. One, what does Apple have to gain from doing so (wider userbase, more developers, less competition, less patent lawsuits, I'm just naming the ones you listed)? What does Apple have to lose (money and time are usually the case)? Does the gain outweigh the cost? If not, then Apple will then say, this deal sucks, we lose more than we profit. There's no reason for us to join together.
Dejay Davison
But..
Humans have strived through unity :)
James Zhang 30+
And your statement "Humans have strived through unity" may not be as crazy as some think. We have the whole open source movements now and people are starting to realize its greatness, but also its pitfalls (as in open-source is really hard to incorporate in a kind of corporate environment). But if we're talking about true unity, then I really think open-source resources are the kind of "unity" you're talking about.
Barry Palmer 50+
Actually, IBM and Microsoft were late comers. You might check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_personal_computers
James Zhang 30+