Apple gambling on Papermaster's leadership skills
Apple knew full well that Mark Papermaster would have to learn his new role as iPod and iPhone chief "on the job" when it hired him.Papermaster's former employer, IBM, filed a lawsuit against him last week, claiming that he broke the terms of a noncompete contract with IBM in accepting a high-profile job with Apple. InformationWeek spotted Papermaster's formal response Friday morning, in which he declares that the two companies are not competitors and that his experience at IBM is not the primary reason why Apple sought his services.The court filings reveal the interesting process Apple used to hire Papermaster to replace Tony Fadell, a longtime executive in charge of Apple's iPod group. And contrary to speculation, it appears that Papermaster--a well-respected chip executive--will have nothing to do with chip design at Apple on Day 1. News.com PollApple began searching within the consumer electronics industry in October 2007 for a lieutenant and eventual successor to Fadell, but it couldn't find anyone it liked, according to the court filing. Instead, the company decided to search for an executive with strong overall technology skills who would be a good fit inside Apple, modeling the search on the process used to find current Mac hardware leader Bob Mansfield.Mansfield was the one who suggested Papermaster as a candidate, though he didn't exactly roll out the welcome mat for his college buddy. On a list of potential candidates sent to Vice President of Human Resources Danielle Lambert (who is married to Fadell), Mansfield described Papermaster: "Mark fits the bill wrt (with respect to) systems and semiconductor understanding, but in every other way is a long shot."Nonetheless, he was brought into Cupertino in February 2008 to interview with CEO Steve Jobs and Fadell. Apple liked Papermaster in many ways, but it wasn't sure that his experience in server development was the proper background for the role--especially in light of the fact that in February, Apple was working hard on getting the iPhone 3G out the door, and it wanted someone who could hit the ground running.However, as Lambert said in a statement attached to Papermaster's response, "nobody questioned Mark's ability to lead a development team." The company offered him a role designing laptops, and while Papermaster was intrigued by the possibility of working at Apple, he wasn't all that crazy about that particular role.But after Apple got this year's crop of iPods out the door in September, the search for Fadell's replacement intensified. Papermaster was offered that role, and he jumped at what he called "the opportunity of a lifetime."As Papermaster sees it, his role is fairly narrow: he's tasked with overseeing the development of iPod and iPhone hardware. He won't be working on personal computers, he won't be working on servers, and perhaps most surprisingly, he won't be working on microprocesors.Papermaster's court filing says the P.A. Semi team acquired by Apple earlier this year is part of the group managed by Mansfield, not part of the iPod and iPhone group. That's a surprising organizational decision, given that Jobs has said publicly that P.A. Semi was brought into the fold to work on chips for the iPhone and iPod Touch.Despite a career spent developing chips at IBM, Papermaster supposedly won't have anything to do with Apple's budding chip team.CNETThe filing notes that Apple currently acquires iPhone microprocessors from an outside vendor, widely believed to be Samsung. Unsurprisingly, it stops short of mentioning whether or not Apple plans to eventually design and develop its own microprocessors for that product, as seems evident. In a declaration accompanying the formal court response, Papermaster notes that "it is also my understanding that I will not be responsible for developing the microprocessors that are used in the iPod and iPhone products, but rather those will be procured from sources outside my group." Whether those sources are outside Papermaster's group but inside Apple is left unstated, but Papermaster also says, "I will be acting solely as a product manager--I am not being hired to develop technology across product lines."An Apple representative declined to comment on Apple's organizational structure or the court filings, only to say, "We think IBM will see that the iPod and iPhone are not competitive with their business." IBM likewise declined to comment on Papermaster's response beyond the statements they have already made regarding their intention to "vigorously" pursue the case against Papermaster.Papermaster's argument against the lawsuit is that since Apple and IBM aren't true competitors, and since he isn't working on the small slice of Apple's business--servers--that does overlap with IBM's business, the noncompete should not apply. Likewise, he believes that he's not in a position to divulge any IBM trade secrets because "Mr. Papermaster's position at Apple will involve a completely different product using different technology that Mr. Papermaster will have to learn on the job."It's quite possible that Papermaster's lawyers are deliberately downplaying his connections to Apple's budding chip design team in order to make this lawsuit go away, since the chip angle is IBM's only real argument. Even if Papermaster isn't directly involved on a day-to-day basis with the P.A. Semi team, he will be in charge of specifying the hardware requirements for the iPhone, and part of that includes the chips that go into that system.Apple appears to be making a bit of a gamble with this hire, entrusting the care of what has become its most important product to an executive who, though well-regarded, has no experience working inside the fast-paced consumer electronics industry. And the most relevant part of his IBM experience doesn't appear to be part of his marching orders at Apple.But the company believes that his leadership skills will serve him well at Apple, according to one of the court filings: "Apple has hired Mark Papermaster because he has strong general engineering skills, is an outstanding leader, and because we believe he will be a good cultural match at Apple."
Is Google preparing to challenge iTunes in the cloud-
Is Google preparing to challenge iTunes in the cloud?
If Google did acquire the company, it could help the search giant keep pace with Apple's expected efforts to take iTunes to cloud computing. Last month, CNET reported that Apple has spoken to the top labels about plans to offer a streaming music service free of charge to consumers. Before agreeing to any new licensing deals, the labels are waiting for Apple to supply more information.A Google spokesman responded to a request for comment by writing: "While we're always talking to various people about various things, we don't comment on rumor or speculation." A representative from Catch declined to comment. Catch doesn't offer or store content. The company wants to be to digital media what Plus, Cirrus, and ATM networks are to the banking industry. Catch has developed a technology that helps hardware companies and service providers register, track, route and clear digital media as it moves across different platforms. If Catch has its way, consumers will one day access media from different vendors and devices as easily as people withdraw money from any available ATM.Founded in 2003 by brothers Boaz Ben-Yaacov and Yaacov Ben-Yaacov, Catch is focused on cloud-based music at this early stage in its development, sources said. In order to enable the cross-platform accessing of songs, Catch has licensed music from all four major record labels: Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, and EMI Music. Conceivably, Catch is one way Google could equip Android cellphone owners with a means to access their iTunes music libraries.Google's interest in a start-up focused on cloud music has sparked speculation within the recording industry about the search engine's music plans. According to a December story in The Wall Street Journal (subscription required), Google was attempting to buy Lala, but Apple won out. In December, Apple paid more than $80 million to acquire the company, which enables users to store a copy of their music libraries on the its servers and then access those songs from anywhere they can connect to the Web. Barely two months prior to Lala's acquisition, Google made news by partnering with the streaming service on a music-search deal. One music industry source said Google began circling Catch soon after losing Lala. Because Google was pursuing an acquisition of Lala, some in the music industry see the search engine's interest in Catch as part of a larger effort by Google to go deeper into digital music. According to music sources, the industry would welcome a new music venture from Google CEO Eric Schmidt with open arms, sort of like how the chiefs of three of the largest labels literally welcomed Schmidt to the Vevo launch party in December. Google's YouTube has already become one of the Web's biggest music outlets. Music videos at YouTube and Vevo, a site created by three top labels with YouTube's help, attract millions of viewers each day. The music industry has said for years that it would prefer an iTunes rival to emerge. As Apple and Google's businesses increasingly begin to collide, who better than to face down Jobs and Apple than Schmidt and Google?
If Google did acquire the company, it could help the search giant keep pace with Apple's expected efforts to take iTunes to cloud computing. Last month, CNET reported that Apple has spoken to the top labels about plans to offer a streaming music service free of charge to consumers. Before agreeing to any new licensing deals, the labels are waiting for Apple to supply more information.A Google spokesman responded to a request for comment by writing: "While we're always talking to various people about various things, we don't comment on rumor or speculation." A representative from Catch declined to comment. Catch doesn't offer or store content. The company wants to be to digital media what Plus, Cirrus, and ATM networks are to the banking industry. Catch has developed a technology that helps hardware companies and service providers register, track, route and clear digital media as it moves across different platforms. If Catch has its way, consumers will one day access media from different vendors and devices as easily as people withdraw money from any available ATM.Founded in 2003 by brothers Boaz Ben-Yaacov and Yaacov Ben-Yaacov, Catch is focused on cloud-based music at this early stage in its development, sources said. In order to enable the cross-platform accessing of songs, Catch has licensed music from all four major record labels: Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, and EMI Music. Conceivably, Catch is one way Google could equip Android cellphone owners with a means to access their iTunes music libraries.Google's interest in a start-up focused on cloud music has sparked speculation within the recording industry about the search engine's music plans. According to a December story in The Wall Street Journal (subscription required), Google was attempting to buy Lala, but Apple won out. In December, Apple paid more than $80 million to acquire the company, which enables users to store a copy of their music libraries on the its servers and then access those songs from anywhere they can connect to the Web. Barely two months prior to Lala's acquisition, Google made news by partnering with the streaming service on a music-search deal. One music industry source said Google began circling Catch soon after losing Lala. Because Google was pursuing an acquisition of Lala, some in the music industry see the search engine's interest in Catch as part of a larger effort by Google to go deeper into digital music. According to music sources, the industry would welcome a new music venture from Google CEO Eric Schmidt with open arms, sort of like how the chiefs of three of the largest labels literally welcomed Schmidt to the Vevo launch party in December. Google's YouTube has already become one of the Web's biggest music outlets. Music videos at YouTube and Vevo, a site created by three top labels with YouTube's help, attract millions of viewers each day. The music industry has said for years that it would prefer an iTunes rival to emerge. As Apple and Google's businesses increasingly begin to collide, who better than to face down Jobs and Apple than Schmidt and Google?
Apple Store now lets you buy items via PayPal
Apple Store now lets you buy items via PayPal
You can now pay for your next iPhone or iPad at Apple's online store using your PayPal account.Previously, you could pay for Apple products and accessories online using only a credit card, special financing or an Apple Store gift card. But now when you order an item through Apple's online store, you'll see PayPal listed as an additional payment option. Select PayPal, and Apple will direct you to the PayPal site to sign in and confirm your purchase.So far, the PayPal option is available only on Apple's website and does not appear on the Apple Store mobile iOS app. Support is limited to just the US and UK.PayPal has long been an option for Apple iTunes and App Store content. You can set up your Apple account to pay for such digital items via a credit card or PayPal. But this is the first time Apple has supported PayPal as an online payment option for physical items, such as iPhone, iPads, Macs and all the related products and accessories.Apple and PayPal have had a seemingly more competitive relationship as of late. Apple's new mobile payments system, Apple Pay, certainly stands to rival PayPal for mobile transactions. Launching Apple Pay during the iPhone 6 event in September, Apple didn't announce PayPal as one of its partners. Shortly after the event, PayPal took a dig at Apple Pay by by hinting that it may not be as secure as Apple claims.Related storiesVideo: Apple Pay vs. Google Wallet vs. PayPalWill PayPal work with Apple Pay? eBay CEO is receptiveRetail group MCX says it's not telling merchants to block Apple PaySo just why have Apple and PayPal come together for this new option?For PayPal, the move gives it access to the second largest online retailer in the US, according to Internet Retailer. And for Apple, the move lets it expand the ways that its customers can afford its products.PayPal gives you the ease of use and the security of using a single online account rather than forcing you to juggle with credit cards. Further, Apple is offering PayPal credit with no interest, so you can take as long as 18 months to pay off any purchase more than $250. That could certainly help people better afford Apple's pricier items, such as a Retina Display iMac or a top-of-the-line Mac Pro. PayPay credit could also serve as a handy option to pay for the most luxurious and expensive edition of the Apple Watch when that device launches sometime early next year.Apple and PayPal did not immediately respond to a request for comment. (Via Recode)
You can now pay for your next iPhone or iPad at Apple's online store using your PayPal account.Previously, you could pay for Apple products and accessories online using only a credit card, special financing or an Apple Store gift card. But now when you order an item through Apple's online store, you'll see PayPal listed as an additional payment option. Select PayPal, and Apple will direct you to the PayPal site to sign in and confirm your purchase.So far, the PayPal option is available only on Apple's website and does not appear on the Apple Store mobile iOS app. Support is limited to just the US and UK.PayPal has long been an option for Apple iTunes and App Store content. You can set up your Apple account to pay for such digital items via a credit card or PayPal. But this is the first time Apple has supported PayPal as an online payment option for physical items, such as iPhone, iPads, Macs and all the related products and accessories.Apple and PayPal have had a seemingly more competitive relationship as of late. Apple's new mobile payments system, Apple Pay, certainly stands to rival PayPal for mobile transactions. Launching Apple Pay during the iPhone 6 event in September, Apple didn't announce PayPal as one of its partners. Shortly after the event, PayPal took a dig at Apple Pay by by hinting that it may not be as secure as Apple claims.Related storiesVideo: Apple Pay vs. Google Wallet vs. PayPalWill PayPal work with Apple Pay? eBay CEO is receptiveRetail group MCX says it's not telling merchants to block Apple PaySo just why have Apple and PayPal come together for this new option?For PayPal, the move gives it access to the second largest online retailer in the US, according to Internet Retailer. And for Apple, the move lets it expand the ways that its customers can afford its products.PayPal gives you the ease of use and the security of using a single online account rather than forcing you to juggle with credit cards. Further, Apple is offering PayPal credit with no interest, so you can take as long as 18 months to pay off any purchase more than $250. That could certainly help people better afford Apple's pricier items, such as a Retina Display iMac or a top-of-the-line Mac Pro. PayPay credit could also serve as a handy option to pay for the most luxurious and expensive edition of the Apple Watch when that device launches sometime early next year.Apple and PayPal did not immediately respond to a request for comment. (Via Recode)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)