Companies buying Twitter: Enough already!

Guess what! Google is going to buy Twitter! No, Facebook's going to buy it! Or Yahoo--oh, wait, they can't afford it anymore. The latest and most absurd rumor, floated by Valleywag, suggests that Apple has been looking at buying Twitter, too.

Yes, Apple. It's a hardware company that really only markets and hypes up software as a means to sell more hardware--like how iTunes really exists to sell iPods--and yet apparently it wants to buy Twitter. I'm not sure Twitter could convince me to buy any hardware, except maybe a water balloon to carry around in the hopes that maybe I could lob it at annoyingly Twitter-happy Ashton Kutcher.

You know what? If I had $500 million in cash lying around, I'd look into buying Twitter, too. I'd also buy a flying car. Twitter happens to be, oh, the hottest start-up in the digital-media business right now, so it'd probably be a good investment. But it's also buzzworthy as a form of communication and news delivery--and with the iPhone, it's completely understandable that Apple would be interested in this sort of property. A BusinessWeek report highlights this: Twitter apps are hot on the iPhone, it'd be a cheap buy for Apple--so why not? It ends on a rather smart note, that perhaps Apple ought to invest in Twitter, not buy it.

Why does this sound so familiar? Maybe because we've heard it all before. Two years ago, Google and Microsoft and Yahoo and News Corp. and probably several Abu Dhabi oil billionaires were reportedly in the running to buy Digg, back when it was on the top of Silicon Valley's start-up heap. It was almost a done deal. And again. And again. And none of that has happened yet.

Somebody will probably buy Twitter eventually, unless it manages to come up with a magic-pixie-dust secret sauce business model that blows everyone's minds and it files for a phenomenally successful initial public offering and it totally single-handedly ends the recession and saves Silicon Valley and the world and yaaaaaay! But until that bright and sparkling day, let's stop getting all totally worked up whenever an executive from some huge tech powerhouse is spotted walking into Twitter's office's front door. Maybe they were just there to play foosball.

This is all giving me a headache. And I don't think you want me Twittering that I have a headache again.

[griffiw]

Thank you!!! I am quite tired of hearing about twitter...

[BlitzBoy1120]

Great post. Nice tone to it xD

Nice post. I definitely agree about all the silliness surrounding these acquisition rumours. However, I've always been a mac person since before I even knew it, and I've always believed (and Stevie J. agrees) that Apple is a software company, that just happens to make their own hardware. Sure, it is indeed what makes them all their money, but at the core of the company, the true prowess and innovation lies in software.

To quote Jobs, who has quoted Alan Kay in the past: "People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware."

I'm not saying that they aren't a hardware company at all, I'm just saying that they're a software company first.

Obviously, I can see this premise was integral to your articles thesis, but just thought I'd share my thoughts :)

Regarding your tweadache tweets, I've honestly believed that anyone can tweet about anything, anytime. Just try to make it funny/witty.

[SIGHUP]

Seriously? A software company? I do not mean to start a flame war, but apple did not even write their own OS. OSX is FreeBSD running an apple themed X. Safari run the Webkit rendering engine. Granted FreeBSD and Webkit are in my opinion the best OS and Browser Engine around but they did not write it. They are about as much a software company as HP is.

I see where you're coming from, but here's my retort:

Mac OS X isn't JUST FreeBSD running a custom themed X. If you trace it back, it's actually mostly derived from NEXTSTEP, being built on top of the XNU kernel - a hybrid of the Mach kernel, with some sources from BSD Unix and subsequently FreeBSD. They would eventually release this set of software as a free open source OS called Darwin. OS X is built on Darwin.

Ok history aside, the fact remains that apple put all this together into a really awesome package. Also if I'm reading you correctly, being a software company doesn't involve writing software (defined as a set of computer programs).

So using your logic, Chrome isn't software, Microsoft isn't a software company either - seeing as they didn't actually write MS-DOS initially (they bought it), Canonical doesn't write software either, seeing as Ubuntu is just derived from Debian, based on GNU Linux.

Just one last question about software. What makes the iPhone so successful? Is it the hardware or the software?

[SIGHUP]

You can spin that Darwin and XNU kernel history however you want too. The bottom line is Apple did not write their current OS. I would agree there is some Apple code in it, but I give them as much credit as I would to Microsoft writing DOS. I do not believe Apple would thrive or even survive as a software only company much like HP and Cisco.

?Chrome isn't software? You are being a little illogical here. Of course Chrome is software, but Just because a company has developers does not make them a software company. I write software for the healthcare industry but the company I work for does not call itself a software company.

As for the iPhone, It is successful because it is a great device (Hardware and Software). It is the first thing Apple has ever done that has impressed me. But, again its software is BSD based.

[The_happy_switcher]

These guys do NOTHING that can't be reproduced by another company. The only thing they have going for them is name recognition and that is hardly worth 700 million.

[servermaker]

You seriously underestimate the ability of others to overestimate the value of this thing.

[wmrfisher]

"Yes, Apple. It's a hardware company that really only markets and hypes up software as a means to sell more hardware--like how iTunes really exists to sell iPods--and yet apparently it wants to buy Twitter."

It's obvious that IT and "social networking" people just don't get it. Apple is not just a hardware company. Nor is it a software company. Apple is something completely different. Apple is a complete interface company that makes use of hardware, software, and mostly human understanding to allow its users to experience media and information in ways that transcend bits and bytes and clock speeds and all other specifications.

There is no way that hardware and software can be bifurcated and recombined by other vendors to yield the same experience. Maybe someday CNET will understand this.

[shootfirst]

So basically you are saying that Apple is dumbing it all down so you can spew propaganda, intriguing.

[Bartx86]

Apparently they didn't dumb it down enough.

[robotaholic]

Evan Williams is more innovative than Steve Jobs. I hope he gives Jobs the finger.

[fjpoblam]

Thank you for a very sane post. (I understand Avery labels is looking to buy Twitter, too, due to the compatibility of short posts with leedle mailing labels! Haw.)

[thechexican]

Apple buys Twitter, and I drop my account. Last thing I want is ridiculous App Store ToS/Restrictions brought to a leading microblogging platform.

[cerebral_but_dull]

The loud Apple-haters out there spoil intelligent discourse. But nothing could be more obvious than that Apple's business model is integration of hardware and software.

[Bartx86]

Wow, its been ages since I've read an article on Cnet. Sadly I thought the article was incredibly uninformed and was going to comment on that, but then I saw the replies. So I guess the demographic that reads this crap is about on the level of the article itself so I guess it all works out.

[robotaholic]

lol i got here from google news; - how did you get here

[B-McGee]

same, google news. perhaps google needs to look at adding another section to their news called fluff as this article is nothing but. and since when did a journalist's opinion count as news?

Apple buying EA sounds much more logical in my mind...

[cnedd]

"since when did a journalist's opinion count as news?"

B-McGee, have you never watched FOX news? They've shown us news is nothing BUT opinions! Thank you, FAUX news for showing how easy journalism is! Just look at the camera and say whatever you think.

On a sidenote, I'm no technophobe, but Twitter is gonna go down hard when everyone realizes how pointless it is.

[kgsbca]

Nobody is going to buy twitter. They haven't figured out how to sell ads in 140 character messages, so they are trying desperately to trick a company that is more desperate then them to buy them. Their PR team keep leaking rumors about companies that are "just about" to buy twitter, but it's not going to happen, at least not until somebody makes a cheap twitter device (like those pagers people used to have before cell phones became ubiquitous).

[pommiegranit]

Why would Apple or any other non-publishing/media company buy Twitter? They'd have to keep neutrality, allow all their competitors to use or else the community would collapse. Apple already has an extensive and passionate following, adding the disparate Twitter crowd is of no benefit.

And whilst those in the publishing / media business would probably love the eyeballs, coming up with the cash is just a bit of a problem at the moment. Twitter has to monetize itself if it a) wants to survive the GFC and b) become an realistic online property.

The only business model they and their investors seem to have is to keep it going long enough for Google to come and buy it and if the reports are correct and YouTube is costing Google half a billion a year then they are not exactly going to be in any hurry to add another money pit to their portfolios.

[70watts]

Awesome article. Ha.

[artistjoh]

Looks like it is time to deal with these persistent rumors. You see, Apple doesn't have a chance here because I have already decided to buy Twitter. Of course I do have a problem in that I heard from the baker that the guy who lives down the street from me had already bought it, and my hairdresser swears that a red headed client of hers was already in discussion over price for Twitter. And when I was passing my local realtor he seemed to be absorbed in some kind of deal making conversation on the phone - I wonder if he is trying to get Twitter too?

Nope, I don't think Apple's got a chance with this one.

[Suny Buffalo]

I'll Twitter, *******...."A Tisket, a Tasket, I found meself a basket....in it a Cup of Cappuccino..LMAO

[Suny Buffalo]

GEE, i dinna know that T--W--A--T--T--E--R was a baaaaaadddd word lol

[PacificGatePost]

As much as the rumor mill is pushing this story, it flies in the case of common sense.

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009/05/common-sense-apple-will-not-twitter.html

Apple is NOT eBay.

[oohmyygood]

700million? What's Twitter's revenue? Someone desperate for love on the internet may be stupid enough to buy this thing, but it ain't gonna be Apple.

[spydergt]

yea , its not only even about the sale any more , when old people old enough to be my great grand something comes on good morning america and jabbers her old flappy mouth about how she "tweets" i just dont care anymore, i closed my micepaste, and i wont do the others either , its not cool when it gets this much media attention ...

[pentest]

What a sad comment.

[rohneas]

Why did ANYONE think Apple was going to buy Twitter in the first place?

Seriously.

For the iPhone? Did we forget that Twitter is FREE and there are plenty of Apps in the <$3 range to use it.