This editorial on why Apple "ignores" the enterprise market is easily one of the most misunderstood concepts in business today.
It really hinges on many of the previous conversations we've had here on Campusfish about size and scale. Not only is bigger not always better, bigger can lead you astray in business to places you don't want to go. Technology companies in particular want to be everything to everyone it seems, which is a really stupid goal.
I used to beat myself up over whether or not something I was involved in was the biggest, or number one, or "best" by some arbitrary metric. I too went through an idealistic phase where I wanted to rule the world or come up with the next great thing.
I'm not sure why so many people view this as defeat or a fear of risk. If you can create something that serves a specific, yet small market, and do it well, why not? Mind you, that's not Apple, since the consumer space for them has been more lucrative on a per-unit basis than the commoditized "enterprise" market, but still. The Apples, 37signals and Mustard Seed Markets of the world provide great products on a more limited scale than related companies, but what they deliver is infinitely more valuable to the markets they serve. And the truth is, the business owners are doing more than OK as well.
Sometimes, you have to be mercilessly focused on the smaller picture to be a part of the big picture.
On the business side it is all about innovation, mitigating risk and operating margin.
Apple seems to pull these off well.
Diversity is good, when tempered by common sense.
Remember when AOL bought Time Warner? They had some issues, but it was a smart move. As the AOL business becomes irrelevant, the diversity of the business saves the day. Of course AOL/TW is a giant.
Apple saved themselves with the iPod. This little innovation pumps profits into Apple as a high margin product. Apple's business infrastructure is massive and if they had to rely on their desktop and notebook segment alone, they would be much smaller.