Businessweek has posted a list of what they call the top 50 most innovative companies in 2009, and guess who is sitting right at the top of the list. Sure enough, it's our favorite computer maker -- according to the survey, taken by "senior executives around the world," Apple is number one, and the reason listed by 47% of respondents is the products. Not that surprising, no? From the iPhone to the unibody MacBooks right up to the new Shuffles, Apple's products ooze new concepts and features and ideas.

Then again, Microsoft comes in at number four, and Wal-Mart is not far behind at number 10, and I don't know too many non-executives who would call those companies out for being "innovative," necessarily. But then again, both of them are being recognized for their "process," not their actual products. In terms of product, Apple is followed by Nintendo (no arguments there), Blackberry's RIM, and then Nokia.

So maybe Businessweek is just asking the wrong people. At any rate, congrats to Apple for topping the list (for the second year in a row), and we can't wait to see what's new in the next year.

After news of Apple's decision to pull out of Macworld, many tech writers are wondering if Apple isn't considering participation in the Consumer Electronics Show, typically held around the same time as Macworld, in Las Vegas.

Most seem to be asking vague questions about what would happen if Apple decided to attend. Even so, most of the pundit crowd seems to be leaning toward it probably won't happen, but it might. Maybe. Someday. Kind of. If it does happen, they'll claim they called it; If it doesn't they're still right.

As Apple produces more consumer electronics devices (like the iPhone, iPod, and Apple TV), BusinessWeek's Arik Hesseldahl sees a place for Apple at CES. "Could a new re-imagined Stevenote at CES in Las Vegas starting in 2010, become the de-facto headline event at CES and thus push Microsoft's presence out of the limelight? It certainly could."

"It probably won't happen, but it certainly could," he writes. The heat death of the universe probably won't happen tomorrow, too, but it certainly could.

BusinessWeek's Gene Marcial is gushing -- gushing -- over Apple stock, suggesting they're not only a good buying opportunity for those who already own some shares, but a good entry point for those who have never owned stock in the company.

"The case for Apple is simple: Its stock is cheap based mainly on strong earnings and sales growth, and the outlook for further expansion of sales and profits. And the stock's profile based on such benchmarks as its technical chart pattern and price-earnings ratio affirms Apple's attraction," he writes.

Marical quotes Standard & Poor's Thomas Smith, Barclays Capital's Ben Reitzes, and Needham's Charles Wolf -- all who have their own reasons to recommend buying the stock. Of 34 analysts who track the stock, 27 recommend buying and five recommend holding. Only two suggest you sell.

As of this writing, Apple was up by over $7 per share at 89.75 during a generally positive session this morning. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up above 8,311, an increase of 265 points.

This Business Week article describes the rising demand for first generation iPhones. "Shelf prices" (using eBay values of virtual shelves) for the 16GB iPhone are currently at about $600, and $500 for 8GB models. In other words, the $250 AT&T refurb specials from March are now worth roughly double what you paid for them.

From easy-unlocking to contract-free usage to eco-consumerism, consumers are looking for those original units and paying premium prices to get them. A majority of phones are heading outside the US for resale while growing demand at home keeps resale prices high.

Not unlike this guy, Apple is going to need avalanche insurance for the mountain of cash that it's sitting on.

According to BusinessWeek, Apple has amassed $20.8 billion in cash and short-term investments, adding nearly $1 billion each and every quarter. It's not necessarily odd for a company to have a lot of cash (Microsoft, for example, has $23 billion socked away), but it's beginning to irk the investors.

If Apple's stock price continues to rise, everyone's happy. But if it starts to dip, experts say Apple should consider investments like acquisitions (possibly in the music business) or raw materials and components.

Matt Asay of Cnet is suggesting something probably unpopular with the Cupertino crowd: tax it. Since Apple's profit margins (as a percentage of sales) are higher than Exxon's, Apple might fall prey to Congress' plan to tax windfall profits, if it becomes law.

Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said earlier this year that "Our preference is to maintain a strong balance sheet in order to preserve our flexibility." Charles Wolf of Needham & Co. says the company doesn't need more than $5 billion on hand, but he'd be more worried "if this was a sleepy company with no growth."

"That's not Apple," Wolf said.

BusinessWeek has ranked Apple #2 on its list of the Infotech 100. This list is designed to rank tech companies on their fundamental economic strength, taking into account "shareholder return, return on equity, total revenues, and revenue growth."

Apple was up from 6th place last year and came in behind only Amazon.com. Microsoft is well back at #23; Google is #11, while HP is #30 and Dell did not even make the list. Apple's winning spell just keeps on going.

[via electronista]

This week's BW cover story puts Apple's approach to business users squarely in the spotlight, as Peter Burrows captures both the remarkable surge of employee-driven Mac purchasing for the enterprise (often triggered by staff who are Mac users at home, or as I sometimes refer to them, "iMullets" -- business in the front office, party in the home office) and what he characterizes as the mostly-benign neglect of the corporate market by Apple's sales force and support infrastructure.

More and more companies are letting Mac installations out of the creative/graphics and video gulag walled garden, some comparatively large concerns like Juniper Networks are implementing 'open choice' on platforms for employees, and a very few biggies have even declared a new all-Mac era in desktop deployments. Though marketshare gains for the Mac have been driven overwhelmingly by consumer purchasing, at some point that platform choice begins to leak back into the 9-5 window.

While Burrows hits it right on the nose with the factors that are accelerating Mac deployment (beyond employee choice and the iPhone + iPod halo effect, the Intel platform, Vista's lackluster prospects and virtualization are key drivers) and on some of the reasons companies might hold back (hiring additional Mac-centric IT resources and a lack of extensive choice in the product line), I think he overstates the degree to which Apple plays it hands-off with enterprise users. Yes, some of the most critical resources for Mac IT are external communities and not Apple-managed, but the sales force and professional consulting arms at Apple have been quietly toiling away for years to improve the standing of Macs at the office. Big-iron vendors like Centrify & Likewise are helping Macs integrate into corporate networks, and even the Microsoft Mac BU is working hard to make Entourage a best-of-breed Exchange client for the Mac.

Just the fact of IT conference tracks at WWDC and Macworld Expo for the past couple of years, featuring Apple engineers and product managers alongside their customers, shows that on some level Apple has been grappling with the needs of the enterprise market even if it's not the top priority at One Infinite Loop. With the planned introduction of the iPhone 2.0 firmware -- which tackles nearly every pain point of enterprise customers with a vigor worthy of the Other Steve -- it does seem that some Apple execs have begun to drink the Big Business Kool-Aid.

Thanks to Arik + everyone who sent this in

Over at Business Week, Helen Walters has an interesting summary of a presentation given by Michael Lopp at SXSW on Apple's design process. Lopp is a senior engineering manager at Apple and gives a sneak peek at the process that Apple uses to bring such great products to the market.

Particularly interesting to me is the idea of the paired design meetings. Evidently each team has two design meetings each week. At the first meeting they're invited to "go crazy" and be creative in coming up with unusual ideas and approaches, while at the second meeting they have to get down to brass tacks and figure out how to actually implement some of those crazy ideas. It sounds like a great way to foster creativity, but also to make sure that there's enough practicality that things actually get shipped. In any case, it's worth a read if you're intrigued by the Apple design process.

[via MacVolPlace]

In a recent BusinessWeek blog post, writer Arik Hesseldahl says he has information from one of his sources that the long awaited iPhone SDK might well be delayed. According to the source, the delay could be anywhere from one to three weeks; with February drawing to a close and no announcement yet of an Apple event, this could very well be true.

The post goes on to say that last minute preparations are being made, and that the SDK release is a complex process (which tracks with our reporting as well). BusinessWeek has generally been respectable when it comes to sussing out Apple rumors (they did, in fact, break the rumor about the iPhone SDK a day before Steve Jobs announced it back in October). However, like with most rumors, there are always a wide variety of opinions.

Arik Hesseldahl has a thoughtful article up today over at BusinessWeek, describing why he won't be buying an iPhone any time soon. There are far too many great lines to quote here so go read the entire post. Hessendahl call's Apple's no-third-party development stance ridiculous. He argues that software developers are an important part of what makes the Mac the strong platform it is -- commercial partnerships and contractual entanglements shouldn't come before creativity and home-brewed innovation. I totally agree. The iPhone is a beautiful OS X platform that deserves to be opened to development.

Full disclosure: Arik consulted with me during the writing of his article.

For the third consecutive year, Business Week has named Apple the "Most Innovative Company" (they beat 2nd place Google with double the votes). Data was collected late last year from the top 10 executives at the world's 1,500 largest corporations.* While acknowledging the accomplishment, Business Week wonders how long their reign will last:

"Now that [Apple is] invading the living room and the cell-phone market, will it continue the winning streak?"

If the iPhone is a real out-of-the-park home run (a lot seems to be riding on that little device, no?), then 2008 could be Apple's fourth straight year on the top of that list.

*Determined by market capitalization in U.S. dollars.

This is the question posed by Arik Hesseldahl in today's Byte of the Apple column for BusinessWeek: what should Apple do with its $12 billion in cash and short-term investments? His suggestion: rather than spending more money on acquisitions (such those that led to Logic, Final Cut and Shake), the big A could start a venture capital fund that would help Mac software startups, and established vendors looking to port to the Mac, with seed money to get products off the ground and out the doors.

Hesseldahl points to other tech giants that run their own VC operations, among them Intel, Qualcomm and Motorola. Perhaps it is time for AAPL (back up to $87/share at today's close, erasing a good chunk of Tuesday's losses) to turn some of that spare change into "changing the world, one software company at a time."

[via The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs]

We're bummed out as much as you are about the Apple TV delay. While we are pouting in our room, crying our eyes out, and forlornly staring at our useless without an Apple TV Sony Bravia television, Businessweek's Arik Hesseldahl has been busy spinning some theories to explain the dearth of Apple TVs. Arik talks to some analysts who think that the 2 -3 week delay can be explained by a delay in FCC approval. Since the Apple TV is a wireless device, the FCC must approve of it before it is sent to market. The other theory offered up by Airk is that of a supply shortage. Perhaps Apple's manufacturing partners are having trouble pumping units out due to some constriction in the supply chain, which has necessitated the delayed launch.

Whatever the reason, I just hope that Apple gets it all ironed out before the end of March. I want my Apple TV!

Over at BusinessWeek, Arik Hesseldahl posts his thoughtful wish list for the iPhone. On top of the obvious music wishes (wireless music downloads, zunelike device-to-device sharing, and iTunes ringtones), Hesseldahl considers how the phone might sync seamlessly with various iApps like iPhoto, iCal, Address Book and Mail. On-board data storage would also be a big win for him.

He'd like to see a camera that does both photos and short video clips--and maybe even iChat-like video chat. Bluetooth support is a given in his opinion, but he's looking for a better headset.

I personally disagree. I think Apple should continue bundling low-end earbuds with their products and let us buy the headset we actually want and can comfortably wear.

Have you heard? Some manufacturers are making wacky iPod products! Seriously, it is true. Would I lie to you? Luckily Businessweek has yet another round up of these gizmos for us to chuckle about, though I've seen most of these products before.