While I wouldn't ignore the original poster, these research companies do have a good reputation amongst their primary customer bases. Many HN commentators have

While I wouldn't ignore the original poster, these research companies do have a good reputation amongst their primary customer bases. Many HN commentators have opinions, occasionally an understanding of a technology/market, and infrequently have any large enterprise experience, so they don't see the need for services like Gartner. In the enterprise you can never get a decision wrong which is why these services have value. Stuff goes wrong all the time, but the culture is very much to cover your ass, which is why Gartner have such value. You'll get most value out of Gartner, Forrester, etc. if you are researching technology in an enterprise scenario and have done a lot of the basics yourself. You can use their write-ups as references to support decisions you are making, but if you have the option you are better submitting an analyst request and having them review your findings or add additional suggestions. On the vendor side it is a mixed bag. You have a IBM's and other entrenched players in the up quadrant for any market. It's hard to make the leap from being seen as a niche player because their analyses take into account all of the supporting services they offer. Unless you going really deep or plan to offer consulting services etc. then there doesn't seem much point to trying to get onto the Gartner Quadrant. You might be better off the radar completely because then a potential customer can't hear a detailed Gartner comparison which may be too generic to hold you in good light. IT people outside of the decision-making arena don't see the point in Gartner et al because they know enough about the business area to find and implement the solution. The problem is that they are often not trusted within the enterprise to make these decisions because of the culture and structure of the organisation.