4 ms·

I just don't understand how IBM - being acutely aware of what happened to Itanium and SPARC + running a cloud platform themselves - still believes this notion o

by DCKing 6y ago

I just don't understand how IBM - being acutely aware of what happened to Itanium and SPARC + running a cloud platform themselves - still believes this notion of "enterprise hardware" is the way of the future. Surely IBM was/is even better entrenched in this area than HP and Sun/Oracle/Fujitsu, but come on. POWER has a lot of history in consumer accessible products even. This is just a recipe for fading into irrelevance ever more.

harha 6y ago
Sounds like a problem that should be easy to find on an org chart. If you don’t reward good ideas (they don’t even need to be particularly good or novel, just common sense), you’ll have a company trying to grow something that’s reached its peak usage with motivational speeches, very inspiring leaders and good old pressure on employees as a form of local optimization.
- techdragon 6y ago
  It’s extremely easy to find. The problem is the org chart itself. The entire way they run this stuff is not setup to handle the kinds of things we expect (and get) from every other hardware vendor or cloud provider that could reasonably be considered a competitor to them in either category.
  - harha 6y ago
    Mostly, but I think you could have an org chart and let individuals and teams override it if they find good ways to reuse assets. I just don't think most companies run this way, maybe it's the military way of thinking of strict hierarchy rather than a market where the best ideas can develop or where you can at least break out of the hierarchy to get something started. The MBAs and bean counters would probably argue that it's important to get certain unpopular things done, but I think a market would solve that too, as soon as something becomes a bottle neck, someone would step in. My impression is that organizations are far too centered around VPs and directors who get to carry on without having to prove themselves again in the new situations they're in.
pr91 6y ago
Beats me. Can't believe a company that was making processors for the most picky of all industries (gaming consoles) is now completely ignoring the everyday consumer. Org priorities and financial engineering it looks like.
- tgflynn 6y ago
  They've made huge changes since those days, getting rid first of x86 laptops and desktops then servers then chip fab. None of those decisions ever seemed particularly wise to me, especially the last.
  - pr91 6y ago
    The most frustrating part is they made really good products(even if slightly expensive) but somehow didn't follow through on any of them.
boooomer 6y ago
What makes you think that IBM sales people and management cares about "the way of the future"? They care about the quarterly report and right now the best way to improve short-term performance is to milk your existing locked-in customers for as much money as possible.
- DCKing 6y ago
  Because they've just announced the next entry into a series of processors that by all accounts can take the fight to Intel and AMD's best (and has done so for some time), which requires huge investments and long term planning, roadmaps and funding commitments to work. Seems pretty committed to long term thinking to me.

by DCKing 6y ago

harha 6y ago

Sounds like a problem that should be easy to find on an org chart. If you don’t reward good ideas (they don’t even need to be particularly good or novel, just common sense), you’ll have a company trying to grow something that’s reached its peak usage with motivational speeches, very inspiring leaders and good old pressure on employees as a form of local optimization.

techdragon 6y ago
It’s extremely easy to find. The problem is the org chart itself. The entire way they run this stuff is not setup to handle the kinds of things we expect (and get) from every other hardware vendor or cloud provider that could reasonably be considered a competitor to them in either category.
- harha 6y ago
  Mostly, but I think you could have an org chart and let individuals and teams override it if they find good ways to reuse assets. I just don't think most companies run this way, maybe it's the military way of thinking of strict hierarchy rather than a market where the best ideas can develop or where you can at least break out of the hierarchy to get something started. The MBAs and bean counters would probably argue that it's important to get certain unpopular things done, but I think a market would solve that too, as soon as something becomes a bottle neck, someone would step in. My impression is that organizations are far too centered around VPs and directors who get to carry on without having to prove themselves again in the new situations they're in.

pr91 6y ago

Beats me. Can't believe a company that was making processors for the most picky of all industries (gaming consoles) is now completely ignoring the everyday consumer. Org priorities and financial engineering it looks like.

tgflynn 6y ago
They've made huge changes since those days, getting rid first of x86 laptops and desktops then servers then chip fab. None of those decisions ever seemed particularly wise to me, especially the last.
- pr91 6y ago
  The most frustrating part is they made really good products(even if slightly expensive) but somehow didn't follow through on any of them.

boooomer 6y ago

What makes you think that IBM sales people and management cares about "the way of the future"? They care about the quarterly report and right now the best way to improve short-term performance is to milk your existing locked-in customers for as much money as possible.

DCKing 6y ago
Because they've just announced the next entry into a series of processors that by all accounts can take the fight to Intel and AMD's best (and has done so for some time), which requires huge investments and long term planning, roadmaps and funding commitments to work. Seems pretty committed to long term thinking to me.