3 ms·

From the article : "Insiders say that marketing missteps and duplicated development processes meant IBM Cloud was doomed from the start, and eight years after

From the article : "Insiders say that marketing missteps and duplicated development processes meant IBM Cloud was doomed from the start, and eight years after it attempted to launch its own public cloud the future of its effort is in dire straits" I would say that this is a symptom of a deeper malaise. From following IBM over the last decade or so, I've come to believe they are facing the consequences of the "EPS 20" [0]. They had the EPS 20 for so long that the core R&D and other enablers towards the EPS 20 were sacrificed. Former employees, your views? [0]https://www.barrons.com/articles/ibm-slips-reiterating-20-eps-target-competition-cash-flow-in-focus-1400093983 https://www.barrons.com/articles/ibm-slips-reiterating-20-ep...

thedougd 5y ago
Submitter here. Yes, absolutely the case. Throughout the late 2000s, the singular focus was on EPS 20. During that time they still had a deep bench of engineer talent, easily capable of building a capable public cloud. Unfortunately, layoffs were frequent and indiscriminate to performance. It was not uncommon to see entire job categories or departments eliminated. Then, by the early 2010s IBM began to cry for 'cloud skills'. I never understood this. AWS was not built with 'cloud skills'. IBM had the breadth and depth in software and hardware, squandered it and ultimately failed to produce a cloud the world wants.
- mb-21 5y ago
  Agreed. Huge mistake by Palmisano to focus on the finances (the end result) rather than the products and tech that generated them. Hindsight is 2020, but I also see it as a huge error that they sold their fabs off. When you look at the innovation and interest in semis these days across mobile and in the cloud, could have ended up as a significant differentiator / value generator for them. Instead they saw it as “empty calories” as Rometty put it; all revenue and no profit. Had they invested in it, could have been a really intriguing offering.

thedougd 5y ago

Submitter here. Yes, absolutely the case. Throughout the late 2000s, the singular focus was on EPS 20. During that time they still had a deep bench of engineer talent, easily capable of building a capable public cloud. Unfortunately, layoffs were frequent and indiscriminate to performance. It was not uncommon to see entire job categories or departments eliminated. Then, by the early 2010s IBM began to cry for 'cloud skills'. I never understood this. AWS was not built with 'cloud skills'. IBM had the breadth and depth in software and hardware, squandered it and ultimately failed to produce a cloud the world wants.

mb-21 5y ago
Agreed. Huge mistake by Palmisano to focus on the finances (the end result) rather than the products and tech that generated them. Hindsight is 2020, but I also see it as a huge error that they sold their fabs off. When you look at the innovation and interest in semis these days across mobile and in the cloud, could have ended up as a significant differentiator / value generator for them. Instead they saw it as “empty calories” as Rometty put it; all revenue and no profit. Had they invested in it, could have been a really intriguing offering.