5 ms·

At this point IBM is only around because it takes a while to die. IBM's leadership are truly incompetent and I do not expect to see them around in another 10 ye

At this point IBM is only around because it takes a while to die. IBM's leadership are truly incompetent and I do not expect to see them around in another 10 years. It's a pity that they acquired RedHat, as it will now be driven into the ground like everything else IBM touches.

eldelshell 5y ago
I read this comment every decade.
- theduder99 5y ago
  yep, they are so large they can easily buy successful businesses like redhat and the cycle continues.
- TaylorPhebillo 5y ago
  I'm sympathetic to the view that "IBM is failing" lacks evidence, but trying to look at the evidence objectively, IBM doesn't seem to be doing well relative to the tech industry broadly. Their stock price is flat since 2000, while the SPY is up 5x. Their revenue is flat/decreasing since 2005 (as far back as I can find). It's possible IBM never dies, or even never shrinks, but stays the same as the world grows around it. That seems like the same thing.
pjmlp 5y ago
IBM has seen unicorns come and go, and will keep doing so for decades to come.
pas 5y ago
Incompetence is rarely a factor in downfall nowadays.
cdumler 5y ago
IBM fulfills a particular niche: when you need to have a contract with a company the will take the fall contractually. There are plenty of too-big-to-fail companies that at the end of the day don't care if the project succeeds, just that if somethings goes wrong you have some definition of legal recourse. You buy IBM because you write in your contract "we agree to buy the necessary computers systems and software as require per our vender (IBM) and the vender will be responsible for ensuring compliance." Sounds great to both parties, except the loophole doesn't say that the requirements need to be correct. If things go great, fine. If things go wrong, customer gets to argue with IBM. Good luck with that. IBM isn't known for their hardware and software in the computer world, they're known for their lawyers.
- dexwiz 5y ago
  Operating in a Too-Big-To-Fail world is more about deferring liability than succeeding. If you fail, you get to keep your job, but if you fail you get fired. If you succeed you get to keep your job, and maybe a bit more, but not equal to the negative of job loss.

eldelshell 5y ago

I read this comment every decade.

theduder99 5y ago
yep, they are so large they can easily buy successful businesses like redhat and the cycle continues.
TaylorPhebillo 5y ago
I'm sympathetic to the view that "IBM is failing" lacks evidence, but trying to look at the evidence objectively, IBM doesn't seem to be doing well relative to the tech industry broadly. Their stock price is flat since 2000, while the SPY is up 5x. Their revenue is flat/decreasing since 2005 (as far back as I can find). It's possible IBM never dies, or even never shrinks, but stays the same as the world grows around it. That seems like the same thing.

pjmlp 5y ago

IBM has seen unicorns come and go, and will keep doing so for decades to come.

pas 5y ago

Incompetence is rarely a factor in downfall nowadays.

cdumler 5y ago

IBM fulfills a particular niche: when you need to have a contract with a company the will take the fall contractually. There are plenty of too-big-to-fail companies that at the end of the day don't care if the project succeeds, just that if somethings goes wrong you have some definition of legal recourse. You buy IBM because you write in your contract "we agree to buy the necessary computers systems and software as require per our vender (IBM) and the vender will be responsible for ensuring compliance." Sounds great to both parties, except the loophole doesn't say that the requirements need to be correct. If things go great, fine. If things go wrong, customer gets to argue with IBM. Good luck with that. IBM isn't known for their hardware and software in the computer world, they're known for their lawyers.

dexwiz 5y ago
Operating in a Too-Big-To-Fail world is more about deferring liability than succeeding. If you fail, you get to keep your job, but if you fail you get fired. If you succeed you get to keep your job, and maybe a bit more, but not equal to the negative of job loss.