9 ms·
IBM is stuck in a cycle of constant re-invention, because they somehow manage to always re-invent themselves in ways that are even worse and more complicated fo
by Timon3 3y ago
IBM is stuck in a cycle of constant re-invention, because they somehow manage to always re-invent themselves in ways that are even worse and more complicated for customers, which they try to fix by re-inventing themselves again. Even if they initially planned on leaving Red Hat alone, every re-invention is a chance for some executive to make the decision to squeeze a little tighter on existing customers. So the question shouldn't be "what game is IBM playing with Red Hat", but "how long until nothing usable is left". I'd say maybe 20 more re-inventions, or 1-2 years.
- 5e92cb50239222b 3y agoYet they're still way older than most tech companies. I'd wager they will outlive 99.99% of those unicorn startups yet.
- Fordec 3y agoThe Lindy Effect.[0] [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect
- taeric 3y agoHow much of that is lingering brand value, though? That and simple ties into existing and old industries. You are also comparing to startups? Which... yes, most things die. Sometimes, it is the old things that die. Often taking a lot of other younger things with them.
- anyoneamous 3y agoImmortality is a curse, not a blessing.
- pjmlp 3y agoMany startups can only dream of being as long and influential as IBM is. Also note that IBM contributions to Linux kernel in 2000, was one of the reasons it actually took off.
- Timon3 3y ago> Many startups can only dream of being as long and influential as IBM is. Okay? Do you feel attacked because I wrote something negative about IBM? Not sure how that is relevant to my point. > Also note that IBM contributions to Linux kernel in 2000, was one of the reasons it actually took off. And that influences the motivations behind their current decisions how exactly?
- pjmlp 3y agoMe attacked, not all. HN loves to hate Oracle, IBM, SAP, Adobe and friends, without getting the point that many startups that go through HN programs never achieve half of what they produce.
- Timon3 3y agoWhat do startups have to do with IBMs business direction and processes? How does this relate to my point? Not every startup being successful somehow means that I shouldn't comment on IBMs recent business decisions?
- pjmlp 3y agoA matter of perspective into actual influence into the capitalist US society.
- dizhn 3y agoWe seem to even be hating on RedHat now. (I was bummed about the Centos thing too). People on this thread are acting like Redhat doesn't even release any free software.
- JonChesterfield 3y agoWell, they used to. Now there's software to be had in exchange for money. Mostly written by people outside of IBM. And the source access they used to provide is disappearing one move at a time. Which leaves a void and an opportunity, but also a lot of annoyance at IBM.
- zitterbewegung 3y agoI think you are being very pessimistic. All of their acquisitions are used to fund reinventions but due to their existing mainframe and other support contracts it makes a moat that people have a hard time crossing. I could see Oracle being merged or bought by IBM.
- 0x0000000 3y ago> I could see Oracle being merged or bought by IBM. Their market caps are almost identical, and personally I'd say it'll be a cold day in hell before Oracle merges with, nevermind is acquired by, IBM.
- Timon3 3y agoI definitely am pessimistic, but that is probably due to my time working for them :) I can't remember any acquisition during my time there that didn't get significantly worse. Red Hat was the one hold-out, but this thread is example enough for me to know that nothing has changed since.