#technology

Why are they giving us computers the equivalent of chromebooks? We need better computers to do our jobs.

What a Chromebook is best for
• Web browsing, email, schoolwork, streaming, Google Docs
• Simple, fast, secure tasks

President Donald Trump hosts a roundtable with top technology leaders, including IBM CEO Arvind Krishna and Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon, to discuss economic growth and deregulation. Krishna commends the administration’s efforts to simplify business operations and...

https://youtu.be/3Ps37tGEdkw?si=qi7yqTHFdb3EeK8F

The Wayne-based medical technology company has agreed to sell its original equipment manufacturer (OEM) business to a partnership between private equity firms Montagu of London and Kohlberg of New York for $1.5 billion. In a separate transaction, Teleflex (NYSE: TFX) will sell its acute care and interventional urology businesses to United Kingdom-based Intersurgical Ltd. for $530 million.

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/news/2025/12/10/teleflex-2b-sale-intersurgical-kohlberg-montagu.html

The Street sees through the smoke and mirrors.

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/ibm-stock-confluent-cflt-news-ai-software/

Anyone want to tell us about how Citi is handling AI use in various departments? I've heard that some departments aren't touching it, while others have gone full send and are exposing everything from policies to chats. Which one are you guys using too, chatgpt or another?

Tech should make work faster, simpler, and more effective. Even at a company like Nike, where the heart is brand, product, and sport - a strong tech foundation is essential to competing in today’s marketplace.

What’s tough is when leadership decisions prioritize image over capability. We’ve all seen what happens when someone is chosen for pedigree or presence rather than the depth required for the role. As a woman in tech, it’s painful to watch because it reinforces stereotypes and biases that so many of us are working to dismantle.

A strong tech organization needs leaders who actually understand the work, care about the teams, and can build the systems the business depends on. That’s how real change happens.

IBM will continue layoffs until it finds a business model that works and works reliably for many years. For the last two decades, Software, Hardware, and Services have taken turns playing the IBM not-me game. I won’t make profit, but I will amplify that other team which will directly own your profit. Without my synergy, you will surely fail, so you must keep me. Every couple years, a new profit maker is anointed and a new round of the game begins.

Even if they find a model, it needs to work reliably for many years. Not so long ago at the beginning of Watson (AI), a Watson kick-off meeting was held in Austin for the entire Watson management team. The business plan presented would rapidly accelerate to stratospheric heights in 3 or better yet 2 years and remain there for 20-30 years before starting a gradual and still profitable decline. Commoditization utterly destroyed this plan and business in 18 months. Models fail even faster in 2025.

In a world of cheap vanilla-grade CPUs, RAM, networking, and storage and completely free software, it’s hard to find a higher grade product that people will pay for outside of regulated businesses. And those who do unquestionably need the value add point to the cheap stuff and demand lower pricing. And the cowards in sales fear losing 100% of their commission and decide that a steep discount benefits both them and their client.

This is nothing new; it’s just come to IBM’s corner of tech now. In the 80’s there was a battle between two consumer video storage systems: Betamax and VHS. The cheaper — in both senses — won out. There were superior alternatives to Compact Discs for audiophiles, but the CD wiped them off the market. MP3 audio compression is terrible, but it dominated the music streaming and download business for a long time.

All 3 of IBM’s pillars (Hardware, Services, and Software) have experienced their own versions of this. That’s why they play not-me. IBM has 3 future strategies. Hybrid Cloud, which can’t sustain an IBM-sized business. AI which is already deep into the commoditization spiral and has as an industry accumulated over a trillion dollars in debt. IBM has already stepped off the AI stage, preferring to serve as high-end salesmen for partners’ actual products packaged up with an IBM bow. Quantum Computing: how many non-governmental clients will actually need this capability badly enough to shoulder some risk, finance the development costs, and pay ongoing support. Quantum computing could be the opening for IBM to become the CocaCola Bottling company of tech — providing a low-profit product that makes others fabulously wealthy.

Until these things change, IBM will have to undergo periodic amputations. When it ends in one or more passes through Bankruptcy Court, then we will discover how bad things can get.

A once failing tech company called Apple righted itself for a while by leaving the tech industry and joining the fickle fashion industry. Is there another industry where centenarian IBM might fit well?

Buckle up folks … and prepare for turbulence for the duration of the flight.

Perfectly said, @tq+1kb1metdd.

Or, what monitors do you guys use at home? Any idea what monitors the campus at Frisco uses?

Oracle appears to be undergoing a similar situation. Although uncanny, it’s not entirely surprising:

https://www.thelayoff.com/oracle
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kawcch11
https://www.thelayoff.com/post/@eq+1karc4qsa

Which companies in this situation will be successful in transition? International Business Machines was successful in the past but with the latest radical shifts in technology, will older companies survive?

What happened with poor clients who were onboarded to this technological marvel just before they announced DXC is giving up on it?

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mako254_we-keep-blaming-ai-for-layoffs-but-the-truth-activity-7400198309136515072-FtGc

With Verizon laying off, what is the impact it has on Citi technology, Irving?

Everything is AI AI AI
What happened to basic things like Networking?

USB drive appears under This PC, but will show 0 bytes capacity, 0 bytes used regardless of format.

Email puts everything out there for inspection and company retention.

In the 1970s, deep inside a research center in Palo Alto, a group of young Xerox engineers quietly built the future. They created a machine unlike anything the world had seen. A screen you could point at. A small device that let you move a cursor with your hand. Windows that opened and closed. Icons that behaved like real objects. Even the ethernet cables that would later connect the modern internet. It was called the Alto, and it was decades ahead of its time.
But inside Xerox headquarters, the company still viewed itself as a copier business. The innovations coming out of the research lab felt strange and experimental, far removed from office equipment and paper. Management could not see the commercial value of a graphical interface or a computer mouse. The Alto never reached the mass market, even though it held the blueprint of the personal computer revolution.
In December 1979, Steve Jobs visited Xerox PARC through a technology exchange agreement. Engineers showed him the graphical interface and the mouse. Jobs later said it was like seeing the future unfold in real time. He returned to Apple energized and committed to transforming these concepts into a consumer machine. The result was the Macintosh, launched in 1984, the first widely accessible computer with a graphical interface.
People often say Apple stole from Xerox. The truth is more complicated. Xerox had built extraordinary tools but did not move to commercialize them. Apple recognized their potential and reshaped them into products that could reach millions. The modern computer industry grew from that moment when one company overlooked its own inventions and another saw the opportunity clearly.
The story of Xerox PARC remains a reminder that innovation alone is not enough. Vision requires the ability to recognize value, invest wisely, and understand how transformative ideas can reshape the world.
Story based on historical records.

https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kaqkpf2t

How invested is JC et al in monitoring their workforce. Do they do it in-house? If so with what? Or do they rely on MS & Teams n stuff?

AI is a bubble. Will Cisco ride that wave to 100?
Thoughts?

Utter waste of time and money. Intel needs a real credible CTO who actually understands the technology that is vital for Intel's future.

... Will be the punchline for this fuggin' bubble.

LMAO!!!

How fuc_ing stupid is a company that knowingly wastes 20% of its employees time do to having to log in to disparate systems many many times a day.

Fire these incompetant people and get real engineers that know how to make this all seamless!

If everyone just boilerplats "confidental" on everything, does that mean nothing is confidential? You just know no one takes the time to think about it - therefore it's useless.

Should just default it to "confidental" and be done with it- and save us 3 clicks everytime we touch a document. SMH

That drill is SO ANNOYING. Who thought this was a useful idea? Using tech to hassle everyone. Great.

AD and SD called, 6 years with VZ. Was recently moved to a new group and was working with senior engineers. Promoted very early on in my tenure, great performance reviews. Didn’t matter they basically said my functions can be done by people in India. Kind of liberating but disappointing at the same time. I just had my first child 6 months ago. I don’t blame current leadership although he was on the board. The stock price su-ked for a decade under Hans, but all we heard was glowing results.

Which one of you brought down the VPN!?

https://fortune.com/2025/11/19/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-says-ai-can-do-his-job/

Two failing and dying tech companies trying to make it together in a pathetic partnership with the magic word - "Quantum".

(The IBM shares are not yet back to the 300 dollar mark - LOL )

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/ibm-shares-climb-after-unveiling-quantum-networking-partnership-with-cisco/ar-AA1QOYUP?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=7938789abfa947c2dfa46afd1353a0c5&ei=26

I’m having issues logging into my laptop today. It keeps trying to install software from the software center unsuccessfully. It also says my device has been disabled. The IT help desk said there’s a bigger ticket out there. Is anyone else having a similar issue?

My VPN just went down and can’t connect. Is it just glitch or they just brought down my access. I am scared now!!!

https://www.trendforce.com/news/2025/11/18/news-former-tsmc-svp-wei-jen-lo-said-to-have-joined-intel-allegedly-bringing-sub-2nm-process-files/

GF can't seem to get GaN right. They started with IMEC some years back, then bought a version from Ratheon, then the past few years have licensed or bought other flavors of GaN from TSMC and others. Why is GF wasting so much money to get a version of GaN working? Did they lose all their technology device/process talent? Something seems broken!!!

If only the CEO wishes he could click his heels and go back, monetise the GUI, mouse, ethernet and PC and things would be a whole lot different. 👠 👠

Quantum is not even close to commercial viability despite what AK likes to spout.

https://www.wsj.com/tech/quantum-could-be-techs-next-big-thing-but-for-investors-its-all-about-timing-aeebc9ff

Quantum computing has made big strides in recent years, but there’s danger in getting in too early

By: Asa Fitch
Nov. 7, 2025 5:30 am ET

Quantum computing is drawing renewed attention owing to a recent advance from Google and talk of the U.S. government taking stakes in companies working on the technology. But the industry has a way to go before the rewards for investors outweigh some glaring risks.

Most U.S.-listed quantum stocks have risen sharply in recent months, including IonQ IONQ which has nearly doubled in the past six months, and D-Wave Quantum QBTS which has more than quadrupled.

That enthusiasm reflects budding interest in an industry that, like artificial intelligence, may become a crux of geopolitical competition that the U.S. seeks to dominate. But it also reflects quantum computing’s significant underlying promise.

Quantum computers make calculations differently than conventional computers. Instead of representing data with bits that can be either one or zero, quantum computers harness the quantum-mechanical properties of so-called qubits that can be a combination of the two at the same time.

That tweak allows quantum computers to juggle more possibilities at once, opening the way for solutions to problems that would take conventional computers a near eternity. A powerful quantum computer, for example, could test complex molecular combinations quickly, potentially leading to the rapid discovery of new dr-gs. Already, scientists have used quantum computers to identify materials that could make solar cells more efficient, simulate Airbus’s aircraft performance and optimize power grids.

But performance is uneven. Even today’s most advanced quantum computers for the most part don’t outperform regular computers in arenas where quantum computing should excel. That is mostly because today’s quantum computers don’t have electronic brains that are large enough and don’t fix calculation errors reliably enough.

And it has proven extremely difficult to build large and error-free quantum computers. Many of them have components that need to be cooled to near absolute zero for quantum effects to become usable. They are often physically large and delicate. International Business Machines IBM has been at it for about a decade and produces some of the most powerful quantum computers, but its most advanced system has just 156 qubits.

Analysts say quantum computers will need much larger numbers of qubits to tackle many problems ordinary computers can’t. IBM released a road map this year that lays out a path to 2,000 qubits in 2033. Google, the other Big Tech company considered a leader in the arena, has a quantum chip with 105 qubits and is aiming to hit a milestone of 1,000 qubits, although its timeline is less clear.

Google last month said its chip could make certain computations 13,000 times as fast as an ordinary computer, providing a taste of the advances that quantum computing could bring.

“Scalability is the primary question as you look from now to the next five years or the end of the decade,” said Wamsi Mohan, an analyst at Bank of America who covers the quantum computing industry. “If you can make them scalable then the usefulness of this technology really becomes quite significant.”

Who will win the scaling-up battle is far from clear. While IBM and Google have poured in money, so have their Big Tech rivals Amazon AMZN and Microsoft MSFT. One of the smaller listed quantum-computing players could also come in from below and prevail in the market. Or it could be a startup like PsiQuantum, which is building large-scale quantum computers in Australia and in Chicago, where it broke ground in September.

Quantum computing is so nascent that it isn’t even clear which basic technical approach to it will scale up best. Some companies, like IBM and Google, use materials cooled to near absolute zero. Others—including IonQ—use charged particles trapped and suspended in space. PsiQuantum uses the quantum properties of light.

For potential investors—including the Trump administration, which has denied The Wall Street Journal’s reporting late last month that it is considering taking stakes in companies including IonQ and D-Wave—there is therefore no lane for exposure to the quantum-computing phenomenon that doesn’t entail a big dose of risk. Any of today’s approaches could easily fail, just as Betamax lost out to VHS in the videotape format war decades ago. Early-stage government backing of one approach over another could also have the perverse impact of holding back the industry if the state bets on the wrong horse.

How long it will take to shake out is also uncertain. BNP Paribas analyst David O’Connor said in a recent note that quantum computing was now less of a science experiment than an engineering problem involving how to make computers bigger. That could take three or four years to work out, he estimates.

Whether that holds is hard to predict. But it seems likely that quantum computing will grow fast and generate significant returns for investors if those challenges get worked out. Mohan estimates quantum-computing revenue could reach $4.25 billion by 2030. That isn’t an incredible amount, but also nothing to laugh at: It is about what Nvidia NVDA was pulling in about a decade ago.

The question now is more one of when, not if, quantum computing becomes a technology worth investing in. And that could be a while.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV-bEhI2nNw

I don't understand the long emails. What is going on with the org?

1-15k layoffs
2-Looking to gain subs from frontier

What about, 2026 strike?

He didn't invent PayPal, just took over 20 years later. Good Luck

OpenAI has been making it rain infrastructure deals. The AI startup just dropped another $38 billion on Amazon Web Services, adding to agreements with Oracle, Microsoft, AMD, and a plethora of other deals that total over $1 trillion this year so far. But there's one company conspicuously missing from the invite list to this very expensive party. Intel, the former belle of the Silicon Valley ball, is now watching everyone else dance.

So when OpenAI came knocking in 2017, hat in hand, asking Intel to invest in their fledgling AI startup, Intel said no thanks. Why would the king of computing need to bet on some nonprofit's sci-fi dreams?

Now, Intel is the one begging for a seat at the table while OpenAI doesn't seem to be interested.

"Why go back to a firm that has an inferior product and also snubbed you?" said Tim Derdenger, an associate professor at Carnegie Mellon's Tepper School of Business.

https://semiwiki.com/forum/threads/openai-wont-buy-intels-ai-chips-says-associate-professor.24015/

Don’t work here!

Fiserv stock is now under 60. With the terrible customer service and outdated technology offerings they offer that’s still too high. The fall of Fiserv should studied.

with clover slowing down our only choice is to compete. that means being fast and responsive with a modern architecture. much of fiserv is based on 1980's technology will a small group of people who resist change and sabotage progress. the key for leadership is to remove these roadblocks and then to execute at a high level the next two years. it's a daunting challenge to be sure