Thread regarding IBM layoffs

IBM has hit the Cloud Iceberg and is taking on Water fast

Between 2004 and 2007, three important IT or technology disruptions arrived on the scene. First, in 2006, Amazon began offering a very simple flavor of Infrastructure as a service and began their ascent to cloud dominance. In 2004, a company called Salesforce who offered CRM as cloud based software as a Service went public on the stock market and began a meteoric climb to SaaS preeminence. And finally, in 2007, the Apple iPhone was invented and then created a massive cloud infrastructure to support its many iPhone apps like iTunes and iCloud. The cloud was born 15 years ago or more. Instead of jumping on these IT and technology mega-trends at that time, IBM chose to, for the most part, ignore them or just dabble in them.

The chance to transform IBM was then. IBM certainly had the intellectual and financial might to reinvent itself. Instead it chose to protect its legacy computing businesses from mainframe to strategic outsourcing as the cloud threatened them all. It chose to ignore or only pay lips service to this cloud phenomenon and massive disruption until the most recent years. Now IBM has hit the massive cloud iceberg and is taking on water fast.

IBM could have jumped into this emerging Cloud market 15 years ago or even 10 years ago and embraced it to be a visionary company in Cloud. It just couldn't or didn't want to see the big picture of disruption that was to happen. IBM didn't want to change. Now it may be too late to catch up. And now IBM must resort to relentless layoffs, reorgs, offshoring, and desperate overpaid acquisitions to try and save itself.

by
| 3915 views | | 9 replies (last May 26, 2020) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+156WIZma

9 replies (most recent on top)

IBM's serious lack of entrepreneurial drive and lack of risk taking in the executive and managerial ranks may doom it's cloud ambitions. IBM thinks that overpaying for the market leader in Linux solutions, Red Hat, is risk taking. While this may be risky, it is not the kind of risk that needs to be happening all across the company to drive innovation and new ground-breaking, successful products and solutions.

What is needed at IBM is entrepeneurial energy to drive organic growth and the growth of early stage acquisitions. This is unlikely to happen as IBM has a play it safe culture (and for good reason). IBM competitors are less risk averse and more driven to allow failure on the way to success.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3wyd+156WIZma

"IBM has always had to buy other companies to stay relevant in the software world."

No, not always.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rdu+156WIZma

Everyone knows IBM and public cloud don’t go together. Even IBM knows that Amazon/Microsoft/google have won that war. Look at Softlayer if you need anymore proof. IBM is trying to capture the space where they still hold sway. Mainframe. Nothing more than that. AK also understands that, and thus his push for Redhat. It wasn’t because Redhat was gods gift to “open”, or anything else. It was because Redhat if adopted via the mainframe customers locks in the legacy. It also changes IBM’s (be all things to all customers) culture to a much more focused company Case closed. Mainframe still controls a pile and I mean a pile of data in the background, and IBM will not give that up without a fight. Until then, IBM has to shrink, and abandon their “all things to all customers’ philosophy. Luckily for IBM, 85% of their revenue still comes from 1000 big customers in the world. You are seeing AK acknowledge that and adopt IBM to that play. Redhat was his leverage to lock that in. It wasn’t Redhat technology so much, but rather their ability to work in parallel with legacy mainframe databases. How you get there is what you are seeing with the RA’s

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dlm+156WIZma

The world of public cloud is one of pay as you go. No contracts, certainly no long term contracts. How will IBM run a stable business under these conditions? That's assuming IBM can even get back into the game and compete with AWS, Azure, Google and, even, Oracle. All these cloud providers have SaaS or E-businesses to support or subsidize their public cloud platforms. IBM's cloud platform will need to support itself. Can this business model even work versus the other major hyper-scaler cloud providers who cross- subsidize their public cloud platforms?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xqe+156WIZma

Cloud iceberg? Is this some kind of reverse sublimation?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ylf+156WIZma

IBM has always had to buy other companies to stay relevant in the software world.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ddq+156WIZma

Gartner Magic quadrant on IaaS 2020 likely in July should give everyone a perspective. Take a look at the The 2019 version }>}^. Frankly it’s frustrating using this platform as an AWS SA. I wish them well, the principles and processes of Cloud are the people behind it. The skills and culture are missing and people like myself who advocate and support clients to use it are now on the way out. When I read the news wire how skills are aligning with the business, it makes me choke because you just k–led your platform.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1lnv+156WIZma

Very true. We are training on Azure and AWS and don't even have any IBM cloud mentioned.
Yet they keep saying IBM is the leader in Hybrid Cloud? Delusional

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1eoh+156WIZma

IBM is running down. No flagship product. Mainframe the only one left.
IBM has IBM cloud. No body is using it. Even IBM doesn't use it. How to catch up ?

IBM service group is providing service for Oracle, Microsoft, AWS, Azure, GCP. Is it ridiculous ? where is IBM's product.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1eyi+156WIZma

Post a reply

: