Taking risks after careful planning are sometimes necessary for every company. But our leadership seem allergic to taking risks?
Unfortunately, I don't see how this company can achieve any goals without it which means that HP will just keep on sinking further.
Print is dead, like it or not. Profit from print is what keeps the company going but print is in a death spiral. PC business is cut throat industry with razor thin margin. Without volume, there's hardly any profit. With volume, the company needs to sacrifice profit.
HP was gone in 1999. Only the name remains. They made a few bucks using the name but that is now coming to an end.
I have to agree. The original poster is just stirring a pot. Probably a competitor like you said. Those of us that do work at HP get those emails letting us know what is new (product wise) and right now I get those at least once a month.
Frankly, I disagree, especially in the commercial space. Anyone who actually works at HP knows our future strategy, which will be rather impressive. So I am confident a competitor is making this post and has nothing else to do but randomly talk sm--k about their competitors. There's only one type of person that does this: a desperate child.
With recent releases of new products, we did actually take risks. HP Presense is a prime example. We made a product that is completely unique to our portfolio. Dell, Lenovo, and Apple haven't done this. Could you say that they didn't want to take any risks? What exactly is your definition of "risk", anyways?
HP is going through a slow but gradual death process. Just like Xerox. Both will be gone in less than a decade.