Apparently Subby has never heard of Spell Check.

Apple will decline? Gee. I thought they'd be around forever like some sort of mythical Methuselah of the corporate world.

Analyst predicts a corporation will, eventually, decline, people act shocked at this. IBM seen rocking in the corner, shedding more staff and selling profitable divisions.

Vaneshi: Apple will decline? Gee. I thought they'd be around forever like some sort of mythical Methuselah of the corporate world.

Analyst predicts a corporation will, eventually, decline, people act shocked at this. IBM seen rocking in the corner, shedding more staff and selling profitable divisions.

Don't forget HP

gozar_the_destroyer:
Don't forget HP

Yahoooo! *splat*

Vaneshi: IBM seen rocking in the corner, shedding more staff and selling profitable divisions.

Really? The IBM that has over 440,000 employees? That has grown revenue, profitability and margin even through the recession, surpassing $100B last year? That has doubled it's stock price in the last six years? That is beloved by institutional investors for its consistency, stability, and ability to hit or exceed its forecasts? That IBM? I think you'll find that IBM rolling around in a bed of money laughing.

I could actually make a good case that IBM today is in better shape than it has been at any time in its history, with the exception of the period where it had effective monopoly control of the business computing market.

In fact, given how well IBM is doing, your statement above is quite possibly objectively the stupidest comment ever made in history of the IT industry. So at least you've got that going for you.

They will be in the same position that caused Steve Jobs to have to come back in 3-4 years max.

When Steve's plans run their course and they find that Steve scared away anyone he perceived as competition, the company will go on a steady decline, where instead of developing new peoducts, they will start doing the MBA shell game till they run out of money and need a bail out or just go under and fade into history.

czetie:
I could actually make a good case that IBM today is in better shape than it has been at any time in its history, with the exception of the period where it had effective monopoly control of the business computing market.

So do they pay per hour, word or complete post? More to the point... what colour is YOUR badge?

You can make the arguments all you want, nobody who actually works for them is going to disagree that IBM has committed ritual suicide over the years, it's shed divisions that were profitable simply because they weren't doing well enough in order to favour divisions that WERE that profitable right up until the support mechanism was sold.

440k employees, yes. WHERE are those employees though is an important question and what are they doing an even better one. Did you know the cost of running Sentinel was £17mil per year when it was in the UK which was considered 'a bit high' they outsourced it to India, to lower the staff costs and well the Indians are better at this sort of thing right? £22mil per year for the first year, £25mil the second, £30mil the third. With less staff than the UK had. Something about them repeatedly blowing the front end off of USF2. Once FRU went over there it all went to shiat as your FRU no longer knew anything about AIX and your Ops didn't know what a BIG RED THING on Tivoli meant.

So, what colour is your badge shill?

czetie: In fact, given how well IBM is doing, your statement above is quite possibly objectively the stupidest comment ever made in history of the IT industry. So at least you've got that going for you.

I think it's because consumers have lost sight of IBM since they stopped bothering with consumer hardware. IBM is the company that makes the company run, not the desktop.

If you want to throw a bird at some pigs, there's Apple. If you want to network 5,000 offices in a single coherent system there's IBM.

wildcardjack:
If you want to throw a bird at some pigs, there's Apple. If you want to network 5,000 offices in a single coherent system there's IBM.

ComputaCentre. Fujitsu (they are seriously on the rise for this shiat). Oracle. I think even Dell do a nice line of such services. IBM's told one too many large customers to go fark themselves and deal with it; a LOT of the service managers still have the mentality of "Where they gonna go? We're IBM!" as their service walks out the door.

Vaneshi: gozar_the_destroyer:
Don't forget HP

Yahoooo! *splat*

Neither HP nor Yahoo! is good example of the thesis "company loses charsimatic leader, goes into decline within 2-4 years". Both are very ordinary stories of decline.

HP never had "charismatic" leadership in the Jobsian sense. Bill and Dave were considered likeable, approachable down-to-earth human beings. They were very popular with HP's employees, but nobody held them up as infallible. Since then HP has had a rotation of operational types, engineers, and "charismatic" leaders. There's actually little correlation between HP's performance and the style -- stodgy vs. charismatic -- of its CEO.

Yahoo! (and AOL and Netscape, for that matter) rose and fell under a single leadership regime. Neither one declined because of a change from charismatic to operational leadership.

Actually, I'm having a hard time coming up with an example of a successful tech company that did have a totemic leader and then lost that leader that would make a good basis for Colony's prediction. The closest I can come to comparable charismatic leaders are probably Phillipe Kahn at Borland, Ken Olsen at DEC, and Scott McNealy at Sun; and all of those companies were already well into decline by the time the respective leaders stepped down. Also, none of those individuals made remotely the level of detailed product decisions that Jobs was famous (or infamous) for.

So basically, as far as I can tell Colony's thesis boils down to "unique individuals are unique".

czetie: Also, none of those individuals made remotely the level of detailed product decisions that Jobs was famous (or infamous) for.

Just to go off at a tangent, but I think it's a shame more CEO's aren't that involved with the companies products. Sure it's no garantee of something being a hit with the people buying it, however it does seem to provide a more unified front when the person with the vision (for want of a better term) is in the meetings.

I still think the guy [Jobs] was an asshat, but then his presence at Apple wasn't part of my purchasing decisions.

Vaneshi: czetie:
I could actually make a good case that IBM today is in better shape than it has been at any time in its history, with the exception of the period where it had effective monopoly control of the business computing market.

So do they pay per hour, word or complete post? More to the point... what colour is YOUR badge?

Ad hominem, irrelevant. (But I do find it amusing to imagine that IBM would actually care what commenters on Fark say about it...).


You can make the arguments all you want, nobody who actually works for them is going to disagree that IBM has committed ritual suicide over the years, it's shed divisions that were profitable simply because they weren't doing well enough in order to favour divisions that WERE that profitable right up until the support mechanism was sold.

I work there. I know lots of people who work there or used to work there. None of them agree with your "ritual suicide" comment. So your unsupported assertion is already disproven.

And what's wrong with selling a profitable division? Why is that inherently either a sin or a bad business decision? IBM has done a pretty good job of selling businesses while they still have value if they aren't considered a good fit.

Incidentally, what makes you think you are remotely qualified to be a better judge of whether or not selling a particular division was a good or bad business decision? Did you have access to the internal financials? Did you have access to the business and market forecasts? Were you privy to the terms of the deal? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess "no".

440k employees, yes. WHERE are those employees though is an important question and what are they doing an even better one. Did you know the cost of running Sentinel was £17mil per year when it was in the UK which was considered 'a bit high' they outsourced it to India, to lower the staff costs and well the Indians are better at this sort of thing right? £22mil per year for the first year, £25mil the second, £30mil the third. With less staff than the UK had. Something about them repeatedly blowing the front end off of USF2. Once FRU went over there it all went to shiat as your FRU no longer knew anything about AIX and your Ops didn't know what a BIG RED THING on Tivoli meant.


Ah, now we get to the heart of the matter. YOUR division got offshored and YOU got laid off. Therefore you conclude that IBM is teh dumb that doesn't know what it's doing and is slowly dying (despite all facts to the contrary). Because obviously your personal story is more significant than all the facts that prove that IBM is doing very nicely indeed without you.

So, what colour is your badge shill?

Oh look, the popular Internet circumstantial ad hominem, further proof that you don't actually have a single real argument on your side. If you can't play the ball, play the man, am I right?

But congratulations on deciding to double down on the stupidity.

Back when Jesus was alive, his cult wasn't that big. It's the idea that he rose again which is why there are cults for him today. Just sayin'.

Vaneshi: Just to go off at a tangent, but I think it's a shame more CEO's aren't that involved with the companies products. Sure it's no garantee of something being a hit with the people buying it, however it does seem to provide a more unified front when the person with the vision (for want of a better term) is in the meetings.

Great (rather than merely good) products do often have a singular vision, even if it's not necessarily the CEO. The original Palm had that, as did the original Handspring. Great car companies often have a powerful chief designer who sets the "design language" (early years of Porsche, for example). And open source projects are often able to exploit this too: without the need to run a business, the leader of a project can be that technical or architectural visionary "benign dictator for life". Most Microsoft products are, by contrast, very obviously the result of mediocrity by committee. I've seen people as diverse as Fred Brooks and Don Norman advocate for the singular vision.

It makes sense, because no business has ever succeeded without Steve Jobs.

The first bit of kit released with little input from Jobs due to illness (since Apple rose again in the early 2000s) was this:

A Shuffle, primarily used by runners and exercisers, that had no controls on it at all, just on the headphones.

A device squarely aimed at a demographic that will almost always use their own in.ear buds.

There is some truth to the rumours that Apple has an awful lot of idiots, and was incredibly dependent on Jobs.

dwrash: They will be in the same position that caused Steve Jobs to have to come back in 3-4 years max.

This is entirely possible. Steve never was the innovator many believed, but he was always excellent at marketing and understanding what products would fit the business model. He was also able to keep tight enough control to prevent Apple products from having issues that competitors' products dealt with. Finding a successor with such a clear vision will be very difficult. They may be OK while they work through the ideas Steve had lined out when he died, assuming they can actually implement them the way he would, but after that, who knows?

/not a Jobs fan
//but he built a good company

czetie: lol

No, my division wasn't off shored. I avoided Merlin, Meteor and all the others. I left because I couldn't in good faith continue working for a company that was so utterly unprofessional in its dealings with customers.

My point still stands, on the books, internally, the company is hemoraging cash due to rash outsourcing policies which failed to deliver the expected savings. Now, they are cooking the books and playing pass the parcel with this but it still doesn't stop the very sad truth that sooner or later this parcel is going to have to be opened and when it is that, much loved share price (which means next to nothing as it stands) is going to tank like you wouldn't believe.

And yes, I just said share price means bollocks. Nintendo (as an example) announce they'll be using PPC for the WiiU, an IBM technology adds the media: share price goes up. Nintendo announce WiiU didn't sell as well as expected in the first quarter, with it's IBM processor adds the media: share price goes down. IBM still sold x pallets of PPC chips to Nintendo for $y profit.

Don't worry though, I'm sure they'll bench you for the required 6 months whilst you try and find an opening internally before they finally let you go. A lot of very bright people ended up going that way and in to the welcoming arms of other companies running managed services, companies like those I already named. Hopefully they won't have face raped the 'C' pensions by the time that happens to you.

And yes, I do know for a fact IBM and the others care about what is said on Internet forums about them.

Nem Wan: It makes sense, because no business has ever succeeded without Steve Jobs.

No, it makes sense because Apple failed without Steve Jobs once already.

Vaneshi: So, what colour is your badge shill?

Shill or not, he has a point. IBM is overlooked by the public and media because they're not making the newest shiny that the consumer is convinced they have to have right this instant. IBM is an incredibly powerful, stable and profitable company. I'm not going to get in your face and accuse you of making the stupidest comment in IT history, because hey, Steve Ballmer is still breathing and talking, but you could do a lot worse then IBM as an investment. They may just surprise in the next decade or so as well--they are working on some pretty cool shiat.

Vaneshi: My point still stands, on the books, internally, the company is hemoraging cash due to rash outsourcing policies which failed to deliver the expected savings

Or, maybe I'm wrong and IBM is up to some bad accounting practices that will catch up with them. Well, what the hell. I stand by my comment about Ballmer though.

czetie: Most Microsoft products are, by contrast, very obviously the result of mediocrity by committee.

There is a story floating about the internet from a guy who had two meetings; one at MS the other at Apple. The MS one excluded the designers in favour of the managers deciding upon UI elements, placement, styling and such. The Apple meeting was delayed for 5min whilst they waited for the design team to arrive (he'd been help up in another meeting). Both meetings had the companies respective CEO's in them (Ballmer & Jobs, this being a post-Gates MS).

I do have to wonder why, with so many advocates of the 'unified vision' thing it isn't more popular in companies? It can't simply be control freakery.

Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher:
Or, maybe I'm wrong and IBM is up to some bad accounting practices that will catch up with them. Well, what the hell. I stand by my comment about Ballmer though.

I am something of an oddity. I love my Apple products, desire a strong an innovative Microsoft (I think Ballmer should be booted out) and hope your Boobies is correct about IBM settling itself and getting back to business comes to pass.

Vaneshi: czetie: Most Microsoft products are, by contrast, very obviously the result of mediocrity by committee.

There is a story floating about the internet from a guy who had two meetings; one at MS the other at Apple. The MS one excluded the designers in favour of the managers deciding upon UI elements, placement, styling and such. The Apple meeting was delayed for 5min whilst they waited for the design team to arrive (he'd been help up in another meeting). Both meetings had the companies respective CEO's in them (Ballmer & Jobs, this being a post-Gates MS).

I do have to wonder why, with so many advocates of the 'unified vision' thing it isn't more popular in companies? It can't simply be control freakery.

I'd e more interested in what on earth this fantastical project could be that would include product meetings at both Apple and MS.

Really Fark? You Boobies that, when it isn't even a actual post made first?

Filter pwned I guess.

Bungles:
I'd e more interested in what on earth this fantastical project could be that would include product meetings at both Apple and MS.

Office:Mac? Farked if I know, I just remember reading the story and it was CEO level at both companies. Hell it was a fark link.

Vaneshi: Bungles:
I'd e more interested in what on earth this fantastical project could be that would include product meetings at both Apple and MS.

Office:Mac? Farked if I know, I just remember reading the story and it was CEO level at both companies. Hell it was a fark link.

Vaneshi: Bungles:
I'd e more interested in what on earth this fantastical project could be that would include product meetings at both Apple and MS.

Office:Mac? Farked if I know, I just remember reading the story and it was CEO level at both companies. Hell it was a fark link.


It just sounds suspiciously like an Aesop's Fable...

Vaneshi: Really Fark? You Boobies that, when it isn't even a actual post made first?

Filter pwned I guess.

You must be new here.

Man, Steve Jobs is so Steve Jobs that Steve Jobs Steve Jobs Tupac Brett Favre Steve Jobs.

For the quarter ending March 31st, Apple recorded $39.2 billion in revenue and $11.6 billion in profit.

For the quarter Apple sold:
35.1 million iPhones - 88% increase
11.8 million iPads - 151% increase

Current cash reserves of $110,200,000,000.00

czetie: Actually, I'm having a hard time coming up with an example of a successful tech company that did have a totemic leader and then lost that leader that would make a good basis for Colony's prediction.

Thing is, everything that went ballistic that came out of Apple went though Steve Jobs. He was a seriously exacting guy who could grasp what customers wanted in the way that most tech CEOs can't. He didn't just say "that'll do", he said "no, go back redo this" and did it 100 times. The guy got involved in the design of men's rooms door handles of the Apple Stores, for goodness sakes.

And that's why people bought Apple's stuff. I'm not much of an Apple buyer but people coo over their iProducts in a way that people with HTCs and Dells just don't. If Apple slip even a little, that'll be gone.

Vaneshi: Really Fark? You Boobies that, when it isn't even a actual post made first?

Filter pwned I guess.

Yep, it'll get you anytime you put...that word...in your post. I've been here years and still do it sometimes.

Twilight Snarkle: Man, Steve Jobs is so Steve Jobs that Steve Jobs Steve Jobs Tupac Brett Favre Steve Jobs.

You missed a Tebow.

So when can we expect an iCrusade and iNquisition?

Bungles: Vaneshi: czetie: Most Microsoft products are, by contrast, very obviously the result of mediocrity by committee.

There is a story floating about the internet from a guy who had two meetings; one at MS the other at Apple. The MS one excluded the designers in favour of the managers deciding upon UI elements, placement, styling and such. The Apple meeting was delayed for 5min whilst they waited for the design team to arrive (he'd been help up in another meeting). Both meetings had the companies respective CEO's in them (Ballmer & Jobs, this being a post-Gates MS).

I do have to wonder why, with so many advocates of the 'unified vision' thing it isn't more popular in companies? It can't simply be control freakery.

I'd e more interested in what on earth this fantastical project could be that would include product meetings at both Apple and MS.

It's made up. See, this proves that Gates is a jerk who doesn't care about design while Jobs is willing to put everything on hold so he can hear what his low level employees think.

Won't matter. If Apple goes, the lemmings will find some other rip-off to flock to.

She comes in colors everywhere: Vaneshi: Really Fark? You Boobies that, when it isn't even a actual post made first?

Filter pwned I guess.

You must be new here.

No, I just hadn't thought about it happening until it happened.

Satanic_Hamster: It's made up. See, this proves that Gates is a jerk who doesn't care about design while Jobs is willing to put everything on hold so he can hear what his low level employees think.

Fascinating, a philanthropist and a time traveller. Is there anything your God can't do?


Bungles:
It just sounds suspiciously like an Aesop's Fable...

I'm inclined to be neutral on it but I can see where you're coming from.

PsyLord: So when can we expect an iCrusade and iNquisition?

NOBODY expects an iNquisition.

I was raised in an Apple household and I've never heard of Jesus.

Our whole family dresses in our best on Sunday morning and goes to the Apple Store for worship.

WWJD?

/Jobsus loves you

Foundling: I was raised in an Apple household and I've never heard of Jesus.

Our whole family dresses in our best on Sunday morning and goes to the Apple Store for worship.

Don't drink the wine, especially if the cult leader is wearing sunglasses.

Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Vaneshi: So, what colour is your badge shill?
Shill or not, he has a point. IBM is overlooked by the public and media because they're not making the newest shiny that the consumer is convinced they have to have right this instant. IBM is an incredibly powerful, stable and profitable company. I'm not going to get in your face and accuse you of making the stupidest comment in IT history, because hey, Steve Ballmer is still breathing and talking, but you could do a lot worse then IBM as an investment. They may just surprise in the next decade or so as well--they are working on some pretty cool shiat.

I'm not a gotta-have-the-newest-thing person, and I've always owned IBM laptops (lenovo, I guess.) They look like this:



Yup, that's a flat, black, non-shiny computer. Every time I take it out in public, people seem to think that it's from 1995.

I like them anyway. never had anything Apple.

Roughly 300 years after Job's death, a council will be held in another country (possibly Mexico) that will determine his role in Apple. Was he an inventor, or a marketer? What about the rumor that he abused his employees, and that manic product shipping deadlines resulted in Foxconn employees jumping off the roofs? Which historical accounts of his life and actions are to be trusted?

After all, we can't have different histories taught of the same man...

Brave New World predicted that people in the future would worship Ford. I think it will actually be Jobs.

Of course, subby jokes about this as Christianity is in decline across Europe and the more so in the United States and Canada.

uncoveror: Brave New World predicted that people in the future would worship Ford. I think it will actually be Jobs.

The profit Jobs, born in the year of our Ford 1955....

cryinoutloud: Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Vaneshi: So, what colour is your badge shill?
Shill or not, he has a point. IBM is overlooked by the public and media because they're not making the newest shiny that the consumer is convinced they have to have right this instant. IBM is an incredibly powerful, stable and profitable company. I'm not going to get in your face and accuse you of making the stupidest comment in IT history, because hey, Steve Ballmer is still breathing and talking, but you could do a lot worse then IBM as an investment. They may just surprise in the next decade or so as well--they are working on some pretty cool shiat.

I'm not a gotta-have-the-newest-thing person, and I've always owned IBM laptops (lenovo, I guess.) They look like this:

[www.notebookcheck.net image 250x206]

Yup, that's a flat, black, non-shiny computer. Every time I take it out in public, people seem to think that it's from 1995.

I like them anyway. never had anything Apple.

I've had lots of MacBooks and several Macs. I dropped Apple completely a few years ago, though (with the exception of my iPad, which I eventually dropped, too) and switched back to Windows when Windows 7 was made available.

My current laptop is a Sony Vaio Z. It's made of carbon fiber, and it's black and plan except for the Vaio on the lid. It's super slim, has an SSD instead of HD, Core i7 CPU, and has a dock that gives it discrete Radeon graphics when I need them. I love the thing. It blows away every MacBook I ever had, in every category.



It's not that flashy-looking, but it is sturdy, fast, and well-made. My only gripe is that I can't upgrade the RAM, because as an ultraportable it's pretty well sealed and permanently stuck with the stock 4GB. It has great battery life, and lots of connectors (which the MacBook Air fails at).

Sony charges way too much for it, but for that money you're getting a lot of features, as opposed to Apple who gives far less bang for the buck.

I'm glad I switched, because I was throwing a lot of money away and not getting basic features like HDMI ports, SD slots, and discrete graphics.

Apple makes great casings for their computers. It's just too bad they're so determined to make you pay through the nose to get simple things like HDMI connectivity.

ZeroCorpse: cryinoutloud: Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Vaneshi: So, what colour is your badge shill?
Shill or not, he has a point. IBM is overlooked by the public and media because they're not making the newest shiny that the consumer is convinced they have to have right this instant. IBM is an incredibly powerful, stable and profitable company. I'm not going to get in your face and accuse you of making the stupidest comment in IT history, because hey, Steve Ballmer is still breathing and talking, but you could do a lot worse then IBM as an investment. They may just surprise in the next decade or so as well--they are working on some pretty cool shiat.

I'm not a gotta-have-the-newest-thing person, and I've always owned IBM laptops (lenovo, I guess.) They look like this:

[www.notebookcheck.net image 250x206]

Yup, that's a flat, black, non-shiny computer. Every time I take it out in public, people seem to think that it's from 1995.

I like them anyway. never had anything Apple.

I've had lots of MacBooks and several Macs. I dropped Apple completely a few years ago, though (with the exception of my iPad, which I eventually dropped, too) and switched back to Windows when Windows 7 was made available.

My current laptop is a Sony Vaio Z. It's made of carbon fiber, and it's black and plan


I meant "plain", of course.

And it's not a fingerprint magnet! The carbon fiber is really good at resisting marks.

cryinoutloud:

Yup, that's a flat, black, non-shiny computer. Every time I take it out in public, people seem to think that it's from 1995.

Here's an image similar to the one you posted:



I think the VAIO logo is a bit much, but that's all there is on it. It's not very shiny, at all.