Do you think IBM could make a comeback and become the most valuable company again?

Do you think IBM could make a comeback and become the most valuable company again?

Attached: stringio.jpg (800x600, 103.06K)

Other urls found in this thread:

preserve.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.11/11.01/LearningtoLoveSOM/index.html
brainyquote.com/authors/thomas_j_watson
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_OS
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Never.

All the people who made IBM great are either long dead or got replaced with poo in loo's 10 years ago.

IBM is just a patent troll company nothing much else

Depends on how they handle the Redhat acquisition. IBM doesn't have any "killer" products right now, but they have the potential do so with RHEL. How will they do that? Ask again later.

I actually analyzed IBM's financials for college recently. Long story short, it's looking pretty fucked for them. They aren't making nearly enough to offset their massive and growing debts.

This basically. RedHat, along with some other factors, are ways in which they could turn this around, but we'll have to see how it plays out.

They have a lot of capital and they're coasting off their previous successes so they can just buy smaller tech companies and hope they'll be the next big thing.

That's what a lot of big but poorly-aging companies do. If you can't beat the competition, buy the competition. Worked for Facebook when they bought Instagram and Whatsapp.

Furthermore, a lot of tech companies pivot from being best in their field to being decent but not the best. For example, Microsoft used to be all about Windows and Office, but now they're offering cloud stuff like Office 365 and Azure. Azure might not be the best platform for developers, but it's *a* platform for developers. So even if they're playing second string to AWS, they're not completely dead in the water.
So it's not as if IBM or other former leaders will die off completely, they'll just become yet another tech company.

IBM willingly gave away their consumer electronics departments. Learn how business works lads, the same kinds of retard will probably also ask "Why doesn't Apple just make 100 dollar iPhones???"

It's called "a race to the bottom" and IBM doesn't want that.

Not only that, there are a lot of buisnesses in competition with Amazon that would perfect not to use AWS

Microsoft is a trillion dollar company alongside Amazon and Apple. They're doing more than fine with software service models.
IBM is doing fine too, but they're not after the same markets as Microsoft. They don't fucking have to be. Their markets are security, high-end computing for the public sector, and quantum research. They will never reach the same market share as Microsoft in these markets, but they don't really have too. If IBM wanted to go full consumer again they would essentially drop their position as a market leader in their own market segments to compete in a more crowded market. Why the fuck would IBM do that? Why are you all so bad at business?

Azure is far behind AWS and GCP. I don't know a single company that uses it I work with a lot of companies for consultation work

IBM is racing to the bottom. They pissed away their place in the PC and embedded market at the slightest hint of competition. Now that ARM has a death grip on the embedded market, they will never get back in just like PPC will never be used for desktop computers again. Once they had no new consumer hardware out there, Linux support tanked just like everything else they've done. They had to reach into Uncle Sam's wallet to buy out RedHat which they will run into the ground too. That's okay though because IBM can exist on pixie dust whatever the fuck that means.

That's not what "racing to the bottom" is you faggot. A race to the bottom is what would have happened if IBM stuck around the consumer market. The PC market was getting more and more competitive and IBM would've either needed to cut corners to stay in the races (race to the bottom) or raised their prices to compete with Apple in the luxury PC market. They chose neither and sold their consumer market to the Chinese who are known for cheap trash so they could instead focus on other shit that actually allowed them to continue standing out. They made the right choices. It was all strategic.

Apple has four times the net worth of IBM and Microsoft and Google could buy them twice over. It turns out the consumer market brings in money. IBM makes nothing but wrong choices which is somewhat comedic for a company that needs the government to stay alive.

Azure is big in govt contracts. Microsoft is an approved and trusted vendor too. They also do guarantees on things like how your data will never leave EEA, which google does not.

The Windows Server platform will be merged into Azure sooner than later. Then anybody tied to a Windows Server environment (Active Directory etc. and whatnot) will have to embrace Azure.

What's with all the intentional misinterpretations of my post? I never said anything about having them be consumer-only. All I'm saying is that a tech giant doesn't go from being top dog to not existing at all. Sometimes they go from being on top to being an okay-ish tech company, and that's fine.

Not only that, but once you're sitting on a pile of cash from previous successful revenue streams, even if they dry up, you can use that money to buy startups instead of investing in R&D to make your own stuff. So it doesn't matter if they stagnate instead of innovating because they can afford to buy companies that make new tech. That has nothing to do with consumer vs. B2B.

Could you post some of your financial analyses?

I'll give ya the main points. Disclaimer, i'm not a professional finance expert.
IBM does have a cloud, but other clouds such as AWS and Azure are either bigger than IBM's, or are growing faster. Their EBIT (Earnings Before Interest & Tax) return on assets has dropped pretty significantly in the past 3 years, which signifies that their assets (cloud infrastructure) are not being used efficiently.
They clearly took a massive cash loan in 2017. Both their cash and debt went up a lot, and by roughly the same amount.
They reclassified their goodwill to "intangible assets". This is meaningful because goodwill accounts (from my understanding) don't depreciate. General intangible assets do though, so this might mean that they are realizing their name doesn't carry as much weight, or something like that.
And as I said before, they aren't making enough money to keep up with their debts, and the RedHat thing makes it worse. S&P recently dropped IBM's score and outlook on the company.

The good people left 6-8 years ago when they implemented this thing that you can only get a raise if your wage is under some market average - which was determined by an "independet" study paid by IBM. All the good people started to hire with clients directly or working for competitors that aren't cheapskates. IBM is living off it's name atm. The charge the highest rates for below average people. I know of a project where they charged full consultant rate for a student intern. It came to light when the guy played WoW during work at the clients site. IBM had to make a 20% price cut to keep the project and to keep the client silent.

too many brainlets in ibm

imagine being louis whatever his name is the CEO that turned IBM into a god and than he has to live with some cunt ruining it all

Do you think the aquisition was a good move for them? I personally don't see what they gain

Do you have any numbers for Watson? Is it a bust?

Apple isn't "consumer". They're "luxury" they aren't in the same market segments as Google and Microsoft either, damn why are you so wrong about everything?

Why do executives fall for this crap?

Executives get bonuses for crashing a company and selling out.
Look at the whore who fucked over HP and killed Bell Labs, she fucking ran for President.
There is no proper feedback mechanism because America has bizarre corporate protections, not sure what it is because you don't hear about this shit happening in Japan or Europe.

IBM used to "attack the problem head on and fix it" and a lot of the native technology like PL/I and SOM is based on this philosophy. SOM was designed to be able to combine code written in multiple object oriented languages, even across machines. Now they use outsourced code like Linux and node.js and charge more to run their own software than they do to run that crap.

preserve.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.11/11.01/LearningtoLoveSOM/index.html

brainyquote.com/authors/thomas_j_watson
This way of thinking is what made IBM successful and brought a lot of innovations in hardware and software, but it's no longer there.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_OS
The "Workplace OS" C microkernel was a huge disaster for IBM. It was a disaster because it was based on Mach and written in C instead of using PL/I or Ada and IBM's 40 years (in 1995) of OS design experience. Shitting out junk like AIX and the RS-6000 didn't help their reputation much either.

You left out the worst offender of them all - IBM. TheRS-6000 may crank out 27 MIPS, but it can't context switchor handle interrupts worth sh*t. You can lower machineperformance to the point of unusability by FTPing a filefrom another machine on the same ethernet segment! Next time get a chance to play with an RS-6000, trythis: Pop about a dozen xterms, iconify them, put the iconsin a row, and wave the pointer back and forth over them asfast as you can. Astounding, no? The highlighting on theicons will keep bouncing back and forth long after you stopwaving the pointer. My personal record is 20 seconds.Makes a Sun-2 running display Postscript seem astoundinglyfast. RS-6000s also have an annoying tendency to "lock up" fora few seconds (5 < x < 15) and then return to normal - I'mtold that this is normal and due to paging activity. Themicrochannel card cage design is pretty bad too - sure, youcan put cards in, but God help you if you have to take themback out! And you better tighten down the retaining screwsall the way... or the first time you look at the card funnyit will pop out. To its credit, I must say it compiles GNU Emacs fasterthan any other machine I've used, but I do more with aworkstation than just run compiles. And, if you thinkUltrix is bad, it's only because you haven't tried AIX.

It definitely makes their situation worse in the short term. If they play their cards right, they could turn it into a competitive advantage and start reversing things, and it would be a very good move. If they don't, it's a bad move due to the debt they took on just to acquire the company.

no clue.

Unless they start to aggressively push Power over x86 instead of this lazy stalking horse shit they have going on with raptor I have little reason to care about IBM.

No. IBM works for big companies, which aren't as stupid with money as macfags. Plus they made it big by having bright people who were innovative, they don't have enough of those to be that ahead now.

Cutting costs improves the next quarter. So killing costs like R&D, testing, support, etc makes an executive look good in the short term. Hopefully good enough to allow him to move far away as the time bomb he created goes off on someone else's lap.

Attached: IBM-LondonDataCenter-1968.jpg (3920x3144, 2.27M)

CompanyMan, is that you?

Nah the only thing left from old IBM is the logo. What's under it is very dark-skinned, smelly, and of Indian origin.

I, for one, welcome our new IBM/systemd/(SE)Linux overlords.

I don't know if it was me or Apple who ass blasted you, but your brain has clearly melted. Apple not in the consumer market? That's all they do.

Yes, just like how Rolex is also "consumer" market. Apple is a luxury brand. That means they sell their name, their design language, and sla a heavy tax on it. They aren't "consumer" like Microsoft or Google.

Having four times the net worth in offshore accounts and companies means jack shit. If Apple tried to actually buy anything with that money they would have to pay taxes on it, so they don't want to use it.

I wish IBM wasn't so shit in the software department, because they honestly do have good ieas and nice innovations in hardware.
Sadly, you can't overlook the terrible shit that IBM has done and as such no one will ever trust them, they live almost completely off of the brands they produced in the past.
IBM a kill

Every nigger on the street has an iPhone but he doesn't have a real Rolex. Apple being luxury is just a bad joke.

Computer wise, Apple literally just sells PCs (and ones that barely stay up to date). Come on Zig Forums. You know better.

The fact that niggers choose to spend their money on appleshit not food means apple isn't luxury?
You realize you can get brand new Buicks or Lincolns or Cadillacs for cheaper than Rolexs? Are they suddenly not luxury brands because every nigger has a caddy?

they actually make a lot of money off of repairs/warranties, not just device sales

IBM has a very real possibility of becoming the next HP, totally relegated to government century-contracted applications.
However, they do have numerous things far up their sleeve, like their research in optical, quantum, and neuromorphic computing.

The fact that nigger CAN spend their money to get one. It's not luxury if it's cheap enough for that.

By that logic, luxury does not exist at all.