Thread regarding IBM layoffs

@16c Z is not actually great. In fact it, along with all the horrible stuff on it (zOS, LE, CICS, IMS, DB2, etc.) make it a close to impossible platform to ever make better. Start with zOS: this looks very little like an operating system that people today understand. In fact, it is one reason CICS and then LE came about: to kinda sorta make this a recognizable platform. Okay, so a bunch of bandages were added to a really odd-ball OS. So we are all good? No: you need very specialized people ( or AI ) to configure and run these systems. (And let's not talk about IMS!) These specializations are mind numbingly recondite and no current SW engineering student should ever want to touch it.

The fact is that even within the company, the specialized skills required to evolve this miasma of overlapping software with bizarre tendrils is slowly disappearing. First, a lot of old timers are heading for the exits. Second, the fixation with moving work to "low cost" countries is not building the deep skills IBM needs. That could happen in time but has not happened yet.

So you have an odd-ball, difficult to manage batch of software that no modern student wants to touch. Add to that the truth that every single customer wants to get off the platform because it is, by far, the most expensive way to run software. (The whole four hour rolling average computing use drives customers crazy. But it does bring in a lot of revenue.) And then again add the fact that IBM's attention is on AI (where they are nowhere), something called "Hybrid Cloud" and Quantum (where they are selling snake oil.)

Until all work is moved off the platform and recognizing that it does run a lot of the world's economy and that even IBM is failing to keep a relevant workforce, this platform should be turned into a public trust and IBM should move on with all of its new initiatives.

Z is great but not big enough to justify the current multiple on the stock. AK and JK want Wall Street to believe IBM is a SW company with fast growth around the corner. Lol.

@12f it's only a matter of time and eventually even Z will end up in the trash can of history (and IBM will end up there too).

Do you hear anyone asking for OS/2 any more ?

@gv Well, one thing is true, all that matters is Z and that's the way it should stay. Z was the first Cloud, and still is. Most available, resilient, low power-high processing, small footprint, and most secure platform on the planet.

When IBM is at the leading edge, it is invariably at the bleeding edge

Blame the it on the worst managers they insist on hiring and retaining.

Okay. But why can't IBM be agile enough to compete in these new spaces? Mostly because the company is built to support Z. That means that if a bank Z customer has a problem, they have a SVP who plays golf with an IBM VP and that SVP can make a phone call to cause wheels to turn. That is all well and good because important institutional customers can keep the world economy rolling. But it does mean that we have a fat, fat, fat management structure. We have program managers and project managers and process managers and procurement managers and ... And that doesn't even include the bloated and political people management side. (And let's not even start on the whole "design thinking" fraud that is now all the rage.) Is there a problem with this? Several. First of all, it's all geared get to "no." We couldn't do small laser printers because everyone knew that there were physical limitations that made it impossible. Except for Canon and a half a dozen others who just did it. Second, obviously it leads to empire building and the sort of political fights that resemble the animal fights you see on Nat. Geo. Third, with all the political fighting with absolute deadbeats winning, it is just devastating to try to be a conscientious engineer in this miasma. (Time after time, really stupid people get to be in charge...I don't think that most of them took high school math.) Fourth, this is just a really expensive way to operate. I could raise more points but I welcome your points.

OS/2 should have been wake-up call. That team was mostly in Boca and the engineers weren't that bad. (Terrible management, BTW.) But they just plain got rolled by MSFT. Microsoft knew what consumers and businesses wanted (given the state of technology at the time.) IBM had bizarre ideas about "this edition" and "that edition" and what consumers and businesses would want in 20 years. (No consumer, but many businesses, might be interested in the long, long term plan.)

Fast forward to Cloud. The world had many choices including AWS, Azure and something called IBM Cloud. (Blue something or other...I had a login and I can't even remember what that Blue-cr-p was called.) This was even worse in terms of not being in the same league.

Today, WCA just isn't a real thing. And what does it have in common with some of these other ones? That's right: myopic management with absolutely zero technical understanding but with many managers planning their own new empires.

I haven't even talked about the fact that our technical development is being transferred to "low cost" countries. I'm sure they are fine people with lots of smarts. But, especially on Z, the garbage we have is really hard to work with. So getting these fine people with lots of smarts up to speed will be ... difficult.

How did IBM be the "first to end last?" I claim that it is the insanely bloated management structure. And, what is worse, that structure is necessary to support the only thing that matters: Z. (IBM) AI is going to die .... IBM Quantum will be con job for a while. Z17 is helping for the moment. But they refresh cycle is now 3 years and slipping.

Guess it's in their DNA to fail and fail over and over and learn nothing from the failure; certainly not to stop doing stoopid things.

Sounds like the lemmings...

Who said elephants can't dance? Nobody, but Gerstner.

"IBM's market capitalization rose from $29 billion to $168 billion. Despite his success. Gerstner also presided over the company's decline, relative to newer rivals, as it lost its once-dominant position in the IT industry. " (Wikipedia)

The decade where it all started, IMHO. Wall Street numbers became more important than long terms substance and support of contributing employees.

Alvind is the ultimate "like there's no tomorrow" CEO. Because there isn't at the pace he's going....