Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Son of SAN - Storage Networking Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: trendmastr who wrote (4162)	11/8/2001 2:46:21 AM
From: Gus	Respond to of 4808

"Just yesterday, IBM told us that EMC would need IBM's APIs to really manage IBM's storage; however, IBM may not be so willing to do so." IBM transformed lock-in-and-gouge into an art form during the mainframe era. According to a recent study by the Meta Group, more than 60% of mainframe programmers are over 50 years old and are approaching retirement. Not surprisingly, after several unsuccessful attempts to reignite interest in mainframe programming among college students, IBM gravitated towards Linux and the open source movement. However, one must not allow IBM's born again rhetoric and too sincere embrace of Linux to obfuscate what is actually a cold-blooded business plan. Right off the bat, Linux and its youth movement allowed IBM to start replenishing its aging mainframe talent pool with fresh talent from Linux strongholds in colleges and universities. Linux also allows IBM to begin marginalizing Microsoft (NT) and Sun (Solaris) in operating systems since this would, in turn, eventually pull out the rug from under Oracle (8i/9i/11i) and Microsoft (Exchange/SQL Server) in databases while setting up IBM's own server (z/OS, AIX, NT) and middleware initiatives (Websphere, MQSeries). Effectively, IBM is using the youthful energy of Linux to turn its traditional weaknesses as a legacy-bound vendor into an advantage. I don't think IBM, in its wildest dreams, expects to go back to its glass house glory days. I do think that IBM believes that whatever increases the complexity of technology procurement ultimately benefits IBM Global Services. That is why one often sees IBM chasing after every new operating system and every new database under the sun -- e.g. the Informix acquisition added 6 databases to IBM's stable. IBM is essentially trying to flood its target markets with the luxuries of too many choices so that they would end up outsourcing rather than drowning in the prospects of managing technology and becoming system integrators. Unfortunately, IBM will end up outsmarting only itself if it misplays the exquisite gambit that EMC has proffered with WideSky, one that is better understood when one understands EMC's mapping technology and its ability to reverse-engineer almost anything. Essentially EMC is calling IBM's bluff about openness. If IBM continues to drag its feet on storage system level interoperability after all its rhetoric about being the born-again open champion, then that would permanently damage its credibility in much the same way that Sun permanently damaged its credibility after it refused to hand over control of Java to a neutral standards committee. That kind of credibility erosion can quickly spread to other IBM endeavors. Bottomline: EMC doesn't need IBM's APIs to make AutoIS work. With IBM squirming over this gambit, EMC gets to finetune its sales strategy and turn IBM Storage into the same Sisyphus that it has been for the last 11 years. That's why Compaq is drafting behind EMC in this area even though it never really learned how to sell a single high-end Shark and even though Compaq's systems will suffer in comparison when put side by side with Symmetrix.