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 : WAVX Anyone? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Marty Lee who wrote (4128)	10/6/1998 2:44:00 AM
From: Marty Lee	Respond to of 11417

More cheap entertainment... Jesse said it. zdnet.com I can't believe it! Marty

To: Marty Lee who wrote (4128)	10/6/1998 2:51:00 AM
From: Marty Lee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11417

Roman Cybulski kicks butt.. Roman Cybulski EMAIL: CYBULSKI@OZEMAIL.COM.AU Monday Oct 05, 1998 Occupation: CONSULTANT Location: VERMONT, VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA Computer: PENTIUM/586 Favorite Topic: ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE Dear Jesse, The idea of renting instead of building IT is novel, and perhaps risky, but I do not agree that it is 'dead wrong'. In my opinion you are missing a point saying that '..over the next decade, technology will be the number one way to gain competitive advantage..' The technology ALREADY IS a number one way to gain competitive advantage. The point is that in the nineties we also want all this technology at a reasonable cost. The information utility and apps on tap are likely to deliver the lower cost of IT in the same way large power stations deliver electricity at a price that even a pauper like myself can afford. Same with phones. You see the only reason not only giant corporations but even medium size companies invest considerable sums of money in their own computing equipment, networking equipment, IT personnel, Disaster Recovery facilities, backup facilities, management software, troubleshooting software, consulting services, etc is because there is currently no alternative way of running a business system. Oh yes, you can outsource your IT operations to the likes of EDS, IBM Global Services, or Computer Associates, but this is basically a way of moving your IT staff from your payroll to their payroll and making the IT costs more transparent to the accountants. The outsourcing helps reduce the IT costs, but they remain considerable still. Wouldn't it be great if the only thing needed to run a business system was a workstation (rented one, of course!), a cable, and a fraction of the cost of the application software? This is exactly what apps on tap and information utility is all about. The concept still needs a lot of thinking through, especially: 1. The data security 2. The data privacy 3. How to catalogue and package the applications for rent 4. How to support custom designed application 5. Change management However to call the idea 'dead wrong' is a simplistic overstatement. In my opinion the first company to make this concept viable commercially stands a good chance of matching or even eclipsing the success of Microsoft/Intel. Let me explain. You see, Microsoft/Intel made the desktop computer ubiquitous and inexpensive. They replaced 3270 and data concentrators, or more recently the X stations and the UNIX servers with Win NT workstations and servers. It is now possible to do your work without remembering dreadful function key sequences because you can point and click. The concepts of 'Apps on tap' and 'information utility' is about making WHOLE IT INFRASTRUCTURE not only ubiquitous and inexpensive but also dependable and reliable (that is why I am not so sure Microsoft could do it with their 'red button cop-out' approach). Imagine being able to do your work without: 1. Paying Gartner Group (or Jesse Berst) to explain the technology trends to you 2. Paying James Martin to come and sell you his development methodology, 3. Keeping an army of restless programmers and designers who passionately argue the relative merits of CORBA vs. DCOM, and use state of the art tools to do things in elegant, object oriented way with little or no regard to the what is really important to your business. 4. Paying younger high flying consultants help you bet your business future by forming strategic alliances with one or more of the following ORACLE, Microsoft , IBM, Digital, HP, or Sun 5. Paying somewhat older high flying consultants to write your tailor made procedures for the deployment, testing, Y2K certification, change management, configuration control, disaster recovery 6. Paying vast amounts of money for support contracts which give you right to test your resolve on an unyielding support technician who insists that what you have discovered is a valuable feature of the product you paid for rather than a bug. Imagine not having any of the above distractions!. Simply decide how you want to run your business, choose what you need, rent your hardware, train your users and and get on with your work. (How dull and boring some might say!) Go get 'em Roman! Loveya, Marty