[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] FW: beating up on IBM?

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 11:03:25 -0700
Message-id: <20100926180326.2A700138F69@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I had this offline conversation, and realized I may have stated my last
email ambiguously, so this is a response to my own response!  I'm not
beating up on IBM, just stating a personal observation about how people
behave in large groups and in small groups.      (01)

-Rich    (02)

Rich Cooper
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2    (03)

I wasn't intending to single out IBM.  Its just human nature - politics -
that asserts itself in a large company, ANY large company, which is why I
named a bunch of them.      (04)

Note that Microsoft and Apple were the small companies in the 70s, and are
now both large companies.  MS is typical, in that its head (and therefore
its favored political factions) followed the sharp business mind of Bill
Gates, without the sharp technical mind needed to produce good quality
technical products at the cost of revenues.      (05)

Apple's head (Jobs) was of the political direction needed to innovate, but
other forces threw him out of the company, which then declined until he
returned.      (06)

If you have worked in large companies and small, you will know the
difference.  More people means more political factions, and only the faction
in control exerts its leadership effectively.  That is the point I meant to
bring out.  Its simply a fact of getting humans together in groups.      (07)

So I am not singling out IBM, or any other company for that matter, I'm
simply stating my personal observations of how all companies function in a
political matrix.      (08)

-Rich    (09)

Rich Cooper
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2    (010)

> Consider what happened in the computer industry from the inception  
> until the late seventies, when the home computer business put the  
> technology into the hands of entrepreneurs instead of big  
> business.  Prior to that, IBM, Univac, CDC, GE, RCA and Bell Tel  
> were the primary force in computing.  Growth was extremely slow,  
> and the creativity of the products was extremely minimal.    (011)

My, my... looks like beat up on IBM day.  :-)    (012)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (013)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [ontolog-forum] FW: beating up on IBM?, Rich Cooper <=