TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Ask HN: What's going on at IBM?

128 pointsby Riodover 9 years ago
Company seems to be doing poorly (14 straight quarters of declining revenue) and according to markets. Would be good if someone with a grasp of how the company works could explain what's going wrong

24 comments

IBMGuyHereover 9 years ago
I&#x27;ve been working at IBM for a couple of years now, started as a grad.<p>What you must be referring to is the stock price, which has dropped from 200 dollars a couple of years ago to like 120 these days.<p>I can&#x27;t claim to understand this company, I think very few people can. There are 300,000 employees and more teams&#x2F;products&#x2F;departments than you can imagine. It&#x27;s absolutely insane.<p>However, what I can say is the following: IBM is shifting it&#x27;s strategy completely and that would&#x27;ve been very difficult to do without a drop in revenue and stock price. IBM is going from whatever it was before to a cloud-based company. All services and products will need to have some sort of cloud offering. I&#x27;m not sure if you can imagine what moving 300k employees worth of work to the cloud means. IBM has existed for like 100+ years now, this industry has not existed until a couple of years ago and, right now, all teams must re-evaluate their work and make the steps towards making this transition happen.<p>Many of the employees are stuck in their old ways, many people have been working at IBM their whole career (20-30-40 years) and it might be hard to adjust to so many new directives coming from the top. There&#x27;s much bureaucracy and many old ways that need to be absolutely obliterated. Also, IBM doesn&#x27;t have a great reputation for being cool or anything... almost everybody hates Lotus Notes, as an example.<p>This was sort of all over the place, I didn&#x27;t spend a lot of time thinking about this. Please let me know if you have any specific questions...
评论 #11055769 未加载
评论 #11055779 未加载
评论 #11055718 未加载
评论 #11061137 未加载
评论 #11058575 未加载
评论 #11055717 未加载
评论 #11055720 未加载
dontscaleover 9 years ago
Regarding some of the Buffett posts, he has been reading the IBM annual report for 50 years. Other major investments he owns, like Wells Fargo and BNSF, are major IBM customers. He once said Wells Fargo&#x27;s largest expense is paid out to IBM each year.<p>Buffett&#x27;s position is that IBM has succeeded in turnarounds throughout its 100+ year history. Also, their advantage is in the Public&#x2F;Private hybrid cloud. Buffett also believes the cloud business is not a &quot;Winner Take All&quot; game.<p>Buffett also applauds what industry pundits have dubbed, IBM&#x27;s &quot;Financial engineering&quot;. IBM has financed share buybacks with debt. With interest rates and share prices at low-levels, he believes the buybacks are sound.<p>In my time, I remember when IBM jumped on the Linux and Java bandwagons with great success. I think most people respect the contributions they made with the Eclipse IDE for example.<p>It will be interesting to see what they do with Bluemix and AI. I still respect them as a technology company.
评论 #11063566 未加载
contingenciesover 9 years ago
I&#x27;m surprised no comments here mention containers. These are a great example of where IBM absolutely screwed itself. Most of the kernel features for containers and the initial release of LXC were done on IBM&#x27;s dime. The two major developers (one focused on kernelspace, one on userspace) then left, at least one of them for Ubuntu, I believe. I know this because I was in touch with them and using LXC personally about 2009-2010 before the docker hype era.<p>As I comprehend it, the features were originally intended to allow fat mainframes to dole out tiny resource portions for distinct jobs. As it seems to have turned out, every CPU these days is the equivalent of a fat mainframe, and the greater challenge is around integrating this form of rapid SOA micro-provisioning in to developer workflow through tooling and education. I just upgraded this few year old Macbook Pro to run Docker 1.1.0: 200MB Linux ISO + Virtualbox + kludgey go wrapper = better solution than IBM ever provided. With a different management culture, they could have released this in 2010, pre-empting stable docker by 5+ years with a kernel commit history and adequate marketing funding.
pdqover 9 years ago
IBM has transitioned into an enterprise services&#x2F;consulting firm over the past 15 years or so. Their game plan is to get huge $$ contracts from Fortune 50 companies and government agencies, which is a long and costly process.<p>This kind of business is extremely hard to scale, compared to a true software or hardware company innovating and licensing&#x2F;selling products. IBM does have a ton of resources behind Watson, but that&#x27;s still basically an enterprise services contract sale, and not much of a cloud product.
评论 #11055837 未加载
评论 #11058013 未加载
评论 #11059341 未加载
评论 #11055646 未加载
stonogoover 9 years ago
Accountants have taken over leadership roles, resulting in a corporate-wide prioritization of earnings-per-share promises over engineering and logistics.
评论 #11055670 未加载
mathnodeover 9 years ago
From my lowly developer point of view.<p>Power may be a bit quicker than Intel, but it&#x27;s unfamiliar to many. Nvidia is breaking new ground, it&#x27;s sexy, accessible, and cheaper.<p>On the software side it&#x27;s a similar story. Why use their unknown proprietary cloud stuff when I can just make use of the plethora python&#x2F;julia&#x2F;clojure&#x2F;R stuff? AWS is fancy and ever expanding, Softlayer is a PITA.<p>IBM biz news <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;finance.yahoo.com&#x2F;q&#x2F;h?s=ibm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;finance.yahoo.com&#x2F;q&#x2F;h?s=ibm</a>
评论 #11055719 未加载
评论 #11055648 未加载
graycatover 9 years ago
IBM has long seen itself not as a computer or electronics company but as a marketing company. Their approach to marketing is to have salesmen in branch offices selling to businesses. Long they sold <i>business machines</i> for routine business record keeping.<p>They are still trying to sell, sell something, via those branch offices to those businesses but they have run out of things to sell. And the sales culture is not good at thinking of good, new products&#x2F;services to sell.
woodcroftover 9 years ago
Robert Cringley has a recent book about the decline of IBM - <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cringely.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;06&#x2F;04&#x2F;decline-fall-ibm&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cringely.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;06&#x2F;04&#x2F;decline-fall-ibm&#x2F;</a> - I found it pretty interesting. His thesis is that IBM&#x27;s management has consistently goosed short-term profits by making cuts that hurt it long term. It off-shored technical work, under-invested in quality, tooling and automation, laid off older more experienced workers, etc. I don&#x27;t have any first hand of experience of IBM, so I cannot vouch for how true Cringley&#x27;s story is.
评论 #11055784 未加载
评论 #11055826 未加载
评论 #11057413 未加载
minimaxirover 9 years ago
Define &quot;doing poorly&quot;.<p>IBM is down 17% percent in the last 6 months. (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;finance?q=ibm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;finance?q=ibm</a>) As far as tech stocks go, that&#x27;s not crisis-mode.<p>As far as newsworthyness, Watson and Bluemix have been making the press rounds.
评论 #11055637 未加载
orionblastarover 9 years ago
IBM has to change their business plan and focus on new technology.<p>When the IBM PC was made it started the PC Era that became the Post-Mainframe era. When mobile devices took off it became the Post-PC era and IBM had to sell its PC and Server lines and focus on services.<p>Now even if it is the Post-PC era PCs are still being used. IBM had to get rid of OS&#x2F;2 and migrate to GNU&#x2F;Linux.<p>Right now it is also the Cloud-Era and IBM has to work on Cloud technology.<p>When a company shifts technology like that it takes a while to find a way to turn a profit.<p>Apple went to the mobile technology market and it took off like a rocket. IBM had the Simon Smart Phone in the 1990s but couldn&#x27;t market it.<p>IBM has a lot of technical debt in maintaining Mainframes and Minicomputers that are still in use. The Lotus products also are outdated and they tried to use OpenOffice.Org to make Lotus Symphony and it didn&#x27;t take off.<p>IBM Opened up its Power technology: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;openpowerfoundation.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;openpowerfoundation.org&#x2F;</a><p>A lot of things have happened to technology that IBM suffered from losing money because the technology became outdated. IBM has to invent new technology to replace it.<p>IBM is focusing on services and the cloud right now. Sort of moving away from hardware because it is hard to earn money from hardware and moving to software and services instead.<p>Everything I used to know about IBM has changed, IBM has to reinvent themselves. The technology and markets have changed and IBM has to adapt.
jhallenworldover 9 years ago
One interesting thing is that Alliance@IBM- the organization that has been trying to unionize the company is giving up. I assume that the interested workers are now at Lenovo.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.computerworld.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;3019552&#x2F;it-industry&#x2F;ibm-union-calls-it-quits.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.computerworld.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;3019552&#x2F;it-industry&#x2F;ibm...</a><p>Maybe they should focus on unionizing Amazon.
Afforessover 9 years ago
IBM is suffering the fate of OPEC countries, except with technology. IBM wasn&#x27;t diversified. (Sure, IBM has lots of products, but it usually sold licenses to all these products in large bundles, rarely did anyone buy just DB2, rather, agreements purchased entire ecosystem of IBM software&#x2F;hardware). IBM was built on a single golden goose &quot;massive multi-million dollar agreements with Fortune 500 CTO&#x27;s for thousands of licenses of IBM hardware&#x2F;software&quot;. IBM solved big problems with big, expensive solutions. Nowadays, developers regularly make the purchasing decisions, not upper-management, so FOSS or Freemium products win out over expensive IBM software licenses. IBM hardware is largely dying out because the Cloud and x86 won the architecture wars and no one wants to develop for PowerPC or AIX. So the legacy IBM is dying on the table.<p>IBM is losing its old accounts and old business agreements faster than it can generate new revenue with Softlayer&#x2F;Bluemix&#x2F;Watson. IBM makes 4.5B from Cloud revenue. In contrast, total revenue in 2015 was 81.7B. So IBM revenue is going to be a bloodbath until Cloud revenue can catch up. Unfortunately, Cloud is a razor thin margin business, where Amazon, Microsoft, and Google are willing to sell at, or below cost to gain marketshare, which will likely continue to hurt IBM&#x27;s cloud revenue at a time it needs it most. IBM is the underdog here, so it can not bring any of the other cloud giants to the table and make them end the price wars, so IBM cloud revenue is likely to remain anemic.<p>IBM also suffers from a number of management mistakes. IBM is way behind on automation and lacks the talent, so they&#x27;ve had to make acquisitions and &quot;strategic partnerships&quot; to buy it. IBM previously tried to outsource as much software and operations to China or India, and the unskilled labor available in those countries simply don&#x27;t have the skill sets to do devops or any sort of basic automation. So you&#x27;ve got datacenters where people still ssh into each box and run commands by hand thousands of times because the skill level isn&#x27;t there. But hey, a few quarters of lower labor expenses in exchange for long term growth is a great deal when you can just parachute out.<p>Other mistakes IBM has made includes massive buildup of debt and stock buybacks to inflate the stock price. As bad as the stock looks now, just consider how bad it would be if IBM hadn&#x27;t spent 8B+ buying back stock. These buybacks have largely been financed by new corporate debt. IBM&#x27;s market cap is nearly 40% less than only a few years ago. These buybacks hide a lot of the stock price damage (the stock would be worth about $75 instead of ~$130). In addition, buybacks are essentially returning money from the corporation to the shareholders, unwinding the assets. This means IBM management has no plans which could return a higher yield to investors than simply handing back their money -- not great for investor confidence or long term future for IBM.<p>Source: Employee.
评论 #11057197 未加载
评论 #11055729 未加载
评论 #11056001 未加载
评论 #11055689 未加载
评论 #11055697 未加载
评论 #11057580 未加载
product74over 9 years ago
IBM makes a lot of money selling ELAs (Enterprise License Agreements) to their customers. An ELA is like buying a bundle of IBM hardware, software and services. It&#x27;s like buffet dining.<p>Big companies are no longer buying the buffet and are increasingly opting to go ala carte. Or alternatively, they are negotiating IBM down on prices for the buffet.<p>It&#x27;s true that IBM is switching its focus to Cloud services and Watson. However, these are just new, unproven items on the buffet menu.
enig_matic7over 9 years ago
I remember Mr Buffet talking about how awesome IBM&#x27;s pipeline for the next few years is. Also, this:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.forbes.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;panosmourdoukoutas&#x2F;2015&#x2F;11&#x2F;17&#x2F;what-warren-buffett-sees-in-ibm-others-are-missing&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.forbes.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;panosmourdoukoutas&#x2F;2015&#x2F;11&#x2F;17&#x2F;wh...</a>
评论 #11055688 未加载
tim333over 9 years ago
According to the CEO the declining revenues are not a bug, they are a feature. From <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2015&#x2F;11&#x2F;03&#x2F;ibm-ceo-said-sometimes-size-matters.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2015&#x2F;11&#x2F;03&#x2F;ibm-ceo-said-sometimes-size-m...</a> :<p>&gt;&quot;In my tenure, I&#x27;ve divested $8 billion of businesses,&quot; Rometty said. &quot;The point was, they weren&#x27;t about the future of where we were going.&quot;<p>&gt;Rometty cited an example of a recent divestiture in hardware — making semiconductors. Now, only 10 percent of IBM is comprised of hardware.<p>see also their pdf on the same <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ibm.com&#x2F;annualreport&#x2F;2013&#x2F;bin&#x2F;assets&#x2F;ibm_ghv_march_2014.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ibm.com&#x2F;annualreport&#x2F;2013&#x2F;bin&#x2F;assets&#x2F;ibm_ghv_marc...</a>
twundeover 9 years ago
IBM is still a strong company, but they are no longer in the position where they are market leaders in their product lines. Watson is the only new product to catch fire, otherwise they are competing and losing to Oracle and Microsoft. Softlayer is an alsoran. They bought cloudant instead of mongodb. The only thing they do well is consulting and even then they are expensive. They appear to be several years behind their competitors with little chance of catching up.
jamesdelaneyieover 9 years ago
Something not mentioned here is their &#x27;big push&#x27; into Design Thinking. IBM have snapped up ~14+ of the graduates from my college course (Visual Communications, IADT, Dublin) flown them out to Austin for a 3 month starter course and now have quiet a substantial design department here in Ireland.<p>More info: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ibm.com&#x2F;design&#x2F;studio.shtml" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ibm.com&#x2F;design&#x2F;studio.shtml</a>
sixhobbitsover 9 years ago
I&#x27;m surprised only one comment here mentions patents. IBM are filing patents as fast ever, and while they&#x27;re trying to get into &quot;the cloud&quot; like everyone else, I get the impression that they&#x27;re also still working on hardware R&amp;D, as well as the AI research that goes into projects such as Watson.<p>Also they calculate the Wimbledon serve speeds, so they&#x27;ve got that going for them which is nice.
gazeover 9 years ago
They&#x27;re doing a bit of quantum computing research and patenting stuff left and right and it&#x27;s making everyone in the field uncomfortable.
proksoupover 9 years ago
Over what time period? Like the last 2 years or longer or shorter? What specifically is the poor being asked about?
crb002over 9 years ago
IBM is failing at devops. It needs to license developer versions of DB2, MQ, and Websphere at free so devs can containerize and spin up instances for unit tests on a whim. It needs to advocate a liquibase type solution too.<p>Fortune 500 IBM software is also dying because IBM has let DBAs running scripts by hand not version control be the source of truth.
enig_matic7over 9 years ago
Wasn&#x27;t there something about Warren Buffet investing in IBM?
评论 #11058108 未加载
GBSthrowawayover 9 years ago
I joined IBM Global Business Services (IBM&#x27;s consulting division) in London a couple of years ago.<p>As others have said, IBM is so big that it can only really be understood as many different companies, all with slightly different cultures. There are plenty of people who are better qualified than me to discuss the overall strategy and financial picture, so I won&#x27;t even try.<p>I can, however, give a few opinions about my 2+ years in GBS.<p>* There is a general lack of respect for technical skills. I was hired as a &quot;Technical Consultant&quot; but put through the same training as the business consultant grads, which is largely about project management &#x2F; presentation skills. A lot of money is spent on this training, if you ask for funding to (e.g.) attend a developer conference, you are told to forget about it. Maintaining dev skills or learning new ones is to be done in your own time or as part of &quot;giveback&quot;, which is the IBM name for extra work done on top of your day job.<p>* The leadership team is utterly obsessed with maximising billable hours. While this is understandable for a services business, it is taken to ridiculous extremes. People are under such pressure to be billable that they are forced into roles that are completely unsuitable for them, rather than spend a few days waiting for the right role. Training etc gets cancelled at short notice if billable targets are not met, especially in Q4. Last year the entire GBS UK workforce were banned from taking any vacation for several weeks in November and December. A spoof email from senior management was circulated, saying &quot;Christmas is cancelled&quot; which gives an idea of current morale.<p>* The annual appraisal (PBC) system is a popularity contest. The best way to game the system is to do &quot;giveback&quot; (see above) work for senior people and persuade them to write nice things about you. This is all well and good, but it means that performance in your main job role is actually secondary to how much eminence you can gain by doing odd jobs for senior management. Thankfully IBM has seen the light and retired the PBC process, so I&#x27;m looking forward to seeing how well the replacement works.<p>* I get the feeling that nobody really understands Watson. It seems like the senior execs are under a lot of pressure to buy into the hype and sell Watson to their clients. There is a lot of hand waving about using Watson in &quot;virtual assistant&quot; type of use cases, but I&#x27;ve seen very little of any substance.<p>* The bureaucracy can be incredibly painful. I once had to go through multiple layers of sign-off involving people in 2 different countries over several weeks, to buy a $25 software licence (which I needed urgently for my job).<p>* Things are changing, slowly. The iX service line is adopting a startup-like approach on some projects. Agile is being promoted in a big way, and we now have access to modern tools like Slack and Enterprise GitHub.<p>I hope I don&#x27;t come across as a bitter, entitled millennial. These are just my opinions.
bluewashedover 9 years ago
&gt; 14 straight quarters of declining revenue<p>Yeah, but dat Earnings Per Share though... &#x2F;s