[sf-lug] nobody gets fired for buying IBM / was Re: OLPC info for the frustrated (Kristian Erik Hermansen)

[jim stockford]

no, no, it's the nigerians and laotian
generals they take to golf.

On Jan 25, 2008, at 3:48 PM, Nathan Hoover wrote:

> Damn, I work in a Microsoft shop and billg doesn't even take me for 
> golf, let alone bribe me while we're there.
>  
> What did I miss?
>  
> :)
>
>  
> On 1/25/08, jim stockford <jim at well.com> wrote:
>>    IBM was famous for making its deals on golf
>> courses: "nobody ever gets fired for buying
>>  IBM", which meant the guy who bought
>> honeywell or perkin-elmer was gonna get
>> talked about if the systems screwed up even
>> a little ("talked about" == "likely fired").
>>    MSFT's tactics seem similar, at least if court
>>  cases in USA and EU are an indication.
>>    seems similar backroom/golf course tactics
>> going on with the target markets for OLPC.
>> i.e. seems like deal making and even outright
>> bribery are at work. the big difference is that
>>  these days there's a well-organized open
>> source community, thanks to internet
>> communications. ergo, defending this medium
>> and using it seems key.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2008, at 12:55 PM, RBV wrote:
>>
>>  > Hi:
>> >
>> > If I can be allowed to make a small side observation about the 
>> OLPC's
>> > apparent, and apparently non-trivial, delivery problems.
>> >
>> > At the last OLPC meeting, I was *hugely* impressed with the design 
>> and
>>  > operation of the OLPCs that Jim brought in for us to examine.  The
>> > OLPC is not only an exemplar of brilliant design, it's a testament 
>> to
>> > the ability of non-proprietary technologies to fulfill such designs.
>>  >
>> > But those with a historical perspective on technology can remember
>> > many instances in which superior technology was trumped by superior
>> > pre- and post-sales customer support.
>> >
>> > For example, IBM became a mainframe giant not because its systems 
>> were
>>  > the most technically compelling (the company generally preferred to
>> > sidestep or befog A-versus-B performance comparisons), but because 
>> the
>> > company offered customer service and support that was far superior 
>> to
>>  > its competitors', albeit in sometimes heavy-handed ways.
>> >
>> > Intel learned from IBM, and so commandeered market share from more
>> > elegantly designed chip products by offering superlative design and
>>  > manufacturing support.
>> >
>> > Like many, I'd be genuinely unhappy to see malicious proprietary
>> > vendors -- including, not incidentally, Intel -- undermine the OLPC
>> > idea.  But I'd also say that the critical challenge for OLPC is not
>>  > one of technologies but rather support.  Given that OLPC seems to 
>> be
>> > antagonizing those who've voted with their pocketbook for the system
>> > and its goals, one can but wonder if anyone at OLPC is prepared to
>>  > understand and react the importance of that support challenge...
>> >
>> > Sorry if this submission seems a bit to the side of the central 
>> issue,
>> > but I believe it to be of some relevance.  Open source -- especially
>>  > Linux -- is a lovely thing, but too often considers user and 
>> customer
>> > needs to be annoying distractions from the "interesting" 
>> technological
>> > bits...
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Riley
>>  > SFO
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > sf-lug mailing list
>> > sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
>> > http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>>  >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sf-lug mailing list
>> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
>> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> _______________________________________________
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug