On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 22:09:14 +1300, Peter Reutemann quoted:
'> It still won't save IBM. They'll go down in the coming year or two along with the rest of the industry we used to call IT...'
Another analysis: <https://www.nextplatform.com/2020/01/31/making-the-red-hat-platform-bet-pay-off-for-big-blue/>, along with a recap of the company’s history. Red Hat may not have been IBM’s biggest gamble--the introduction of the System/360 range in the 1960s cost the company *two years* of revenue in total, which is an absolutely mind-boggling amount. (It did pay off, exceedingly well.) So Cringely is not the only one taking for granted that Red Hat will continue to grow and thrive under IBM ownership. This quote bothers me, though: Red Hat didn’t need Big Blue to succeed, but IBM surely needs Red Hat to do so. Makes me wonder what the benefit was to Red Hat of the acquisition. Is it getting extra investment capital, that it couldn’t access otherwise? (But the quote seems to say no.) Even if Red Hat ends up ingesting the remnants of IBM, what does the former get out of that? As everybody knows, acquisitions by large companies of not-so-large companies have a low chance of turning out well. Red Hat may be turning out to be an exception so far, but I think there’s still a chance that IBM can screw this up.