“I get a kick out of the Small Medium Size Business division talking about pricing of under $20K / month. That’s a pretty penny, but I guess for company where downtime is priced in the thousands (or much more) per minute it might be a good buy. But companies fitting that description have always been big companies in my experience.”
Ah the old SMB problem, where IBM’s M is everyone else’s E, and IBM’s S is everyone else’s M.
$20k per month? Sounds like a good deal – where do I sign up?
Seriously – as I have long argued, IBM really needs to work out ways to touch smaller companies. Web 2.0 isn’t just about grassroots devs, but also service consumers and brokers.
Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are acquiring cool firms long before they have time to develop a dependence on, or even orientation towards, IBM’s enterprisey products. Amazon and salesforce.com offer data storage and hosting. Google absolutely plans to be the great database in the sky, and in the world of the mashup data matters more than applications.
When Microsoft recently announced a multi-billion dollar investment in hosting for web 2.0 and so on, IBM’s response was silence. Maybe that was because of the impact on Microsoft’s share price when it announced a massive new capex program.
But hasn’t IBM already made that investment? You would think the firm can get a pretty decent deal on servers and storage. So what exactly is the role of IBM as a hosting company? IBM has all the infrastructure and potentially economies of scale – so why not leverage it.
Frankly I think IBM hosting and developerworks need to work out a plan. Developerworks needs to host/capture useful or cool services, not just content and downloads. IF I was Buell Duncan I would make John Musser an offer for starters.
Buell says IBM needs to be ready for software as a service. I think IBM needs to be ready for the grassroots. wasce may be less enterprisey than WebSphere classic, but that doesn’t mean its what the cool kids are using. eon, cognizant and centric CRM all look Web 1.0 to me.