![]() They also argue that a review period two years after the settlement would come into force is too long to wait, and they call for regular monitoring of the ballot screen every six months, to make sure it is having the desired effect of encouraging consumers to exercise their free choice.Īt the beginning of this year the European Commission issued a statement of objections to Microsoft, accusing the company of abusing the dominance of Windows to skew competition in its favor in the Web browser market. Microsoft has proposed that Windows operating systems should show users a ballot screen inviting them to choose a Web browser from among the most popular ones when they first attempt to access the Internet.Ĭonsumer organizations and the company’s rivals generally approve of the idea, but believe the way Microsoft’s ballot screen is designed is biased and will deter people from replacing Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser with another. Their concerns about the settlement are echoed by ECIS, a trade group representing Oracle, IBM, Red Hat and others, as well as by consumer organizations following the Microsoft antitrust case. I could not be stronger in my endorsement of the move to two independent companies and look forward to the changes in the market.Microsoft’s antitrust settlement offer to the European Commission needs minor, often cosmetic changes in order to restore fair competition to the market for Internet browsers, said some of the software giant’s main rivals Thursday. ![]() The action simplifies and optimizes Big Blue’s operating model, enabling speed and growth in IBM and NewCo. This most recent action in Big Blue’s strategic growth transformation over the past few years is significant. If it results in the increased execution capabilities that I expect, I think competitors in both business spaces need to take this very seriously. Two IBMs, which are unconflicted, are truly formidable. This separation of the businesses will bring much more formidable competition to the marketplace. So, it is a win-win-win, across the IBM spectrum. With the two businesses no longer combined, the stockholders will benefit. Arguably, by combining them (as was the case before this announced separation), the stockholders faced less value. This move is great from a stock perspective because a technology-based company’s value rather than a services-based company’s value is usually much higher. It will also accelerate their career opportunities. The separation into two independent companies simplifies their work lives and will allow them to execute better. The move is great for IBM employees, as they struggled with the internal operating conflicts between the two different businesses. Now, both organizations can deliver even more excellence because they will no longer be conflicted in their paths and focus. The separation into two companies frees IBM to operate at its best in both the legacy modernization space and in the open source and AI transformation space. It requires time to accomplish, requires disciplines and a different level of change management that is unlike partnering services for helping customers move down the open cloud platform and AI route. But its legacy infrastructure business required that the firm operate with stability and discipline.įurthermore, the business engaged in modernizing and migrating customers’ legacy infrastructures to the cloud. For its AI and open source cloud platform business, IBM needed to be an agile IP-based firm. ![]() ![]() Fundamentally, the businesses tried to do different kinds of operations, made decisions and investments differently and partnered with customers differently. It was confusing for services customers with both businesses under one roof. Let’s consider in more detail the implications for all IBM stakeholder groups as well as its competitors. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |