Both observations support my opinion: Gartner never talked to the people actually fixing the problems, they just listened to the hand-wringing doom sayers. To the talkers, not the do-ers.
But then if the level of paranoia HADN'T been as high as it was, maybe we wouldn't have gotten the resources necessary to fix the problem as well as we did. The thought of planes falling from the sky and exploding microwaves was a pretty good incentive to get it right. (Anyone seen that Simpsons Halloween episode?) Same thing with the mainframes. A few customers hear about cheap UNIX servers. They call Gartner and ask about the feasibility of replacing the mainframe with client server. At first, Gartner has no opinion, just some vague cautions. But as more customers call with the same question, they detect a consensus: "Everyone wants to replace their mainframes with client-server". Soon they start telling customers that a large percentage of their customers are doing it, but still offer vague cautions just to be safe. This convinces more customers to try it, creating a feedback loop. Conclusion: Mainframes are doomed. When (insert significant percentage of c/s conversion projects) of them fail, Gartner collects those stats, and passes them along to the next generation. I don't think Gartner exists for any other purpose than as a CYA mechanism for management. If a project turns sour, even if it was a stupid idea from the beginning, a manager can always say "well, we called Gartner, and they said it was a good thing to do, so the problems must be with the implementation", and the techs get the blame. > -----Original Message----- > From: James Melin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 2:40 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Gartner speaks > > > I will add this caveat - the reason the doomsayers were wrong > about Y2K is > because the collective lot of us who twiddle code across the > globe took > GREAT steps to ensure it was a non problem. > My relatives kept asking me if things were going to fail, and > I said a few > minor things will go wonky, but nothign major we depend on because my > colleagues across the world were making sure the problem was > eradicated. > > If we had done nothing as an industry however, all hell would > have broken > loose. > > Gartner also said the mainframe was dead 8 years ago. I guess > the Z900 and > Z800 in my datacenter are not supposed to exist . In any > case, there are > those that believe that the sun rises and sets in the > posterior crevasse of > the gartner group, and their word is law. > > > > |---------+----------------------------> > | | "Hall, Ken (IDS | > | | ECCS)" | > | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]| > | | ml.com> | > | | Sent by: Linux on| > | | 390 Port | > | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]| > | | IST.EDU> | > | | | > | | | > | | 07/24/2003 01:20 | > | | PM | > | | Please respond to| > | | Linux on 390 Port| > | | | > |---------+----------------------------> > > >------------------------------------------------------------- > -----------------------------------------------------------------| > | > | > | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > | > | cc: > | > | Subject: Re: Gartner speaks > | > > >------------------------------------------------------------- > -----------------------------------------------------------------| > > > > > *My* experience with Gartner is that they just parrot what > the last few > customers told them about whatever you're asking. I'd call > and ask about > some product or other, and they'd give me an opinion. > If I disagreed with it, they REALLY wanted to know why, and I'm sure > whatever I told them worked it's way into their position. > They seem to do > research by dynamic consensus. But this is pretty much > what they say they do, isn't it? Do no independent research, > just collect > opinions from subscribers, and redistribute them. > > With Y2K, I guess they were hearing overblown paranoid > doomsday scenarios, > and just repeating them like they do with everything else, paying no > attention to what was REALLY going on. Probably they > didn't hear about all of the work being done because those > doing it were > too busy to talk to them. The only ones who DID talk had > nothing better to > do than fret. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gregg C Levine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 2:05 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Gartner speaks > > > > > > Hello again from Gregg C Levine > > Then how come during the Y2K business, they bungled it badly? They > > thought that during the craze to get everything fixed, the group, > > would not? But we did, as everyone on this list, knows. > > ------------------- > > Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > > "Use the Force, Luke."� Obi-Wan Kenobi > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > > Of > > > Adam Thornton > > > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 1:43 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Gartner speaks > > > > > > On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 07:08, Joe Poole wrote: > > > > We're still rolling out the penguins (without fur BTW). > Websphere > > > > Commerce Suite is the latest effort, running in test instances. > > Our > > > > CIO is in "wait and see" mode, as are we all. Attorneys agree. > > > > Without proof, there's no reason to stop. > > > > > > It's been my perception for a number of years that Gartner is > > largely a > > > Microsoft mouthpiece. > > > > > > Oh, and, by the way: > > > > > > I own copyright over code that 95% of the Windows code out there > > > infringes on. I refuse to show it to you or anyone, > because it's a > > > trade secret. But I demand that each and every one of > you who have > > ever > > > so much as *seen* a computer running Windows immediately pay me > > $1000. > > > PER COMPUTER. Or else I'm going to sue. So just Paypal it to me, > > OK? > > > > > > Adam > > > >
