IBM to acquire Confluent

Post by rf15 » Tue, Dec 09, 2025, 4:21 AM UTC

selcuka wrote: post #257

Lu2025 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they consistently deliver low quality/bottom-tier services and products I worked with IBMers. The main priority for a lot of them is to ensure continuous employment for themselves and their buddies. They'd add unnecessary complexity to a product to stretch out the development for another couple of years. And they work at leisure pace for tech. Actual 9 to 5, many coffee breaks. They can't compete.

I worked with IBM several decades ago for a customer project, and the solution suggested by an IBM'er for backing up a NoSQL database (Lotus Notes) on a daily basis was to translate and migrate the data to a relational one (DB2), then use a DB2 tape backup system to back it up. When I pointed out that this was a stupid way to do it, they openly told me that they just wanted to sell DB2.

Post by tristan957 » Tue, Dec 09, 2025, 4:32 AM UTC

tannhaeuser wrote: post #23

EarthIsHome wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gnome has stagnated significantly.

If only it had stagnated around gnome 2.0.

Post by worthless-trash » Tue, Dec 09, 2025, 4:47 AM UTC

sqircles wrote: post #73

notepad0x90 wrote: post #28

This is so fascinating to me. I mean how IBM keeps taking over other companies, but they consistently deliver low quality/bottom-tier services and products. Why do they keep doing the same thing again and again? How are they generating actual revenue this way? Ok, so does anyone remember 'Watson'? It was the chatgpt before chatgpt. they built it in house. Why didn't they compete with OpenAI like Google and Anthropic…

There are entire niches of us that make a living (not at IBM) making certain IBM products actually do what they're supposed to. From my vantage point I see essentially zero maintenance going on with their products. I sincerely don't understand the market (why do people keep paying hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars for non-existent support?) - but whatever.

Post by dingnuts » Tue, Dec 09, 2025, 5:00 AM UTC

beachy wrote: post #290

npalli wrote: post #272

Confluent was trading at less than 50% of its IPO price when IBM made the offer. The stock and the company has been going sideways for several years now, keeps growing revenues but loses even more as most of it is in Sales and Marketing. In which world is this seen as some sort of extraordinary company that will get sabotaged by IBM. Seems Confluent management knows the writing on the wall, IBM will clean up (fire a…

I joined IBM over 40 years ago, like my pappy before me. My main takeaway from IBM's longevity is just how astonishingly long big companys' death rattles can be, not how great IBM are at running software businesses.

Post by dpark » Tue, Dec 09, 2025, 5:33 AM UTC

beachy wrote: post #290

npalli wrote: post #272

Confluent was trading at less than 50% of its IPO price when IBM made the offer. The stock and the company has been going sideways for several years now, keeps growing revenues but loses even more as most of it is in Sales and Marketing. In which world is this seen as some sort of extraordinary company that will get sabotaged by IBM. Seems Confluent management knows the writing on the wall, IBM will clean up (fire a…

I joined IBM over 40 years ago, like my pappy before me. My main takeaway from IBM's longevity is just how astonishingly long big companys' death rattles can be, not how great IBM are at running software businesses.