Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
1–10 of 87 posts
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#2What’s strange here is OpenShift as a target. The last I looked, VMs were just getting initial support - certainly not enough functionality or proving to encourage one to rehost 100k VMs onto it as a platform. Also why the assumption that IBM would treat them better than Broadcom/CA?
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#3No post body was provided.
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#4Redhat acquisition of Makara (Aug 2021) probably enabled a sweeter price point for CxO to buy and virtual host themselves.
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#5Interesting, it does seem plausible that the cause is the VMWare price hike; as they specifically stated aiming at large enterprises because they’re slow to move, I wonder whether they may be overplaying their hand.
On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine these enterprises moving have a million of VMs before the end of the year, so they probably do have a point. But it just seems like short-sighted short-term thinking here, giving up enterprise market share in exchange for some additional $ now.
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#6Fantasy fiction of a sysadmin that uses anonymity on the internet to craft themselves into someone more important than they are in real life.
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#7This definitely feels fake. Either just a fabulist or someone mad at VMware and wants to scare them. CEOs of Fortune 500 companies do not know about the Linux virtualization market.
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#8What’s strange here is OpenShift as a target. The last I looked, VMs were just getting initial support - certainly not enough functionality or proving to encourage one to rehost 100k VMs onto it as a platform. Also why the assumption that IBM would treat them better than Broadcom/CA?
A commenter on the thread mentioned the VMWare price hikes, so it could be as simple as IBM sensing an opportunity to poach customers from VMWare (probably more overlap in potential customers than AWS/GCP/Azure) and aggressively selling OpenShift to the C-suite with a promise of "if we can get a deal done this year, we'll give you heavily discounted pricing for X years".
It does seem a bit strange that all of these requests supposedly come specifically "from the CEO" though, as I would expect most companies would have CTOs making purchase decisions like this.
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#9Interesting, it does seem plausible that the cause is the VMWare price hike; as they specifically stated aiming at large enterprises because they’re slow to move, I wonder whether they may be overplaying their hand. On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine these enterprises moving have a million of VMs before the end of the year, so they probably do have a point. But it just seems like short-sighted short-term thinkin…
Any reduction in memory managed by VMWare would be savings though. Say they need 50% of the VMWare license this year and 5% next year they're probably still happy.
At least happy until whatever IBM has been promising behind closed doors runs out, and then IBM start turning the screws.
Re: Sudden disturbing moves for IT in large companies, mandated by CEOs
#10Fantasy fiction of a sysadmin that uses anonymity on the internet to craft themselves into someone more important than they are in real life.
This, unfortunately.
Fortunately it's quickly nipped in the thread on reddit. The news isn't new, and companies already had shy of a quarter to work on it, but not that we hit Q3 and forecasting for Licensing is now kicking in for Q1-Q2 23' it's now sudden that the capex will be $$$ so there is a huge rush to migrate to mitigate licensing cost and sunk cost of a yearly licensing option.
Most IT/Sysadmins do not communicate with Finance/FPA, but the ones that do are really ahead of the game. I'm fortunate that in my past and present org(s) I always include them on talks, and once they are on your side they are an invaluable ally. Money talks, finance talks.
IT and Finance are back office administration, or the other side of the house in many orgs and should be talking about all terms of licensing and proper forcasting, but I do see it strained because IT focuses on what the tech can do, and finance only understands money and liability.
But IT can also mitigate liability if it's framed properly. This MSP sysadmin is clearly only in tech and never went out of it. Which isn't bad. But it is a very, very common silo and trope for external IT partners.