Slashdot Mirror


Dell Abandons Its Customization Roots

LiveFreeOrDieInTheGo writes "Dell intends to scale back its build-to-order service model, while increasing sales of prepackaged systems. The goal: $3B USD savings by 2011. The downside: customers expect Dell to build-to-order. The deeper downside: Dell will outsource more production and assembly."

372 comments

  1. In other news... by kpainter · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dell changes its name to "Dull"

    1. Re:In other news... by Sepiraph · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is actually some truth to that, I actually did find my last Dell laptop to be quite dull. Based on my own personal experiences in owning my last 3 laptops from Dell, HP and Lenovo. I'd say HP's design is by far much better than the other two, and I wonder if that's one of the reasons why it took over Dell's lead in the PC market.

    2. Re:In other news... by Sanat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Getting Carly out of HP improved a host of areas within HP including morale. Of course a 21 million dollar severance package didn't hurt her too much.

      HP is back to producing again instead of in-fighting.

      .

      --
      And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
    3. Re:In other news... by Just+because+I'm+an · · Score: 3, Funny
    4. Re:In other news... by timmarhy · · Score: 4, Insightful
      she was a terrible ceo, and it's amazing how many of these clowns are out there, jumping from CEO position to position picking up huge packages and leaving a trail of distruction behind them.

      stonemasons, i swear it has to be something of that kind that allows completely useless people to run these companys.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    5. Re:In other news... by loteck · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think you meant Freemasons, not stonemasons, unless you are cursing HP for their conspiracies to create beautiful sculptures and pretty stone engravings.

    6. Re:In other news... by timmarhy · · Score: 4, Funny

      actually i meant stonecutters, i was trying to make a refference to the simpsons ep.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    7. Re:In other news... by teknomage1 · · Score: 1, Redundant

      I'm replying to this post since I tried to mod it insightful and the system chose redundant instead. Replying should blow away the previous mod. I miss the old system with an actual submit button for moderation.

      --
      Stop intellectual property from infringing on me
    8. Re:In other news... by NecroPuppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not really.

      The Dell brand is primarily going to be 'standard' home user and the corporate market. There's not a huge amount of customization needed there.

      For the gamer who wants to customize a system, but not build it from scratch, there's the Dell subsidiary Alienware.

      --
      I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
    9. Re:In other news... by HungSoLow · · Score: 5, Funny

      No no no... it's the stonecutters! Now known as the Ancient Mystic Society of No Homers.

      "Who holds back the electric car?
      Who makes Carly Fiorina a CEO?
      We do! We do!"

    10. Re:In other news... by pembo13 · · Score: 1

      what about laptops?

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    11. Re:In other news... by adolf · · Score: 1
    12. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      vagina

    13. Re:In other news... by zippthorne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it's a kind of hero worship. "Corporate Saviors," I believe they were called in the 80s or 90s.

      It's a kind of narcissism to believe that it takes these special people to run your company, you have to get just the right person, someone who's done it before, even if they were a spectacular failure. Besides, look at the severance packages.. the companies must have believed in them to offer them that much...

      But it's not all that different from the idea of the box-office superstar. As if only a few people making $20million a picture are capable of making good films. Precisely when it's just the opposite: a movie star will get people in the seats opening night, and maybe save a poor film, but a good movie will get people in the seats five weeks later and establish the body puppets associated with it as "movie stars."

      Anyway, my point is that there are talented, capable people waiting in the wings in every field, and you might just be able to get great performance *and* save on salaries by expanding the scope of your talent search. I hope you're listening, shareholders meetings and Hollywood producers.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    14. Re:In other news... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but Dell computers genuinely are decent deals, by virtue of the razor-thin margins. People interested in bragging rights buy Alienware, and it doesn't look like terrible machinery from the specs, but it's not "the best" you can get, and it's far from "the best deal" you can get.

      The last time I priced a machine from them, I could get equivalent performance for literally half of the price by building it myself. At least, as long as my definition of "performance" didn't include, "really cool looking, glowy case"

      I don't know what a "serious gamer" would be interested in, (performance? Showing off how much money they have?) but when I was at my closest to that category, I wouldn't have given Alienware more than two thoughts. It's not at all very much different from the "million dollar laptop" that turned out to be a $3k laptop with a half million dollars "worth" of diamonds and precious stones glued on.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    15. Re:In other news... by amsr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dell beat themselves at their own game. They created the commodity PC market, and now they have nothing to compete on except for price...

      It turns out that now-a-days, people want more than just price. They want design, portability, battery life, higher end features, an OS that works without having an IT dept to maintain it-and they are willing to pay for it. Those people are now buying Apple notebooks and iMacs. The clunky old inspirion doesn't cut it.

      The other end of the market, the bargain basement cheap custom PCs that businesses buy by the boatload. Well, it took 10 years, but everyone else caught up with Dell's business model and are doing the same thing. There really is no cost advantage or ease of procurement when buying Dell vs. any other PC mfgr. Dell can't drop the price any lower to compete, because their margins are already razor thin. Their supply chain is leveraged to the max, so there is no room for efficiency there either.

      Dell is getting beat at its own "cheap" game, and has no model to compete for the business of users that want more than just "cheap". I'd say they are between a rock and a hard place.

    16. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dell is Dull, in other news

      WTF with the new look Slashdot?

      My screen doesn't have enough room for all the indentations and borders and buttons,

      can't ... handle ... change ...

      AC

    17. Re:In other news... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Anyway, my point is that there are talented, capable people waiting in the wings in every field, and you might just be able to get great performance *and* save on salaries by expanding the scope of your talent search. I hope you're listening, shareholders meetings and Hollywood producers.

      The problem is the price of failure is high and the risk of using an unknown is pretty big given the cost of failure. Going with someone who is perceived as a superstar is a lot less risky; and if they fail the board can say "well, they we successful at company X so we had no reason to think they wouldn't be here, so we did our job." They don't want to be sued when some "unknown" drives the company into the ground so they take the "safe" choice.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    18. Re:In other news... by aurispector · · Score: 3, Informative

      Heh. Carly was a complete idiot. Didn't one of the Hewletts (or maybe it was a Packard) fight her tooth and nail from the board or directors? She practically kills the R&D dept - one of HP's crown jewels, then she wanted to sell cross branded Ipods. Perhaps she thought she was running Walmart?

      I think the reason these numbskulls get the big packages is because they are slick enough to be able to legally prove they did their jobs carrying out the will of the majority of the board of directors. Pass the blame, collect the buck. In the few instances where I had inside information on the departure of upper management, the concensus was that it was cheaper to pay them to leave than to force them out. A protracted legal battle airing the dirty laundry is bad for stock value.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    19. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The truth may be much simpler and more boring than that, actually.

      According to one argument I've heard a while ago, it may simply be a matter of math: if you have to pay X million to a CEO to get rid of them immediately, the question that the directors will ask themselves is "how much longer would it take this CEO to lose the company another X million?". Or, put another way, "if we do not get rid of this CEO immediately, how big is the figure of Y million that they will lose the company until their contract runs out the regular way?"

      If keeping a CEO would lose the company Y million dollars, and getting rid of them immediately would lose them X million, then it's worth getting rid of them immediately if X is less than Y, obviously. So the fact that a CEO is paid - say - 20 million after running a company into the ground may simply mean that the company realises that if this CEO stayed, they'd lose even more than that.

      Of course, this approach is ripe with problems - it doesn't encourage CEOs to do good work, and may in fact even encourage them to do bad work -, and it's also difficult to explain to employees why their jobs are being cut despite their good work when the CEO who's responsible for the mess is getting more money than they'll ever see in their entire life for fucking everything up, but from the beancounters' perspective, it may make sense.

    20. Re:In other news... by vux984 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The last time I priced a machine from them, I could get equivalent performance for literally half of the price by building it myself. At least, as long as my definition of "performance" didn't include, "really cool looking, glowy case"

      Actually a premium case and some glowy bits don't add that much to the bill at all.

    21. Re:In other news... by garutnivore · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sounds good in theory but I don't think that's quite how it works. Even CEOs who would be considered to have failed end up being hired pretty easily somewhere else. The way CEO performance is measured goes like this. When the company the CEO is heading does well, the CEO gets the credit. When the company the CEO is heading goes down the tubes, there's an excuse like "bad economic climate", "piracy" or something else.

      After quitting or being fired from their previous position they are hired with little regard to what their previous performance was because there's always an excuse. Ok, if a CEO does something mind boggingly stupid that will probably have some impact. But run-of-the-mill poor performance won't be enough to make them unemployable.

      I agree with most of your point except that I don't think the rationale used by the board in case of failure would be "the CEO was successful at company X so we had a good reason to hire him." I think the rationale is more like "the CEO was labeled with the sacred seal of corporate infallibility, the three-letter acronym "CEO", so we had a good reason to hire him."

      Heh... I guess I'm more cynical or something.

    22. Re:In other news... by SkyDude · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When the company the CEO is heading does well, the CEO gets the credit. When the company the CEO is heading goes down the tubes, there's an excuse like "bad economic climate", "piracy" or something else.

      You couldn't have hit it more on the head if you had a laser guiding you. That's precisely the BS a former employer of mine fed the staff. Then, when the company nearly went bankrupt, she sold it off. And of course, she had the hot ticket in her purse - an MBA. Two months later she was back at work for another company in the same industry, in a similar position.

      Heh... I guess I'm more cynical or something.

      Naw, you're just telling it like it is. If I had mod points today, you'd get most of them.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    23. Re:In other news... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      I thought it was Packard Dell.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    24. Re:In other news... by uncoveror · · Score: 1

      It wasn't the stonemasons. It was IBM. Carly was a mole, and her job was to bring HP down. Since they survived her, she must not have made he bosses at IBM very Happy.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
    25. Re:In other news... by Jazu · · Score: 1

      I tried to come up with the same sort of performance on both dell and alienware, and it came out $500 higher at aienware.

      --
      My joke got modded as Insightful and my insight got modded as Funny.
    26. Re:In other news... by John+Biggabooty · · Score: 1

      They never really did much customization anyway. Dell would ask a few questions to clients who can't tell storage space from ram, and would either send out the basic package with integrated video and sound, or the multimedia package with video and sound cards. Either way, most people only got 256MB of ram when XP needs 512. Some poor suckers only got 128.

      --
      That's Bigboo TAY! TAY!
    27. Re:In other news... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "it's amazing how many of these clowns are out there, jumping from CEO position to position picking up huge packages "

      Damn....I wish I knew what it took to get those type jobs!! I'd tweak my resume if I knew what the prerequisites were....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    28. Re:In other news... by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      You can get cool glowy cases from Dell too. XPS stuff all has those big black ominious cases, that look way more cool than alienware's stupid fins and scoops scally-car look, and the XPS laptops either come with yummy aluminium and soft touch lids (mmmm, strokable) or they have glowy LEDs and crap like the alien ware ones.

    29. Re:In other news... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Sure but why does the board get CEOs like that?

      Carly Fiorina had a track record of being a "slash and burn" CEO, how could they not see the damage she did to Lucent?

      They should give CEOs a not spectacular base package and give potentially huge bonuses dependent on the performance of the company 3 years later (related to the rest of the market).

      --
    30. Re:In other news... by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      The movie star may save a poor film from financial disaster, but the much more likely scenario is that a good film flops due to lack of a big name. That's why the big names are so valued - everyone is trying to avoid the latter scenario.

      Not only that, but these people have connections commensurate with their salaries. The company's not only paying for whatever business talent they have, but also the network they bring with them.

      In keeping with your movie analogy, if you hire Bob Smith right out of acting school instead of Tom Hanks, do you think Bob Smith will be able to call up top-notch directors and cinematographers and attract the best talent to work on the new movie? Wouldn't simply having Tom Hanks on board grease the skids for you with the movie studios and ensure wide distribution for your film? How much is that worth?

      The end product might be no different had Tom Hanks or Bob Smith been hired. Maybe (probably) Bob Smith is a better actor. The difference is that chances are nobody ever will see the movie with Bob Smith, but a Tom Hanks movie is almost guaranteed to make money. It's about how much you're willing to risk.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    31. Re:In other news... by mikael · · Score: 1

      I thought the author meant The Flintstones movie.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    32. Re:In other news... by mikael · · Score: 1

      I looked at buying a laptop or new desktop from Dell. The annoying thing was that their prices constantly changed from week to week, seeming to get cheaper at the end of each month. Even the prices for home users vs. small office were different for the same configuration. But if you tried to place an order for the cheaper of the two configuration, they would change the order in some way (some components were apparently "delayed for delivery". Not forgetting that they had outsourced their sales department to India - one guy kept calling me at home at 8.00am for entire week determined to get the sale.

      While looking around to get the best deal (most powerful GPU vs. laptop vs. desktop), it was less hassle to buy a laptop from a warehouse store.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    33. Re:In other news... by MrMonroe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You mean for the gamer who wants to customize a system, but not build it from scratch, and is hemorrhaging $20 bills out of their anus, there's the Dell subsidiary Alienware.

    34. Re:In other news... by NecroPuppy · · Score: 1

      Yep.

      But that's how "brand awareness" works.

      You hear of a system/company that does good work (cost aside, Alienware does go good work), and an individual is more likely to go with them, than someone they've heard little about. That's why advertising agencies get the big bucks; to get the names out there and recognized.

      --
      I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
    35. Re:In other news... by canuck57 · · Score: 1

      Heh... I guess I'm more cynical or something.

      No, not cynical. Perhaps realistic.

      But I would include all CxO positions, CEO, CIO, CTO, CFO and even senior VPs. It is a big plutocratic aristocratic type of club. And when their reputations go south, they get to sit on boards of directors.

    36. Re:In other news... by garutnivore · · Score: 1

      But I would include all CxO positions, CEO, CIO, CTO, CFO and even senior VPs.

      Agreed!

    37. Re:In other news... by drsmithy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The way CEO performance is measured goes like this. When the company the CEO is heading does well, the CEO gets the credit. When the company the CEO is heading goes down the tubes, there's an excuse like "bad economic climate", "piracy" or something else.

      Exactly. It's the same as religion:

      Things go well - Praise the Lord ! Without him we'd all be fucked.
      Things go badly - it's part of his "greater plan" or "we weren't worthy" or some other such bullshit.

    38. Re:In other news... by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. The correct way to reward executives is option packages with a strike price significantly above the current value.

      And if you (as in a board of directors) want to support long-term growth/stability, then issue options that cannot be exercised until a certain date (months/years).

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    39. Re:In other news... by couchslug · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It may matter more who they serve. Companies and workers have always been expendable one way or the other.
      If enough of the right people make money during a CEOs tenure, there is no reason not to use him or her elsewhere.
      Companies can be used as throwaways in a larger war (SCO) or be sucked dry and discarded. Those with enough money can always whip up a new company if needed.

      Of course, since companies and workers don't matter, that eliminates any reason for worker loyalty. Scam what you can and fuck them before they fuck you.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    40. Re:In other news... by OmegaWolf747 · · Score: 1

      Customer service goes down the shitter and oh yes, add the lovely outsourcing crap as well. Give me a break! These fucking American companies need to hire American workers and sell to American people at reasonable prices and give us the best treatment in the world; not this half-assed crap they pull right now!

      --
      I charge forward recklessly, leaving chaos in my wake.
    41. Re:In other news... by LinuxLuver · · Score: 1

      Carly won the infighting in the HP / Compaq merger. But since then she's shown she doesn't know how to run a company that makes stuff people want and happy they bought it where they did. Many CEOs don't "get" the customer thing. They are too far removed from the people who ultimately pay hard-earned cash for their stuff. Instead, they talk to the CFO every day for an hour and fly-by-spreadsheet and it measures the gap or not between performance and the quarterly targets. Driving by such indicators is like driving by the rear-vision mirror. You're looking back, not forward.

      --
      Only boring people are ever bored.
    42. Re:In other news... by Destroyeron · · Score: 1

      Good to see Dell continuing to go downhill.

    43. Re:In other news... by mgblst · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is, that picking your next CEO has a huge influence over the share price of the company. Picking someone who is perceived to be a corporate saviour is more important on whether they actually are.

      Since the public can not actually know everything about a company, perception is very important.

    44. Re:In other news... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Ross Perreault, an ancient presidential candidate claimed that no executive was worth more then 20 times the average salary of the employees under him.

      Any other compensation belongs to the shareholders. To earn more, the leader has to be a shareholder with good amounts of shares.

      Leslie

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    45. Re:In other news... by Squalish · · Score: 1

      I think there's another factor not being considered.

      Their paygrade, hirability, et cetera are not related to their talent or the success of companies under their leadership. They are, however, related directly to the size of the companies they have led. This worship of size in the bulging financial sector scales all the way up to the Fed Chairman, who holds the power to destroy the US economy, and continue to be asked to all the good parties afterwards.

      It's at least partially a recent cultural ramification of taxing capital gains very gently, and unregulating the financial sector. A dividend-based economy where people invest in companies and the companies pay them after they use it to procure profits, I would not expect to suffer from this particular delusion.

      --
      People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation
    46. Re:In other news... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      On the other side of the coin, the lesson to take home is simple - job networking is critical. Mild competence and the ability to kiss the boss's ass without looking like you're kissing the boss's ass will take you six figures further than superior competence and a strictly professional relationship with the higher-ups.

      Love it or hate it, that's how it works and the only reasonable response is to adapt your job strategy accordingly. Know your craft, but more importantly make friends with the bigwigs.

    47. Re:In other news... by fataugie · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ross Perreault, an ancient presidential candidate

      Did you mean Ross Perot? He ran in 1992, and was best known for being fucking batshit crazy, besides rich.

      --

      WTF? Over?

    48. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The shit rolls down hill and not up. ;)

    49. Re:In other news... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      I would blame golf courses before I blame Freemasons.

      The best part is that many times exCEOs end up sitting on some corporate board voting for another profit milking compensation plan for a fellow CEO. Heavens forbid they reinvest that money back into the company.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    50. Re:In other news... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Ross Perrault may be what you said he was, but then how did he get rich? And think about this, how many people can you manage directly. ( I would say that when you reach 7 to 8 diverse talents, that's it). And while RP may be wierd, he is right. No individual employee deserves a salary that is more then 20 times the average.

      If the average is 100k, then 2 million per year is more then a good income. It is what he is worth. No 50 million deals.
      In the old boys directors clubs, the directors are not really responsible to the shareholders. They vote each other raises that are disproportional to their contributions. The problem is that directors, once voted in, control the media, and thus they are hard to dislodge. And a screw up by one of these fat cats deserves an unceremonous relieve of duties (Provided the screw up was in his control). And I am positive that any university graduate can do the directors job after experiencing one full financial year cycle.

      Its no big deal.

      Leslie
      Been there, done it.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  2. Wow by sltd · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Will this affect their offering of pre-loaded Ubuntu systems? There isn't a huge market for them, unfortunately. But I remember all the old Dell commercials - the main thing they had going for them was customization. I guess they're just becoming an entrenched monopoly like IBM or Microsoft, now.

    1. Re:Wow by calebt3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Remember: The market is steadily moving towards laptops. And laptops are harder to custom-build.

    2. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh. Lenovo is doing fully-customizable ThinkPads for about the same price as Dell ($1600 or so for an obscenely powerful workstation). There's certainly a cost difference in customization vs. mass-assembly, but I don't see how that difference increases significantly for laptops vs desktops.

    3. Re:Wow by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > But I remember all the old Dell commercials - the main thing they had going for them was customization.

      I think the point is that those were the old Dell commercials. If you look at ones today, they're all about price. Features and price, admittedly, but price is the biggest thing.

      This is a reflection of the market for PCs. When they represented a substantial capital investment, you wanted to tailor them to your particular needs, and avoid paying for anything you didn't absolutely need. That made customization and U.S.-based assembly locations worthwhile. Now, people don't want that as much. The PC, as a unit, has become increasingly commoditized. I bet a lot of buyers today don't even look at specs; they just buy "a computer" and make a lot of assumptions about what they'll be able to do with it. (Assumptions that are actually pretty safe if you don't plan on doing much beyond typical consumerish tasks with it.)

      As a result, the goal is no longer "build me a PC to my exact specifications," it's "build me as much PC as possible for $500". Or $300, or $250. I suspect before too long it'll be $99.

      That doesn't favor having a lot of assembly points close to consumers; it favors doing all your assembly in a quasi-slave-labor camp somewhere, to better keep costs down, and then shipping tons and tons of identical boxes in bulk to wherever the consumers are. 'Who cares if it's not exactly what you want? It's $500 and it's more power/features/speed than you'll probably need, so just buy it,' is the message.

      It's easy to blame Dell here, but it's buyers of technology that are driving it. Not enough people want essentially bespoke computers (or the ones that do aren't buying them from Dell), and Dell is going to eliminate the facilities that provide that service.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    4. Re:Wow by Swampash · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The market is steadily moving towards laptops. And laptops are harder to custom-build.

      Not only that; people want to see, touch, and hold laptops before making a purchase decision.

      I'll leave the conclusion up to the reader.

    5. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's easy to blame Dell here, but it's buyers of technology that are driving it. Not enough people want essentially bespoke computers (or the ones that do aren't buying them from Dell), and Dell is going to eliminate the facilities that provide that service. Perhaps the consumers that are intelligent enough to know what they need from a customized system are also smart enough not to buy it from Dell.
    6. Re:Wow by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      Pre-loaded or not, it is in Dell's best interests to sell hardware that is linux-compatible. You shouldn't have any problems loading it on dell equipment. At least with servers.

      Dell sells to a lot of very large companies (including government) that do a whole lot of linux.

    7. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Amen to Kadin2048 whoever you are. I work in the computers department of a popular retail store, and what you have said I see and almost have to argue against 40 hours a week with customers when trying to give them a tailored, customized fit for their needs. It is very true that PEOPLE ONLY CARE ABOUT THE PRICE. Instead of "What's the best computer to fit my lifestyle?", a lot of the questions and comments I get are, "What's the best deal on the best computer you got?", or "Why spend over $500 when it's going to be outdated tomorrow?", or "I don't care what it does or doesn't do or what it has or hasn't got, I just like the price." or "Computers are pretty much disposable nowadays anyway. So why pay more?" and etc, etc, etc.

      In this non-tech-savvy society that we live in, I can understand that people are hesitant to make a "large" purchase on something they know very little about, i.e., the specs of a computer. However, the biggest obstacle I think computer companies face is the fear consumers have: the fear of their next or first computer purchase being a waste of their money. I think everyone of us has had or know someone who has had a bad experience purchasing a computer. Be it because of the poor customer service we received before our purchase or the product itself after we purchased it. And no doubt no one wants to waste their money, but it happens to everyone of us everyday be it knowingly or unknowingly. Instead consumers rely on a "good brand" second (which there is no such thing by the way. I hear, read, and see negative things about every brand where I work. In fact on more than one occasion, I've even seen Apple computers returned to my store. Believe it or not.) and a "good price" first and foremost, which is any computer within their means. So, I'm not surprised Dell is making this move. Why pay more for a customized option when you can get the same or nearly the same and more for less?

      Buying a computer has now become like buying a pair of socks to your everyday consumer. In their mind: Who cares if the more expensive socks are the best fit for my lifestyle? I'll try to stretch and make an eMachines or Compaq Presario pair play video games, stream and download video, photos, and music for my family of 4 or more because it fits my wallet right now before I'll even think about purchasing the Dell pair. Absolutely no fault of Dell's on this move folks, we've got ourselves to blame for this one.

      Oh, and by the way, we also sell Dell computers at the retail where I work too. Thank you and have a blessed day.

    8. Re:Wow by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't claim they are an entrench monopoly because of this. Probably what happened is that the economy is on a down turn in more places then just America and some bean counter suggested a saving of X which probably made up for their losses from something that they can't control.

      I think it is a stupid move on their part but I'm not running their company. I also don't buy their computers so I really don't care that much about them. Their so called customization was more or less cookie cutter customizing that most other companies just had a line for. Their benefit was paying for the parts when the order was made to them and the pieces came off the truck instead of paying 2 months in advance to have a few different models sitting on store shelves and taking up warehouse space. I'm not sure buying something two months earlier would make that much of a difference.

    9. Re:Wow by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dell unfortunately is a victim of its own success too. They sold a crapload of computers during the boom years and had phenomenal growth. The problem is that there's no way to sustain that growth. They'd have to sell like 10 billion computers a year. But Wall Street hits them hard when they can't the market's predictions. So they have focus on making more profits. Which means cutting costs by getting cheaper parts, labor, etc. All the while, the margins are shrinking. It's a bad cycle.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    10. Re:Wow by microbee · · Score: 1

      This is simply not true. I bought a laptop from Dell last year and I could choose almost everything differently. I consider this is great advantage and one of the reasons I chose Dell.

    11. Re:Wow by urbanriot · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Exactly! And as an OEM I can tell you that the majority of home buyers are shopping solely on price, and don't care about the quality of the parts. These days, your average PC buyer considers the PC to have a 3 year disposable cycle.

      I think the point is that those were the old Dell commercials. If you look at ones today, they're all about price. Features and price, admittedly, but price is the biggest thing.
    12. Re:Wow by Nimey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not only that; people want to see, touch, and hold ... before making a purchase decision.

      I'll leave the conclusion up to the reader. You're not going to meet a girlfriend over the Internet?
      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    13. Re:Wow by Nightspirit · · Score: 1

      Yep, my dad just bought a computer without consulting me first, and it was a $299 acer at best buy with windows vista. Now I have nothing against vista, it runs great on my laptop, but I highly doubt a $299 machine has the specs to make it run nicely. Thankfully he bought more ram, I just hope the machine has a decent processor.

    14. Re:Wow by p0tat03 · · Score: 1

      Features and price, admittedly, but price is the biggest thing.

      I'd have to disagree. While this was certainly the direction Dell took, not all manufacturers have done the same. Consumers are still looking for features, just not in the form of megahertz and megabytes. These are so similar between machines nowadays that consumers simply tune this information out. What matters now are "premium" features - Apple's magnetic power cord, thinness, weight, battery life, Sony's color customization, and Lenovo's durability technology, for examples.

      Dell simply failed to differentiate their product in a market full of cheap imitators, and this is why they suffer. Many people are willing to pay a premium for a premium product, but Dell has almost entirely not touched that segment of the market. With the new XPS laptops they're starting to approach it, but I fear this new round of cost cutting will compromise that. IMHO going higher-end is the only way for Dell to survive.

      If my time at an auto parts factory (a failing one) has taught me anything, it's that for every penny you shave off your cost, some Asian company will shave off two. They can afford to eat gruel and triple-bunk their beds, you cannot.

    15. Re:Wow by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      3 years = 2 moore's cycles. You're talking about a relative depreciation to 25% of the original "value" (in terms of relative capability) If your cell batteries degrade by 75% or suddenly, there were batters 4x better, you'd probably consider them pretty much disposable as well.

      And after only ~5 years, you're talking about an order of magnitude increase in relative capability, for the same price.

      So yeah, consumers probably should consider computers to be 3-5 year disposable items. In fact, for any given computer budget, I'd wager it's better in terms of integrated "relative" capability (as measured, potentially, in "months of bragging rights over your friends) to buy lower quartile (price-wise) machines more frequently (as in, spending the same total amount of money over time, but in smaller pieces). Like, maybe even as frequent as once per Moore.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    16. Re:Wow by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      See?! It's a sign... get Linux! =P

    17. Re:Wow by LLKrisJ · · Score: 1

      The market is steadily moving towards laptops. And laptops are harder to custom-build And how is this exactly?

      Most of the Dell notebook customizations involve the CPU and RAM. It is just a matter of plugging som chips into a standard mainboard design.

      Anyhow... I hope that Dell will keep on building custom machines. The new Latitude E series looks rock-solid, maybe this will turn things around for Dell.
    18. Re:Wow by UncleTogie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is very true that PEOPLE ONLY CARE ABOUT THE PRICE.

      Bullhockey. Niche builders like {pre-Dell} Alienware do well. You work in the computer department of a retail store. You're getting the bargain basement shoppers. They're the ones buying up eMachines at a frantic pace and wonder why it doesn't last/work for a darn. To use the vaunted /. car analogy, sure you had a lot of people buying Yugos SOLELY because of the price, because they didn't know any better. Once the maintenance/safety/reliability record became known, however, people were willing to spend a few more bucks to get a more robust vehicle...

      It did take getting burned once for a number of people first, didn't it?

      What you don't see is the flip side; the folks that know what they want. Last week, anecdotally speaking, we had a client that wanted a machine for hard-core number-crunching. I spec'd it out, and when she came in we discussed what she was getting and why. When it came time to give her the price, she cut me short and said simply, "When can you have it ready?"

      Just because you work at a Yugo dealership, and all you see are people buying Yugos, it does NOT follow that everyone wants a Yugo.

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    19. Re:Wow by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Spouting of this incorrect crap about Monopolies makes you look idiotic. Dell are so far away from being a Monopoly, compared to Microsoft, and IBM in the day, that it is ridiculous. How the hell you get marked up is a joke, a bad one.

      Seriously, how much customization to most people want - none. They just want a computer that works. Offer two models, one for the cheapos, one for the more reasonable people, and give people the ability to buy more hdd, ram, etc... simple.

  3. Please learn to spell "its." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Spelling matters.

    1. Re:Please learn to spell "its." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is slashdot, not an mid-term. It doesn't.

    2. Re:Please learn to spell "its." by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      and a full-on megalopolis to give that man a tax burden to cry about

      I'll see your megalopolis with one divorce lawyer, and raise you a demand for alimony.

    3. Re:Please learn to spell "its." by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Alimony, for when, she doesn't love you, but she does love your money.

      I'm sure it's probably repulsive to you, but does the law allow you to get anything in return for that dough? I mean, you should be able to claim that you got used to the lifestyle of having someone cook and clean* for you, and of course, "maritals."

      *assuming she did those things. But regardless, whatever she did do (and it had to be something, or your marriage was pretty lopsided), you'd grown accustomed to, right? I mean, if you're going to send money as if you were still married, then she should do some things for you as if you were still married, too, right?

      It seems weird to me that a person can have a claim on another person's money just based on the fact that other person used to give them money.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    4. Re:Please learn to spell "its." by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      People don't need a valid reason to sue nowadays ... the level of sense of "entitlement" is obscene. Of course, it's always fun to have someone end up spending $15,000.00 suing you and losing ...

    5. Re:Please learn to spell "its." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's life, we're not your arsehole friends. If you want to make a point, it does matter.

    6. Re:Please learn to spell "its." by uncoveror · · Score: 1

      If you misspell something or misuse the apostrophe while making a serious comment, many readers will not take your comment seriously because it looks like an illiterate yahoo made it. In this case, you have failed to communicate your idea. Your opinion on whether Dell rules or sucks is rendered irrelevant.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  4. Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is outsourcing a downside? Dell is creating wealth for all of the consumers who will be able to get more bang for their buck.

    1. Re:Deeper Downside? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Outsourcing lowers the GDP of our country, reducing our buying power. What logically happens is jobs are removed from our country.

      Now, tell me how people can afford to buy stuff if they have no job, or one that pays 1/2 as much?

      --
    2. Re:Deeper Downside? by torkus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ahh...but you see that's 5-15 years down the road. The shareholders (e.g. uber-rich trading firms) all want to meet this years or this QUARTER's financial targets.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    3. Re:Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, if you want to talk about 15 years down the road you might as well mention that in 15 years all the demand from our outsourcing will make the Chinese as well off as us, forcing them to charge as much, cancelling out any benefit of outsourcing there.

      You're a little capitalist, and you don't even realize it. Want all the jobs to stay in our country? That's greed; the same thing driving those shareholders to make more money. Unfortunately, whining doesn't get much done, so we'll all have to work really hard and offer some kind of advantage to keep the jobs. It's called "competing".

    4. Re:Deeper Downside? by ivoras · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah yes, but you see, working for your living instead of getting the money by playing the stock market or owning Dell is so Middle-ages, and people who depend on it should really move on or die off. By removing menial jobs from the country the Big Boys are actually helping people to transition to pure royalties-based industry, and get the money the way it's meant to be had - by sitting in leather armchairs and smoking Cuban cigars while reading the stock market reports, not something as vulgar as working in an office.

      (If you don't see Alien-grade sarcasm dripping from the above words, get yourself new glasses.)

      --
      -- Sig down
    5. Re:Deeper Downside? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thats exactly it: nobody with power cares for the long term maluses by strongly pushing outsourcing.

      As long as the quarter looks good, its golden. Another question would be this: Why do the uber rich trading firms want to only see short term gains, and not longer term ones?

      What financial disadvantage would there be if companies developed new things and technology, and continued further research going ahead up to 30-100 years? Ma Bell did that and we ended up with the transistor, lasers, Unix, C...

      --
    6. Re:Deeper Downside? by Original+Replica · · Score: 3, Insightful
      tell me how people can afford to buy stuff if they have no job, or one that pays 1/2 as much?

      They can't. In the words of Marriner Eccles:

      As mass production has to be accompanied by mass consumption, mass consumption, in turn, implies a distribution of wealth -- not of existing wealth, but of wealth as it is currently produced -- to provide men with buying power equal to the amount of goods and services offered by the nation's economic machinery ....But by taking purchasing power out of the hands of mass consumers, the savers denied to themselves the kind of effective demand for their products that would justify a reinvestment of their capital accumulations in new plants. In consequence, as in a poker game where the chips were concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit ran out, the game stopped.
      Guess where we are right now?
      --
      We are all just people.
    7. Re:Deeper Downside? by jlarocco · · Score: 0

      Thats exactly it: nobody with power cares for the long term maluses by strongly pushing outsourcing.

      Maybe you're not seeing the long term gains of outsourcing.

      Maybe you failed to consider all the new factories that the outsourcing companies will have to build to handle the increased load? And what about all the people who will get new, higher paying jobs in those factories? And what about the the standard of living increase those people and their families get because of this? Oh wait, all those people will live in a different country. Racist much?

      In that case, maybe you're forgetting the poor people in our country that will be able to afford new computers now? And what about all the money that will be saved by people/companies who buy Dells?

      If nothing else, look at it this way: Now that Dell has fewer employees doing manual labor, they'll be able to hire more people to design new, better machines.

    8. Re:Deeper Downside? by homer_s · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Outsourcing lowers the GDP of our country

      Can you please explain how that is so? Reading countless economics text books about the benefits of division of labor have confused me.

    9. Re:Deeper Downside? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Interesting


      Well, if you want to talk about 15 years down the road you might as well mention that in 15 years all the demand from our outsourcing will make the Chinese as well off as us, forcing them to charge as much, canceling out any benefit of outsourcing there.

      Not a chance; not with the population they have. Maybe in a century, but fifteen years? That's ridiculous. There are millions upon millions of people in China (and India, and quite a few other places) who have grown up and are used to far cheaper standards of living than the average person in the U.S. That translates into dramatically lower labor costs for the foreseeable future, since they're going to be willing to work for less. Someone who remembers life in a mud-and-thatch hut on a rice paddy is probably going to have a markedly different bar for 'success' than someone who grew up in the U.S.'s heyday and expects to be able to do better than that.


      You're a little capitalist, and you don't even realize it. Want all the jobs to stay in our country? That's greed; the same thing driving those shareholders to make more money. Unfortunately, whining doesn't get much done, so we'll all have to work really hard and offer some kind of advantage to keep the jobs. It's called "competing".

      That's a great thought but it's a little lacking in substance. What do you propose the U.S. ought to specialize in? I'm quite honestly interested, and I've asked this question over and over to a lot of fairly intelligent people and have yet to get a satisfactory answer back. I'm not sure there is one. Do we try to go the Neal Stephenson route? Music, movies, microcode, and pizza? Other parts of the world are chipping into 'software' already, and there's no reason to think that we have some kind of automatic, natural, competitive advantage in any of those.

      About the only thing we do have here in the U.S., at least at the moment, is a hell of a consumer market. Until we figure out exactly how we're going to keep ourselves going, I don't think it's necessarily illogical to want to carefully manage access to the one thing of value we have left. I'm not proposing or advocating for complete isolationism, just a careful analysis of exactly who we're allowing access, and to which markets, and what the effects are.

      More bluntly, I don't see any reason why the U.S. ought to open any market to foreign competition unless there's a clear indication that opening it results in a net benefit to the United States. Now, it may be that fully-open markets are the best (or least-worst) policy for Americans in general, but I haven't seen any of the politicians pushing for open markets really going out of their way to demonstrate this. And from where I'm sitting, it looks a lot like we're just letting ourselves go bankrupt on imports without much of a thought towards the long-term sustainability of this situation.

      Even if by restricting imports it increased the cost of non-essential goods to consumers, but in doing so bought us a few more years or decades of solvency in which to work on our comparative advantage (or for the Chinese and other developing markets to bring their labor force's standards of living, and thus costs, closer to par), I can't see why that would necessarily be bad.

      National governments have a mandate to serve the best interests of the people they represent. If free trade and open borders are demonstrably the best path, I'd be more supportive, but right now they look suspiciously like a path that leads off a cliff.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    10. Re:Deeper Downside? by timmarhy · · Score: 1
      It's pretty rich of you, an american, to wail about open markets hurting your country when in fact it's america that's the 800lb gorilla in international trade. just look at what happened to the canadian automotive manufacturing industry when it engaged in open trade with the USA.

      the USA has consistently signed trade agreements then procceded to break them and refuse to stick to what it's signed.

      While i'm all for open trade, because it brings wealth to everyone, I would be super careful of signing anything with the USA if i was in charge.

      Oh and can we please drop the retarded myth that when a job is sourced over seas that persons buying power vapourises. it's just not the case, and has been proven many times over since the industrial revolution.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    11. Re:Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all the demand from our outsourcing will make the Chinese as well off as us

      Dividing the wealth of America among the billions of people "out there" won't make anyone very well off at all. Unless, of course, you're in a position to keep your wealth from being shipped out.

    12. Re:Deeper Downside? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ---Maybe you're not seeing the long term gains of outsourcing.

      I understand all right. It raises the whole world out of poverty by spreading the money where labor is cheap until they're equal with everybody else. That that means for me, my generation, and my children is that it effectively lowers our wages. I dont like that, and I think its fairly easy to see why.

      Selling out our ability to create is just a bad idea altogether. It weakens our military and our ability to protect us.

      ---Maybe you failed to consider all the new factories that the outsourcing companies will have to build to handle the increased load? And what about all the people who will get new, higher paying jobs in those factories? And what about the the standard of living increase those people and their families get because of this? Oh wait, all those people will live in a different country. Racist much?

      Smart much? Cause you aren't showing it. It's called nationalism, and yes. I have it. Since our world has no real idea of free travel and migrating citizenship (what Adam Smith believed), we are bound to our country. Because of that, I will attempt to make this country good to live in, and that means having jobs and money abound.

      ---In that case, maybe you're forgetting the poor people in our country that will be able to afford new computers now? And what about all the money that will be saved by people/companies who buy Dells?

      If the poor people worked HERE instead of over there out of our territories, they could afford to buy them now. And pray tell, dont we see what the quality is when we seek the bottom? Or do you think lead is safe for children?

      ---If nothing else, look at it this way: Now that Dell has fewer employees doing manual labor, they'll be able to hire more people to design new, better machines.

      In actuality, they will spend more on advertising, along with paying more to their top execs. The stock prices might go up some.

      --
    13. Re:Deeper Downside? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      consider "GDP of our country" vs "total global GDP". That's how.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    14. Re:Deeper Downside? by homer_s · · Score: 1

      I still don't get it.
      When I, as an individual, outsource graphic design to my friend, the both of us benefit and both our 'GDPs' increase. I can focus on programming and she can focus on graphics.
      If I stopped 'outsourcing' this to my friend, I'd have to learn both, spend more hours doing both pieces of work. And she'd have nothing.

      Why would it be different for countries/cities/states/companies?

    15. Re:Deeper Downside? by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      Hypothetical: If EVERYTHING were designed and built overseas and then brought back here and sold, who here would have enough money to buy it?

      GDP = gross domestic product. Less producing = less GDP. It's an interesting conundrum. Companies think they can save money by building stuff in China. That was ALWAYS debatable but the beancounters made it look good. Now, I would wager that the cost of shipping it all back is edging up.

      Let's hear it for the beancounters! Making questionable managerial decision look good through moving beans strategically from one bucket to another!

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    16. Re:Deeper Downside? by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Those people in a different country chose a communist government that shot their economy to hell, not to mention killing millions of their best citizens in progress. Why should I prop their economy at the cost of my salary and job security when they still didn't admit any mistakes? If they don't like their standard of living, let them put their current government in jail and develop economy that allows ordinary citizens to afford locally made products rather than relying exclusively on exports. Which country is going to bail USA out of recession by outsourcing jobs to here?

    17. Re:Deeper Downside? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Outsourcing lowers the GDP of our country

      Can you please explain how that is so? Reading countless economics text books about the benefits of division of labor have confused me. Try at least a little harder than that.

      Imagine a widget factory. The factory takes in raw materials, and produces finished widgets. The widgets are sold on the market for some price that exceeds costs, resulting in profit. The workers are paid a salary, which they can use to buy widgets. With the exception of possibly exhausting whatever raw materials are used to create the widgets, you can repeat this wealth-generating cycle forever. (I.e. it's not some sort of closed system, and it's not zero-sum; you're creating wealth by adding value via the raw-materials-to-finished-products process. There are other processes that create wealth, this is just the most obvious.)

      Now, we outsource that factory to Somewhere Else, but continue to import the widgets to satisfy domestic demand, perhaps at a lower price. Now, consumers buy their widgets from Somewhere Else, meaning that wealth flows over there. At the same time, all the people who work at the widget factory are unemployed.

      Do you start to see a problem here? If you can't find something else for your former widgetmakers to do, you end up just draining money out of your economy. If you have modern finance at your disposal, you can conveniently spend more wealth than you actually have, issuing debt and importing stuff; at least you can until people stop wanting to buy your debt. This isn't sustainable. Eventually you either literally run out of hard currency (the case if you use gold or something else that can't be created), or people decide to stop buying your debt. And then you have a bunch of angry, unemployed ex-widgetmakers who can't afford to buy widgets anymore. Problem.

      Of course, there are cute responses to this. You could argue that this is just the way things are supposed to work -- if the widgetmakers couldn't compete, they deserved to go out of business. Fair enough, and that actually makes a certain amount of sense.

      But suppose you have an entire nation of widgetmakers? An entire nation of people who have built themselves a nice lifestyle (oh, and by the way, a huge fucking quantity of nuclear weapons) for themselves, making widgets, and suddenly end up unemployed? What do you expect them to do, calmly and rationally reduce their standard of living so that they can compete better on price? I don't think so; not when they have the ability to go and take a lot of wealth via brute force.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    18. Re:Deeper Downside? by timmarhy · · Score: 0
      "That that means for me, my generation, and my children is that it effectively lowers our wages. I dont like that, and I think its fairly easy to see why."

      you are wrong because you are operating under false assumptions like THAT.

      http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2006/08/15/average-income-in-the-united-states/

      as you can see the trend is up, not down as you keep claiming and america has been outsourcing for decades. If you can actually show me some credible evidence that outsourcing has lowered your wages i'll stand corrected.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    19. Re:Deeper Downside? by homer_s · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hypothetical: If EVERYTHING were designed and built overseas and then brought back here and sold, who here would have enough money to buy it?
      And that is why everything will not be designed and built overseas. The Chinese would want to sell you stuff only if they know you can pay.

      What *will* be designed and built overseas is whatever that can be done cheaper.

      If it costs Americans $1 to make a plastic spoon and if the Chinese can sell it for $0.98, then that will be outsourced.

      The Chinese know you can pay for it (since you were spending $1 for it until now) and the Americans are better off by $0.02.

      The guy who loses is the guy who actually makes the spoon for $1. He can either go do something more productive that people would willingly pay for, or he could gather a bunch of economic ignoramuses and try to force people to buy his stuff.
    20. Re:Deeper Downside? by timmarhy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      man your grasp on economics is staggeringly bad.

      all you have done is grossly over simplified the whole process and picked out the little bits that suit you. the money doesn't just flow in one direction to the widget makers, the widget makers need people from widget land to show them how to build the factories and train them, they need someone to design and market the widgets for them in the first place. In short the clever widget makers who started the whole industry get to specialise at a different part of the supply chain, and don't have to spend all their time subsidising work that can be done better/cheaper else where.

      if your idea's really did work, why does communism and protectionism fail?

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    21. Re:Deeper Downside? by timmarhy · · Score: 1
      "The guy who loses is the guy who actually makes the spoon for $1. He can either go do something more productive that people would willingly pay for, or he could gather a bunch of economic ignoramuses and try to force people to buy his stuff."

      never seen it put so well. Oh and i'm in software developement, you know one of those key area's that's supposedly being raped by outsourcing.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    22. Re:Deeper Downside? by adrianmonk · · Score: 1

      Thats exactly it: nobody with power cares for the long term maluses by strongly pushing outsourcing.

      Huh?

    23. Re:Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, tell me how people can afford to buy stuff if they have no job, or one that pays 1/2 as much?

      Western consumers don't matter much anymore in terms of computer purchases. How much are you willing to pay for a new computer system if you already have a decent 3-4 year old one? Probably not much. Compare that to that how much Mr. Jianxi is willing to pay for a new computer system with his $6/hr manufacturing job. He has no computer now, but has saved up the dinero over the year for one...

      There is an order of magnitude more potential Mr. Jianxi's than "you and me"s in the world.

    24. Re:Deeper Downside? by Sri.Theo · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing also enable you to have that (relatively) cheap computer you're typing that comment on. Outsourcing also enables many small business owners that otherwise wouldn't have the capital to set up their own factories to develop and sell their own products. And outsourcing also raises wages abroad which helps create a new class of consumers that American companies can sell to if that's what you're worried about. America still has a far lower unemployment rate then many other first world countries (France, Germany, UK). You have very little to worry about.

    25. Re:Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine it this way:

      You have X dollars, which you use to pay for things.
      Your friend grows all the food in his garden.
      You give him money for the food.
      He buys nothing from you, needs nothing from you except your money.

      Assuming you have to eat on a regular basis, and your friend can keep producing food, where will all the money ultimately wind up?

      This is an extreme example of what's happening right now. Money is leaving the USA, but there isn't a matching amount coming back in. Trade deficit. The replacement of money with cheap overseas products which have a limited lifespan can only last so long. The countries you buy these things from will get richer, the USA will get poorer, and eventually it will balance out and become unprofitable to outsource. By that point, you're in a hole that becomes difficult to get out of, and will take decades.

    26. Re:Deeper Downside? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why exactly is that assumption false? We are creating a country of ownership of ideas and not of production. That in of itself is a loss of power if we ever have a military action against those countries of of an ally of them.

      This is the time you're supposed to prove me wrong... not show me maps of "not accounting for inflation" pretty graphs. Didn't you even read the comments below the graph, or did you just go "goo goo gaga pretty"? Erik Koht poignantly said that if we were to apply EU standards of living to the USA, 40% are in poverty level.. But even that tells not the whole story.

      What I would venture is happening in our country is a ever-widening gulf between those who get paid to do and those who get paid to think. Our idea is we can just outsource it and sweep it under the rig, so to say. We have jobs that routinely get paid 100k+, and then we have 35k jobs. Those are the 2 working parent family households.. Manufacturing traditionally held that role of between intellectual and manual labor that a family could progress to higher socioeconomic ladders if they so chose.

      I also have been told stories by the older generation that college could be paid off each year by working 40 hr/wk on summers. No more. Instead, we have corporations that demand we all have college, even traditionally they did not require it. Now, college has turned into a sorts of a new high school in which we pay to learn what once they would train on the job.

      Unless we rebuild our nation, starting with our currency, then to manufacturing, and on, I can see us economically dying to countries like China and India that have almost 2 billion between them. Even during the Cold War, the USSR only had 200m civilians. That's a drop in the bucket compared to what China and India can do.. I wonder how high the Chinese could push oil? 200$ a barrel? 300$ a barrel? Or even our worst nightmare of switching OPEC to the Euro?

      --
    27. Re:Deeper Downside? by Sri.Theo · · Score: 1

      Not in 15 years? You underestimate the mobility of multi national corporations, they're already complaining about wage raises in the coastal areas of China - and due to that are moving into less developed interior provinces.


      Many companies now talk about a China +1 strategy, they also invest in another south-east Asian country such as Vietnam in order to hedge their bets regarding China's viability

      And if you don't see why the US should open itself to foreign markets, then just maybe the fact that the US has been the one bashing free trade down everyone's throat for the last decade is reason enough.


      To run away from that now you're seeing the other side of the sword is pure hypocritical bullshit.

    28. Re:Deeper Downside? by Missing_dc · · Score: 1

      Forgive my niavety (and spelling), but does the raise in wages you point to keep in proportion to the raise in the cost of living? because if not, you are just stacking your numbers to look good without showing the entire picture. If increase in wages DOES NOT match (proportionatly) the increase in the cost of living, it MAY be due to the reason you are disputing.

      Just a late-night thought for you to consider. Also, I am not an economist and am just throwing opposing views for you to chew on.

      BTW, your link is dead, perhaps slashdotted already.

      --
      How amazed would you be to suddenly find that you just forgot what I wrote and you needed to reread my post.... again.
    29. Re:Deeper Downside? by homer_s · · Score: 1

      Ok - I'll bite.

      Now, we outsource that factory to Somewhere Else, but continue to import the widgets to satisfy domestic demand, perhaps at a lower price.

      Good - the lower price tells you that it is more efficient to buy than to make. Or that the other guy is dumb and will go out of business soon.

      Now, consumers buy their widgets from Somewhere Else, meaning that wealth flows over there.

      Ah, I wasn't aware that each time I buy an apple my wealth is being transferred to the grocery store. I always thought that I got something in exchange for what I gave them. Silly me.

      At the same time, all the people who work at the widget factory are unemployed.

      So now, not only does the community get widgets for cheaper, they also have all these man-hours to design & build other things.

      Wealth is not 'all the people working all the time'. If wealth meant that everyone always had work, then the middle ages would be the wealthiest period in the world and Africa would be the wealthiest place in the world now.

    30. Re:Deeper Downside? by jlarocco · · Score: 1

      This is what's wrong with America. Instead of wondering how you can beat the Chinese, you're whining that you should get the job for no other reason than you live in America.

      Or do you think lead is safe for children?

      Hey, at least outsourcing to China will avoid asbestos, amirite?

    31. Re:Deeper Downside? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2, Informative

      That assumes that the people down the supply chain don't decide to take your knowledge and compete with you.

      I read an interesting story awhile back about Schwinn bicycles. From what I read, Schwinn had various techniques that they used in assembling their bicycles that made them more reliable. But they were losing sales to cheaper foreign-made bicycles which weren't as reliable but were considerably cheaper.

      Well, they moved their assembly to China. They went over and taught Chinese workers their techniques for making making a reliable bicycle. So now they had less expensive bicycles which were just as reliable.

      Until the bicycle factory took these techniques and started producing their own bicycles using those techniques and competing against Schwinn.

      So even if you "specialize at a different part of the supply chain," the stuff still has to be assembled and whatever unique knowledge you have brought to the product will be taken by your competitors.

    32. Re:Deeper Downside? by maxair_mike · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of comparative and absolute advantage? Oh, and another thing, we don't really lose the jobs, people just retrain, or move elsewhere where they are useful in the workplace with their current education/experience. Free trade based upon comparative and absolute advantage is what advances our economy, and the economy of others. Why spend our resources on something that costs us more than for someone else to make/do when we could be using them more efficiently? If you want to reach absolute efficiency, you have to participate in free trade, including the job market.

    33. Re:Deeper Downside? by bendodge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is unions and government regulations. Try firing someone. You have a union to deal with. Try building something really innovative, say a nice new nuclear power plant. Your kids will be grown before you get a single hole dug; you'll still be waiting for the next mountain of papers to be filled out and processed.

      The Canadian automotive industry died because it has even more regulations and unions than the US. China kills US manufacturing because it has less regulation than the US plants. Can you believe that a US plant has to not only pay property tax but a tool tax on the machines? Ol' Patrick Henry would roll over in his grave.

      There are two solutions to this problem:
      1. Protective tariffs: historically a bad idea (recall the Civil War).
      2. Deregulate and deunionize: historically a good idea (think the Iron Lady salvaging Britain).

      Unfortunately, the US is rapidly adopting Hillary's favorite idea: the government can save you! Guess how?

      But then, I don't know of any candidates who don't subscribe to that idea. Republicans just aren't what they used to be. It seems the only differences are on social issues. Economically, all the big candidates look the same. It's so frustrating to talk to people who like what Ron Paul says but dismiss him offhand with a sickly smile and say "But he's not electable."

      The only way to save our economy is to somehow break through people's thick heads. Unfortunately, we are living a generation that thinks in a herd mentality, usually delivered by rich morons like Oprah.

      I only hope the generation now at college (that like Paul so well) will learn something from the current disaster and do something about it.

      (Wow, I this post is all over the map. I feel better after just saying it all though.)

      --
      The government can't save you.
    34. Re:Deeper Downside? by timmarhy · · Score: 1
      I know I always chuckle at the "think different" crowd, because they all think the same.

      unions are a good idea in theory. but in real life they end up corrupt and strike happy, blissfuly unaware that if they make it impossible to do business, there won't be anything to return to after the strike.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    35. Re:Deeper Downside? by timmarhy · · Score: 1
      "This is the time you're supposed to prove me wrong... not show me maps of "not accounting for inflation" pretty graphs."

      No son, this is where YOU are supposed to pull out some proof of your own and prove ME wrong. I've given you some data to back up my point, if you have a graph from a credible source that can shoot me down, i've already challenged you to do so.

      trade creates wealth because it divides the amount of work needed to produce an item, and does it in the most efficent way possible.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    36. Re:Deeper Downside? by timmarhy · · Score: 1

      I'm missing the part here where it's bad for consumers? consumers drive the economy not any specific group of workers.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    37. Re:Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      National governments have a mandate to serve the best interests of the people they represent. If free trade and open borders are demonstrably the best path, I'd be more supportive, but right now they look suspiciously like a path that leads off a cliff.

      The shitload of cheap, Chinese made products undoubtedly filling your house would seem to indicate you're wrong.

    38. Re:Deeper Downside? by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but where does all the food end up. And what's your friend going to spend all that money on, anyway? not food from you, that's for sure, because your friend's cheap food resulted in you abandoning your food-growing efforts.

      People forget that money and wealth are not the same thing. This is one of the things that makes economics harder than it looks. You have to take a holistic approach to understanding, and it's extremely easy to get caught up in one aspect and misunderstand its overall effects on public welfare.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    39. Re:Deeper Downside? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Let's say your value as a programmer is $50 an hour. Your value as a graphic designer is $25 an hour. You work 40 hours a week doing a mixture of both.

      Outsourcing graphic design work would be a good thing for your GDP. Outsourcing both graphic design and programming would be a bad thing for your GDP (Your value as a waiter is only $5 an hour.)

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    40. Re:Deeper Downside? by OakLEE · · Score: 1

      National governments have a mandate to serve the best interests of the people they represent. If free trade and open borders are demonstrably the best path, I'd be more supportive, but right now they look suspiciously like a path that leads off a cliff.

      That's just what most people were saying in this country right before the US passed the Smoot-Hawley Tarrif Act. I think the Wikipedia article does a good job describing the horrendous results of that act of protectionism.

      If it wasn't for free trade you would only be able to drive cars made by Ford, GM, or Chrysler, you wouldn't have cheap Taiwanese semiconductors powering your PC, you wouldn't have $5 dollar t-shirts at Wal-Mart, and you're only choice of video game consoles would be the XBox360.

      I agree, there are plenty of short term downsides to free trade. People lose their jobs and have to adapt as industries shift offshore, but other jobs and industries inevitably take their place. People were complaining just as much in the 1970s and 1980s when all of are manufacturing moved overseas.

      What are people going to do for a living when we no longer manufacture anything? No one, but the brilliant few saw services and technology as the future of the economy. It's the same situation now, only people are wondering what will happen when all low level tech jobs are outsourced. Do most of us know what's next? No, but I bet a few people do and their going to the billionaires of tomorrow. That's just how the world works.
      --
      The sun beams down on a brand new day, No more welfare tax to pay, Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light...
    41. Re:Deeper Downside? by homer_s · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing both graphic design and programming ......

      And when would I do that? Only when I have an opportunity to earn $100 as a project manager.
      Or when I make enough on the margin from outsourcing that it is a net win for me - i.e., I make $49+$24+$5 by outsourcing programming+ outsourcing graphic design+waiting tables.

      Of course, if I'm making $73 from outsourcing, I'd spend my free time learning a new skill to be more productive.

      And this is exactly how division of labour frees up time to become more productive.

    42. Re:Deeper Downside? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1
      Even better question: what are they going to do with all the factory workers that simply CAN'T get an education? My ex brother in law has an IQ of maybe 105, and I know a LOT of guys like him. In my parents generation those with a strong back could afford to feed a family and buy a little home. Now the factories are nothing but decaying hulks, and what little work is left is being snapped up by illegal aliens that will work for a pittance while living ten to a rathole so they can take their money back home where they can live well.


      The simple fact is we have a black hole in this country, and it is only getting wider. Our money is being bleed to other countries while we make nothing but imaginary property which can be easily copied. I personally believe we'll end up in a ten year+ depression while will sadly in all likelihood be followed by a xenophobic fascist police state, circa Germany in the 30's. And the governments current folly of bailing out the investment bankers by printing more money is simply going to make the problem worse. And most sadly I don't see any way out of it, as it would require REAL long term planning and possibly even WPA style public works to rebuild our aging infrastructure and all of the corporations and public officials seem to be of the "damn everything but the quarterly report" types.


      I only hope that when my teenage nephews get out of college this mess will have gone through the worst of it and we will be headed for recovery. I personally am going back to school in the fall because it is just getting to hard for me to make a living in IT. Maybe in 8-10 years when I have run out of things to get a degree in there will actually be plenty of jobs to choose from that will actually pay enough for me to work down my student loans. But I'm not going to hold my breath. But of course this is my 02c, and I personally hope to every deity I don't believe in that I am wrong.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    43. Re:Deeper Downside? by m0i · · Score: 1

      If it costs Americans $1 to make a plastic spoon and if the Chinese can sell it for $0.98, then that will be outsourced.

      The Chinese know you can pay for it (since you were spending $1 for it until now) and the Americans are better off by $0.02. Logical fallacy: if you outsource, the $1 income permitting Americans to spend $1 is gone.

      --
      have you been defaced today?
    44. Re:Deeper Downside? by homer_s · · Score: 1

      Logical fallacy: if you outsource, the $1 income permitting Americans to spend $1 is gone.

      So the money to buy the spoon is obtained by profit from making the spoon?

      John used to buy the spoon from Mr.Smith for $1. Mr. Smith buys bread from John for $1. No outsourcing and Lou Dobbs is happy and unemployed.

      John now buys the spoon from Mr.Chang for $0.98. Mr. Smith is broke and cannot buy bread from Mr. Smith.
      But Mr. Chang buys bread from John. (Or more likely, Mr.Chang buys F16s from Peter who buys more bread from John.)

      John is better off by $0.02 & whatever extra he gets from the bread. Mr. Chang is better off because he gets cheaper bread and was able to make a profit from the spoon.

      Smith is unemployed and:
      1. Realizes that he has to do something else to add value to society. --or--
      2. Points a gun at John and forces him to buy spoons from him. --or--
      3. Gets the govt. to do (2) for him and calls himself a patriot.
    45. Re:Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And what makes you think that the widget makers will not quickly figure out for themselves how to build factories? Or train each other?

      Or, translated back into the real world, what makes you think that the Chinese are so dumb that they will never be able to design their own products or build their own factories, and will always need to rely on Uncle Sam to lead the way?

    46. Re:Deeper Downside? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem is unions and government regulations. Try firing someone. You have a union to deal with. Try building something really innovative, say a nice new nuclear power plant.
      The unions in the USA are famously _weak_. Their wings have been clipped from the start. If you want to see how real unions look like, just take a look at Germany or France. It is widely known that France doesn't have a single nuclear power plant due to the tree hugging hippies, government regulations and unions, that is why their electricity needs are satisfied in 70% from the nuclear source.

      It seems you're advocating deunionization without knowing what it actually means.

      Deunionization as an economic measure means that you plan to solve fundamental problems in the economy by worsening the bargaining power of the lower and middle class, in effect worsening their conditions. Instead of outsourcing, this is bringing conditions from China to the developed world. Newsflash: if an industry fails because it cannot survive unless it has unacceptable working conditions, then that is a good thing.
      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    47. Re:Deeper Downside? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing lowers the GDP of our country, reducing our buying power. What logically happens is jobs are removed from our country.

      Not necessarily. GDP is total value of goods and services produced domestically - i.e basically total consumer, investment and government spending, plus the value of exports, minus the value of imports.

      Given that most of the components in a Dell are non-us made, labor is probably the largest part of the input to US GDP. For sake of argument, let's say a Dell costs $3. Of that, $2 is the cost of the parts, $.5 labor, and $.3 G&A costs. In that scenario, about $1 is added to the US GDP.

      Now let's outsource production. No, let's assume Dell pays 1/2 as much for labor. If they can shave $.25 off of the cost of parts then they've saved $.5 - which can be added to the bottom line, resulting in the same $1 addition to GDP.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    48. Re:Deeper Downside? by Dark_MadMax666 · · Score: 1

      [quote]
      That's a great thought but it's a little lacking in substance. What do you propose the U.S. ought to specialize in? I'm quite honestly interested, and I've asked this question over and over to a lot of fairly intelligent people and have yet to get a satisfactory answer back. I'm not sure there is one. Do we try to go the Neal Stephenson route? Music, movies, microcode, and pizza? Other parts of the world are chipping into 'software' already, and there's no reason to think that we have some kind of automatic, natural, competitive advantage in any of those.
      [/quote]

      US could specialize in power and tech. It was first nation to build nuclear weapon and nuclear power plant, cradle of microelectronics . US has a lot of brain power (a lot of them are immigrants but nevertheless).

      Unfortunately I don't see it happening - nuclear power is unsupported and is regulated to strangulation. Biotech and pharma faces many regulations(I mean bad ones -like excessively long FDA approval process) . Mainstream public is generally unsupportive of those areas and media even more so.

      In an area of power production you have coal and oil industries helding any possible alternatives in check. Biotech is used as spare change in political games ( stem cells anyone?) and so forth. America needs to wake up and put its priorities in order- like it did during Manhattan project and space race. Power and tech is the future - not consumer junk .Unfortunately US forgot this.

    49. Re:Deeper Downside? by vidarh · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yeah, that's why everyone is unemployed in Europe. And of course we don't have 20-30 days a year of paid vacation depending on country (wtf makes people in the US accept 10?!?), or working hours typically set at 37.5 (less in some countries) either.

      Oh, and all our companies are close to bankruptcy, and no executives and shareholders ever manage to take out huge bonuses and dividends..

      Seriously, unions are why you don't still have 12+ hour working days in the US and most of the rest of the world. It took decades of campaigning, strikes that often were illegal and bloodshed when police struck down on strikers for the US unions to get employers to accept the 8 hour working day.

      It's a paradox that the rest of the world can thank US unions for the 8 hour day, when your unions have been reduced to festering corpses, and that May Day was established as an international day for the working class to demonstrate directly in response and support of the US unions, while the US working class was quickly subverted into accepting the watered down Labor day.

      A huge part of the improvements in working conditions in the latter half of the 1800's and well into the 1900's were a direct result of strong unions in the US.

    50. Re:Deeper Downside? by owlstead · · Score: 1

      "Other parts of the world are chipping into 'software' already, and there's no reason to think that we have some kind of automatic, natural, competitive advantage in any of those."

      Yes, you have. The English language is one for instance. And then there is the economy of scale. Any really interesting conference on Java and Security is in the old US of A, and it is a pretty big drawback if you're thousands of miles from the city it is held in.

      Even books on all the subjects are a lot more expensive than in the US, and don't forget the higher living conditions (it's easier to do your job properly if you don't have to put in so much energy in the rest of your life).

      Of course, some of these advantages are declining a bit, but I don't think they will disappear completely. So now it is up to you to compete. Somehow I am pretty sure that if I'd apply for a job over there, it would be easy as pie.

    51. Re:Deeper Downside? by Kryptikmo · · Score: 1

      I see this argument a lot - "we need to work out what we are best at in the long term". I don't understand it - there's a pre-supposition there that such an advantage exists. As far as I can see, advantages from nation to nation come about from two sources: geographical location (rich mineral deposits, large-scale renewable natural resources compared to population size etc.) or culture (education, work ethics, technical expertise). Neither of these two last "long term".

      Natural resources run out, or population increases to diminish any advantage. Cultural advantages also dissipate in the long term - the next generation of top-class engineers, scientists and business-men could come from North America, or Europe. Or Japan. Or India, or China. The next-next gen may come from any of the above, or Bangladesh, or somewhere in Africa maybe. The "Western world" will compete with, but not dominate, these guys. The only long-term advantage you can obtain is to expand, artificially limit your population or deliberately use your current advantage to permanently disable your "competitors".

      Since the last two are morally dubious, the first is pretty much your only option. And since no-one is keen on invading a country, slaughtering the natives and re-settling it, the only place to go is off-world. If the States and Europe were to race out to the moon right now, they may be able to keep an advantage for the next few hundred years, getting themselves a monopoly on off-world exploration. That would diminish after a while too, but it would last until there was no such thing as nations, maybe. But in "the long term", we're all just people.

    52. Re:Deeper Downside? by drsquare · · Score: 1

      You're assuming there that people don't get other jobs. In the UK in the 70s and 80s we outsourced all our coal mining. It hurt in the short term but in the long term now we have better, easier jobs.

    53. Re:Deeper Downside? by drsquare · · Score: 1

      GDP = gross domestic product. Less producing = less GDP.
      You're assuming that the people laid off from the factory don't get other jobs and produce other things.

      If people like you had your way, America would just be full of people working shifts in filthy mines and factories. In fact there'd be nothing to produce because anyone capable of inventing anything would be stuck doing manual labour.
    54. Re:Deeper Downside? by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      "We are creating a country of ownership of ideas and not of production. That in of itself is a loss of power if we ever have a military action against those countries of of an ally of them."

      There's also a fundamental economic problem with basing everything on IP: it assumes that the countries who are being outsourced to will continue to be IP consumers rather than IP producers. We had the same ideas about Japan in the 1950s and 1960s, when we were telling ourselves that they could only make cheap rip-offs of Western products because they weren't capable of inventing things for themselves, and we all know how accurate that prediction-born-of-arrogance ended up being.

      "Unless we rebuild our nation, starting with our currency, then to manufacturing, and on, I can see us economically dying to countries like China and India that have almost 2 billion between them."

      By 2007 estimates, they have considerably more than 2 billion people between them (around 1.3 billion each), which means that either of them has about the same population as the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and Europe put together.

      "I wonder how high the Chinese could push oil? 200$ a barrel? 300$ a barrel? Or even our worst nightmare of switching OPEC to the Euro?"

      China isn't pushing oil prices up except indirectly by competing for supplies. Oil producers and petrochemical commodities traders dictate the price it sells at, and oil producers will be also the ones who decide what currency they want in exchange for it. China is as much a victim here as we are, possibly more so, because their low labour costs mean that raw materials (many of which are directly or indirectly derived from petrochemicals) and transport are a much bigger part of their overall production costs than is the case with products made in Western countries.

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
    55. Re:Deeper Downside? by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      "Those people in a different country chose a communist government that shot their economy to hell, not to mention killing millions of their best citizens in progress. Why should I prop their economy at the cost of my salary and job security when they still didn't admit any mistakes?"

      Because the government _you chose_ to run your country (which also refuses to admit it's made any mistakes) has said that you're going to, and there's nothing you can do about it because you have a two party system, and both of them are paid by big business to do what's best for big business, i.e. increase profits by paying cheap foreign labour to do the same jobs that they used to give to expensive American labour.

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
    56. Re:Deeper Downside? by Talez · · Score: 1

      Another logical fallacy.

      For that to work you imply the Chinese are wanting to buy something that the US has. There isn't. They're amassing huge currency reserves instead.

    57. Re:Deeper Downside? by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem with pretty much ANY of these thoughts either way is that the proponents thereof seem to think that they're
      such great ideas that're workable that they do them to the exclusion of everything else- including outsourcing. Never mind the
      consequences.

      Just as Communism and Protectionism failed- so will this other stupid idea we keep seeming to have.

      We're not outsourcing to "make new opportunities" or that it does this when you do it- that's really analogous to breaking all
      the windows in a business district because it'll "make new opportunities" for the glass makers. When you outsource, that job
      is gone. If you don't make another job somehow (and the people that're outsourcing AREN'T- they're just pocketing the short
      term gains they got by cheapening things...) then the money that you spent there went elsewhere- wherever you outsourced it to.
      When you outsource it doesn't magically mean that you're going to be in a position to keep supplying ideas to the outsource
      places. They take your ideas and run with them for themselves- eventually they don't need you for ideas because you've given
      them all to the other people. Where are you when that happens? Outsourcing and a whole host of other things that're in vogue
      are no different than Communism or Protectionism when they're practiced the way they've been done for the last 10-20 years.
      In the end, they're no more sustainable than the others. And, we're in an economic recession, almost depression, right now
      largely as a result of all this unsustainable activities.

      What everyone that's a proponent of outsourcing keeps missing are questions like this:

      What good does it do to make a product for less money, when nobody wants it?
      What good does it do to outsource something for less money, when nobody can buy it?
      What good does it do to outsource something for less money, when the people you outsourced it to took your ideas and no longer need you?

      There's tons more unasked (but SHOULD be so...) questions like this.

      All of this is now ongoing and we're beginning to see the signs of the damage from the real start of this madness some 15-20 years ago.

      Is the answer Protectionism?

      No. But a little less "openness", considering that most of the people we're outsourcing to are very much Protectionist, will go a long way.

      Is the answer Communism?

      No. But I think some accountability to the populace, and not just Shareholders, would go a lot longer way on things.

      We certainly can't keep going the way we are- we're going to see the collapse of this country because of the short-term thinking on things
      that's driven by the current business thinkings.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    58. Re:Deeper Downside? by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      The economics textbooks expound an UNPROVEN theory that is actually being misapplied.

      You want division of labor, yes, but the economics books are applying a mathematical model to a real-world thing. Math is a wonderful tool, but it doesn't make for rules of how the world works (opposite thinking...) nor does those numbers force things to be something other than they're not.

      It looks good on paper to outsource to another country- for a couple of years, if that. In many cases, the outsource partner looks good on paper- but the reality of all the work you end up doing re-working their work (And, I know this from professional experience...) and all the lost reputation of your company because your product has vastly more defects when delivered (again...) ends up more often than not washing out any gains you might have gotten from the process. Add on to this that you're moving that money from your own country to another that only gives a damn about their own country (which is highly understandable, really...) and doesn't reinvest resources here- meaning that the money sunk in offshore outsourcing just went bye-bye... The math doesn't add up to what is going on right now. When the math doesn't add up; when the theories don't match up to what you're seeing- it's time to come up with new math and theories.

      The people keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting the results the theories tell them should be happening and all we're doing is spiraling back down into a Great Depression.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    59. Re:Deeper Downside? by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      The stupid problem with that thinking is that the consumers are disconnected from the other.

      The consumers are the people doing the work in this country. They're the people working here.

      Outsource their work and they don't have money to buy your stuff at some point.

      Everybody foolishly thinks that they're enriching the lives of the people over here when they make stuff cheaper. Short term, perhaps a bit. Long term, not so.

      If you do it in one place, it might not be a bad idea. If you do it everywhere (which is what is getting done here...) it's not just a specific group of workers getting impacted, it's a lot of them, which then causes the consumers to have less or no money to buy things.

      It's the simplistic thinking that you can simply envision a single aspect of a business and modify it without understanding the whole that keeps getting everyone into trouble. It gets worse when you start trying to apply that same simplistic thinking to what is effectively an ecosystem.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    60. Re:Deeper Downside? by homer_s · · Score: 1

      And all that currency is good where?

      (Hint: there is only one country in the world where the U.S dollar is guaranteed to be honored. Guess which one.)

    61. Re:Deeper Downside? by euler2323 · · Score: 1

      man your grasp of the motivations of outsourcing is staggeringly bad...

      Business does not move jobs to an area to save labor..... just to spend that saved money on 'sales and marketing'. And, they already had that before they outsource. They had people design them, they had people market them. They aren't going to specialize 'at a different part of the supply chain'. They are going to put that extra cash into shareholders/owners pockets.

      Protectionism isn't the answer. But when capitol and business has the rules skewed toward their benefit then 'the free market' isn't at work is it?

      Besides, you're the incredibly stupid person who thinks outsourcing bad == communism.

    62. Re:Deeper Downside? by euler2323 · · Score: 1

      The only way to save our economy is to somehow break through people's thick heads. Unfortunately, we are living a generation that thinks in a herd mentality, usually delivered by rich morons like Oprah.
      In other words, everyone has to be forced to think like you to make it all work. The government and economy is a contract among the citizens. It doesn't matter what system is used, as long as most people agree on how it is run.
    63. Re:Deeper Downside? by euler2323 · · Score: 1

      It is widely known that France doesn't have a single nuclear power plant due to the tree hugging hippies, government regulations and unions, that is why their electricity needs are satisfied in 70% from the nuclear source.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France Please tell me your post is just a joke
    64. Re:Deeper Downside? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 1

      I guess it is. Obviously noone would use sarcasm on slashdot, it is completely unimaginable.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    65. Re:Deeper Downside? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Those consumers used to be employed at Schwinn, and now they've starved to death in the gutter. They're not consumers anymore!

      Instead, the new consumers are the Chinese working at the outsourced Schwinn factory. They're doing just fine on their shiny new bicycles.

      It's a great deal for the people the work gets outsourced to, but not so great a deal for the corpse in the gutter the work got outsourced from. Do you get it now?!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    66. Re:Deeper Downside? by mhollis · · Score: 1

      The problem is unions and government regulations. Try firing someone. You have a union to deal with.

      Both unions and government regulations are an attempt at leveling the playing field between big business and the little guy working his or her heart out, obeying the rules and paying most of the taxes. When big corporations feel like they're paying too much in property taxes, they threaten a locality or state that they'll move and take their jobs with them. States and localities immediately pony up tax abatements. If you try this, your state congressman will tell you, "You're free to move wherever you wish."

      In non-union shops, corporations must go through their own red tape to fire someone. Presently, that takes a number of weeks because corporations don't want to be sued. I suppose, were I to use your argument, corporations ought to be able to fire women who become pregnant while on the job (the sheer effrontery of them!) because the amount of time they'll be away having a child and initially bonding with their child will reduce corporate profits. Because that will affect the bottom line, corporations should be able to find that, since there is birth control and these foolish women have chosen -- of their own free will -- to harm the corporate interest by getting pregnant, they have cause to fire with impunity.

      Unfortunately for these corporations, federal law seems to differ.

      You're decrying unions for having made it nigh impossible to fire workers, including workers who may be discriminated against and saying the unions are to blame for this and all the while you are ignoring the fact that the corporations willingly (and with a battery of corporate attorneys present) signed these agreements with their eyes open and with full knowledge of what these contracts mean. Unions usually don't write these contracts. Corporations do. Unions negotiate with these corporations and try to derive solutions that work best for their membership. And it's a losing game, as you will note that -- over time -- the number of union-represented workers has steadily diminished in the US

      Do you know that ERISA law is superseded by a collective bargaining agreement? In other words, federal law allows for these agreements to create "perma-temp" workers who have none of the job protections in typical union contracts. Unions have been coaxed by corporations into signing collective bargaining agreements that create a "second tier" to workers with fewer benefits and rights in the workplace? Did you know that the most recent UAW contract with the automotive manufacturers creates a "two tier" workplace with the new hires getting considerably fewer benefits for their union membership than people they're working alongside who were hired a number of months earlier?

      China kills US manufacturing because it has less regulation than the US plants. Can you believe that a US plant has to not only pay property tax but a tool tax on the machines? Ol' Patrick Henry would roll over in his grave.

      China has many of the same laws you decry on the books. China just chooses to not enforce their own laws where party officials are the owners of the businesses being regulated. This is very similar to the US EPA refusing to regulate greenhouse gases because cronies of the current administration own coal-fired power plants.

      Patrick Henry's main issue in his "...give me liberty or give me death" speech was one of representation. He was speaking before the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (which was not then the capitol) in favor of raising a local militia to oppose the Royal Marine regiment under the orders of Lieutenant-Governor Dunmore in Williamsburg (the capitol). The Lieutenant-Governor was working to prevent the colonists from rising up in defense of their right of self-government.

      But I note you're a supporter of Ron Paul. I t

      --
      Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
    67. Re:Deeper Downside? by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      man your grasp on economics is staggeringly bad. Possibly, but yours is quite far on the other side of the spectrum. Would you hire say a system architect that never had touched code? No way. But if all the entry-level programming jobs are in India and pay next to nothing, they'll never get started. Sure you do a transfer when you have the know-how and the skilled workers, but eventually they'll have experienced workers and evolve their own know-how. To think that you can stand on the outside and only snipe the good positions you want is quite unrealistic in the long run. It'll work for maybe 10-20 years but then you'll find they have their own factory managers, own training, own designers and you're only a market analysis and sales channel. Being a car retailer is an infinitesimally small part of all the processes involved in making a car, nevermind the checkout guy at Wal-Mart. Yes it's a slower death that can preserve jobs in the short run, particularly for senior staff already employed but it's also killing off the career path.

      In the end, the strength of an economy depends on supply and demand, if the US wants plenty from China but China wants nothing from the US the economy will falter. Imagine as an extreme example that the US was full of hairdressers and China was full of widget makers. The borders are closed so no tourism or working abroad. Selling off ptoperty would be a short-term solution and so ignored. The hairdressers can cut each other's hair creating value internally, but if they want widgets from China they have nothing to offer. There's no supply chain because there's no incentive to supply in the first place. If there were a flow, part of the value would remain in the country but it'd still be a net transfer of value out. The whole theory of comparative advantage assumes there's something both parties want in infinite amount. If China were to say "US goods/services/whatever? Well, actually we're covering domestic demand already so there's nothing we need really..." the US is screwed. Or it can take on debt, which means it's screwed somewhat later.

      I see it in my own country, we have oil and so our economy is strong because the world wants oil. Everything else has problems because the input costs are so high, it's difficult to be competitive at anything. In the real-world economy with uncertainty it'll easily happen that in the market you think you'd make money there's overproduction and so your head is first on the block because your costs are the highest. If you do find stable demand, there's always someone out there with an eye to undercut you. In practise, it doesn't work nearly as nicely as in theory.
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    68. Re:Deeper Downside? by Mspangler · · Score: 1

      "the widget makers need people from widget land to show them how to build the factories and train them, they need someone to design and market the widgets for them in the first place."

      True, but we still have a numbers mismatch. Take a factory with 1000 workers. Outsource the work. It takes about 100 of the original thousand to build the factories and train the new workers. And you only need to do that once. So instead of 1000 people employed for decades, you have 100 employed for the three years it takes to build a new factory. So what do the other 900 do now? And what do the 100 factory builders do later? When the next factory needs to be built, the people from the outsourced location will be able to build it; you won't need the original 100 any more even then.

      The designers are about 10 out of the 1000. They might be able to keep their jobs for longer, but eventually they will be replaced by the overseas designers too, who will have learned how to do that task. So unless you are truly of the Steve Jobs and Jon Ives caliber, you will be outsourced to in turn.

      I used to be a big believer in free trade. Not so much any more. We may be returning to the early 1900's with a few ultra-rich tycoons/robber-barons, a small professional class, and 20% of the population being servants to those groups.

      As the grandparent post put it well, current consumer consumption was powered by home equity loans. With that shut down, the "wealth" in real estate declining, and unemployment going up, and jobs still departing (Lazy-Boy furniture's departure was on on NPR this morning) what will hold up the economy? More exactly, what will hold up the middle class? Or was a large middle class a temporary aberration caused by a shortage of labor in the same locations that had excess capital to invest?

      On the other hand, the Pacific Northwest is purring along wondering what all the fuss is about Back East. (Back East is east of Idaho, by the way.) The oil patch is doing very well, thank you. And farmers might actually make some money for the next few years, much to the annoyance of those city dwellers who think the countryside owes them cheap food no matter what. And since farmers spend money like mad when they have it, that will support other parts of the economy. So it's not all doom and gloom.

      The next decade will be way too interesting. I actually expect who ever wins the White House will be a one termer reviled even more than Jimmy Carter was as he/she gets dumped in a landslide. And said President will find they have almost no freedom of action once they are in the Oval office. You'd have to be either completely power-mad or totally naive to want that job just now.

    69. Re:Deeper Downside? by pizzach · · Score: 1

      In short the clever widget makers who started the whole industry get to specialise at a different part of the supply chain, and don't have to spend all their time subsidising work that can be done better/cheaper else where. The parent above you was talking about the workers. You're talking about a small subset of people who become insanely rich at the cost of the workers. With your logic, the US will corner itself into only having jobs for managers of multinationals...yes even the clever widget makers will eventually be outsourced (read as todays engineers, computer science majors...).
      --
      Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    70. Re:Deeper Downside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "In short the clever widget makers who started the whole industry get to specialise at a different part of the supply chain, and [...]" ..And, now they likely employ fewer people, if any, as you look ahead...

      If I made and distributed widgets for forever and decided to outsource manufacturing, what would my new role be? Why would I want to be little more than a middle man? Where's the tactical gain?

      There is no tactical gain - quite the opposite, I've practically put myself out of business. Instead of buying widgets through me, anyone that wants them can buy direct for a discount.

      Besides that, my workforce was trained to make widgets. Now the few widget-makers that I retain have to be retrained to sell and support the widgets instead. Only maybe I should just outsource that too...

      And we're back to having no locals that can afford "my" widget and I'm out of a job....unless you think somehow I can sit in the middle and remain on top!?

      It's captcha=noontime, and everyone is out to eat my lunch.

    71. Re:Deeper Downside? by mikael · · Score: 1

      Most of the employment that the UK and Germany still has, came from the loss of shipbuilding and manufacturing jobs to the Far East, and the closure of coal mines.

      At least if you have an education, you can probably get a public sector job, which is fair compensation for having your job outsourced in the first place.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    72. Re:Deeper Downside? by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing lowers the GDP of our country, reducing our buying power. What logically happens is jobs are removed from our country. You realize this is the trade policy equivalent of saying "Windows (or MacOS) is way better" when you've never actually used a Mac (or Windows box), right?

      Please go read about comparative advantage, which is the core of why trade works. Do some math; build some simulations. Then you can come back and make new and different errors, rather than the basic, obvious ones.

      As an incentive, here's a thought experiment. If moving manufacturing jobs from Alabama to Mexico is bad, then wouldn't moving jobs from California to Alabama also be bad? And ditto for moving a job from downtown to a suburb?

      Please don't answer right away. Go study comparative advantage and come back with some actual math.
    73. Re:Deeper Downside? by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      Outsource their work and they don't have money to buy your stuff at some point.

      This is plausible, but wrong. If you took a little time to look historically, you'd see that.

      Over the last few decades, our trade is up dramatically, 10x or more. Everybody's is. But is there drastically more unemployment? Or drastically more poverty? No, just the opposite. The only big difference in the US is increased inequality, but that has nothing to do with trade and everything to do with ideology.

      It gets worse when you start trying to apply that same simplistic thinking to what is effectively an ecosystem.

      Funny you should say that, because that's where you're going wrong. Systemically, trade produces measurable net benefits, proven both in theory and in practice.

      If my employer finds somebody to do my job for cheaper, whether they do that in my city, elsewher in my country, or a different one, then I personally lose, while my employer and my employer's customers win. Then I get a new job, and things carry on. On average, though, they win more than I lose; we are collectively richer.

      Because trade is not a huge cause of lost jobs compared to normal market flux, the solution to this problem is relatively easy. Because we are collectively richer, we can use some of that extra wealth to retrain people who lose jobs due to trade.

    74. Re:Deeper Downside? by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      Those consumers used to be employed at Schwinn, and now they've starved to death in the gutter. They're not consumers anymore! So obviously, given the massive rise in trade and outsourcing, the few of us still employed should barely be able to get into our cars for stepping over corpses.

      But it turns out that unemployment is not massively high. Trade has gone up substantially in the post-NAFTA era, but unemployment has gone down. We are seeing a little bump right now, but that has nothing to do with trade, and everything to do with idiocy in the Bush administration.
    75. Re:Deeper Downside? by Moocow660 · · Score: 1

      Thanks America, for saving us all yet again.

      Whatever would we do without you?

    76. Re:Deeper Downside? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      But it turns out that unemployment is not massively high. Trade has gone up substantially in the post-NAFTA era, but unemployment has gone down.

      On the contrary, "unemployment" only counts those people who are still "actively looking" for jobs.

      It doesn't count people like my father, who got laid off in February 2007, gave up looking last Fall, and now calls himself "retired" even though he hadn't intended to retire yet and doesn't have as much money as he wanted saved up.

      It also doesn't count people who are underemployed -- people who used to be making $75K/year as white-collar workers, and now flip burgers at Mickey D's. And that particular statistic, I believe, has gone way up.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    77. Re:Deeper Downside? by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, "unemployment" only counts those people who are still "actively looking" for jobs. Well, then look at the labor force participation rate, which seems to be what you're after. Trade has been going up for decades, but the overall labor force participation rate has improved.

      It doesn't count people like my father, who got laid off in February 2007, gave up looking last Fall, and now calls himself "retired" even though he hadn't intended to retire yet and doesn't have as much money as he wanted saved up.

      I don't know anything about your father's situation, but the general problem faced by older workers has little to do with trade. The main issue there is that they grew up in a time when you got a job early and expected to stay in that company for life, getting paid a little bit more each year until you retired. When your father started work, an employer was a community as much as a business.

      Now that has changed. These days, you're employable as long as you have beneficial skills at a good price. If the performance of older workers is lower than younger ones (either due to aging or the whippersnappers having more relevant training), then a lot of companies expect to pay them less. A lot of older workers don't like the idea, and prefer to take early retirement than to get paid less than somebody younger.

      According to Krugman, this started to change with the corporate raiders in the 80s, who could restructure a company and fire all those people they saw as overpaid, and not worry about keeping people on to 65. A number of other factors have reinforced that change, so that any younger person I know would laugh if you suggested they find a life-long employer. They expect to be changing jobs with some frequency up until they retire.

      people who used to be making $75K/year as white-collar workers, and now flip burgers at Mickey D's. And that particular statistic, I believe, has gone way up.

      I'd love to see a reliable statistic for that. If you find one, let me know.
    78. Re:Deeper Downside? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      ---The economics textbooks expound an UNPROVEN theory that is actually being misapplied.

      Too true. I'm being inundated with conjectures from economic theory and pretty graphs that obviously account for diddly. After all this conjecture the basic question lies: How does one pay for goods when one does not have a job?

      Or perhaps better yet, where are the foreign businesses outsourcing TO the USA? If their statements are true, we should see an influx roughly equal to what we ship out. We dont.

      ---You want division of labor, yes, but the economics books are applying a mathematical model to a real-world thing. Math is a wonderful tool, but it doesn't make for rules of how the world works (opposite thinking...) nor does those numbers force things to be something other than they're not.

      I've read the theories. They have so many holes and assumptions and restrictions how they work, so I cant even figure WHY they can even use them in the cases they do. Comparative advantage is exactly that: assumes that production is stationary. We see exactly the opposite of this, by our manufacturing leap-frogging around the globe for the absolute cheapest prices. Something tells me that we seek the lowest prices (race to the bottom), but do not account for people to buy that very stuff. We saw this same behavior once before: The Great Depression. I guess that's the bad side effects of a surplus economy (or whatever they call it now).

      ---It looks good on paper to outsource to another country- for a couple of years, if that. In many cases, the outsource partner looks good on paper- but the reality of all the work you end up doing re-working their work (And, I know this from professional experience...) and all the lost reputation of your company because your product has vastly more defects when delivered (again...) ends up more often than not washing out any gains you might have gotten from the process. Add on to this that you're moving that money from your own country to another that only gives a damn about their own country (which is highly understandable, really...) and doesn't reinvest resources here- meaning that the money sunk in offshore outsourcing just went bye-bye... The math doesn't add up to what is going on right now. When the math doesn't add up; when the theories don't match up to what you're seeing- it's time to come up with new math and theories.

      Yeah, the key word is "right now". Look at Japan. We thought nothing of them around the 50's and 60's, as they created cheap knock-offs of our superior goods. Now, we've slacked off and they create the goods we drool over.

      This is happening in India, China, and everywhere else our influence exerts itself. While they may be inferior to us now, they will not be later one. After all, those two countries can literally brute force problems in ways we cannot imagine (something has to be said for 1.3B people each).

      ---The people keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting the results the theories tell them should be happening and all we're doing is spiraling back down into a Great Depression.

      That would be my guess, considering how our money is constantly being devalued. Another of my worries was brought to my attention by a statistician: China is one of the biggest US Treasury Bond holders. What would happen if they were to play "hot potato" with them, and dump them on the international market? From all of her calculations, she is now investing IN China.

      --
    79. Re:Deeper Downside? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      ---Even better question: what are they going to do with all the factory workers that simply CAN'T get an education? My ex brother in law has an IQ of maybe 105, and I know a LOT of guys like him. In my parents generation those with a strong back could afford to feed a family and buy a little home. Now the factories are nothing but decaying hulks, and what little work is left is being snapped up by illegal aliens that will work for a pittance while living ten to a rathole so they can take their money back home where they can live well.

      After reading John Taylor Gatto's book, Undreground History of American Education. It's free to read on his website (he published 1 chapter per month free). Back in the 1800's, coal miners complained they had to work too hard and long that they couldnt inform themselves of happenings in government, along with enjoying of the Classics. That is a marked departure from today where they seek to watch the latest yuck on tv: complete and utter apathy.

      I would never tell, myself included, that someone is not cut out on getting an education. Yes, some things are difficult, but all things are understandable. They may take time, but really, what are we going to do in the meanwhile?

      ---The simple fact is we have a black hole in this country, and it is only getting wider. Our money is being bleed to other countries while we make nothing but imaginary property which can be easily copied. I personally believe we'll end up in a ten year+ depression while will sadly in all likelihood be followed by a xenophobic fascist police state, circa Germany in the 30's. And the governments current folly of bailing out the investment bankers by printing more money is simply going to make the problem worse. And most sadly I don't see any way out of it, as it would require REAL long term planning and possibly even WPA style public works to rebuild our aging infrastructure and all of the corporations and public officials seem to be of the "damn everything but the quarterly report" types.

      Do you know what saved our butts in the last Great Depression? Excessive government spending and coming up to a World War. We dont have the manufacturing base we once had, nor are we solvent as a country. Though a theory states that extreme interdependence on trade reduces warlike aggression, it does not eliminate it. I wonder what would happen if the USA found itself in a corner.

      --
    80. Re:Deeper Downside? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1
      The guy tries to work a pc by tapping the little icons on the screen with his finger, I swear to god. Let me give you a little true story about him and, as I later found out, a bunch from his twenty something generation around here (rural south).


      He got in trouble with the law a few years ago for having some weed on him and got sent to jail for a six month stretch. Somebody thought it would be a good idea that all prisoners should have at least a GED as a condition for release. So they passed their little rule and brought in teachers and literacy experts and all on the public dime, which I don't mind if it helps them get a job. So six months passed and I'm sitting in the courtroom to see if the guy needs a lift, as I feel sorry for the way his folks just abandoned him when he turned 18. Him and about 30 other prisoners are brought before the judge and when the judge asks if they got their GED, the literacy expert says no, and they aren't going to be able to either. The judge wants to know why not. The literacy experts says that even though most standing there had made it through 6-10 grade before dropping out the average reading and comprehension skill in the group was less than 2nd grade, and that was with 12 hour days of instruction for 6 months. The expert said that if they stick with the GED rule they will be looking at an average of 3-5 YEARS per inmate to get them their GED and thus their release from custody. Needless to say they soon dropped the GED rule.


      I was lucky-most of my teenage years I was homeschooled by a full time mother who loved Asimov and Heinlein and had a large library full of great horror and sci-fi to stimulate my mind when I wasn't doing the three R's. But more and more I am seeing folks like my ex brother in law who was just passed without caring if he could read by the school system, and whose parents simply sat them down in front of the idiot box(perfect name for it) until time for bed. In the old days they could have at least worked factory or construction or one of the many other blue collar jobs. But now those days are going and we are having an ever growing underclass that simply will not be able to compete in an educational setting, period.


      And while I agree that government spending could help like in the depression, the whole "cut the checks for the bankers" bit isn't going to help anyone but the rich who'll be taking their money offshore as the dollar tanks. What we need is a WPA style program to fix our failing bridges and crumbling infrastructure and to wire the country with the national high speed networks we will need to compete. And I apologize for the length, and I am sure that you believe what you say. But after spending nearly a year trying to educate some of these guys I can tell you this-if they have reached 20 without any real kind of intellectual stimulation you can pretty much give it up. Their minds have been dulled to the point that with years of work you MIGHT get him to 6th grade, but he and his buddies will never be college material. Sadly in most of these little rural towns all the money is spent on the sports teams while the education is pisspoor at best. Which is why places like India and China are going to be kicking our ass in the number of PHDs if they aren't already. But this is my 02c on the subject, and I sincerely hope that we get some leadership after the shrub that will actually DO something besides pander to his rich buddies.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    81. Re:Deeper Downside? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      ---The guy tries to work a pc by tapping the little icons on the screen with his finger, I swear to god. Let me give you a little true story about him and, as I later found out, a bunch from his twenty something generation around here (rural south).

      I do computer consulting around these areas (linux fileservers for the companies with DRBD if requested), and I've seen such activity from people who were about ready to get their doctorate. I used to be computer-elitist but I grew out of that phase. Everybody has their own forte which can be brought out by proper experience and training.

      Even though, I am not a professor, I called out an anthropology prof because he thought the same way I think you do: that there are people who can never learn, even when poked and prodded. I do not accept that, thought many do.

      I snipped the story about your ex-brother-in-law, but I think that would have been an extraordinary opportunity for the court to issue probation to get his GED. Since we're at it, we could even offer free college (even though many would not take it). However, I believe this offer must be made to show we care about those who have little and are left to the legal system to take care of. At least, this would provide a route to those who recognize the merits of higher education and absolve monetary reasons for them.

      ---I was lucky-most of my teenage years I was homeschooled by a full time mother who loved Asimov and Heinlein and had a large library full of great horror and sci-fi to stimulate my mind when I wasn't doing the three R's. But more and more I am seeing folks like my ex brother in law who was just passed without caring if he could read by the school system, and whose parents simply sat them down in front of the idiot box(perfect name for it) until time for bed. In the old days they could have at least worked factory or construction or one of the many other blue collar jobs. But now those days are going and we are having an ever growing underclass that simply will not be able to compete in an educational setting, period.

      That you were lucky. I graduated in 2000 and were subject to the public education system. So to say, it put me back about 3 years as I was not even remotely prepared for the university. After 2 years, I tried to go, and failed miserably. Not to promote myself, but I thought I was better than those that had to be taught concepts, rather people like me who taught themselves. I failed by the simple rote homework that many professors require, as I am used to learning something for a term (2-5 months) and then do something tremendous with it.

      As my experience showed, I do best with classes that focus on learning the whole time, with a major project/paper near the end. Quizzes scattered about are nice to show comprehension.

      ---And while I agree that government spending could help like in the depression, the whole "cut the checks for the bankers" bit isn't going to help anyone but the rich who'll be taking their money offshore as the dollar tanks. What we need is a WPA style program to fix our failing bridges and crumbling infrastructure and to wire the country with the national high speed networks we will need to compete. And I apologize for the length, and I am sure that you believe what you say. But after spending nearly a year trying to educate some of these guys I can tell you this-if they have reached 20 without any real kind of intellectual stimulation you can pretty much give it up. Their minds have been dulled to the point that with years of work you MIGHT get him to 6th grade, but he and his buddies will never be college material. Sadly in most of these little rural towns all the money is spent on the sports teams while the education is pisspoor at best. Which is why places like India and China are going to be kicking our ass in the number of PHDs if they aren't already. But this is my 02c on the subject, and I sincerely hope that we get some leadership after the shrub that will actually DO something besides pander to his rich buddies.

      --
    82. Re:Deeper Downside? by bendodge · · Score: 1

      Unions were good, but now they seem soured. Two recent examples: the US automotive industry and Utah's failure to pass voucher-based education (the teachers unions worked extremely hard to defeat it).

      --
      The government can't save you.
    83. Re:Deeper Downside? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1
      I apologize if I came off as a pc elite, that was not my intention. What I meant to point out was after 6 months of me working with the guy I still couldn't get him to think of a pc as anything but an ATM. To him, if it had a screen it was a tv or an ATM, period. And I don't really think it is his fault, or the fault of his IQ. It is simply the fact that for the first 25+ years of his life intellectual stimulation consisted of tv, smoking bud, and sitting in the back of class. I doubt if you gave his parents a reading comprehension test that either of them would read beyond the 3rd grade level. When I went to see his mother to tell her that her son was in jail I noticed that there weren't even magazines or an evening paper in the house, nor a single book. When I asked why, she said "the tv gives us the news, and the preacher reads from the bible on Sundays, so we really don't have no use for them." Children learn by interacting and mimicking their parents. Can you imagine living in a house without a single thing to read in it?

      And I know EXACTLY how you felt when going back to college. Due to my father being injured on the job my mom had to go back to work for the last two years of my high school. Here is what I did for 2 YEARS of my final education: Go to class at 8:30-teach jocks how to spell things like "flour" and "stood" until lunch at 11:30 when I would have lunch in the teachers lounge.11:30-3:30 teach jocks other basic skills, just enough so they could pass the test and play on the team. They scheduled the jocks so they would have study hall in groups of 10 so I would have smaller sizes to work with.

      I had already given up on learning anything there as I kept getting sent to the coach's study hall when I would point out that the math teacher was giving the wrong answer to a basic math problem(if the book got it wrong,so did the teacher) and while sitting their in my "punishment" study hall reading "an old friend of the family"(great classic horror novel, I'm afraid I can't remember the author") and was "called before the coach" because he was sure I was hiding dirty mags behind my book. When he saw that not only didn't it have any pictures, but I could discuss at length subjects like vampire mythology and how the vampire metaphor was often used for subjects that we find uncomfortable he demanded I show up there before first class. Figuring I was going to get YET another study hall, I show up only to be escorted from class to class by the coach who explains to me that if I take this new "assignment" that'll I'll get all A's in all my classes without actually going to them.

      I paid for my two years of being free when a decade and a half later I had to spend 6 months learning math that was "supposed" to be taught in high school. The only thing that kept me from feeling stupid is that there were many there that had just graduated from the high school I attended the normal way, and they were all worse off than me. Apparently if you can balance your checkbook that is "good enough" for them. And we were actually in one of the wealthier districts. The southern half of the state has such pisspoor education that the feds are constantly threatening to take them over, due to the fact that most of the buildings should be condemned. While we always had new buildings and books, the jocks got million dollar gyms while we got 3 pcs in our entire science lab and had to get on a waiting list to use one. That is why places like India, China, and Japan are all going to kick our ass. They emphasize education, while our public schools (at least the ones I have seen here in the rural south, don't know about everywhere else) spend all the big bucks on sports. It is just sad.

      Well, I believe we could afford a "wpa 2.0"(nice title,btw) if we weren't spending billions in aid propping up foreign dictatorships, pull out of at least 1 of the 2 unpopular war fronts, quit spending billions on defense contractor handouts like a missile defense shield that doesn't work, etc. Unfortunately items such

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    84. Re:Deeper Downside? by mgblst · · Score: 1

      If you can't find something else for your former widgetmakers to do, you end up just draining money out of your economy. This is the important point, that you seem to gloss over. If you can't see that we do so many new, different jobs in out country within the last 20-30 years, then you are blind. Probably even your job would not have existed 20 years ago.

      So we know that we have new types of jobs that needs new types of people, these people get paid MORE not less. So GDP is increasing. (as long pay from new jobs is greater than jobs lost, which I will conveniently gloss over in any great detail).

    85. Re:Deeper Downside? by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Well, just as the buggy whip manufacturers lost their jobs, and people in the 80s lost their jobs to machines, your ex-bro in law will lose his job.

      Are you suggesting that we should keep jobs just for people like this??

      I guess he could join the army?? They always need people, i think the term is cannonfodder.

    86. Re:Deeper Downside? by AgentSmith · · Score: 1

      timmarhy said


      While i'm all for open trade, because it brings wealth to everyone, I would be super careful of signing anything with the USA if i was in charge.

      Oh and can we please drop the retarded myth that when a job is sourced over seas that persons buying power vapourises. it's just not the case, and has been proven many times over since the industrial revolution.


      Holy Crap!

      Can we get some reference to back this up?!

      The parents posters aren't talking immediate losses. This is down the road when all the US just becomes a blob of service industry employees and bloated corporate consumers.
      We still have direct manufacturing in the US, but how can a US manufacturer compete with someone who's willing to live one step above a mud hut?!

      You ever been in manufacturing? Ever see entire plants and towns go under? People in lines looking for jobs and having to
      move out of their homes and live out of their cars or backwoods trailers?!
      And we're not talking Appalachia here. These are not lazy people either. They paid their taxes, held their mortgages and tried
      looking for other jobs until the money ran out.

      It's one thing if a business goes bust. That's another issue to resolve.
      When a corporation moves overseas because they have to make shareholders happy even if it burns people. That's bad.
      It's hard to see this thing through the veil when everyone uses mutual funds investments through a brokerage company.

      To individual American investors. Take a look at your investments. Do they burn their people like firewood to make profit?

    87. Re:Deeper Downside? by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      *cough*France*cough*

      The most highly regulated employment markets in Europe are a really poor example for you to be holding up here. If you count just the Euro zone, unemployment is double what it is in the US.

      The problem with unions isn't that they exist. It's that they continue to exist after they've solved the problem they were organized to create. Inevitably, corruption overtakes the primary objectives of the union and they move beyond "fair labor practices" to racketeering and protectionism. There's an easy fix, of course. Allow unions, but also allow replacement of union employees that strike. If the union has fair and reasonable demands, the copmany won't be able to hire replacements for the long term anyway.

      Additionally, people in the US generally get 15 days vacation as a minimum. With exceptions of course.

    88. Re:Deeper Downside? by rtechie · · Score: 1

      The problem is unions and government regulations. Try firing someone. You have a union to deal with. Unions are simply NOT the problem. The percentage of workers in the USA that are members of unions has been steadily falling since the 1970s. Unions, especially in the private sector, are rapidly going away.

      Try building something really innovative, say a nice new nuclear power plant. Blame the oil industry. Who do you think funds anti-nuclear groups? Who funded "The China Syndrome"?.

      China kills US manufacturing because it has less regulation than the US plants. Chinese manufacturing is also enormously harmful to the Chinese environment and public health. Literally millions of Chinese have died due to environmental destruction, poisoning, etc. Since China is a vicious dictatorship that treats it's people like slaves, this is hardly supprising. I do not wish to join China in a race to the bottom.

      1. Protective tariffs: historically a bad idea (recall the Civil War). Tell this to the Europeans who have been enjoying a higher standard of living than us for decades, largely due to protectionism and trade tariffs.

    89. Re:Deeper Downside? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 1

      Voucher based education is a tax break for the wealthy. Good thing it was defeated.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
  5. Typical kneejerk business move... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm a fan of Dell kit, but when HP hae beaten you in sales for 6 successive quarters - as stated in the article - limiting the amount of customizing may save you cash, but it isn't going to get more people buying your kit is it?

    The 'fix' doesn't seem to be the solution to the highlighted problem... sure it'll save you money in the short term, but no gains in share there at all. Less customization is never going to make a punter go "oh, I'll buy that because it's not as customizable".

    Add to that the outsourcing of manufacture and it all looks like a world of hurt waiting to happen.

    *baffled*

    1. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by mysidia · · Score: 1


      Customization one of the few things Dell had going for them. Now what reason is there not to pick HP?



      Only upside for them selling packaged deals is now they can try to force customers to buy stuff they don't want.



      When ordering a system at retail, they do already offer lots of extraneous options like Cameras to go with a new PC, totally extra sw, etc.



      W/ the package deal I suppose they may now impose their junk crapware that they forcefully preload on new systems... getting original OS install media no longer a customization option.

    2. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      > I'm a fan of Dell kit

      I'm calling BS unless you provide a URL to these kit computers you claim Dell sells. I bought just over seven figures worth of hardware from Dell last year and have bought from dell for over 15 years, and I have never seen a Dell kit computer. They sell complete computers. They don't sell parts kits like you claim. You're full of crap.

    3. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kit is a british-ism meaning 'equipment'.

    4. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Less customization is never going to make a punter go "oh, I'll buy that because it's not as customizable".
      What if Dell passes along some of that $3B in savings?
    5. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a fan of Dell kit, but when HP hae beaten you in sales for 6 successive quarters - as stated in the article - limiting the amount of customizing may save you cash, but it isn't going to get more people buying your kit is it?

      You may reduce quantity; but you are going to thicken your margin if you're reducing costs. Now; how are sales being measured? ? Total units shipped? Dollar amount on units? There is more; but I digress. No point in guessing what the article is referencing when it lacks clarity.

    6. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by digitalhermit · · Score: 1

      Depending on how they make this change, it might do well. Ford was doing a similar thing. Apparently they had thousands of possible options. This made customers unhappy because the options they wanted were rarely on the dealer floor. By limiting *some* options they can make customers happier (the logic is bizarre, but that was the business speak).

      Now I have a lot of Dells too. Five Inspirons, a couple Dimensions, an XPS to be shipped next week. I enjoyed that I could build it to my specs, but there are choices that add build time but maybe I don't care so much about. For example, they have several choices on wireless cards. As long as it works with Linux and Windows, I don't care. Why have six hard drive choices? Maybe a couple different speeds would be fine, but so many choices on capacity doesn't benefit me too much. Other people would likely hate that they can't choose an 80G, 200G or 320G, solid state, or 7200RPM versions... But for my limited needs the options don't mean much...

    7. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by nacturation · · Score: 1

      > I'm a fan of Dell kit

      I'm calling BS unless you provide a URL to these kit computers you claim Dell sells. I bought just over seven figures worth of hardware from Dell last year and have bought from dell for over 15 years, and I have never seen a Dell kit computer. They sell complete computers. They don't sell parts kits like you claim. You're full of crap. Wow. The GP said the equivalent of "I'm a fan of Dell gear" and you just wasted your time demonstrating that Dell doesn't actually sell gears, nor cogs for that matter.
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    8. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Why would more customizability translate to increased sales or profit?

      More desirable designs, more desirable software, more desirable capabilities, that will sell more computers, and none of those things have anything to do with "customizability".

    9. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Less customization is never going to make a punter go "oh, I'll buy that because it's not as customizable". True. But how many people buy computers because they're customizable? Computers have become commodity items. Corporate buyers (where most of the profits are) buy hundreds or thousands of identical systems. Consumers buy based on advertising, word of mouth and branding. A few geeks buy custom-built systems, but how much money does Dell make off them?

      I work for one of Dell's competitors, and I've always been a little surprised that Dell still builds its own systems. If we had to go back to doing that, we'd be out of business in a week. It's expensive. Part of it is lower offshore labor costs (though some of the companies we outsource to actually have their factories in the U. S.) but it's mainly a matter of specialization.

      To make a profit selling computers you have to grab market share and control costs. Getting out of the custom build business wont have much effect on Dell's market share, but it will lower their costs. Lower costs = higher profits + happier investors.

      Companies often do stupid things to tweak their costs and other numbers. (Some of the things my employers do makes me want to tear my hair out.) But this isn't one of them.
    10. Re:Typical kneejerk business move... by Mulligan417 · · Score: 1

      The assumption that less build-to-order means less share is laughable--was that a Carson Daily joke or an attempt to educate the masses?

      The consumer end of the PC market is buying more and more laptops, and they are doing that purchasing in retail outlets in increasing numbers. The trend makes sense, considering the laptop is not only being commoditized, but also is a seemingly necessary fashion statement--"I want my notebook to say something about me and my personality." It is a touch and feel product, and as the consumer market space moves further and further into portables, a direct model business appeals to a much smaller part of the market.

      What's more, the move actually gives consumers greater choice in how they buy in addition to the ability to impact exactly what they buy. A customer, like myself and likely many of you, who wants a high degree of specificity, retains the ability to pick up the phone or hit up the daunting website and order a custom configuration with exactly the features you are looking for. But when the majority of the market space wants to walk into Wal-Mart and leave with a machine that they have no expectation of dissecting, much less understanding, it's not a 'knee-jerk business move'--it's a calculated and intelligent understanding of the future of the business.

      And on a side note, gross revenue comparisons between HP and Dell are fairly irrelevant--it's like saying that Target is more successful than Best Buy because Target reports higher revenues. They may sell some similar products, but that doesn't mean a dollar-for-dollar comparison says what you seem to imply.

  6. Hardly. by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When companies seek to recover these kinds of profits, they cut something more important.

    Their reputation.

    Most likely, they will move their call centers out of India and into a lower paying 3rd world country. The lower techs will be given even less latitude to help fix problems. Along with that, they will reduce access (and numbers) of higher up support, along with "new policies" of the 'not our fault' game.

    They will obviously cut their unprofitable programs, such as their IdeaStorms website, all Linux support for low and middle tiers, along with the cheaper customizable options. They will leave customizing available for the higher packages, as all businesses cater to the big spenders.

    Yes, our system is based upon a race to the bottom, but depending how you get there means if you survive or not. That really depends on how their deals with Microsoft go, as they are parasites upon MS.

    --
    1. Re:Hardly. by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Look, the business plan of "you can have any color you want, as long as it's black" may have been brillant and inventive when Ford did it, but the rest of the world has caught on to that. Most businesses have something they make volume on, and something related (which they wouldn't get without volume) they make margins on. Cutting out all the other things and try to only make money on volume is fighting for pennies per computer, they're hardly the only ones capable of setting up an efficient assembly line these days. I'm agree that cost control is important, but building cheap "noname" PCs is a pretty poor idea. That said, I can understand that their customization market isn't what it used to be, for one laptops are taking over and secondly the prices of hardware has come down so far it's probably cheaper to do a little overkill than spend the money on building it "just right".

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Hardly. by AncientPC · · Score: 1

      Dell has been losing market share to HP and Apple quite a while now (at least 6 quarters consecutively according to AC above).

      HP and Apple's turnaround in the marketplace has been somewhat attributed to R&D and strong design teams which Dell lacks, according to "Why Dell isn't the next Apple."

      In response, Dell has been designing some great systems due to launch this year:
      XPS m1330 ultraportable: http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/05/more-pics-of-the-dell-xps-m1330/
      Latitude XT tablet: http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/11/dell-latitude-xt-tablet-is-official-sexy/
      E5000 / E6000: http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/22/dells-leaked-latitude-e6000-and-e5000-series-of-laptops-pack-gp/
      E4200 / E4300: http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/21/up-close-with-dells-latitude-e4300-and-e4200-ultra-portables-wi/

      You would also need to argue how much net profits extra customization adds to Dell's offerings. In the past, I've always thought the memory and hdd upgrades through Dell were ridiculous, I would rather just buy the parts separately and add them in myself.

      I attended an AMD talk the other day where the presenter noted that a 10% difference in CPU clock was equivalent to having a black laptop instead of white (based on same spec Macbooks).

      The consumer market has reached a point where customization and marginal performance options are taking a back seat to design and price point.

    3. Re:Hardly. by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      They won't cut the Linux stuff; that is all there solely to get better rates from MS.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
  7. As a data center operator that buys dell.... by LWolenczak · · Score: 1

    I think I may be looking to move to HP or IBM. While the last time I ordered HP, it was a room full of boxes for five servers and some drive shelves, I do believe they went into the custom built model in the last few years.... Hmmm..

    1. Re:As a data center operator that buys dell.... by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      I think I may be looking to move to ... IBM.

      Ahem... IBM doesn't make PCs anymore.

    2. Re:As a data center operator that buys dell.... by ciellarg · · Score: 1

      I think I may be looking to move to ... IBM. Ahem... IBM doesn't make PCs anymore. Ahem Ahem....IBM does make servers still. :)
    3. Re:As a data center operator that buys dell.... by binaryspiral · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You should have been looking into alternatives years ago.

      Anyone can build and sell a server - supporting it is where the company wins or loses.

      I call IBM at 3am when a server up and dies. Tech is onsite in two hours, new parts arrive 45 mins later... a bad power regulator fried all 16 sticks of ram. They didn't have enough on hand, so three other couriers were dispatch from two other states with more than enough ram to get the server up and running.

      Three hours later the box was back up.

      Dell - will argue to the enth degree about predicted drive failures alarms from their raid controllers... we just call them dead now so they'll send replacements. The drives take about two days to show up which is about enough time for the drive to finally fail.

    4. Re:As a data center operator that buys dell.... by crossmr · · Score: 1

      It still is. I've built my last two homes out of the boxes I've received on a couple of small HP orders..

      You still have to put in your own ram and extra hard drives.

      There is a DL320 out there with a little blood in it from when I was trying to move a bracket to get a HD in it..

    5. Re:As a data center operator that buys dell.... by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      HP hasn't done it very well. Their customizations are quite limited, and their capabilities for a 2U or 5U box lag well behind Dell for the same price range, and tend to lack capabilities.

  8. software is easier to "customize" than hardware by voss · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Ubuntu is just another disk image like windows xp, or vista.

    1. Re:software is easier to "customize" than hardware by calebt3 · · Score: 1

      What's your point? You aren't going to be playing Civ4 on an 8 meg video card no matter what you do to your software.

    2. Re:software is easier to "customize" than hardware by voss · · Score: 1

      My point is customizing the OS is easier than customizing the hardware, thats why dell will keep linux as a customization option. How this got modded off topic is moderator schenanigans

    3. Re:software is easier to "customize" than hardware by adrianmonk · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu is just another disk image like windows xp, or vista.

      Heck, if you reduce the number of hardware customization options, you might reduce the number of device drivers needed and the number of different possible configurations, and it might actually become easier to support alternate OSes well.

  9. Outsource more manufacturing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Are you high?

    Dell already outsources just about all their manufacturing. All that will happen here is that now they can streamline the supply pipeline because they only ship x different configs instead of 100x. Less work at the (already) outsourced supplier/contract manufacturer, less work on the order fulfillment side.

    How it's going to save 3 billion, I don't know. I think they're aiming a little high. Expect support to be outsourced to even crappier Indian call centers....

    1. Re:Outsource more manufacturing? by Schnapple · · Score: 1
      The article actually says

      Dell will also outsource more PC manufacturing to partners, he said.
      That sounds to me more like they're going to let other companies manufacture their stuff for them. Like you said, Dell already outsources all of their manufacturing, so this just sounds like a shift rather than "DEY TUUK ERR JAAAHBS"
    2. Re:Outsource more manufacturing? by adrianmonk · · Score: 1

      Dell already outsources just about all their manufacturing. All that will happen here is that now they can streamline the supply pipeline because they only ship x different configs instead of 100x.

      They do a lot of in-house assembly still. They don't make the individual components (video cards, motherboards, power supplies, speakers, etc.), but they do put them together, test them, and then box them up. I know because I live not far from some of the buildings where they do a lot of it. (Specifically, the buildings I'm thinking of are the ones on both sides of Parmer.)

      I suppose it's possible they could streamline this away, but from what I understand, they've already regionalized it (i.e. final assembly in different parts of the country depending on where it'll be shipped) specifically to save on shipping costs and shipping time. So it seems like it's to their advantage to do some of this stuff nearer the spot where they're going to ship stuff to, although I suppose they could theoretically change their final assembly points into distribution centers instead of factories.

    3. Re:Outsource more manufacturing? by edwardpickman · · Score: 1
      Expect support to be outsourced to even crappier Indian call centers....

      You mean the ones where they don't even bother to teach them English?

    4. Re:Outsource more manufacturing? by adolf · · Score: 1

      I don't live in Parmer, so my view of things may be different from yours.

      That said: My Dell Inspiron 6000d laptop was built and tested in Malaysia, flown to a FedEx facility in (IIRC) Kentucky, and was then shipped by truck to my home in Ohio. It at no point in its life has ever been in a Dell facility in the United States.

      I understood, at the time, that this was all par for the course for this model of laptop.

  10. Could have been worse by FoolsGold · · Score: 3, Funny

    Be thankful there isn't a deeper deeper downside!

    1. Re:Could have been worse by dollarfreak · · Score: 1

      Never forget your forte ! .. bad ..bad idea

  11. Dell changes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I make all my own parts choices and assemble all the computers I need so this mean bupkus to me! After all they have done to MUTATE the city of Round Rock it is about time they scaled back...

  12. A current "Dell House" by UrgleHoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I work for a small (about 100 person) company with a heterogeneous environment (Linux, OS X, Windows). In the past few years the IT team has settled on Dell for quick turnaround of ordering customized systems and consistency (the devil you know). They order Dell laptops, desktops and servers. It has pretty much turned into a "Dell house." The quick turnaround on customized orders is extremely important to meet developer needs. If Dell makes custom ordering take longer or involves increased hassle, I would bet that our IT management would start looking into other vendors.

    --

    Dogma - "let's just say we'd like to avoid any empirical entanglements."
    1. Re:A current "Dell House" by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Agreed. We purchase 200-300 Dell servers a month. If we weren't able to customize them anymore (which would mean we'd be wasting our time swapping components after they arrived all the same), we'd find another vendor (as others have pointed out, HP or IBM). Alienware may want to move into the server space, as they're use to high margins as it is (custom, high end desktops) and their customization they currently do with desktops/laptops could easily be extended to a server platform.

    2. Re:A current "Dell House" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      i work in a company that is similar in size, we have been using HP servers for some time and haven't had any issues with customizing them. the only down side is that the extra parts that you wanted to upgrade with come in a separate box and you have to install them.

    3. Re:A current "Dell House" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize Dell owns Alienware? Right?

    4. Re:A current "Dell House" by hibiki_r · · Score: 1

      Alienware? You know they were bought by Dell back in 06, right?

    5. Re:A current "Dell House" by drix · · Score: 1

      Presumably you would experience the same problems with Alienware, seeing as Dell owns them.

      --

      I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
    6. Re:A current "Dell House" by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware. That's depressing =( I checked their website before posting my comment, and didn't see any sign they were owned by Dell.

    7. Re:A current "Dell House" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am in a similar situation as you are.

      As far as I can tell (in terms of quality) HP>Dell>>>>IBM .
      IBM servers are filmsy to install and maintain, Dell servers are reliable, and HP servers are so well built that if you drop one on your foot, you will probably need crutches for the rest of your life (as oppose to IBM's "flexible" xServers (as in the thing flexes vertically on its rack rail)- not a good thing)

    8. Re:A current "Dell House" by NothingMore · · Score: 1

      I doubt that the turn-around time will increase that much, what will increase will be the cost of the machines (which is how i suspect they will stop people from making customizations to the base models by jacking up the cost of the parts that are not "standard")

    9. Re:A current "Dell House" by MistrWebmastr · · Score: 1

      As soon as I saw this, I got on the phone with my account manager, and asked for the lowdown. According to him, this is for the consumer side, mostly focusing on dropping the extreme high-end stuff. They'll only offer systems that the majority of consumers would want, not high end Core2 Extreme processors. He said that the business side should not change, however. We can still spec out our systems like we wish.

  13. Richard Corsale by darkchubs · · Score: 1

    I just bought a Dell, specifily because I could customize it. I needed a high end video card on a 15' platform and suspect most computer professionals have specific hardware requirements. Without the option to build the system ( which all ready has pretty limited customization options and 80% is up sell pitching anyway ) they would be removing something that gives them an advantage in a crowded commodity market. On the other hand, it creates opportunity for new manufacturers

    1. Re:Richard Corsale by Starcub · · Score: 1

      Dell doesn't provide a high end video card on the 15" platform, unless you are talking about the Alienware model. AFAIK, AW and Clevo resellers are the only ones that offer high end video in that form factor.

    2. Re:Richard Corsale by darkchubs · · Score: 1

      well, its the 8600 GT 256mb .. not the best I know but..

  14. What does "cut back customizing" mean? by timotten · · Score: 2, Insightful

    e.g.

    1. We will cease customizations through our "Dell Home" program but will continue with it in our "Dell Large Business" program.

    2. We will cease customizations for our "Dimension" line but continue customizations for our "Optiplex" and "PowerEdge" lines.

    2. We will continue supporting some customizations (e.g. RAM and HD) but cease support for other customizations (e.g. anti-virus software).

    3. We will increase the price on customized models and decrease the price on prepackaged models in order to reshape demand.

    1. Re:What does "cut back customizing" mean? by mpeskett · · Score: 1

      So what... no more customising at all in the "Home" section? If they're only doing custom orders for Large businesses then the rest of us are all getting screwed. The Dimension line is the only one of those 3 that I've heard of. Looking at Dell's site, the Optiplex is only available in the business sections, and Poweredge is servers. Again, home users getting shut out it seems. My cynical side is reading the 3rd point as "we will sell you antivirus software you don't want, just bend over and accept it. Last point... oh, great, charge us more for the one thing that sets you apart from the competition, great strategy there Dell. Really, I applaud whichever bright spark decided they needed to cut costs by not doing the thing that makes them worth giving money to. They aren't known for impressive quality, so how they expect cutting down on the customisability to help I do not know. The only reason I'd consider Dell over any other make is that I get some choice over what goes inside. A desktop I can build my self, but laptops... not so much.

    2. Re:What does "cut back customizing" mean? by mpeskett · · Score: 1

      I put line breaks in that. I don't know where they went.

  15. It's roots by brainstyle · · Score: 4, Funny
    --
    "Why can't everyone just be straight with me?"
    "Because we live in a bendy world, dear."
    1. Re:It's roots by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the problem is that "it" is the only noun (okay, pronoun) where the apostrophe s ('s) won't make it possesive. It's rather stupid. Another exception to add to the long list of rules and exceptions -- which English has an unnecessary amount of; just like its pronunciation quirks.

    2. Re:It's roots by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the problem is that "it" is the only noun (okay, pronoun) where the apostrophe s ('s) won't make it possesive. Dell is the noun. The sentence could also be written (very awkwardly) as "Dell's Customization Roots Are Abandoned By Itself".
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:It's roots by Nocterro · · Score: 1

      I counter your angry picture with Wikipedia!

      --
      [clever sig]
  16. There goes their one selling point... by wiwa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, remind me again what I can now get from Dell that I couldn't get from any other manufacturer? Nothing? Oh well then I might just take my business elsewhere. Hrmph!

  17. Customizing "not needed" by linux+pickle · · Score: 1

    A friend of mine just bought a Dell XPS laptop because he loved how configurable it was. I bet there are plenty more people who agree. It would make sense for them to cut customization on the more basic models (Inspiron, Dimension) but keep it for the gaming models. As for outsourcing, I just hope their quality doesn't degrade. Right now I'm using a 9 year old Dell desktop that has been chugging along just fine the whole time.

  18. Apostrophe's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and they're use's.

  19. Anti-Foreign Bias by NEOtaku17 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The deeper downside: Dell will outsource more production and assembly."

    Which will result in lower prices which is good for consumers. How is this the deeper downside? Why are Americans, which have one of the highest standards of living in the world, more deserving of these jobs than people in other countries?

    1. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1

      The concern is that America is importing more than it exports. Overtime, this causes long-term damage to an economy.

      By itself, outsourcing isn't bad. However, combine that with exports (manufactured goods are more expensive here than elsewhere) then there is a problem.

    2. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > more deserving of these jobs than people in other countries

      It has nothing to do that. Stop trying to turn this into a race issue. It has to do with quality. Typically when you buy American-made products you get better quality than when you buy something made in China. It's like with pre-unification Germany. When you saw the "Made in West Germany" label you typically got a product that was very high quality, even higher than American-made. Before Germany was sucked into mediocrity about fifteen years ago by uneducated and unmotivated people from East Germany, I bought all of my tools and shop machinery from West Germany. Now I buy American for things I need to last, but I do buy plenty of Chinese garbage for machines or bits that I will only use a few times. Typically the Chinese garbage will only last 10% of the line of a real American-made machine or bit, but for certain purposes that's acceptable.

      Where are you from that you don't understand quality? Are you an inexperienced and naive college student w/o real world experience?

    3. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by homer_s · · Score: 1

      The concern is that America is importing more than it exports. Overtime, this causes long-term damage to an economy.
      If the Chinese are giving you free stuff (if you are giving them less than what they give you, you are getting something for free), why is that bad?

      Are the Chinese and every other country that dumb that they want to give away their wealth and work to you for free?
    4. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      Which will result in lower prices which is good for consumers. How is this the deeper downside? Why are Americans, which have one of the highest standards of living in the world, more deserving of these jobs than people in other countries?

      I think he was talking about the downside as it applies to the build quality, not the economy. But I agree with you in general - when people talk about slashing gov. sponsored R&D funding, I ask a very complex simple question: why are janitors in America paid many, many times those in India for doing the same work?

    5. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by homer_s · · Score: 1

      Because Americans do not want cheaper goods and services. They want full employment.
      Even if such employment makes everything more expensive and results in Americans working longer hours.
      Remember, only evil economists say that productivity gains make everyone richer. The truth is, slogging away for 20 hours a day is what people really want.

    6. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 'free stuff' ain't free ... it's debt.

      So no, they aren't dumb. We are.

      Willing to borrow and borrow to satisfy our short-term desires. When they finally collect, we'll discover that WE have sold it all, down to the last asset. And we'll have no way to make it back, since we won't have anything left to sell, either in assets or competencies ... unless somehow a market for 'shoppers' arises ...

      The only 'unfair' aspect of the whining about outsourcing is that it is often accompanied by a complete lack of awareness of the 'personal responsibility' aspect. If we *willingly* do this to ourselves, we have only ourselves to blame, not the rest of the world, which has as much right to pursue wealth as we do.

    7. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by homer_s · · Score: 1

      The 'free stuff' ain't free ... it's debt.
      It depends on the terms of the sale, doesn't it?
      And even if that were true, if I want to take on a mountain of debt to enjoy something in the short term, why should anyone have the right to stop me?
      If I own my life and property, I should be able to spend it in whatever way I want. If I want to sell all of my stuff to a Chinese man for some lead-tainted toys, why shouldn't I be able to do that?
      Unless of course, I don't really own my life and property.
    8. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are Americans, which have one of the highest standards of living in the world, more deserving of these jobs than people in other countries? Because they possibly would want to maintain that standard of living? Why else would they be less deserving of them?
    9. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Americans are not anti-foreign. We're anti-getting-screwed.

      Outsourcing drops the prices against domestic producers, just enough to put them out of business, then the price drop holds steady. In other words, the labor costs drop say 70% while the product cost drops maybe 10%.

      The American (and other consumers) are getting comepletely ripped of by this kind of outsourcing. It's the outsourcer that makes a damn fortune of this scheme.

      If things have to be outsourced from US production, I'd rather see more of a free market for external production. Rather than sending everything to China, increasingly things are going to India. India is rapidly expanding their free economic zones.

      That's when we'll start seeing real drops at the store...when China and India are competing for production.

      I consider Dell a Corporate Welfare Whore. Many government institutions allow purchases from Dell only. I think that is very wrong...it's anti-free market.

      And your comment that Americans have the highest standard of living in the world is ludicrous. Which "America" are you talking about? The masses of homeless people wandering the streets of our large cities? The millions of people languishing in prisons for non-violent offenses? Or the "people" living in the Bill Gates mansion?

      Japan and several European countries have a much higher overall quality of living than the USA. Longer, less stressful lives, better care for the elderly, better general care for the citizenry. What about Bahrain?

      Every non-american in the world is on a bashing spree against the US, but we don't have it as good as you think. Probably never did.

    10. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by feyhunde · · Score: 1

      Elderly care is an interesting point. America versus Europe shows one thing that's clear. Both sides are flawed. The US system is a bit heartless, while Europe has become institutionalized. If you live in Britain, you face a problem at the end of the year. Doctors have an hour quota under NHS. They are usually done at the end of the year, making it damn hard to get treatment. There's an additional complication that Retirees are a net drain on the system. They no longer pay in, and use the majority of the resources. A quirk of fate has US retirees generally paying into the entire system and being the largest group means the entire industry is seeing dollars in Elder care making it a very popular choice rather than a thankless chore. However, you're not going broke due to debts for medical expenses like in the US, and defaulted debts aren't driving up the costs for everyone else. Neither system is especially great.

      --
      I'd say more, but my guild is raiding.
    11. Re:Anti-Foreign Bias by LiveFreeOrDieInTheGo · · Score: 1
      Whoa, big fella!

      You assume incorrectly.

      I assumed outsourcing in within the U.S.A,, in particular Texas! Have you ever heard of Copperas Cove, Texas? They could provide a very attactively priced labor market.

      I don't care where the outsourcing occurs. The people who care, Dell executives with a vested interest in the Dell brand and logo, will encounter a significant gap in their ability to manage quality. The outsourcer can "just move on". The customer gets the raw deal. DOA units were low with Dell. 1 in 10. Now we see 1 in 4. We've moved to HP.

  20. Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Our system isn't a race to the bottom. It is a race to what people want. People want computers at the cheapest possible price and they do not care about tech centers or even support.

    Outsourcing is a good thing for the economy, not a bad thing. If Ford did not outsource, for example, it would have to make everything from the drills for the oil, the refineries for the gasoline, the machines to make the steel and the chips and the plastic, really, recreate the entire economy and in doing so lose the efficiencies that come with shared costs. We can lament outsourcing of some function at a company, to make ourselves feel good, but, if there were no outsourcing, there would be no cars, no tvs, computers, or any of the millions of products, in all their choice and complexity, because those products would not exist without outsourcing.

    We ourselves, each and everyone one of us, outsource all of the time. Go ahead can say Dell is terrible because they outsourced a call center to India or the Philippines, but we outsource every time we use a stapler or a printer, or for that matter, even a computer. How many developers recommend using MySql or Postgres or even Linux over some solution developed in-house. That is outsourcing too, and without that outsourcing, it is very likely that there would be less jobs and more economic stagnation. Few products have the margin or merit to justify the creation of a custom database server or operating system solely for them.

    In that vein, outsourcing a call center might actually result in -better- customer service. If a place in India has 200,000 people answering the phones, they are going to get the economies of scale that even Dell could not possibly get.

    Outsourcing actually -creates- opportunity. Any time you see more than one company engaged in a similar practice, that is an opportunity for a product or a service than can be outsourced to someone else, and that person might as well be you. If outsourcing did not exist, then, there would be no opportunity, the companies that could have benefited from outsourcing would stagnate, and products would remain more expensive, rather than less.

    Bottom line is, outsourcing is a good deal, rather than a bad once, and the dramatic increase in the standard of living in much of the world - from the skyscrapers in China, the surge of wealth in India, to the internet of south korea and the massive works in Dubai, the world is getting richer and better off for it. Even in the USA, where outsourcing has been the subject of much debate, everyone has benefited from outsourcing.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ok then. Take for example our current manufacturing situation... We are hemorrhaging jobs from all markets for the manufacturing of goods. Instead, those jobs first went to Mexico. They ended up being too expensive, and the deals with China were brokered.

      Along with China, India was also brought forth as a manufacturing country. Now, it appears they are too expensive, and our companies are off for cheaper places. Now, it is not arguable that China and India benefit from our presence. They do, however, is it advantageous that we put ourselves at a distance in terms to create?

      I know where the USA wants to go towards: the brain of the world. Intellectual Property Capitol. Except they do this by selling off what got us here: our very industry to create. How would we do a Manhattan Project without every country knowing now? Buy this kit from this country, that kit from that country...

      --
    2. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, all us unemployed people are much better off because the Chinese have our jobs. Maybe you can buy me some sandwiches and Thunderbird wine with all the money you save by shopping at Walmart the next time I moan at you on the street.

    3. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by homer_s · · Score: 1

      You seem to suggest that division of work is good. That productivity gains due to specialization is good for the economy.

      Next thing you know, you'll suggest that people trade only when it benefits them and hence the local economy.

      We don't take kindly to economic truths and common sense around here.

    4. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by homer_s · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Finally, someone speaks the truth about the damage outsourcing does.My city (woodridge,il) is hemorrhaging jobs because we outsource everything.

      We outsource car production, computer production, etc. Heck, we don't even make our own offshore drilling rigs to drill for oil so we can get petroleum that we can use to make plastic to make little spoons.

      It wasn't always like this. A couple of hundred years ago, we manufactured almost everything we needed right here. Everyone was employed.
      In fact, there was so much work, people had to work about 18 hours a day.
      With all the outsourcing now, there isn't enough work. In fact, there is so little work, people actually sit in front of their TV and do nothing.
      Hopefully, the govts around the world stop outsourcing so we can go back to living like we did in the 1700s.

    5. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by xkhaozx · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but you cannot argue that an Indian telephone support outsourcing will result in a better customer appreciation.

      My mom works as for computer support at Dell, and she always receives calls where the customer is greatly happy to hear their finally on the line with someone who "can speak English". These kinds of greetings were even more common at the previous call centers she has worked at.

      And while you argue that you may get better customer service by having more representatives, I find this hardly the case. I still have quite long wait times even when I get an Indian representative.

      So while there may be other benefits to outsourcing, doing so for call centers will not result in better customer satisfaction.

      And btw, I've heard Dell is prospecting the idea of selling a "pro customer support" contracts, so that they can pay for the call centers in Canada or in the USA. (not sure if this is public)

    6. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What people normally complain about is offshore outsourcing, which some have actually suffered from. But yes, one's loss is another's gain.

      But you knew all that, didn't you, Mr. Pangloss?

    7. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by hemp · · Score: 1

      If Ford did not outsource, for example, it would have to make everything from the drills for the oil, the refineries for the gasoline, the machines to make the steel and the chips and the plastic, really, recreate the entire economy and in doing so lose the efficiencies that come with shared costs.

      That would make Ford a vertical monopoly. That is not allowed in the US. To take your example to its furthest conclusion - Ford would require only Ford brand tires on each Ford car wheel, Ford brand motor oil in the crank case, etc. They would love to be able to accomplish this.

      --
      Skip ------ See the latest from http://www.anArchyFortWorth.com
    8. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We ourselves, each and everyone one of us, outsource all of the time. Go ahead can say Dell is terrible because they outsourced a call center to India or the Philippines, but we outsource every time we use a stapler or a printer, or for that matter, even a computer

      Poppycock. It's one thing to outsource things that aren't your core business, I mean, those not in the stapler business shouldn't be making staplers. But if you're in the stapler business and you outsource the manufacturing, assembly, and support of staplers, then exactly what IS your business? What opportunity does that get you? You've mostly switched the business from being a manufacturer to a distributor. Assuming the distribution hasn't been outsourced. Maybe Dell is becoming just a retailer. All this sounds like is getting rid of your business and painting yourself into a corner.

    9. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by timeOday · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Outsourcing is a good thing for the economy, not a bad thing. If Ford did not outsource, for example, it would have to make everything from the drills for the oil, the refineries for the gasoline, the machines to make the steel and the chips and the plastic, really, recreate the entire economy and in doing so lose the efficiencies that come with shared costs. We can lament outsourcing of some function at a company, to make ourselves feel good, but, if there were no outsourcing, there would be no cars, no tvs, computers, or any of the millions of products, in all their choice and complexity, because those products would not exist without outsourcing.
      You can't defend outsourcing by redefining it. Nobody concerned about outsourcing is referring to domestic trade, that's a total straw man!

      To claim that everybody has benefited (net) from outsourcing is just crazy. I'll take a wild guess here that you don't live in Detroit. Cheap imports don't offset being unemployed. Even the most devout capitalist knows there are winners and losers.

      Outsourcing (meaning foreign trade, especially between vastly unequal economies) has a whole slew of effects. How do you show the benefits are more than the drawbacks? Especially if you restrict the analysis to the US instead of the world economy as a whole? Nothing you said even addresses the issue.

    10. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by knight0wl · · Score: 1

      Is there a reason we have to simplify things down to the black and white, "outsourcing is good" or "outsourcing is bad"? Can't it be both? Is there anything wrong with saying "Outsourcing is good for us as consumers, bad for us workers"?

      --
      Name-calling, insults, and general rudeness do not increase the chances that someone will suddenly agree with you.
    11. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by folstaff · · Score: 1
      Insourcing off sets many of the jobs lost by outsourcing, they just don't fill the spot you are expecting. The state of Alabama is filling up with car manufactures like Hyundai, Honda, and Mercedes. The new Airbus tanker is partially made in Mobile.

      Everybody complains, not many listen.

    12. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, all of you dumbasses who think outsourcing is a good idea listen up and comprehend this: "outsourcing" as it's used today doesn't mean "we buy stuff to make our stuff with". It means "we don't make stuff but want people to think we do while we just slap our label on things". Substitute appropriate language for services all you want. The bottom line is that outsourcing your core business functions, especially in the race-to-the-bottom "global market" is relatively new and totally destructive.

      Put simply: corporations can cross borders to move work around almost without restrictions. Can you do that? It's true that the US is the only country dumb enough or crooked enough to allow anyone from anywhere to come and work here, but everyone else in the countries-that-matter realm has strict rules about that sort of thing. Therefore, what terms like "outsourcing" and the "global economy" really mean is arbitrage of labor--nothing more. It's the ability of capital to move freely across borders while labor is stuck where it is, pure and simple. Oh, it's true that eventually the market catches up with itself. Sometimes people in these "low wage" countries actually start making higher (relative) wages. Guess what happens then? Corporations move out of those places into even more impoverished areas.

      Economies exist to serve people, and idiots like you have that backwards, so there: fixed that for you.

    13. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by homer_s · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No - I completely agree with you. In fact, I want to go much further than you.

      I'm tired of all those a-holes from Bolingbrook, Il stealing jobs from Woodridge, Il. Why it is a race to the bottom.

      And my employer is in Lemont, Il and is playing a simple wage arbitrage game.

      I demand that Woodridge, Il shut its borders and stop exporting jobs to Bolingbrook and Lemont.

      We should have an Ikea here in Woodridge. And an Amoco station so we don't spend Woodridge wealth in Darien,Il.

      We should also build a microprocessor plant and an Iron mine here in Woodridge, Il so we don't give away our wealth to Intel and Mittal Steel.

      The JC Penny can stay in Downer's Grove, Il - we don't want that kind of business here.

    14. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by TheNucleon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some of us - those whose jobs have not yet gone overseas - have benefitted from outsourcing in the short term. But in the long term, we annihilate our internal industries, bleed talent and capabilities, and become accustomed to an unsustainable lifestyle. It will all eventually tank, as it is beginning to do now. The dollar is headed from hero to zero, and once there, the currency and lifestyle disparities between us and our outsourcing vendors (that got us all of this near-free stuff) will be gone.

      I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with you. Outsourcing is a very bad deal. While it has the allure of temporarily deflating the cost of goods and services, it is, in the end, a direct assault on the lower and middle class. Because companies can now outsource to other nations without such pesky problems as labor laws or a living wage, we are quickly seeing the working class gains of the last few decades evaporate.

      --
      My comments are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, my spouse, my children, or my cats.
    15. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      I didnt know it was THAT hard to apply for citizenship for each of those towns in Illinois.

      On a real note: do you expect the working class to go to the countries jobs are now plentiful? And what makes you think that those countries will accept them?

      --
    16. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by homer_s · · Score: 1

      I didnt know it was THAT hard to apply for citizenship for each of those towns in Illinois.
      You are close.

      It is easy to 'apply for citizenship' in each of these towns in IL. It is also easy to move goods and services from/to each of these towns. And we are all better off. No one is "stealing jobs", no one is "transferring wealth".
      The same is true for IL and CA or IL and AK for that matter.

      It is not so easy to gain citizenship between nations. And it is not so easy to move goods and services between nations.

      Do you see the problem yet? Here is a clue:

      Go to Google earth and see if you can find the difference between the line that separates Woodridge,IL and Darien,IL and the line that separates USA and Mexico.

    17. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Nice religious argument. It always hurts to have to admit you're wrong after years of self harm. Also, i have to point out that this:

      It's true that the US is the only country dumb enough or crooked enough to allow anyone from anywhere to come and work here, but everyone else in the countries-that-matter realm has strict rules about that sort of thing.
      marks you as one of those who was complaining about not being able to get your 'fair share' when your country prospered, because of all those 'damn foreigners'. You're also technically and legally incorrect.

      tl;dr Enjoy your fail
    18. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by homer_s · · Score: 1

      I'll take a wild guess here that you don't live in Detroit.
      But I do know of a single mother here in IL who could buy a much safer car for a lot less because of outsourcing. Since she paid less for the car, she doesn't have to work overtime to make the car payment.

      Guess she is one of those evil people who benefited from outsourcing at the expense of the hard working auto union employee.
    19. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can we rate posts as "shill?"

    20. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Outsourcing is only a good idea if its done *properly*. I know that if that if I buy your aforementioned drill from Skill or Black & Decker or any other reputable company, I'm probably going to have a tool I will be able to use for years to come. I also know that the gasoline I'm purchasing has to live up to a certain cleanliness and octane rating.

      Granted, I could always buy the 8 dollar drill from The Dollar Tree store that starts smoking and grinds to a halt after the first 3 times I use it or I could go across the border into Tijuana and buy gasoline that makes my car sputter and spew smoke.

      The problem occurs because companies don't EVER outsource with the idea of quality in mind, they always outsource with the idea of saving a couple of bucks. Left to their own devices, they will always go for the lowest cost solution. The result in this case will be shitty parts, bad quality and absolutely nowhere to turn when you have the inevitable problem with your purchase.

    21. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Otter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You can't defend outsourcing by redefining it. Nobody concerned about outsourcing is referring to domestic trade, that's a total straw man!

      Use "offshoring" to refer to "foreign trade, especially between vastly unequal economies". That's not what "outsourcing" means, and it's silly to accuse people of redefining a word they're using correctly.

    22. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by andy_t_roo · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing is ok as long as, as a country, you can afford to pay people overseas for something you can do yourself. Hopefully you will do this by offering something more substantial than the ever decreasing US$. - if everything is outsourced, how will you pay for it?

    23. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by XorNand · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I work across the street from Comerica Park. Not everyone from Detroit is still deluded into believing that a life-long career in manufacturing is still viable. If fact, I would say that the bulk of the people here have learned that first hand. My father was a tool and die maker and while he really enjoyed his trade and made decent money, he warned me as a young child not to follow in his footsteps. Every year he watched CNC machines take over more of what he used to do by hand. He quit after 25 years and went into real estate. Shortly thereafter, even the CNC machines disappeared as his former employer folded as the work moved to Mexico. It hurts, but thus is the way of progress.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    24. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know the difference between "Outsourcing" and "Offshoring"? A company can very easily "outsource" jobs to others in the US. Another company can set up shop in another country and "offshore" tasks to people outside the US while keeping the jobs within the company (not outsourced). Which would you prefer?

      Outsourcing has been around forever. Hiring another company to keep your grounds groomed. Having FedEx deliver your packages. Companies hire others to do work more efficiently all the time.

    25. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Trillian_1138 · · Score: 1

      Would you all please stop arguing? Everyone knows that once you get outside of Chicago you're not going to find anything worthwhile anyway! (With the possible exception of Ikea, as noted above.)

    26. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Atario · · Score: 1

      It must be very fatiguing to willfully and consistently conflate the term "outsourcing" with the concept of offshoring. Dell sending their call center to Amarillo (or even Lansing) is vastly different from sending it to Hyderabad.

      They really are two different classes of activities, and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

      --
      "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
    27. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't know the meaning of the word 'outsource' then look it up.

      We do not 'outsource' every day. I never did make databases, or cars, and certainly haven't reared cows to produce milk, so when I buy milk at the shop, or download Postgresql, I am not outsourcing anything.

      Outsourcing, implies a change in the process. Where once a manufacturer made something, they now contract another company to produce that item for them.

      Your simplistic arguments might fool many people, but they do not enlighten any.

    28. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by CBravo · · Score: 1

      marketing, distribute, design and services?

      --
      nosig today
    29. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by vidarh · · Score: 1

      People get what they pay for. And people are clearly demonstrating that as much as they complain about offshore call centers, are fairly large part of the market continues to buy from these companies because price is more important to them than avoiding those call centers episodes. So while the customer appreciation of the call centers goes down, presumably enough people appreciate the overall value of the product enough to keep buying them.

    30. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by maxume · · Score: 1
      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    31. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Hopefully you will do this by offering something more substantial than the ever decreasing US$. - if everything is outsourced, how will you pay for it?

      If everything was outsourced, we would each have our own distinct business feeding into the global economy. Corporations would become virtual entities collecting a set of goods and services from each set of individual entrepreneurs to build a product, and therefor, there would be full employment, with everyone in jobs that actually made a difference and thus were more rewarding, the world would be richer and we would have more stuff. Oh wait, its kinda like the world that we can see approaching now, if we set aside our fears, embrace change, and not let the end of a depression in commodities prices cause us to erroneously assume that the entire world economy is melting down, when in fact, its actually getting better.

      --
      This is my sig.
    32. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 1

      It must be very fatiguing to willfully and consistently conflate the term "outsourcing" with the concept of offshoring. Dell sending their call center to Amarillo (or even Lansing) is vastly different from sending it to Hyderabad

      Economically speaking, its not different at all.

      --
      This is my sig.
    33. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by EMeta · · Score: 1

      The dollar is headed from hero to zero, and once there, the currency and lifestyle disparities between us and our outsourcing vendors (that got us all of this near-free stuff) will be gone.

      This is a very strange argument to make. The declining dollar is the one great force against offshore outsourcing. Perhaps it would not surprise you to think that if the dollar drops another 20% against world currencies that our exports will grow more than 20% and our imports will shrink more than 20% (and thus our domestic spending grow higher).

      As far as the lack of disparities in lifestyle between us and other nations, well, good! We spend a lot of money in aid (and rightly so) each year trying to get other countries to a decent standard of living. Certainly our trade treaties need to come with working condition standards, but hundreds of millions of people in China living above the poverty line is not a bad thing.

    34. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Nexx · · Score: 1

      You had me until you mentioned Ikea as "possible exception" to "not going to find anything worthwhile" :P

    35. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Wrong. You can't automate technical support and a bunch of other things.

      Jobs ARE being lost to outsourcing- and to declare that they're all just being lost to automation is to delude yourself and to attempt to delude others.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    36. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but you cannot argue that an Indian telephone support outsourcing will result in a better customer appreciation.

      I could. But, whether or not the call center delivers better service is another matter. It's really up to Dell.

      I for one used to actually recommend Dell on the basis of, yes, their computers were a bit more expensive, but they had excellent service and were better. But that was back when people felt like they had to call all the time. Now, when people buy computers, they look at the circulars, see a sale at Best Buy or Walmart or Costco or Sams Club, and go and just grab one.

      --
      This is my sig.
    37. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Guess she is one of those evil people who benefited from outsourcing at the expense of the hard working auto union employee.

      It's not just the unions that lead to the woes of the big three. Management of these companies made some pretty stupid decisions too.

      --
      This is my sig.
    38. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with you. Outsourcing is a very bad deal. While it has the allure of temporarily deflating the cost of goods and services, it is, in the end, a direct assault on the lower and middle class. Because companies can now outsource to other nations without such pesky problems as labor laws or a living wage, we are quickly seeing the working class gains of the last few decades evaporate.

      But is the working class actually -poorer-. That's the question. If you argue on the basis of wages, yes, but if you look at what can be bought with them, then the answer is no.

      50 years ago, the biggest food problem in the USA was malnutrition, and now, it is obesity.

      50 years ago, people perhaps had one or two family radios. Now, they have radios than they can count. They have radios in their car keys, remote controls, routers and more.

      50 years ago, people did not have TVs. Now, people have more TVS than they need.

      40 years ago, people did not have what they have today, and 30 years ago, they did not, and even 20 years ago. People have a lot more -stuff- than they had before. Even houses, cars, etc, are all bigger.

      Just look at the increase of energy consumption per capita in the USA. I don't think it has ever gone down.

      --
      This is my sig.
    39. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by homer_s · · Score: 1

      Yes they did. Like bending over to the unions. The shareholders deserve to lose their investment for employing those clowns.

    40. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by maxume · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I should have qualified it, I meant manufacturing jobs.

      Also, popular usage would suggest that you aren't a citizen of the state of Texas, you are a resident of Texas and (probably) a citizen of the United States.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    41. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by BarefootClown · · Score: 1

      [Outsourcing] means "we don't make stuff but want people to think we do while we just slap our label on things." The problem here is that you're working on the theory that "manufacturing" is the only way to add value to a product.

      That couldn't be further from the truth.

      Pick any company--we'll pick on Dell, since they're the subject of the thread, but the theory works equally well for your neighborhood grocer--and consider what value they bring you.

      A product. That's nice. In fact, it's the reason we're looking to engage in commerce in the first place: we want a computer, Dell has a computer.

      But Dell--or your grocer, if you want a box of cereal instead of a computer--doesn't just provide "a computer." They provide a computer right now, when you want it. You don't have to wait for custom tooling to be built (or wheat to be milled to flour, mixed with other ingredients, baked, and packaged). They provide a whole computer, instead of parts, saving you both the assembly, and--far more importantly--the (considerable) effort of brokering deals with all of the various vendors. Do you want to call Intel, nVidia, Micron, Creative Labs, Seagate, and 3Com every time you build a system?

      Further, companies add value by grading and standardizing parts. Whether you think the quality is high enough or not, you have to admit that it is at least consistent. Companies put considerable effort into making sure of what they get; can you evaluate a shipment of parts yourself to assure quality? How much effort will that take, and how much time? Yes, they get fooled from time to time by counterfeiters--check out some of the leaky capacitor problems--but larger companies have A) greater resources to inspect, and B) more clout if somebody does try to pull a fast one.

      Local stores (i.e. not mail order) add utility of place: you can go pick up your box of Chump-O's, or whatever strikes your fancy, down at the corner of 36th and Main, instead of having to go to the factory in Georgia (or wherever), and while you're there, get apples from Washington and oranges from Florida.

      Bottom line is, "making stuff" isn't the only way to provide value; in fact, it's one of only dozens. "Slapping our label" on it means that we've done something, even if it's just providing a convenient point of contact, and that's valuable.
      --

      "Make it ten--I am only a poor corrupt official."
      --Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains), Casablanca

    42. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the UK is just as stupid. You can accept a job in a certain position with a company, only to arrive on the first day of the job to be hold "that you had only expressed an interest in that position", and see the job that you were going to do, to be given to a foreign worker. And if you do complain, they give you two weeks of what you were suppose to do, then fire you.

      Don't worry - those types of company are already half-way through their death spiral.

      The mantra of employment in the UK: "Any job is yours unless of course, a migrant wants it."

    43. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by mikael · · Score: 1

      If workers are given the funding, time and education to retrain and relocate, that isn't a problem. But the closure off the dominant employers in some areas, meant there is no-one to sell services to.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    44. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a ridiculous argument, based on absurd conclusions that rely on redefining "outsourcing" as you see fit for any given situation, rather than the current social/cultural meaning.

      Using a stapler is outsourcing? I figured it was called "using a stapler."

      Wow, silly me.

    45. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      Because companies can now outsource to other nations without such pesky problems as labor laws or a living wage, we are quickly seeing the working class gains of the last few decades evaporate. A way of framing it in which you neatly ignore that the reason those people don't have the kinds of protection you do: because they can't afford it. Yet, anyhow.

      The reason we developed these protections was not some sort of inherent moral superiority; it was because we became rich enough that we could make choices unavailable before.

      But look at South Korea as an example. Through extensive trade, they have gotten richer, and picked up a lot of the rights that they lacked. And by trading with them, we've gotten richer too.

      Or look at Japan. A smoking, post-fascist wreck after the war, they rebuilt to the extent that in the 1980s, half of everybody was running around shouting, "ZOMG JAPAN WILL DESTROY US!" But we trade as much or more with them, and overall nobody is sweating that now.

      Outsourcing is a very bad deal.

      You probably mean offshoring. When you go out to a restaurant or buy a frozen pizza, you are outsourcing cooking. Outsourcing is just another way of doing division of labor.

      Of course, the recent corporate fashion for outsourcing and offshoring, like any fashion, frequently leads people to do idiotic things. No argument there. But that's not an indictment of trade, but American corporate culture.
    46. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      Jobs ARE being lost to outsourcing- and to declare that they're all just being lost to automation is to delude yourself and to attempt to delude others. Net, outsourcing creates jobs. Mainly it moves them around, though. You're just not counting them as jobs if you don't like the people who get them.

      The main cause of job destruction is indeed automation. Historically, almost everybody worked on farms. Thanks to improved tech, most of those jobs are gone. That freed up a labor pool for all sorts of things, especially industrial production. Most of those early industrial jobs are gone now too, thanks to further automation.

      And that's important here because although jobs are getting destroyed all the time, we keep finding new things for people to do. Unemployment goes up and down some, but there is zero reason to think that the loss of a few tech support jobs that didn't even exist ten years ago are substantially different than the jobs lost at every new invention and new trade opportunity since the cotton gin.
    47. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Xonstantine · · Score: 1

      In that vein, outsourcing a call center might actually result in -better- customer service. If a place in India has 200,000 people answering the phones, they are going to get the economies of scale that even Dell could not possibly get. If your goal is economies of scale, then yes, off-shoring to an Indian call center will likely result in your company saving money in the short run while burning bridges with potential repeat customers.

      But if your company goals and selling point is best-in-class customer support, then probably not so much. And many of the ballyhooed benefits of off-shoring are grossly over-rated, and I speak from first hand experience. In a software development off-shoring model, you get a lower overall FTE cost in exchange for a longer time to market and a lower quality of delivery.

      In the call center world, you get people with poor English skills and frustrated end users. Dell's motivation is that, well, these customers have already paid us their money. The problem is, when it comes time to buy a new computer next year, these same folks might pay an extra $50 to get a computer made by someone else who didn't offshore their call center folks to India.
    48. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Xonstantine · · Score: 1

      If Ford did not outsource, for example, it would have to make everything from the drills for the oil, the refineries for the gasoline, the machines to make the steel and the chips and the plastic, really, recreate the entire economy and in doing so lose the efficiencies that come with shared costs. Oh yeah, forgot something. How well is Ford doing these days? Last time I checked, not so well. When your exchange is lower quality in exchange for a better looking bottom line, Wall Street may love you for a while, but eventually the consumer figures it out and moves to another company.
    49. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, forgot something. How well is Ford doing these days? Last time I checked, not so well.... When your exchange is lower quality in exchange for a better looking bottom line, Wall Street may love you for a while

      You should check again. Ford's actually a good stock to pick, and its funny, because of the opposite of what you say. Ford is investing more resources into its cars to improve their feature set and build quality. Consumers are noticing, but Wall Street is non-plussed at the moment.

      Ford's new cars are being well received. Unlike some their 1980s dreck, the Focus, Fusion, Edge and Mustang are all good cars. Lincoln is actually starting to get something of an identity back. And...the F-150 remains a highly regarded pick up, if you want such a thing.

      The same thing is taking place at GM. GM might be an even better stock pick because GM isn't carrying nearly the debt that Ford is, and GM's product renaissance, again, investing more into building better cars, is beginning to pay dividends. Car magazines do not laugh at GM or Ford small cars the way they did before. The Chevy Cobalt is a -good- car, and 10 years ago, the conventional wisdom was that Americans could not make small cars anymore (although Chrysler's Dodge/Plymouth Neon was actually a wonderful car to drive).

      --
      This is my sig.
    50. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Xonstantine · · Score: 1

      Your post doesn't really contradict my point. It takes years to build a brand reputation, but very little time to destroy it, and one of the fastest ways to do so is the "race to the bottom" of shaving costs by reducing quality, either in the final product or the support of that product.

      Your two examples, Ford and GM, are sitting over a rapidly declining percentage of the US and global market, largely due to inroads by Toyota, which has built a carefully crafted brand revolving around reliability, and Toyota is making good inroads into the truck market as well (and I own a F150, for what it's worth).

    51. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that vein, outsourcing a call center might actually result in -better- customer service. If a place in India has 200,000 people answering the phones, they are going to get the economies of scale that even Dell could not possibly get.
      Apparently, you've never had a conversation with an Indian that barely speaks english passably calling himself "Bob", giving horrible advice, being unable to comprehend what you want (or explain properly what you're going to actually get), and making it so you don't WANT to call support again. Because if you HAD, you'd understand why outsourcing support is the dumbest idea in the history of dumb ideas.

      If all support took was a pre-typed script, we wouldn't NEED humans on the other end. We could just solve all tech support problems with just automated help lines. Unfortunately, what we wind up with is automatic help lines with difficult to understand humans on the other end. Truly the worst of both worlds.

      I don't think the reaction in America is so much against all outsourcing as it is against outsourcing that decreases the value of a product or service, or removes jobs from Americans without providing a noticeable benefit to ALL parties involved. You're right that companies outsource a lot of things, but the tendency to just instantly outsource without consideration to consequences for (soon to be ex) employees and customers these days is really getting out of hand.

      It's not that I'm against outsourcing, or that I'm even against globalization. I'm (like most Americans, I'd wager) just against mindless management drones that feel outsourcing is always the panacea for all their profitability woes.

    52. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Your post doesn't really contradict my point. It takes years to build a brand reputation, but very little time to destroy it, and one of the fastest ways to do so is the "race to the bottom" of shaving costs by reducing quality, either in the final product or the support of that product.

      I don't disagree with that at all. I always preferred Dell even if they were a bit more expensive because their service was -excellent-. I like Apple for the same reason.

      But, if Dell wants to turn themselves into Walmart Computer Company (which is what the outsourcing is really all about), then, yeah, they will make more money in the consumer space... but, just like years of bad Chevy's trashed Cadillac, so too will hoards of cheap Dell PCs trash them in the enterprise.

      There will be lots of happy people, I'm sure, buying a cheap Dell from Walmart or Walmart like stores where they couldn't have bought them before. But, there won't be people like me spending $2,500 on a Dell PC or a Dell Server, just because, its like, any more than I would hypothetically buy a Yugo Limosine, and I certainly wouldn't tell anyone that Dell is a premium brand any more, when it is not.

      --
      This is my sig.
    53. Re:Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race to the Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our system isn't a race to the bottom. It is a race to what people want. People want computers at the cheapest possible price and they do not care about tech centers or even support.

      Frankly, this is bullcrap! Many, many times I say to myself "I would pay for more quality... but I can't get it!" I can pay more, but I can't get any better quality. Many of the people I service computers for have tried the "support" offered by Dell (and others, not fair to single Dell out). After lots of frustration and no solutions, they call me and many times they spend more for my hours than they spent on the system. If there was a more expensive system they could buy that would provide honest-to-God support then they would choose it. They tell me that many times. But it simply does not exist. In the case of computer tech support, the race to the bottom is over: winners- Dell, HP, Microsoft and all that can afford their own tech support dept; losers - Mom, Pop, and everyone else!

      How many developers recommend using MySql or Postgres or even Linux over some solution developed in-house.

      As a consultant, I have recommended these things many times. But it has always been as a move to in-house, where problems can be fixed and enhancements be added by the very company using them, rather than replacing an in-house solution. In every case, it was to replace a proprietary solution with little or no customer support, certainly no consideration of features/enhancements needed for a specific business and no vendor responsibility beyond "you bought it, you own it".

      While I won't argue with a lot of the rest of your statements (dramatic increase in the standard of living in much of the world etc.) the problem is that everyone in the business world sees only one solution now and THAT is the "race to the bottom". There are other ways to compete profitably but no one wants to hear them.

  21. something Dell neecs to consider by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    not everybody buying a PC is a first time buyer, take me & lots of others, i recently bought a new LCD monitor (wide screen) that can do 1680x1050 and i don't need another monitor, i already have a decent keyboard & mouse, if anything all i want is a new motherboard & CPU combo, but sometimes i dont want to build my own but a new tower with a great motherboard & CPU sounds great providing the motherboard has a Linux compatible chipset (especially ethernet and audio) and upgradeable - PCIe is a must nowadays, i search around at newegg & tigerdirect but i dont always want to build another = Hey Dell! show me something that makes buying a pre-assembled system from you just as good (maybe better) that what i can get from newegg or tigerdirect, if Dell can do that then they would have captured a chunk of the market share that made newegg & tigerdirect successful...

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:something Dell neecs to consider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the idiotic rambling paragraph without any logic, sentence structure, or cohesive thought. As such, we at Dell feel that you would fit in perfectly with our Business Planning and Development department. Let me know if you are interested and when you will be available for an interview.

      Cheers,
      Michael Dell

  22. still boycotting Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I keep old postcards from Dell on my desk. Here's one:

    DELL MAIL-IN REBATE

    Dear Consumer:
    Thank you for participating in this promotion. Unfortunately, we could not honor your request because of the following reason:

    YOur request was postmarked beyond the eligibility period of this promotion. [BULLSHIT!]

    BTW the rebate was for 150 USD, which was MY MONEY that probably went into Michael Dell's Pebble Beach CC Membership Fund instead. Yes, this was from several years back. No matter.

  23. After 12 years, our agency stopped purchasing Dell by Jameson+Burt · · Score: 1

    Until a year ago, the workstations everyone of my agency's employees used
    came from Dell.
    Before Dell (in the early 1990's), we had problems with companies like Micron and Compaq.
    Now, for a couple years, we have had problems with Dell; eg,
    my computer is on its fourth motherboard in as many years,
    and I know if I leave my computer on 24 hours a day
    that its motherboard will burnout.
    Dell has replaced every one of our agencies motherboards on our Dell computers,
    but they keep burning out.
    For our 1000 personnel, over the last year,
    we no longer buy Dell, but buy HP workstations.

  24. Expensive options by Dzimas · · Score: 4, Informative

    My experience is that customizing a Dell always costs an arm and three legs. Upgrading RAM costs twice what it would to buy retail, and please don't tell me that a 320 GB hard drive costs $100 more than a lowly $160 GB model. They make money hand over fist when small/medium business purchase customized machines (I've seen co-workers add on $1000 in not-so-necessary option), but the company has a much harder time with price-sensitive customers. I've purchased three Dells for home use over the past six years, and in each case I waited until they offered an extremely good deal and bought a minimally configured system and added my own memory, second hard drive and video card.

    Dell has been losing ground against other manufacturers, and one often sees off-the-shelf machines at Best Buy that offer better value and immediate availability. Part of the reason is that more and more buyers are opting for notebook PCs that are made in China alongside machines from HP, Acer and countless other competitors. In essence, Dell adds an extra layer of complexity to their manufacturing process by allowing customization of these laptops to occur once they arrive in North America. In the meantime, Acer is able to ship preconfigured systems directly to retail outlets without additional expense. The days of the big beige box are coming to an end, and much of Dell's business advantage centered on getting people to buy overpriced (and often unnecessary) upgrades that simply aren't feasible in a notebook form factor.

    1. Re:Expensive options by BarneyL · · Score: 1

      My experience of Dell in the UK is that the extras are expensive if you use their web site.
      Giving them a phone call and asking them to price up your requirements tends to wind up far closer to what you would expect to be charged. Even better is the "what can you give me for £XXXX" approach which I've bee told by Dell sales people allows them to pull in the best bargains they can offer.

  25. Re:After 12 years, our agency stopped purchasing D by clifffton · · Score: 0

    Gotta love those GX260's eh? Glad those are only 3 of the 600 PCs I take care of! The new Vostros look like eMachines (inside and out), but the mobos are at dead stock ATX ones you can get at "Fred's computers and screen doors".

  26. Well, that sucks by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    I've bought several Dell's in the past, and been happy with the driver support and things

    My latest purchase is about a year-old Inspiron E1705 with a GeForce 7900GS, C2D, 2GB RAM.

    Every Single pre-selected system I've ever seen of theirs doesn't work for me. I have strange needs - I don't need a 600GB hard-drive, that's what my GigE is for. I don't need a whopping-huge screen because I need a faster processor. I don't need 3GB ram installed because I need a faster processor.

    Basically, I order a system built for what I need it for. I don't want to (and haven't had to) pay for things I don't use. If they change that, I guess I'll need to go HP... anybody else have suggestions?

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    1. Re:Well, that sucks by toddestan · · Score: 1

      ... anybody else have suggestions?

      Build your own? Failing that, try a local whitebox store. Most of them will put together whatever you want from standard, off-the-shelf parts.

    2. Re:Well, that sucks by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Ah, forgot to mention it's a laptop. High-end gaming/development laptop...

      Believe me, I'd build if I could. Last time I spec'd out a machine on NewEgg, I got a C2D extreme, 8800gtx, 260GB drive for under $1200

      But, anybody know of a build-your-own laptop? You supply the processor, motherboard, drive(s), graphics card......? That'd be nice

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    3. Re:Well, that sucks by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Barebone notebooks exist, but most of them are pretty close to complete notebooks, missing just the parts that are pretty easy to change out anyway like the memory and harddrive. But it might be worth checking out if you need more customizability than what Dell, etc. offers. Newegg doesn't carry them (I think), but here's one I found with a quick search (at Amazon, of all places):
      http://www.amazon.com/MSI-1637-B001US-15-4-Barebones-Notebook/dp/B000RZFKGW

  27. Re:After 12 years, our agency stopped purchasing D by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    One of my first computers was a Dell. A 4MHz PC-AT that had a turbo button that could send it to a blazing 8MHz! It was a fine machine, and I never had a single problem with it for several years. Of course Dell was one of the most expensive PC's you could buy, second only to an "original" IBM machine. However since the mid 90's I have heard nothing but complaints from Dell owners - apparently they sacrificed quality when they decided to drop the price. There's no reason at all for an electronic device to fail for YEARS after the initial burn in period, unless it's poorly designed or made with dodgy components (or your electric company sucks or you get a lightning strike). Yet most Dell owners I know, including the computer lab at my alma mater - regretted their choice.

    Meh, I wish them luck redesigning their business, but the only people who buy "Dell" nowadays are the ones swayed by the media hype.

    I still build my own PC's, ever since the day of the 386, and have never had ANY problems.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  28. Dell doesn't sell computer kits! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just looked through about twenty pages of searches for products with the word kit at dell.com, and the only things I saw were things like parts kits for rack-mount equipment. There were no computer kits.

    I think that AC just owned you!

    -- Proud unregistered user since Oct 1998

    1. Re:Dell doesn't sell computer kits! by Nimey · · Score: 1

      See the previous AC. If you've read the BOFH stories, you know that "kit" is .uk English for "equipment".

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:Dell doesn't sell computer kits! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PROTIP: ownage requires comprehension.

  29. At least get your insults right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh wait, all those people will live in a different country. Racist much? That's not racism, that's nationalism. What country a person lives in doesn't say anything about their race.
    1. Re:At least get your insults right. by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 1

      Oh wait, all those people will live in a different country. Racist much? That's not racism, that's nationalism. What country a person lives in doesn't say anything about their race.

      Off topic: Racism and Nationalism (and many such "isms") are the same exact idea working in the same exact manner, the only difference is the object of discrimination. So while gramatically AC's point is true, I believe the "spirit" of GP's comment stands.

      On topic (hopefully!): Commercial entities' raison d'etere is to make money. If Dell is shifting from it's previous business model towards a different one, chances are that they had some financial bigwigs and tech people looking through a bunch of numbers (statistics, trends, historic behavior, etc) to make the decision. Not all decisions that we dislike or can't understand are wrong.

      If they saw any money in the future for that market I'm pretty sure they would keep a brach dedicated to custom-built H/W. The fact that Dell doesn't do this tells me that it doesn't fit into the way they wish to conduct business. After all, that kind of market is comprised mostly of whiners like us slashdotters, and we (in a broad generalization) never seemed to like their offerings much.

      --
      +Raider of the lost BBS
  30. Intel IT & Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The rumour was that ~8 years ago Intel was looking around for a new laptop manufacturer. I believe this is when Intel was making the desktop to laptop switch.
    They desperately wanted Dell to supply all PCs for corporate use. However, Dell just couldn't make enough PCs.
    IBM could. So Intel became an IBM shop when they transitioned over from desktops to laptops.

    It doesn't hurt that IBM Thinkpads are very modular and easy to replace component by component.

    1. Re:Intel IT & Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a person who has taken apart several Thinkpads and also other laptops, there is nothing particularly modular or serviceable about any of them. It's a royal pain in the ass to change anything, dozens of tiny screws that need sharper screwdrivers than ordinay ones, dozens of plastic clippy things that break, and once you get past that there's another layer of more shit, and when you put it back together you discover the thin ribbon cable that connects to the display is loose and you have to start all over.

      They are all crap. I advise not paying any money for any of them until they are cheap enough to be disposable.

  31. Ron Garriques/Motorola Connection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Many former and current Motorolans will wonder if this has anything to do with Ron Garriques joining Dell. Maybe he'll run Dell into the ground just like he did at Motorola.

  32. Re:thats right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why I always bottom.

    Rob Malda
    Pants are optional, but recommended for you.

  33. Re:After 12 years, our agency stopped purchasing D by El_Oscuro · · Score: 1

    I have 3 Dells in my household, as well as a couple at work. I pretty much run on Dell everywhere. I am writing this on a Ubuntu Dell. I mean, their support is craptastic, like everyone elses. But I have been running Dell for 5 years and never had any failur#64vg

    ******** NO_CARRIER *******

    --
    "Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
  34. Sumbission is flamebait? by thealsir · · Score: 1

    Does anyone here get the same feeling that the submission is flamebait? Why is outsourcing production and assembly a necessarily bad thing, again?

    --
    Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
  35. Ah yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nearly all econ books deal with hypothetical economy's and all are either open or closed. FEW econ books consider what happens when govs. play with it. In particular, China has the yuan relatively fixed to the dollar. In addition, they make it easy to export to America, but not for us to export to them (in fact, they make it damn difficult).

    1. Re:Ah yes by New_Age_Reform_Act · · Score: 0
      --
      "The New Age. The New Beginning."
  36. Customization was Dell's great draw by ancarett · · Score: 1

    Two of my four current computers are Dell (they'd all four be except for I have one current and one retired work computer that I was required to buy from IBM) and what I loved from Dell was the ability to customize. I never see a standard configuration with the video card and RAM that I need (yet I don't want to spend a premium on Alienware with that funky desktop grill which has the added ability to give my two kids nightmares).

    I can understand the economizing aspects, but I really think that Dell's going down the wrong road, abandoning what made it stand out from competitors and, instead, trying to beat HP and others by adopting their selling strategies.

    --
    ancarett, historian and zombie gamer
  37. Killing PC gaming! by Doug52392 · · Score: 1

    This is why some people (not me though) think PC gaming is dead. Let's see some random PCs from Dell:

    Dell Inspiron 530:
    Video Cards:
    Integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 3100 (Can't run shit)

    Dell XPS 210 (so-called "Performance PCs")
    Video Cards:
    Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator 3000 (Yet again, horrible shitty integrated cards that CANT RUN SHIT)

    Dell XPS 630 (finally!)
    Video Cards:
    nVidia GeForce 8800 GT 512MB (finally, something that can RUN GAMES!)

    So 2/3 of the desktops Dell sells will NOT run any games, but the ones that cost over $1,100 dollars will? And you HAVE to buy that? Wow, I wouldn't be suprised if newegg saw profits rise over this!

    So that's why PC gaming is "dying", most average PCs use those fucking cheap integrated "graphics" cards that can't run anything!

    1. Re:Killing PC gaming! by Mr3vil · · Score: 1

      You act as though this is some new thing. This was nothing new 10 years ago. Pre-boxed systems always had poor choices for hardware if you were a gamer, but were acceptable if you were a typical consumer. PC gaming is not dying, it continues to be the realm of the super hardcore gamer as it always has been. Nothing has changed the fact that PC Gaming has a much higher cost of entry than consoles. Not only that, but the gamers that are on a budget don't buy pre-built systems anyway. 90% of us do DIY builds. And the other 10% have deep pockets and will purchase an Alienware, Voodoo, Falcon Northwest, or an XPS 720. Oh, and for the record, Dell offers the 8600GT as an option on the Inspiron 530. And there's nothing really stopping you from buying your own video card afterwards and installing it yourself, there's no "Warranty void" sticker on the side panel, and the PSU is a standard ATX part.

  38. Deep Doodoo by deanston · · Score: 1

    Remember a story a few years ago where Dell basically threatened some city/county in the states that they won't build a plant there unless the government help pay for it. And now they're dumping off those workers that they used as an excuse to get corporate welfare ("we create jobs").

    The only thing companies like Dell knows is how to do is play with margins, skim quality, cut worker cost to create a business all for the bottom line for the short term. Their problem is that there are a 1000 other companies around the world now that can put commodity parts together better than they can and for less cost.

    Dell and companies like it are nothing special. They create nothing of real value in the long run. They invent nothing. They innovate nothing. They can't even provide basic service when service industry and not manufacturing is about the biggest thing left. It's no wonder their boom and bust follow the same trend and short life span as the dot-com and housing meltdown.

  39. Deeper Disguise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Ah yes, the slashmyth that shareholders aren't US! People who bought stock, or have a mutual fund. People who have a pension or other retirement plan. How many here have even read the prospectus they send out to shareholders, or voted in a meeting? It's easy to have a scapegoat. If it can work for third world countries like North Korea and Iran, then it can work for slashdot? Yeah! It's all the rich folks fault that you're apathetic.

    1. Re:Deeper Disguise? by JoshJ · · Score: 1

      If I have 100 or even 1000 shares, I have less than 0.1% of a say on a company. Usually there's a small number of shareholders that have a supermajority, a bunch of employees that make up a fair bit of what's left, and the public is effectively shut out of all decision making. It'd be like if the Republicans had 90 Senators, 400 Representatives, and the White house, but claim that the Democrats "have a say". Technically, sure; but practically they don't. (This is just an example, you may reverse the party alignments or refer to third parties or whatever. The point stands.)

  40. Re:Billions of cheap labor in the planet. by enjoyoutdoors · · Score: 1

    It is amazing to me how a lot of our current economic theory is built on "wishful thinking. It is pretty simple to see what will happen with globalization. There are Billions of cheap laborers in the world labor pool. Economic theory would simply indicate that will lower wages dramatically. You need $15 an hour to live, 5000 others in the world will do your job for $2 an hour. Eventually wages will go up. But we are much more likely to end up with lots of losers and $4 an average hour wages. If we place our country against 2cd world labor we simply end up with second world conditions in much of our country. Ultimately.

  41. Took longer than I expected... by wolferz · · Score: 0

    I've been waiting for this. Dell is making all the mistakes that Compaq and HP made in the mid 90's. They stared by doing away with quality customer service and support and now they are doing away with quality computers. Wonder who is going to replace them.... who is the next Gateway?

  42. Alienware != Dell by adolf · · Score: 3, Informative

    Alienware is owned by Dell, but that doesn't mean that they act like Dell.

    My wife recently bought a nice (though low-end, by Alienware standards) desktop computer from them. Though the ordering screens are similar (as well they should be - Dell's web-based ordering is rather slick), and credit for both companies is through Dell Financial Services, the similarities ends there.

    The Alienware case is a regular ATX case, with a regular ATX backplate and regular ATX mounting holes, and is large enough to accept bloody any motherboard, whereas Dell uses a strange-ish quasi-Micro ATX design without a removable backplate. The motherboard itself is an off-the-shelf model (Foxconn, in this case), not some weird Dell special. The front panel connectors (including those for the large number of fancy LEDs) are compatible with regular ATX boards, instead of Dell's non-standard monolithic connector. There's a plethora of drive bays, with all of the hardware needed to use them included, whereas Dell seems to take great joy in including only as much hardware as is needed to assemble that particular system (on the low end of things, at least - Dimension 2350 and 2400 machines have provision to hold a number of 3.5" hard drives, but there's only enough hardware included to mount exactly one. The other bays are physically absent.). The price was very reasonable - about $100 more than equivalent parts from Newegg.

    We had weird issues with the Alienware's extra LEDs on day 1. Called tech support, and without waiting in queue got a real human (in America!), who spoke real American English, had a real name, and who actually had at least half a clue. They sent a new part, which didn't fix the problem. Called back, again immediately got a real human, who dispatched both more parts and a warm body to install them. Problem solved.

    And, sure, it'd have been better if the system didn't need any service, but I did feel pretty good about the whole process. It seemed that Alienware wanted to solve my problem, instead of just force me to jump through hoops.

    Meanwhile, I loathe to call Dell support. One of the hinges on my laptop broke (which was reasonable enough after 2 years of hard use), and I had to wait for 20 minutes before some girl in Bangalore came on the line who only wanted to talk to me about reinstalling Windows XP. I had to fight with her for about 15 more minutes in order to get transferred to someone with enough clue to understand the simple problem and dispatch parts. And this with their premium support package!

    So, yeah: They're the same company in that they're owned by the same people. But that heterogeneous ownership doesn't mean that they're at all similar in operation or quality.

  43. North Carolina Plant Job Cuts? by The+Urmanator · · Score: 1

    Anyone have any insight regarding the impact on North Carolinians who are still forking over incentive $$ to this very wonderful company? Last April, we were assured our Winston Salem plant would not be impacted. Dell is allowed 40% job cuts to still qualify for our outrageous incentive programs. With no new hiring in the past 7 months and these drastic changes being made, job cuts at the North Carolina plant seem inevitable.

  44. where to begin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...man, not sure what flavor you like, but you have consumed 55 gallon drums of the globalist thieves kool aid. I will assume you are quite young as well, gen x or y.

    OK, first off, lets get real *today*. They HAVE been doing things exactly their and your way with outsourcing everything and the economy is collapsing. Read some *&^ing damn headlines at least. Two, historical data points: Mortgages used to be ten years as common,now they are 30-50 or even interest only, and typically take 50% of peoples net income, when they used to be around 25% tops before major outsourcing started. Car loans were 12 months, not 60 or 72. A typical even lower paying blue collar single income was enough to support a family with multiple kids, college education for them, vacations and savings (we are at NEGATIVE savings now in the US, even the "great depression" era had higher savings), and now it takes TWO incomes to achieve parity with that. And yes, most of those jobs had full bennies, medical, retirement, all of it. How do I know this? Unlike the younger guys here, I was working then and enjoying a robust well diversified economy. I'll tell you right now you have been betrayed and I am incredulous that you embrace getting ripped off! Wake up! You've been brainwashed man, get a grip. During the outsourcing boom we went from largest creditor nation to now the largest debtor or dead beat nation. Our "debt" now extends to the unborn generation to come.

    The US is freaking bankrupt! Read between the lines and just look at reality! Stop listening to those wall street shills and their sock puppet politicians! It's all over but the slide to second world status. They are running on fumes and inertia now, with over 30 billion a day going in to bailout the rich wall street assholes who caused all of this. They cook the books on all the stats, reconstructed M3 (google for it) has inflation running 2-3 times as high as they admit to. Unemployment-real unemployment-is in double digits and rising fast, they keep it artificially low by changing the rules on how they count it. How the FUCK can they claim tens of thousands of new construction jobs were "created" this past month when the lenders are slammed shut tighter than a cat's asshole right now and thousands and thousands of homes and strip malls and office space are sitting empty, with the owners dropping prices every other day? The banks are so backed up with foreclosures they are letting people slide just so they don't have entire blocks sitting with empty houses for the copper thieves to hit. Freaking Lowes and Home Depot are hurting, so where's all this construction going on? I could go right down the damn list but I won't right now..it's bad like that most all over now.

    In short, everyone who hasn't been brainwashed knows the CO$ is a freaking stupid cult, well, so is the globalism cult. All it has done is make the top 1% wealthier and left everyone else holding their debt.

    And you think this has been a good idea...sheesh... And they WILL abandon "you" when you are no longer useful to them, and all those foreigners are going to STOP selling you cheap trinkets when you no longer have anything of value to trade for them, and believe me, it won't be long before that FRN stash you have is about worthless. They'll be trading with the places that provide them with raw materials they need. They will abandon the US market once they no longer need it, replacing it with internal markets and tangibles trading partners, not printed up pieces of paper traders. They only did that for some years while they were buying up machine tools, go back and research what china, inc has been buying for the last 25 years, machine tools, factories and raw materials and energy, and IP they just outright steal constantly. And they built up their infrastructure with it. Now for the second phase, and we have just started it.

    Basic historical economy, been proven over and over and over again: you can NOT printing press your way to wealth. It works for a short time..but not

    1. Re:where to begin... by vidarh · · Score: 1
      It didn't bother reading most of your post, but two points:

      Mortgages have gone up in length because people are prepared to commit longer to get better properties, or to stay in more desirable locations. For what I'm paying to own a house in central London I could buy a house that would be many times the size of what a typical two income family could afford a few decades ago.

      As for cars, you don't have to go very far back before most people couldn't afford even a single car. Now many households have two, three or even more. That, and the fact most people don't pick the cheap low end cars that would be comparable to what they would've been able to buy decades ago, is why the length of car loans have gone up.

      The fact that people are willing and ABLE to take on increasing loan burdens is generally an indication of wealth, when subtracting blips like the incompetent banks going into the sub-prime market.

      I, because of the salary I'm on, could if I wanted to get a mortgage over 32 years at about 5 times salary. When I grew up, my parents weren't doing badly, but banks in Norway at the time would never grant loans to "normal people" at over 2-2.5 times salary of the main income earner + maybe half of the second earner, and rarely more than 20 (apart from a government backed one that offered 30, which was considered exceptional).

      Despite that, I'll end up paying substantially less in terms of percent of my income in mortgage payments over my lifetime than my parents did, for properties that are larger and better standards. When they were 30, they bought a small 2-bed flat in the suburbs of Oslo. When I was 30 I bought a large 3 bedroom house with a garden i London in the middle of a property boom.

  45. Re:After 12 years, our agency stopped purchasing D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That has to be the worst haiku I have ever read.

  46. That applies to 90% of managers.... by cheekyboy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    All great companies ever created were created by engineers and run by engineers.

    Many great companies have been driven to destruction by control freak managers with zero ability to know technology.

    Not to say that there arent control freak engineers out there making mistakes, but they at least create something aswell, not just create lies.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    1. Re:That applies to 90% of managers.... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All great companies ever created were created by engineers and run by engineers.

      While many were, there are a significant number that weren't. Apple for example - Woz certainly is a tech guy but not an engineer and Jobs certainly isn't one.

      Many great companies have been driven to destruction by control freak managers with zero ability to know technology.


      Understanding technology (in an engineering sense) is not necessarily a requirement to do well at running a tech company; I think understanding technology's impact on people and how it can be used effectively is a more important skill.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    2. Re:That applies to 90% of managers.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Understanding technology (in an engineering sense) is not necessarily a requirement to do well at running a tech company
      Of course it's not a requirement. Having your good-old-boy network put you in charge is the usual requirement. If you want to grow a tech company, you'd better understand the engineering side of things. MBA jargon will only get you so far.
  47. dell is closing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    those assembly plants you are talking about. Was in the news two days ago. They are cutting thousands of jobs-not moving them, cutting them.

  48. Faster than walking into a shop? by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    Is dell really that much faster than walking in a large shop supplier, making your order, paying and getting a box in 15mins?

    Maybe its because its lazy and easy to get hardware from one supplier, but then again the contracts state that ram+hd upgrades also be done by DELL, at 3x the retail price
    of those parts ofcourse.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  49. Cutting Back by EEPROMS · · Score: 1

    I have seen this out sourcing cutting back to basics method of compensating for lack lustre management from so many US based companies now that Im surprised companies still do it. GM and Ford both did exactly the same as Dell while Toyota who now totally thrashing them built more factories and became bigger and better. Dell should stop thinking of cutting back and saving costs but look at ways of becoming more inventive and increase your size thus restricting your competitors ability to strike at you. When you down size your company you do to some degree become more competitive but you also lose the ability to increase your market share and if your competition is clever they should attack this weakness.

  50. Dell To Save 100% Of Annual Costs by nick_davison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The goal: $3B USD savings by 2011." If all you're after are cost reductions, Dell could save 100% of their annual costs by simply closing up and going out of business.

    Profit, remaining the difference between income and costs however, isn't as simple as "reduce costs, increase profit"... you stop selling things, you stop getting the income too.

    Speaking as a manager who purchases regularly... Dell's god awful love of non standard components to try and drive customers back to them for upgrades is next to inexcusable. I tolerate it because office machines can be bought to the spec I need without cracking the case. To now be told, "Oh? You need a high end processor and ram but don't care about the rest of the system? Sorry, that only comes in our high end system and you now have to pay for media burners, graphics cards, hard drives and Vista Ultimate that you don't want."... Especially when I can't buy a lower end system and swap out the processor because the old motherboard won't support it and can't swap out the motherboard because the case uses non standard connectors and fan mounts... I'm going to be going straight to the competition.

    So, yes, Dell will cut $3B in costs. Part of that will be the costs of all the systems they used to sell to me. Along with the profits on those systems too. Assuming the same holds true for others, they successfully cut off their $4-5B nose to spite their $3B face.
  51. Not really, no by TeXMaster · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Most of my family, me included, bought customized Dell laptops online. I was first, in 2002, then my father followed (different model), then a couple of cousins of mine, then my sisters and finally my mother. Overall, I think we bought no less than ten laptops from Dell, as private users. And although some of us bought models that other relatives had bought already, we didn't really care about being able to touch and hold the laptops before making the decision: customizability when buying online, on the other hand, was an extremely important point.

    For example, I finally went with Dell because it was the only one that offered, in Italy, the option to buy a laptop with an American keyboard instead of an Italian keyboard, with an English version of the O/S instead of the localized one, and with a European electrical plug instead of the Italian one.

    My laptop has served me rather well in these 6 years, despite my very rought handling, and requiring a bare minimum of upgrades and replacements (new cooling fans, more RAM, a new hard disk).

    Now I'm starting to look around for a new system, and I found out that Dell doesn't offer any of the customization options I chose Dell for in the first place. When I bought my mom's laptop, it was extremely difficult to find a system that offered XP instead o Vista, now they are completely gone. I can't choose the O/S language, I can't choose the keyboard layout, and I can't choose the plugs. I'm going to look elsewhere, most definitely. A Lenovo, probably.

    --
    "I'm never quite so stupid as when I'm being smart" (Linus van Pelt)
    1. Re:Not really, no by Allador · · Score: 1

      I cant speak to any country version other than US. But here, someone like you should be buying from the Small & Medium Business site, where you can still get XP.

      And that way, you stay away from the crappy consumer level stuff.

  52. You're entitled to that sense of entitlement: by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1
    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    1. Re:You're entitled to that sense of entitlement: by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      You're not entitled to a sense of inordinate privilege for doing nothing or the minimum possible, which is what has happened, for example, with a lot of people over the last decade. Witness the house flippers, who figured they'd just buy houses, maybe slap on a coat of paint and mow the lawn, and suddenly they had "earned" $100k. Or what are now known as RealtWhores - the people who were the first link in the chain in putting people into houses they couldn't afford, and who certainly did NOT deserve 6% for "getting the listing". fortunately, the internet, bank auctions of REO houses, etc., have put half a million of those destructive leaches out of "work".

      You're also not "entitled" to 2 airplane seats for the price of one as a consequence of stuffing your face for the last 20 years. Yes, "a waist is a terrible thing to mind" as the NAAFP (National Association for the Advancement of Fat People) keeps reminding us, but hey - "You made your Wonderbread - you eat it!" has its' consequences.

      Entitlement means fairness - you're entitled to that which is just or fair. Not that which, without justification or merit, seeks to impose an unfair burden, or obtain unjust compensation, or unearned enrichment from others.

    2. Re:You're entitled to that sense of entitlement: by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      Entitlement means some patronizing form of fairness provided to you by the government, the source of all that is right and fair.
      (Actually I agree with you 100%, just throwing you a jape).

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  53. The Iron Lady did not salvage Britain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Iron Lady did not salvage Britain. She offered a safe haven in Europe for pirates and crooks to store their loot. Yep, some of the locals have benefited from that. Those who mix with crooks and are willing to turn a blind eye often do.

    If regulation is the problem, then why not deregulate entirely, and go back to the slave trade? Low labour costs, cheaper production etc....

    If a well regulated state has open trade with an unregulated state, then it will be the regulated state which will loose out. That's what we have seen these last 40 years as cheap imports from China have undermined our local well regulated industries and our democratic tradition along with them, and boosted those of China where individual liberty is no great consideration.

    Don't imagine that you are only importing goods from China when you trade with them. Their government has a vastly greater say in world affairs as a result of this trade, and the say of the US has decreased proportionately.

  54. You speak the truth by __aailob1448 · · Score: 1

    It was a pleasure to read your post, sir or madam*. Thank you for making this blog worth visiting today!

    *Just kidding, I know there are no women on /.

  55. In the end... by kahrytan · · Score: 1

    Dell shares fell 38 cents to $19.95. ... as I said, In the end. This change doesn't sit well with investors it seems. And in the end, nor will Dell's customers. I just hope it doesn't kill Dell.com/open sells.

    --
    \
    1. Re:In the end... by mgblst · · Score: 1

      I don't really think a 2% price share reduction is much of an indication of anything, maybe in response to it not beating HP in global sales (it still leads in US sales), certainly to a reaction to it new proposal.

  56. Now is the time to create a computer line by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More and more virus are showing up in computers and parts coming from China. This includes hard disks, bios, and even in chips (including several ASICs, which indicates a more systemic approach is happening; i.e. it is not just a single hired contractor that was able to slip it in). Somebody who creates a manufacturing line that does not utilize these infected parts would go far with western govs. And if done in an automated fashion, it could be much lower cost than what is coming from China.

    I suspect that said company could even take over companies like HP and Dell by focusing on Customer Service, in addition, to having lower costs and a SECURED system.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Now is the time to create a computer line by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      I suspect that said company could even take over companies like HP and Dell by focusing on Customer Service, in addition, to having lower costs and a SECURED system. And who would you trust to do that? If its an American company(s) It would only be secure to the manufacturers and media companies, and be full of DRM restricting what you can/cant do. ( remember "trusted computing"? )

      An *open* system is what is needed. With companies making their $ off the fabrication into silicon of the open and testable standard, and support/distribution.

      Do you have a reference to this ASIC virus statement? Not that i don't believe you, id like to read that.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    2. Re:Now is the time to create a computer line by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      I suspect that any line like this will offer up both. In particular, Openbios and/or coreboot will probably be considered the best approach for security AND lower costs.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Now is the time to create a computer line by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Id go so far as to also open up the cpu and support chipset. Remember, you can embed DRM/Backdoors/TPM in either if you control/hide the designs

      While some companies might freak at the idea, i still think that there would still be money to be made. Its not like everyone can make their own silicon. ( ya, FPGAs are an option, but not for everyone )

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  57. Any color you like by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    As long as its black.

    Well, lack of choice does decrease manufacturing costs.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  58. Their true roots by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Was selling poor quality white box clones that they stuck their name on.

    Really bad stuff. But it worked out for them as all the other companies buying the same garbage to 'rebrand' back then are long gone..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  59. Oh Really? by tjstork · · Score: 1

    It is amazing to me how a lot of our current economic theory is built on "wishful thinking

    No, its based on really proven fact. Outsourcing is really nothing more than specialization of labor. Originally, the manufacturing unit was the family. Then, some of those functions were outsourced to other families and thus villages and then cities were born. Eventually cities outsourced to other cities and thus states and then nations were born.

    Along the way, somebody got screwed because of outsourcing, someone always does. But, last time I checked, we all have computers, in fact, we're building computers for third world countries. We all have cars, bikes, broadband, and the radio that seemed almost magical a scant generation or two ago is now pervasive as another feature of everything we own. Thus, in terms of sheer wealth, in terms of sheer things owned, we have way more than we had even ten years ago.

    You can't go back on outsourcing without the wealth it brings, so, the question really has to be asked? What level of outsourcing do you want to dial back to? Do you want to go back to the 1960s, the 1970s? The Amish people in Lancaster PA do their best to maintain manufacturing at the village unit, and they have horse and buggies and still must buy reflectors from outside the village. Do you want horse and buggies?

    Really, the thing is, when people condemn outsourcing, they never really are specific as to what they think should or should not be outsourced. I buy American cars and American products, but, what's an American car these days? I would be willing to bet that the memory for the onboard computers are made in taiwan, probably using machines designed and built by Siemens in Germany, possibly using an embedded system designed by the British and integrated in design by American engineers, and yeah, probably containing a fair number of parts manufactured in China.

    There's nothing national anymore, and even if there could be that way again, how fair would that be for countries that do not have various resources in either raw materials or population on their country. Last time we tried national manufacturing, the economic system completely and repeatedly collapsed, and instead of peaceful oceans we had oceans stuffed with massive battlefleets as various countries tried to grab the best access to raw materials and talent as it could.

    Viewed from a distance, the world wars and then the cold war can really be viewed as the consequence of a national manufacturing. We Americans had the insight to use our successful in those wars to more or less impose a free trade regime on the world, with the idea that if trade were unhindered, there would be no more major wars.

    -THIS POLICY HAS WORKED-.

    Sure, there are plenty of little wars, and even though what's happening in Iraq is costly and unfortunate, overall, there have not been cities being firebombed and 100,000 people being killed in a single night. You don't see armies of 20,000,000 or men mobilized to duke it out. I mean, even now, the US Army of 2008 is -SMALLER- in manpower than the British Army of 1916.

    So yeah, it sucks that we might lose our jobs to some muk muk that can do it cheaper, but it beats the shit out of doing what previous generations did - world wide panics, a world war, millions killed, global economic meltdown, then, ANOTHER world war.

    It is so historically evident that war is an inevitable consequence of the restraint of trade, that, I should think it madness to seriously contemplate a significant restraint of trade at all.

    --
    This is my sig.
  60. Change != Good ? by maxrate · · Score: 1

    Maybe Dell changing their policies to a lesser number of configuration options will end up hurting them even more. I really couldn't care who makes a computer, as long as it's quality and I can configure it the way I want to. My last two notebook computers have been Dell's - only becuase Dell enables me to get almost exactly what I was looking for (and with a serial port too!). If they gave me less options, I might buy a ThinkPad or an HP - or the way things are going, maybe even a MacBook pro. That new 1920 x 1600 LCD Backlit screen looks nice.

  61. I guess you didn't buy a service contract by DragonHawk · · Score: 1

    Dell - will argue to the enth degree about predicted drive failures alarms from their raid controllers... we just call them dead now so they'll send replacements. The drives take about two days to show up which is about enough time for the drive to finally fail. I guess you didn't buy a service contract, then. We always buy the "Gold" level contracts when buying Dell. For servers, that means on-site parts and service within four hours, and they've never failed to deliver. I was once working a consulting job in Boston, and the parts were at the door within 20 minutes -- before I got off the phone with Dell.

    Dell makes this all quite clear when buying their stuff. Indeed, I think for servers, they select the mid-level contract by default, so you actually had to go out of your way to downgrade the level of service you were choosing.

    You got what you asked for, and now you complain.
    --

    dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
    I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
    1. Re:I guess you didn't buy a service contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copy that, Gold support from Dell is still excellent. I wouldn't be brave enough to claim 20 minutes turnaround, but 2hrs sounds about right. Once, I received the parts before their techie arrived. I had already had everything installed by the time he arrived, he was there to watch it boot-up ;)

    2. Re:I guess you didn't buy a service contract by binaryspiral · · Score: 1

      Each server is purchased with a service contract, albeit its up to the customer to decide on 24hr or 4hr. (stand by - double checking my facts) In this comparison it was two servers with the highest support contracts.

    3. Re:I guess you didn't buy a service contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      From my support contract with Dell:

      2-Hour On-Site Response with 6- Hour Repair Service

      Technician aims to arrive on-site within 2 hours after completion of phone-based troubleshooting and endeavours to repair the hardware within 6 hours of dispatch.

        Available 7 days/week, 24 hours/day - including holidays.
        Available within defined 2 hour response locations.
        Available on select Dell models only.
        Emergency dispatch in parallel with troubleshooting
      available for Mission Critical Severity Level 1. fact.
  62. Actually, by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    You do not have to be in charge of the design center. All you really need is the manufacturing line and control of the equipment that is used to build it with.

    As to open chips, well, hummmm... First things first. Set up a profitable line that will sell to feds, as well as companies. It should have a motherboard, built with chips from a secured company/location. Once that is done, then you can point out what is used and what is not. From there, you can move into open chips as well.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  63. Re:After 12 years, our agency stopped purchasing D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet my bottom dollar, (well bottom uro), that you office had a bunch of Optiplex GX270/GX280's. These are prone to the dreaded bulging capacitor problem http://www.news.com/PCs-plagued-by-bad-capacitors/2100-1041_3-5942647.html. We had a bunch of them pop over the last year or so. It's unfortunate, but Dell have been pretty good to us since.

  64. Agree by tjstork · · Score: 1

    If workers are given the funding, time and education to retrain and relocate, that isn't a problem. But the closure off the dominant employers in some areas, meant there is no-one to sell services to.

    I agree with that.

    The other problem, too, is that the USA seems to be the only nation that really doesn't have nationalistic consumer shoppers. Japan comes to mind as the biggest offender. Everyone has a hard time making it in Japan largely because Japanese consumers are outrageously nationalistic when it comes to shopping. There's not some law that the government could pass that would open things up... it's that the people there will only buy Japanese stuff.

    Europeans, too are the same way. For decades, Europeans often have been saying that American stuff is crap, and yet, if you look at any honest study of defects per item made, European stuff is surprisingly laggard when it comes to quality. Jaguar is legend for it, but, BMW owners too often have a ritual of taking the car to the shop for teething problems. I know two guys with M3s, and they both went to the shop for this, that and the other.

    SO, with that in mind, despite my idealistic and strident defense of the theory of free trade, and, being enormously mindful of the heavy price paid by American manufacturers for it, I do often ask - is the USA the only country that actually tries to trade fairly, and if so, then, really what's the point of free trade? Maybe it would be better to carve the world up into manufacturing zones - like Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Americas.

    --
    This is my sig.
  65. I'm not ashamed to say by MeditationSensation · · Score: 1

    that I bought a Dell a couple years back when I just didn't want to put in the effort of selecting, shipping, and assembling a bunch of parts. The thing "just works". Of course, I was persuaded by a $315 savings e-coupon. :-)

  66. Outsourcing Gets a Bad Rap, Race for the download. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Our system isn't a race to the bottom. It is a race to what people want. People want computers at the cheapest possible price and they do not care about tech centers or even support."

    We want free software and free entertainment.

  67. Don't overlook "the Board" factor... by ibsteve2u · · Score: 0

    Don't forget that all of these CEOs also serve on each other's Board of Directors.

    They're not really "screwing up and leaving", they're just getting out of the way so that one of their friends and compatriots can take his or her turn at plundering the corporation.

    It pays to go to the right universities and join the right clubs and organizations...

    --
    Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
  68. I don't like unions. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have dealt with way to many of them and frankly I think they are more of problem than a solution.
    But your just a bit nuts.
    China is eating our lunch because.
    1. They pay slave wages.
    2. People are willing to are willing to pay very little money for crap. And people are less willing to pay for quality.
    3. China will dump lead, mercury, and any other nasty material you can imagine into the environment with out any really consideration of the out come.

    I am pro Nuclear power but I am glad that we do debate it's merits. I just wish that the fear mongers would stay out of it.
    I am not fun of environmental extremists but the air and water are a lot cleaner now then they where back in 60s.

    Unions are a pain but they are not the villain you make the them out to be. Yes some government regulations are a pain but they also have their good side.

  69. My fellow American.... by rts008 · · Score: 1

    You are the type that gives us a bad name globally.
    Your mistake is in assuming that the American version of the English language is the only one in use, or existence.
    I thought that it was common knowledge here on /. that the term 'kit' used in this context translates to 'equipment', or 'gear', or even 'toolkit'(eh:toolkit could be a dead giveaway here!). *says under breath* Stupid git! (my apologies to Monty Python)

    Remember where our English language came from. Not only that, but it is currently spoken over most of the globe, and I can assure you that outside of the USA, the version is most likely based on the current UK version.

    Open your eyes and mind, quit limiting yourself and those you may influence. Get informed.

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti