Slashdot Mirror


IT Snake Oil — Six Tech Cure-Alls That Went Bunk

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Dan Tynan surveys six 'transformational' tech-panacea sales pitches that have left egg on at least some IT department faces. Billed with legendary promises, each of the six technologies — five old, one new — has earned the dubious distinction of being the hype king of its respective era, falling far short of legendary promises. Consultant greed, analyst oversight, dirty vendor tricks — 'the one thing you can count on in the land of IT is a slick vendor presentation and a whole lot of hype. Eras shift, technologies change, but the sales pitch always sounds eerily familiar. In virtually every decade there's at least one transformational technology that promises to revolutionize the enterprise, slash operational costs, reduce capital expenditures, align your IT initiatives with your core business practices, boost employee productivity, and leave your breath clean and minty fresh.' Today, cloud computing, virtualization, and tablet PCs are vying for the hype crown." What other horrible hype stories do some of our seasoned vets have?

21 of 483 comments (clear)

  1. In Defense of Artificial Intelligence by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The bad news is that artificial intelligence has yet to fully deliver on its promises.

    Only idiots, marketers, businessmen and outsiders ever thought we would be completely replaced by artificially intelligent machines. The people actually putting artificial intelligence into practice knew that AI, like so many other things, would benefit us in small steps. So many forms of automation are technically basic artificial intelligence, it's just very simple artificial intelligence. While you might want to argue that the things we benefit from are heuristics, statistics and messes of if/then decision trees, successful AI is nothing more than that. Everyone reading this enjoys benefits of AI but you probably don't know it. For instance, your hand written mail is most likely read by a machine that uses optical character recognition to decide where it goes with a pretty good success rate and confidence factor to fail over to humans. Recommendation systems are often based on AI algorithms. I mean, the article even says this:

    The ability of your bank's financial software to detect potentially fraudulent activity on your accounts or alter your credit score when you miss a mortgage payment are just two of many common examples of AI at work, says Mow. Speech and handwriting recognition, business process management, data mining, and medical diagnostics -- they all owe a debt to AI.

    Having taken several courses on AI, I never found a contributor to the field that promised it to be the silver bullet -- or even remotely comparable to the human mind. I don't ever recall reading anything other than fiction claiming that humans would soon be replaced completely by thinking machines.

    In short, I don't think it's fair to put it in this list as it has had success. It's easy to dismiss AI if the only person you hear talking about it is the cult-like Ray Kurzweil but I assure you the field is a valid one (unlike CASE or ERP). In short, AI will never die because the list of applications -- though small -- slowly but surely grows. It has not gone 'bunk' (whatever the hell that means). You can say expert systems have failed to keep their promises but not AI on the whole. The only thing that's left a sour taste in your mouth is salesmen and businessmen promising you something they simply cannot deliver on. And that's nothing new nor anything specific to AI.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:In Defense of Artificial Intelligence by John+Whitley · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The people actually putting artificial intelligence into practice knew that AI, like so many other things, would benefit us in small steps.

      Actually, there was a period very early on ('50s) when it was naively thought that "we'll have thinking machines within five years!" That's a paraphrase from a now-hilarious film reel interview with an MIT prof from the early 1950's. A film reel which was shown as the first thing in my graduate level AI class, I might add. Sadly, I no longer have the reference to this clip.

      One major lesson was that there's an error in thinking "surely solving hard problem X must mean we've achieved artificial intelligence." As each of these problems fell (a computer passing the freshman calc exam at MIT, a computer beating a chess grandmaster, and many others), we realized that the solutions were simply due to understanding the problem and designing appropriate algorithms and/or hardware.

      The other lesson from that first day of AI class was that the above properties made AI into the incredible shrinking discipline: each of its successes weren't recognized as "intelligence", but often did spawn entire new disciplines of powerful problem solving that are used everywhere today. So "AI" research gets no credit, even though its researchers have made great strides for computing in general.

    2. Re:In Defense of Artificial Intelligence by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ERP could work if the vendors would realistically deal with GIGO.

      Unless you lock down the permissions so tightly that the system is unusable, your users will enter bad data. They'll add new entries for objects that already exist, they'll misspell the name of an object and then create a new object instead of editing the one they just created. They'll make every possible data entry error you can imagine, and plenty that you can't.

      We'd see a lot more progress in business software applications if all vendors would follow two rules:

      1. Every piece of data that comes from the user must be editable in the future
      2. Any interface that allows a user to create a new database entry MUST provide a method to merge duplicate entries.
    3. Re:In Defense of Artificial Intelligence by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Funny

      seriously, are you me?

      I don't think so but the possibility can't be ruled out without further investigation. Have you ever tried to expose a database application to users and subsequently lost all faith in humanity?

    4. Re:In Defense of Artificial Intelligence by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've never worked for a software company but as the "computer guy" I got to help move people from the "emailing spreadsheets around" workflow to basic MS Access database applications (I know just enough about databases to be horrified about the idea of using Access for critical business functions but it's better than Excel).

      As the maintenance manager of a factory I got to help the plant manager make software purchasing decisions. I've come to the conclusion that mid-sized to large corporations should just bite the bullet and hire their own programmers. If it makes sense to design your product and design your own assembly lines and design your own tooling, jigs and fixtures then it makes sense to design your own software. Any cost savings you can achieve by outsourcing to a more specialized company never seems to materalize.

    5. Re:In Defense of Artificial Intelligence by murdocj · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just out of curiosity... did you ever try to find out WHY people were making entries with invalid phone numbers? Is it at all possible that instead of your users being idiots, they HAD to make an entry, but the phone number was one piece of data that simply wasn't available?

      If I've learned anything over a lot of years of programming, it's that when your users absolutely insist on doing something contrary to what your program wants them to do, it's time to sit down and listen.

    6. Re:In Defense of Artificial Intelligence by turbidostato · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "We had a simple field on a form to "Supply a Telephone Number". The users didn't, so we used JS to validate they had filled it in."

      So instead of validation server-side you rely on validation client-side?

      "The more you Idiot-Proof a system, the smarter the Idiots become. Not smarter at actually entering the correct data, just smarter at bypassing the protections you put in place."

      Hummm... Why are your users entering such telephone numbers as 1111111? Are you *sure* they do it on mistake? Or might it be that they don't *want* to give their telephone number to you for their own valid reasons and you still didn't add the option "I don't have or don't want to share my telephone number with you"?

      I'm not sure which keyboard end is the idiot one in this case.

  2. Virtualization has worked by mveloso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not sure why virtualization made it into the potential snake-oil of the future. It's demonstrating real benefits today...practically all of the companies I deal with have virtualized big chunks of their infrastructure.

    I'd vote for cloud computing, previously known as utility computing. It's a lot more work than expected to offload processing outside your organization.

    1. Re:Virtualization has worked by VoidEngineer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having been involved in a business start-up for a year or so now, I'd have to disagree. Virtualization is indispensible for QA testing. Being able to run a virtual network on a personal PC lets me design, debug, and do proof-of-concepts without requiring the investment in actual equipment. Virtualization isn't just about hardware consolidation: it's also about application portability. Small companies have just as much need for QA testing, hardware recycling, and application portability as the large ones.

    2. Re:Virtualization has worked by digitalhermit · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I administer hundreds of virtual machines and virtualization has solved a few different problems while introducing others.

      Virtualization is often sold as a means to completely utilize servers. Rather than having two or three applications on two or three servers, virtualization would allow condensing of those environments into one large server, saving power, data center floor space, plus allowing all the other benefits (virtual console, ease of backup, ease of recovery, etc..).

      In one sense it did solve the under-utilization problem. Well, actually it worked around the problem. The actual problem was often that certain applications were buggy and did not play well with other applications. If the application crashed it could bring down the entire system. I'm not picking on Windows here, but in the past the Windows systems were notorious for this. Also, PCs were notoriously unreliable (but they were cheap, so we weighed the cost/reliability). To "solve" the problem, applications were segregated to separate servers. We used RAID, HA, clusters, etc., all to get around the problem of unreliability.

      Fast forward a few years and PCs are a lot more reliable (and more powerful) but we still have this mentality that we need to segregate applications. So rather than fixing the OS we work around it by virtualizing. The problem is that virtualization can have significant overhead. On Power/AIX systems, the hypervisor and management required can eat up 10% or more of RAM and processing power. Terabytes of disk space across each virtual machine is eaten up in multiple copies of the OS, swap space, etc.. Even with dynamic CPU and memory allocation, systems have significant wasted resources. It's getting better, but still only partially addresses the problem of under-utilization.

      So what's the solution? Maybe a big, highly reliable box with multiple applications running? Sound familiar?

    3. Re:Virtualization has worked by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, the funny thing is, real snake oil actually does what it was originally supposed to do. "Snake oil" comes from traditional Chinese medicine (as a cure for joint pain), and was made from the fat of the Chinese water snake, Enhydris chinensis. It is extremely high in omega-3 fatty acids (particularly EPA), and is very similar to what is sold today as fish oil. Omega-3 fatty acids (in particular, EPA) are now known to reduce the progression and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis.

      Now, in the US, a variety of hucksters took fats from any old snake (if it even involved snake oil at all) and made all sorts of miraculous, unsubstantiated claims about what it would do. But concerning in its original role in Chinese medicine, snake oil likely did exactly what it was claimed to do.

      --
      Look at me, still talking while there's science to do.
    4. Re:Virtualization has worked by publiclurker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about using VMWare to make sure you are not doing something decidedly stupid. I have VMWare images of every platform our software supports. I can easily verify that everything works as advertised without running all over the place snagging time on different machines. And if I encounter an issue on a particular setup, I can save a snapshot for later or restore the machine to it's pre-install state and try again.

  3. disappointing... by Known+Nutter · · Score: 5, Funny

    very disappointed that the word "synergy" did not appear in either linked article or the summary.

    --
    Beware of the Leopard.
  4. The Cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It has vaporware all over it.

  5. I don't see anything wrong with this list... by Jazz-Masta · · Score: 5, Funny

    We need to bring about a paradigm shift, to think outside the box, and produce a clear synergy between cloud computing and virtualization.

    1. Re:I don't see anything wrong with this list... by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Funny

      We need to bring about a paradigm shift, to think outside the box, and produce a clear synergy between cloud computing and virtualization.

      Damn it all, man. Your don't produce synergy! You leverage synergy. Please get it right will you? The sooner you do, the sooner you can return to your core competency and synthesize some maximum value for your investors. M'kay?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  6. Re:My Meta-assessment by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's a pattern here. Many of the hyped technologies eventually find a nice little niche. It's good to experiment with new things to find out where they might fit in or teach us new options. The problem comes when they are touted as a general solution to most IT ills. Treat them like the religious dudes who knock on your door: go ahead and talk to them for a while on the porch, but don't let them into the house.
         

  7. Thanks for linking to the print version by harmonise · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is a bit OT but I wanted to say that snydeq deserves a cookie for linking to the print version. I can only imagine that the regular version is at least seven pages. I hope slashdot finds a way to reward considerate contributors such as him or her for making things easy for the rest of us.

    --
    Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
  8. The crazy hottie by GPLDAN · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I kind of miss the crazy hotties that used to pervade the network sales arena. I won't even name the worst offenders, although the worst started with the word cable. They would go to job fairs and hire the hottest birds, put them in the shortest shirts and low cut blouses, usually white with black push-up bras - and send them in to sell you switches.

    It was like watching the cast of a porn film come visit. Complete with the sleazebag regional manager, some of them even had gold chains on. Pimps up, big daddy!

    They would laugh at whatever the customer said wildly, even if it wasn't really funny. The girls would bat their eyelashes and drop pencils. It was so ridiculous it was funny, it was like a real life comedy show skit.

    I wonder how much skimming went on in those days. Bogus purchase orders, fake invoices. Slap and tickle. The WORST was if your company had no money to afford any of the infratsructure and the networking company would get their "capital finance" team involved. Some really seedy slimy stuff went down in the dot-com boom. And not just down pantlegs, either.

  9. Those aren't all by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We used to play buzzword bingo when vendors would come in for a show. Some of my personal favorites:

    IT Best Practices - Has anyone seen my big book of best practices? I seem to have misplaced it. But that never stopped vendors from pretending there was an IT bible out there that spelled out the procedures for running an IT shop. And always it was their product at the core of IT best practices.

    Agile Computing - I never did figure that one out. This is your PC, this is your PC in spin class.

    Lean IT - Cut half your staff and spend 3x what you were paying them to pay us for doing the exact same thing only with worse service.

    Web 2.0 - Javascript by any other name is still var rose.

    SOA - What a gold mine that one was. Calling it "web services" didn't command a very high premium. But tack on a great acronym like SOA and you can charge lots more!

    All those are just ways for vendors and contractors to make management feel stupid and out of touch. Many management teams don't need any help in that arena, most of them are already out of touch before the vendor walks in. Exactly why they're not running back to their internal IT people to inquire why installing Siebel is a really BAD idea. You can't fix bad business practices with technology. Fix your business practices first, then find the solution that best fits what you're already doing.

    And whoever has my IT Best Practices book, please bring it back. Thanks.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  10. Why Artificial Intelligence may never exist by jc42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The most obvious counterexample to the "AI" nonsense is to consider that, back around 1800 or any time earlier, it was obvious to anyone that the ability to count and do arithmetic was a sign of intelligence. Not even smart animals like dogs or monkeys could add or subtract; only we smart humans could do that. Then those engineer types invented the adding machine. Were people amazed by the advent of intelligent machines? No; they simply reclassified adding and subtracting as "mechanical" actions that required no intelligence at all.

    Fast forward to the computer age, and you see the same process over and over. As soon as something becomes routinely doable by a computer, it is no longer considered a sign of intelligence; it's a mere mechanical activity. Back in the 1960s, when the widely-used programming languages were Fortran and Cobol, the AI researchers were developing languages like LISP that could actually process free-form, variable-length lists. This promised to be the start of truly intelligent computers. By the early 1970s, however, list processing was taught in low-level programming courses and had become a routine part of the software developers toolkits. So it was just a "software engineering" tool, a mechanical activity that didn't require any machine intelligence.

    Meanwhile, the AI researchers were developing more sophisticated "intelligent" data structures, such as tables that could associate arbitrary strings with each other. Did these lead to development of intelligent software? Well, now some of our common programming languages (perl, prolog, etc.) include such tables as basic data types, and the programmers use them routinely. But nobody considers the resulting software "intelligent"; it's merely more complex computer software, but basically still just as mechanical and unintelligent as the first adding machines.

    So my prediction is that we'll never have Artificial Intelligence. Every new advance in that direction will always be reclassified from "intelligent" to "merely mechanical". When we have computer software composing best-selling music and writing best-selling novels or creating entire computer-generated movies from scratch, it will be obvious that such things are merely mechanical activities, requiring no actual intelligence.

    Whether there will still be things that humans are intelligent enough to do, I can't predict.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.