Slashdot Mirror


Virginia Rometty Selected As Next CEO of IBM

itwbennett writes "IBM will start the new year with a new CEO. Virginia (Ginni) Rometty, who built up IBM Global Services, will be the company's first female CEO."

131 comments

  1. Get your breasts out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll guess she'll have to follow suit.

    http://www.smh.com.au/victoria/get-your-breasts-out-ibm-employee-sues-20111020-1m8ut.html

    1. Re:Get your breasts out by Cryacin · · Score: 3, Funny

      Can't wait to see her welcoming email! Which should arrive in the next 6 weeks or so, when her copy of Lotus Notes finally finishes starting up.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    2. Re:Get your breasts out by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Nine weeks. OS/2 has to start first.

    3. Re:Get your breasts out by swalve · · Score: 1

      Maybe she will fix that. IBM Services has been killing it, performance wise.

  2. Female? by atari2600a · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought IBM purely consisted of gay successful men. That's how their songs put it...

    1. Re:Female? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Common misconception. Back in the 50s, when those songs were written, everyone was gay. The world has changed a lot since then.

    2. Re:Female? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who says that she wasn't... *cough*... just a little bit more successful than the rest of the gay men? ^^

  3. RIP IBM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RIP IBM! I won't be sorry to see you go!

  4. A new CEO? So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where is the news in this?

    1. Re:A new CEO? So what? by blair1q · · Score: 0

      have you seen her?

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2011/10/25/virginia-rometty-named-next-ibm-chief/

      if that doesn't get the fapping noises going in your basement lair, you're no kind of nerd

    2. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Third+Position · · Score: 1

      That was a particularly flattering picture. This one, not so much. Photoshop? Who knows?

      --
      American Third Position
      Finally, a real choice!
    3. Re:A new CEO? So what? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      That's not photoshop. It's simply keeping a 20-year-old picture on file.

      For what it's worth, she's still not unattractive in the newer photo.

    4. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      You can see the anger stamped into her forehead, as if she were a Klingon or attacked by a Tostitos press.

    5. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > have you seen her?
      > http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2011/10/25/virginia-rometty-named-next-ibm-chief/ [forbes.com]
      > if that doesn't get the fapping noises going in your basement lair, you're no kind of nerd

      bitch please..

      i am a nerd used to reading 4chan... slashdot is where i go when my penis has become too sensitive..

    6. Re:A new CEO? So what? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Any nerd can fap to scat pr0n.

      This woman has the power to order the upgrade of Watson to achieve sapience.

    7. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who cares what she looks like. If you want pretty turn on the TV. What do you want, Kim Kardashian as CEO?

    8. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fapping? To that? Your standards are beyond poor- What, did Cartoon Channel run out of Teletubby episodes, big guy?

    9. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Peristaltic · · Score: 0

      Damn, man, she looks like Nurse Ratched.

    10. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Third+Position · · Score: 1

      As Oscar Wilde said - by the age of 50 everyone has the face they deserve.

      --
      American Third Position
      Finally, a real choice!
    11. Re:A new CEO? So what? by gandhi_2 · · Score: 1

      Looks like Val Kilmer in drag.

      But seriously.... I'm sure she's a very nice lady.

    12. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the age of 50 Oscar Wilde had a nice rotten skeleton face going. Anyone who is going to make a commentary on specific ages had better have survived to be that age, otherwise anything they say is pure rubbish.

    13. Re:A new CEO? So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    14. Re:A new CEO? So what? by zabzonk · · Score: 1

      >As Oscar Wilde said - by the age of 50 everyone has the face they deserve George Orwell, actually.

  5. Sounds OK to me... by linatux · · Score: 1

    Never heard of her until 10 minutes ago, but sounds like she should be able to keep IBM afloat - unlike HP

    1. Re:Sounds OK to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If she was the head of global services, expect them to under-bid and force out everyone else in the business, but not do any of the work (or product delivery) required by the newly won contracts, because they under-bid so far they can't afford it. Also expect any service to be done by the lowest bidder... on EVERY SEPERATE JOB, not whoever actually has training/capability.

    2. Re:Sounds OK to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I've seen, IBM RFPs are 2x what everyone else bids.

    3. Re:Sounds OK to me... by swalve · · Score: 1

      Depends on the market segment, I think. If you are a big customer (think government) looking to have someone support ALL your hardware, IBM is going to bid cheap. But I think if you want an app developed or to buy some iron, they leverage their name and charge big$$.

      If only they wouldn't outsource their call centers. I had a conversation last week with someone who learned their English from Agador Spartacus.

  6. End of a Era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And IBM begins collapsing in 3 2 1...

    1. Re:End of a Era by Third+Position · · Score: 1

      And IBM begins collapsing in 3 2 1...

      I don't know if IBM will collapse... but their stock sure did in the last 1/2 hour of trading. Wonder if that has anything to do with this news item?

      --
      American Third Position
      Finally, a real choice!
    2. Re:End of a Era by Fluffeh · · Score: 1

      Not really. A drop of $1 over a shareprice of $180 isn't a steep drop. In fact, most the market did somewhat fall that day. Looking at the monthly trend however, IBM and Apple are the only ones that have had a significant dip over the last month (google finance on IBM).

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    3. Re:End of a Era by funwithBSD · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not really.

      It has been very volatile lately, going up and down several dollars for no real reason.

      I am on calls 2 or 3 times a month where she is also on the call. She seems well liked by the technical side of the house and is very approachable.

      Won't catch me calling her Ginnie, I stick to ma'am and Sir for VP's and above if we are on the clock.

      Better her than some other female execs we have.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    4. Re:End of a Era by bws111 · · Score: 2

      IBM Closing price on Sept 23: $169.16
      IBM Closing price on Oct 25: $180.36

      I am not sure where the 'significant dip' comes from.

    5. Re:End of a Era by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Lets see. They offshored a number of their tech jobs to people that were not ready for it. They moved hardware production offshore and then were forced to sell teh divisions to the same ppl that were stealing them blind on tech. As it is, I suspect that had Palmisano remained at IBM for another year or two, he would have sold Watson to China.

      Sadly, rometty is not much different since she was at the core of the sell offs. The end of IBM was started 10 years ago.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re:End of a Era by Fluffeh · · Score: 1

      The GP is saying that their shareprice has sunk heavily due to the appointment of the new CEO who is female. I am saying that their shareprice hasn't dumped since the appointment. I did say that Apple and IBM were the two companies in the bunch that had a bit of a bad spell over the last month.

      IBM shareprice Oct 14th was $189. Now it is $180.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    7. Re:End of a Era by bws111 · · Score: 1

      That is the last 10 days, not month. If you look at the whole month, the price went up.

    8. Re:End of a Era by Peristaltic · · Score: 1

      Yep. 10 years ago, my IBM GS position went to Puna, India. I was offered something in Armonk, across the country from where I lived. Took the package, ended the unhappiest 3 years of my professional life, and never looked back. What a miserable, miserable place to work. 7 managers in 3 years.

    9. Re:End of a Era by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Sorry to heat that. I know others that got burned as well.

      I worked for IBM watson (via Colorado) back in 1996 ( or was it 94?) when akers was fired and Gerstner was brought in. At the time, we were about to open source OS2. Gerstner killed that idea quickly, which bummed me out. However, while it damaged OS2, IBM was brought back to being a decent a company. I was gone by the time that Palmisano took over and glad that I was. That guy has gutted the company.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    10. Re:End of a Era by swalve · · Score: 1

      Only if she goes all Fiorina and decides to change everything that makes IBM successful.

    11. Re:End of a Era by dpilot · · Score: 1

      Does anyone care to compare her with Carly Fiorina?

      That's the real disa^H^H^H^H check we need.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    12. Re:End of a Era by dpilot · · Score: 1

      That already happened, long ago.

      -----------------
      1 - Take care of your customers.
      2 - Take care of your employees.
      3 - The profits will take care of themselves.
      T.J. Watson, Jr.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  7. What does this mean for AIX and DB2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what does this mean for IBM's major products, like AIX and DB2?

    1. Re:What does this mean for AIX and DB2? by sexconker · · Score: 0

      So what does this mean for IBM's major products, like AIX and DB2?

      You'd have to tell me what those are and convince me that they're still relevant before I can make a decision.
      Actually, no you don't. Regardless of what you say, that decision will be "Nothing. They'll sit around doing what they do now, and eventually be phased out but it won't matter because anyone using them will have countless other options and was only using them because that's what they had years ago.".

    2. Re:What does this mean for AIX and DB2? by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 1

      If you don't know what they are you don't really exist in a major IT organization.

    3. Re:What does this mean for AIX and DB2? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      If you don't know what they are you don't really exist in a major IT organization.

      The point is AIX and DB2 are irrelevant. Anyone still using them is doing so because that's what they've used in the past, they're afraid of change, and they're willing to throw away money on a product that's barely better than the alternatives (and only in ways they'll never take advantage of). OR, they're one of the handful of organizations that actually do need big iron design, and since such organizations are so massive and disparate, the vast majority of people in the organization, even the tech guys, know nothing of their DB2/AIX/etc. installation.

      Shit is so back end almost no one sees it, and those who do are afraid to change anything. And if they're forced to change something, it won't be an issue because there are plenty of viable alternatives that cost less (or nothing), are infinitely more light weight, and don't require 3 old billy goats that no one ever sees to maintain it.

      Basically, WHOOSH.

    4. Re:What does this mean for AIX and DB2? by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 1

      Desktop support and web development aside, big companies use them for a reason. Power is still a viable architecture and AIX is a good OS. Not everyone can run their business on MySQL.

    5. Re:What does this mean for AIX and DB2? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Or he works for an organization less than 30 years old.

      I can't speak for DB2, but AIX is a crock of shit. The only reason anyone chose it back in the day was because Linux didn't exist.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  8. Schizophrenic America by RobinEggs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here we are celebrating another newly minted female CEO of a powerhouse corporation. Meanwhile, with the other side of our mouths, we're constantly bemoaning the fact that most Fortune 500 CEOs are greedy parasites, not to mention the large minority who seem to be sociopaths (and not in a figurative way, either).

    It reminds me of that small number of feminists who seem to view sexual liberation not in terms of respect, mature dialogue, and winning their freedom from chauvanism, but merely as the freedom for women to be as sex-crazed and/or misandropic as some men are chauvanist and misogynistic.

    Perhaps we shouldn't be so proud of women breaking into a job dominated by assholes? Are we assuming that women, unlike the men with whom they successfully competed to get these jobs, will suddenly be nice people when they're the ones on top? I try to understand when people say the pendulum is still swinging, that women need to make further explicit gains before we can just call it all equal, but I still wish we could reserve admiration and outright celebration for simply people who do good things, rather than continuing to break it out into Men and Women.

    At some point the lauding of the "first female" this and the constant keeping of score has to stop if you want to say you achieved real equality.

    1. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your presumption is that it's about equality. It's not.
      It's about women's rights and empowerment.
      You get rewarded for having a vagina today, and punished for having a penis.

    2. Re:Schizophrenic America by blair1q · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think we're supposed to assume that since she's female, she's less likely to be a greedy parasite.

      Unfortunately, Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina have forever destroyed that stereotype.

      It remains to be seen if Ms. Rometty is human as well as success-oriented.

    3. Re:Schizophrenic America by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Freedom includes the freedom to be an asshole. One of the standard stereotypes about women is that they're less capable than men in jobs which require making ruthless decisions. Now, personally, I think we'd all be better off if CEOs of both sexes were a lot less ruthless generally -- that is, if they felt some empathy toward and personal responsibility for the welfare of their employees -- but since that's not the world we live in, women have to show that they can perform in these jobs as well as the stereotypically nicer ones in order to be taken seriously.

      There's a flip side here; a good friend of mine worked for IBM Global Services until recently, and his view of the management of that division was ... well, let's just say that I doubt he considers this promotion to be cause for celebration. Rometty is just as legitimate a target for criticism just as harsh as that directed at any male executive who slashes jobs while taking enormous raises and bonuses; this too is a victory for feminism, even it looks a little backhanded.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    4. Re:Schizophrenic America by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      You get rewarded for having a vagina today, and punished for having a penis.

      And then you whine about it. Endlessly. How manly of you.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    5. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the standard stereotypes about women is that they're less capable than men in jobs which require making ruthless decisions.

      And yet my dating history, as well as the dating history of almost every male I know, is filled with countless examples of women so ruthless, that Machiavelli would curl up into the fetal position, sobbing, if he had any interaction with them.

    6. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, well.

      What's the manly way? Beat the crap out of her? Thats not really manly anymore.

      These days it seems that all we have left is watching sports and drinking beer.

      Women where I am are starting to like football, next they'll come for beer.

    7. Re:Schizophrenic America by RobinEggs · · Score: 1

      I'm just pointing out that some gendered double standards are better dissolved by raising gender x to the higher standard we once enforced only on gender y, than by simply saying "Gender y, you can act just like those fuckers over there now!"

      It's not some straw man; it's an analogy suggesting that maybe we should prefer men learn from the stereotypical woman in business rather than the other way around.

    8. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The wages are still unequal, even for the same jobs, so I wouldn't assume women are getting better treatment than men that way.

    9. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.megwhitman.com/

    10. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know, right? Anyone would think they were *people* or something.

      @GP: I find that people who view equality as a zero-sum game have rarely thought about the full implications of what they're saying. If you're framing the argument as 'everything women gain, men have to lose', you're starting from the base assumption that men *deserve that thing more*. "men inherently deserve jobs, political power, money, influence and the ability to make decisions about their careers, lives and bodies *more than women do*". Is that really what you want to say?

      Or, you could think about it for more than 5 goddamn seconds, and realise that there are plenty of ways that the empowerment of women can benefit us too, and that if played right, can easily be a win-win situation.

    11. Re:Schizophrenic America by freeweed · · Score: 1

      It reminds me of that small number of feminists who seem to view sexual liberation not in terms of respect, mature dialogue, and winning their freedom from chauvanism, but merely as the freedom for women to be as sex-crazed and/or misandropic as some men are chauvanist and misogynistic.

      Considering what women have had to deal with throughout history, and still continue to deal with today - this is a hell of a good start, if nothing else.

      The respect and dialogue can come later. In my experience it won't come at least until men understand that women CAN be sex-crazed in the first place. I shit you not, I had a conversation with a cow-orker the other day about "wifely duties". In 2011. I felt like I had slipped back 70 years.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    12. Re:Schizophrenic America by Arivia · · Score: 1

      They've been here for years.

      --
      The role of the writer is not to say what we can all say, but what we are unable to say. -Anais Nin
    13. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      @GP: I find that people who view equality as a zero-sum game have rarely thought about the full implications of what they're saying. If you're framing the argument as 'everything women gain, men have to lose', you're starting from the base assumption that men *deserve that thing more*. "men inherently deserve jobs, political power, money, influence and the ability to make decisions about their careers, lives and bodies *more than women do*". Is that really what you want to say?

      This is the slippery slope at best, or a strawman at worst, pure and simple. Your logic is as weak as the person you're attacking.

      Or, you could think about it for more than 5 goddamn seconds, and realise that there are plenty of ways that the empowerment of women can benefit us too, and that if played right, can easily be a win-win situation.

      Name three ways in which this has been proven with concrete results. Now. With cites, not anecdotes pulled from your ass.

      In addition, the whole idea of "empowerment" is a joke. Have you ever been on an interview board? Have you ever been involved in salary negotiations? The women who play hardball on the par with men make just as much if not more. In addition, those that are assertive (as with alpha males) are prone to find themselves leading, not following.

      Here's my logical fallacy for the day: "empowerment" is a code word for "it's too hard, we have to be competitive and assertive and it pushes us outside of our estrogen induced comfort zone, so we should be GIVEN said position."

    14. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice redefinition of 'empowerment' there. Empowerment is NOT the same thing as 'affirmative action' or imposing ratios. It's not 'giving minorities things they haven't worked for'. Empowerment is 'opening up opportunities to them that were previously closed for no reason other than their minority status'.

      There are some women who play hardball with the guys, and earn a lot of money. However, there are MANY women currently put off such paths by intense (often subconsciously applied) social pressure and bias. Empowerment is (should be) the process of addressing these pressures and biases so that women who DO have the ability aren't blocked by arbitrary obstacles.

      Women are persistently judged to perform equally to men when their gender is hidden, and worse when it is known (and to back that assertion up, one random cite out of hundreds: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/mckinley/notes/blind.html)

      It's interesting and telling, btw, that you seem to be assuming she was given the position BECAUSE she is a woman, not because of ability (apologies if this is not the case, but your argument only makes sense in that context).

      The benefits to men I am thinking of (of a less gender stereotyped society in general as well as less homogenous company boards) are things like:
      -increased range of career options open to men (I know many guys who would love to spend more time with their kids and would be happy to work only part-time to do so, but don't want to put up with the social stigma)
      -more recruitment into disciplines like engineering, computer science (and on the other side, things like nursing and teaching)
      -better exploitation of the talent available improving scientific progress etc
      -more diversity of opinion feeding into company strategies and decisions, hopefully leading to more robust economy ...and so on. I'm talking about theoretical differences of a shift in attitude, not figures showing e.g. that company X made more money after it appointed a female CEO.

    15. Re:Schizophrenic America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we're supposed to assume that since she's female, she's less likely to be a greedy parasite.

      *chuckle*

      Try telling that to a divorce lawyer or an ex-husband!

  9. A female CEO by baka_toroi · · Score: 0

    This reminds me of Homer working for Hank Scorpio (terrorist guy) to help him boost productivity: "Uh... Work harder!"
    What the hell will she do there?

    1. Re:A female CEO by Surt · · Score: 1

      Set the strategic direction for the company, make decisions that those below her are too afraid to, meet with the heads of business partner companies .... what do you think a CEO does in general?

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    2. Re:A female CEO by baka_toroi · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight. So, in order to become a CEO, you don't need to have solid technical knowledge, you just have to be "assertive", "proactive" and all that crap. Am I correct?
      I don't have a clue about the daily activities of a CEO.

    3. Re:A female CEO by Surt · · Score: 1

      No, at any company large enough to really warrant having a CEO, being technically capable of the work the business is in is almost certainly irrelevant. CEO is a strategic/interface role.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    4. Re:A female CEO by bmo · · Score: 2

      >no technical knowledge.

      She started as an engineer and rose through the ranks. Promoted from within. A rarity.

      Straight off you assume she's another Carly or Meg. I think you should take your stereotypes and shove them squarely up your arse.

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:A female CEO by baka_toroi · · Score: 2

      Stereotypes exist for a reason, but I certainly haven't given her a chance, so point taken.

    6. Re:A female CEO by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Sculley worked really well at Apple.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re:A female CEO by Surt · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that what made Jobs succeed as Apple's CEO was being a good homebrew computer engineer? What made him work out was being a perfectionist asshole who drove others to succeed.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  10. Promoting from Within by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    She was once the 99%. Hired as an engineer. Climbed the ranks.

    Why didn't the IBM board offer gagillions to some flash CEO from somewhere else?

    Good luck Ginni.

  11. Good riddance, Oinker Sam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To the tune of Jingle Bells.....

    Driving us insane
    With pay cuts and RA's
    To the bank he goes
    Squealing all the way!

    Playing with our lives
    Leaving tears and blight
    Wouldn't it be loads of fun
    to string him up tonight?

    Chorus:
    Oh! Oinker Sam!, Oinker Sam!
    How do you sleep at night?
    Why do I ask?
    A sociopath
    Cares for no one but himself

    Oinker Sam!, Oinker Sam!
    IBM is heading south
    Wouldn't he look great
    With his head on a plate
    And an apple in his mouth!

    Working overtime
    For this ungrateful swine
    What's a little heart attack
    If it helps the bottom line?

    No one to lend a hand
    My colleagues all were canned
    Our SLA's have gone tits up
    Say thanks to Oinker Sam!

  12. And, in related news... by Provocateur · · Score: 0

    The world ends tomorrow. Details at 11.

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  13. I hope she breaks the trend... by bogaboga · · Score: 1

    ...of former female CEOs, who have all been mediocre (think Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman). I wish her all the best.

    1. Re:I hope she breaks the trend... by Spy+Handler · · Score: 2

      she'll end up at HP too if she turns out to be mediocre...

    2. Re:I hope she breaks the trend... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      If she was all that mediocre, she'd already have been CEO at HP.

    3. Re:I hope she breaks the trend... by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      Or running for Governor or the Senate or some other public office.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    4. Re:I hope she breaks the trend... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Na. I bet HP would be sold to a Chinese company at that point. The executives would rather sell out than go down with that ship.

  14. IBM Services Company by Mr.Bananas · · Score: 1

    The new CEO is the old head of their services division and oversaw the PriceWaterhouseCoopers takeover in 2002. I think this means that in the coming years, IBM will make a lot more money with a lot less engineers, thanks to their lucrative services business.

    If you ask me, it's just a matter of time before the slow death of the server group accelerates into high-speed PC/consumer business style death.

    Hold that stock.

    1. Re:IBM Services Company by Virtucon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That was just one of the GSD failures. There was the Texas Data Center fiasco, which is now being re-bid.

      http://searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/news/2240031466/Texas-rebids-IBM-data-center-consolidation-project

      I'm sorry but IBM GSD is full of incompetent buffoons and making Ms. Rometty CEO will drive IBM into the ground. I would sell your stock immediately.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    2. Re:IBM Services Company by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      She headed IBM Global Business Services (GBS, sometimes referred to as IBM Global Services or plain services). It has little to do with GSD or the data center fiasco. I wouldnt start selling or shorting stock yet

      More on topic, this was more or less expected. The GBS division has become the cash cow, and has grown tremendously in the last 5-7 years.

    3. Re:IBM Services Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually she is an engineer by training: She has a BA in CompSci and EE from Northwestern. She was originally a systems engineer at IBM. Recently she has been involved in preparing Watson for commercial use.

      I'm just not sure where your concerns are coming from...the reality is far more interesting than what you propose.

  15. Congratulations by msobkow · · Score: 3

    Congratulations to Virginia Rometty on her promotion. The glass ceiling isn't shattered yet, but it's cracking.

    Is she going to be getting a 25:1 Canadian or Euro style pay package, or is she taking the hundreds to one ratio of many US executives that people are complaining about? The article doesn't say.

    IBM is a great place to work or contract. I really enjoyed the time I spent working on a project with them.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Congratulations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction, they're a great place to work and get laid off

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

      I'm very annoyed with this "the first X to do Y" stuff. Can't we just say that Virginia has the CEO position? Do we really need to go into all of the political correctness crap? Second, every time we do, we keep racism/sexism/whatever-ism alive just a bit longer. Third, females have been in positions of power before - positions more important than CEO of a company - and will do so again in the future. It is no longer a big deal. Fourth, it really cheapens the whole announcement by distracting the audience with the aforementioned BS.

      Please stop. We're better than this.

    3. Re:Congratulations by msobkow · · Score: 1

      I'll stop when the companies who try to acquire patents on technology they did not invent stop abusing the patent system, and fanboys stop trying to rewrite history. You don't have to read what I post.

      Like I care about the objections of an Anonymous Coward at all.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    4. Re:Congratulations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to read what I post.

      Oh, but I did:

      Congratulations to Virginia Rometty on her promotion. The glass ceiling isn't shattered yet, but it's cracking.

  16. The IBM Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if she'll be "getting her breasts out".

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/get-your-breasts-out-woman-sues-ibm-over-harassment-20111020-1m8ub.html

  17. Next stop: head up the USPTO. by jbn-o · · Score: 2

    And if David Kappos' recent move is any indication, her next big step is clear: head up the US Patent and Trademark Office when Kappos leaves. I'm guessing that IBM would love this move because there she can better serve IBM's interests against those of the public. Kappos, current USPTO Director, was former IBM vice president and assistant general counsel of "intellectual property" law. IBM holds the most patents. First-to-file undoubtedly helps large firms like IBM because large firms hire lots of lawyers to file all sorts of patent applications. The more patents IBM holds, the more IBM can cross-license their way out of any threatened patent litigation by threatening countersuit and then negotiating a patent license.

    1. Re:Next stop: head up the USPTO. by a_hanso · · Score: 1

      Didn't we sort the first-to-file vs. first-to-invent issue in a past story? I thought first-to-file was unambiguous and not open to legal challenge. A small time inventor who files first is safe no matter how large a lab/legal department a mega corporation has (assuming, of course, that the invention is valid). Where in the first-to-invent system, a large corporation with a large R&D department would be able to pull up various old/abandoned/half-baked proposals and claim to have invented it first. Of course I could be wrong. I'm a programmer, not a lawyer.

  18. I had high hopes that she would ... by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    be the next Gerstner. I just realized that she was fundamental to the offshoring of the company and the selling of the divisions as much as Palmisano. I predict that IBM is the next ATT and watson will be the next Bell Labs. Gutted for short sales in the market place.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:I had high hopes that she would ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stock is going to keep going up and up and up until finally the hollow shell of the company will collapse in upon itself.

  19. When I Went Through the Orientation by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    They said their priorities were their customers, their employees and their shareholders. In that order.

    Since that time I've seen them outsourcing their employees jobs, and I don't know who are their customers anymore. I've seen them lose some remarkable talent to "early retirement" programs. I've seen them sell division after division that were core components of their culture and their business. At one time I felt like even when I wasn't working for them, I knew who IBM was and what they were trying to achieve. Now... I don't. I think they're some sort of storage company.

    Anyway, I wish her the best of luck with her... storage company. I'm sure that she'll make ONE BILLION DOLLARS for herself.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:When I Went Through the Orientation by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      At one time I felt like even when I wasn't working for them, I knew who IBM was and what they were trying to achieve. Now... I don't. I think they're some sort of storage company.

      They still sell more big iron than everyone else put together, and there's still a lot of money in that market. How long this will last, it's hard to say; but people have been predicting the death of the mainframe for decades, and it just keeps on not happening.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:When I Went Through the Orientation by supremebob · · Score: 1

      Yeah... Ginni was my division boss when I worked at IBM a few years ago. I think I even met her once... she give our department a "major" award with a very "minor" cash bonus attached to it. Under her tenure, half of my department's workload was outsourced to India, China, and Brazil.

      So, yeah... don't expect anything other than more of the same from her leadership.

    3. Re:When I Went Through the Orientation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are the 18th largest company in the USA. Their customers are most of the rest of the Fortune 500 list. They are the top seller of servers in the world. They make mainframes (zSeries), Power servers (p and i Series), and Intel servers (xSeries). They make point of sale systems. They make storage systems. They have $25B in software revenue. They have an enormous services business. They sold off printers, disk drives, and PCs, none of which were ever the core of their business.

    4. Re:When I Went Through the Orientation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but people have been predicting the death of the mainframe for decades, and it just keeps on not happening.

      uh-huh. i suppose it has escaped your notice that system z nodes list for literally one fifth of what they did 10 years ago

      let's do a quick comparison, shall we?

      entry dell workstation of q4 2001: dell precision 340, 2GHz pentium 4, $899 sans monitor
      entry dell workstation of q4 2011: dell precision t1600, 3.1G core i3, $629 sans monitor

      now let's take a look at ibm's definitely-not-dying mainframes, shall we?

      entry z-series box of q4 2001: IBM z900 model 101, 1x600MHz CPs, 5GB mem, I/O, HMC etc, $1,200,000
      entry z-series box of q4 2011: IBM z114 model 2818, 1x3.8GHz CPs, 16GB mem, I/O, HMC etc, $75,000

      so there you have it. dell has more or less tripled the performance of their basic workstation this last decade, and cut prices by 30%.
      IBM, on the other hand, has seen similar performance gains but cut prices by 94%.

      Look, I'll grant you this: some people have been predicting a sudden death of the mainframe, and you're quite right - that hasn't
      happened. However, only an idiot (or an IBM sales rep, which is much the same thing) would maintain that the mainframe market has any kind of future.

    5. Re:When I Went Through the Orientation by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Your numbers are wrong and misleading.

      First, z900 was not an entry level box, z990 was. However, that may not have been available until 2002. More importantly, you can not use GHz as any measure of mainframe speed, because not all models run at full speed.

      So, using the correct numbers and comparison between the same type of box, with a single processor running at full speed, we see the following:

      2001 - z900, model 101, 239 MIPS, $500,000 (don't know where you got the $1.2M from)
      2011 - z196, model 701, 1202 MIPS, $1,756,000

      So, IBM quintupled the speed, and raised the price 3.5x, so price/MIPS fell about 30%. Using your numbers for Dell, their price/GHz fell about 55%.

      BTW - the numbers you quoted for 2011 (z114 for $75000) is a model that runs at 26 MIPS. Comparing those numbers with 2001 you find that the price/MIP actually went UP almost 40%.

  20. Good Luck Ginni by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, really. Good luck. Congrats on getting the job and I hope you do well.

    I really really hope you don't do to IBM what Gillard has done for Australia. It would be sad to see IBM go..

  21. it is genetic by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    female primates are way worse than the males; it has to be genetic and it also went on to the humans! females hold on to stuff for a long time and will do nasty things during or finally at the end of that time; won't even be a logical connection, just wham! out from nowhere comes some vindictive thing from the past. at least males deal with it upfront and get over it... that male aggression has a few good sides (just a FEW.)

    obviously, there are exceptions, we are not totally run by our genes.

    how about human teens? when stuff can still be acted out and self control is weak (that is before we jailed them for being kids, now they fear ...well if they think ahead at all they hold back.) The males can be split up in a fight; especially by a female -- but the fighting females can easily harm anybody who gets in their path. Seen it. heard about it from teachers. ask one, they'll tell you about it. even really upset males it comes down to a chest thumping power show even when elevated with weapons its mostly just a show like apes making noise and throwing sticks.. females will fight to the actual death; if not, they may harm or kill the other's offspring later. good reason to be sure and fight all out now...

    1. Re:it is genetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I see guys are more likely to be able to turn off the personal grudges/dislikes temporarily, in order to get the job done.

      e.g. You may hate the guy but you will still pass the ball to him if he's in the right spot to score/slamdunk.

      Women seem less able to do that sort of thing. I've asked some women about it and they seem to agree.

      Perhaps all the guys who couldn't do this got themselves and their entire tribe killed when they didn't help their hated tribesman while fighting against an enemy tribe...

      Not saying the guys are so great - many might still seek revenge later, but meanwhile there's a battle to win first.

  22. IBM Global Services is badly run by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM Global Services is so badly run that customer have to sue them to get out of contracts:

    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/projectfailures/texas-warns-ibm-on-failed-data-center-consolidation/10370

    And that's hardly an isolated incident. You can't believe how inept IBM GS is. Like, they have retarded people working as upper management.

    No, I'm not exaggerating.

    If this is the person who was in charge, IBM is so screwed. It will be fun watching them fail, as I have had to live with IBM's incompetence for years.

    Post as AC for my job's sake.

  23. Mainframes by qbzzt · · Score: 1

    The organizations that still use mainframes are up-time fanatics with business models that suffer when a system is unavailable for a few minutes. As a result, they're so conservative that if they were running the country we'd still be under British rule. As long as mainframes work, they'll keep using them rather than risk changing to a different system.

    Note: I'm an IBM employee, but this is my personal opinion, not IBM's. Technically speaking, corporations don't have opinions, except maybe "more money good, less money bad".

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
    1. Re:Mainframes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      up-time fanatics with business models that suffer when a system is unavailable for a few minutes.

      What's wrong with NASDAQ's business model?

      Go back to playing with your toys. Big Iron exists for a reason, not an ideology.

    2. Re:Mainframes by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      It's not just mainframes... the biggest IBM product we use at wr0k is Netezza (technically not IBM invented, but heck, that's the future of "big databases" right there). Though they should cut their prices in half, or else Greenplum (EMC) will eat their lunch...

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    3. Re:Mainframes by swillden · · Score: 1

      Except that increasingly, mainframes aren't the only way to get high reliability, or even the most cost-effective way.

      (Disclaimer: I worked for IBM from 1997 to 2011, and now work for Google, which is perhaps the posterchild for high availability on commodity hardware.)

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Mainframes by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      You're correct from the technical perspective. But my point is that a CTO of a fortune 500 company would rather spend more money than make changes that could impact uptime. "If it ain't broke, and breaking it would cost you your job, don't fix it"

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
  24. Rising from Global Services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh boy!

    IBM is one of the largest, if not the largest, outsourcing services footprint. Having the new CEO coming from that background and rising internally to boot.. It goes to show how serious IBM is in that segment of that market.

    HP absorbed EDS (or EDS allowed themselves to be swallowed) with IBM in their target cross-hair. HP is very clear on this! Those were the days of Mark Hurd.

    I'm not saying Mark Hurd is a great guy, well.. not from employees point of view. They were miserable under him! EDS acquisition was approved by the Board and executed by Mark Hurd's team. Then the schmuck had to go and chase a skirt indiscreetly. An expired skirt on top of that! Can't you go for a young thing and impress all of us with your virility?

    Mark Hurd's replacement in form of Leo Apotheker was not exactly inspiring.Which was it? WebOS? Software offerings? IT Outsourcing? Couldn't make up your mind?

    In less than a year, now we have one-trick-pony Meg Whitman. Wonders whether we'll see two-trick-pony? Dare we hope for more than two?

    EDS acquisition gave HP a clout in the services market segment. IBM's their target. Somehow they lost their focus and IBM strengthening their position - that's where Ginni Rometty comes in.

    Now two women in control of two of the largest IT Services company gonna face off. It's like WWE's Trish Stratus vs Chyna.

    Hmm..

  25. Totally expected... by elsurexiste · · Score: 1

    You only needed to know that she led the Sales division. IBM always gave a lot of credit and power to its sales force, and its CEOs are usually those who held her position.

    --
    I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
    1. Re:Totally expected... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

      Her college degree was tech, and she appears competent. What concerns me is she said "I deserve it", which is a very bad attitude.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  26. Not at all... by elsurexiste · · Score: 1

    She was rewarded because she was the director of the Sales division. It's really common for IBM to grant the CEO badge to whoever led Sales. If an extraterrestrial entity had been in her position, it would have been elected instead.

    --
    I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
    1. Re:Not at all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you consider the possibility that she was put in that role to get her ready for the CEO role - as part of succession planning? She had previously held several other positions within IBM as the article notes.

  27. Ugh, here we go... by nobodyman · · Score: 1

    I don't consider myself a feminist by any means, but I imagine it's a bit frustrating that a discussion of a male CEO rarely ever involves talking about their looks, yet it's one of the primary topics when discussing female CEO's.

    1. Re:Ugh, here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because everyone on Slashdot is a dude. Go check out some chick sites. I'm sure there are plenty of women talking about which male CEOs they think are hot or ugly.

    2. Re:Ugh, here we go... by Nursie · · Score: 2

      99% of all male CEOs are fat old guys with multiple chins. Is there a need to evaluate them?

      When we have had enough female CEOs, pehaps people will stop commenting on how old and unattractive they are too.

    3. Re:Ugh, here we go... by swalve · · Score: 1

      Huh? Go to google images and search for "ceo". Not one fat old guy to be found.

    4. Re:Ugh, here we go... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      99% of all male CEOs are fat old guys with multiple chins.

      The other 1% is Steve Ballmer, who is fat, old, has multiple chins and is a slaphead.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:Ugh, here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn how to scroll, moron. You'll find Ballmer, Akerson, Welsh...

      Jobs would have been fat if he didn't have AIDS.

    6. Re:Ugh, here we go... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      If I had to guess her job from that pic, I'd say she's a senior flight attendant, two or three years off retirement. Perhaps it's that dumb hairband. And the jacket.

      But to get back to sanity: can she possibly be anywhere as bad as Carly Fiorina was at HP, or Meg Whitman is likely to be?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  28. Ohh great she is a woman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I will not be satisfied until we have a retarded trans-gendered, blind, schizophrenic as the head of a major corp. It is the only way to show the world that we value diversity. Also why do the retarded, blind, schizophrenics who are trans-gendered not have a figgin month. I mean blacks have a month. Women have a month. 'Asian americans and pacific islanders all have a month. We need to have a month just dedicated to the immense contributions that retarded, trans-gendered, blind, schizophrenics have contributed to society. By giving 'minorities' a month we are letting them know that they are just as important as Jewish, or white people.

    1. Re:Ohh great she is a woman. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Gee, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue isn't enough, you want to screw up a company too?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:Ohh great she is a woman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lol'd. Would mod you up but have lost the password to my account.

  29. Great choice for IBM CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have worked with Ms. Rometty in the past and think she will be a great CEO for our company.

  30. She was the second choice by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    Former IBMer Bob Moffat, who was head of the Systems & Technology Group, was being groomed for the top job. But he got himself involved in an insider trading ring. Not for personal profit, but some careless chit-chat at a dinner party about Sun's finances, which IBM was considering to buy at the time.

    So he got canned, and rightly so. If you are smart enough for the top job, you'd better be smart enough to watch what you say. Ginni will be subject to all sorts of scrutiny by the press in he coming months. IBM has probably already checked to see what she has under her fingernails.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:She was the second choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was much more more than careless chit-chat. He was having an affair with Danielle Chiesi and told her all sorts of insider details. She got 2.5 years in club fed for her part this - Moffat got 6 months.

    2. Re:She was the second choice by Grumpinuts · · Score: 1

      Made my day when I heard this...thanks!! Missed the news about Moffat at the time. He was the individual who sold our manufacturing plant to a company who had a history of buying factories to get the business, then shutting them down. Day the sale was announced he turned up at an all hands meeting and tried to feed us some crap about how we were like his children who he was letting go to college. Actually he was selling us down the river, plant closed less than 2 years later, a shell of the excellent place to work it had been. . Patronising b******d, glad he got his comeuppance.

    3. Re:She was the second choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to six months in prison. A man of his stature and legal resources does not plead guilty to a felony if what transpired was the result of simple carelessness.

      One parallel that comes to mind was Gary Hart, who was the frontrunner for the Democratic Party nomination for the US Presidency in 1988 until compromising photos surfaced showing his romantic involvement with a woman named Donna Rice. It seems these men had a certain daredevil streak or feeling of immunity from rules and constraints.

  31. I wonder by AdamJS · · Score: 1

    Was that the reason for increased IBM training programs this year about specifically *not* talking about anything that might lead to insider trading?

  32. RIP IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RIP IBM...