Slashdot Mirror


IBM Will Share Tech With China To Help Build IT Industry There

An anonymous reader sends this report from Reuters: IBM Corp will share technology with Chinese firms and will actively help build China's industry, CEO Virginia Rometty said in Beijing as she set out a strategy for one of the foreign firms hardest hit by China's shifting technology policies. IBM must help China build its IT industry rather than viewing the country solely as a sales destination or manufacturing base, Rometty said. ... [Her] remarks were among the clearest acknowledgements to date by a high-ranking foreign technology executive that companies must adopt a different tack if they are to continue in China amid growing political pressure. A number of U.S. technology companies operating in China are forming alliances with domestic operators, hoping a local partner will make it easier to operate in the increasingly tough environment for foreign businesses.

108 comments

  1. Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Bad idea. they will get all the information and ditch IBM take it all for themself. Unless they only share opensource things that is already open then its fine.

    1. Re:Buy american only. by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think IBM probably realizes that, but hopes to make money in the medium-term anyway. If a pro-China strategy gets them into the Chinese market for the next 10-15 years, they could profit significantly. If that results in their Chinese partners eventually taking over their business and nudging them out, well, in 10-15 years someone else will be CEO, and that's their problem.

      A lot of petrochemical firms are doing similar things. When Dupont goes into a joint venture with a Chinese firm to build a plastics facility, there are not many illusions about is going to happen to the technology: the JV partner will stay with Dupont for a few facilities until they develop enough skill in the tech to do it on their own, then subsequently will start building its own plants without Dupont.

    2. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad idea. they will get all the information and ditch IBM take it all for themself. Unless they only share opensource things that is already open then its fine.

      Bad idea?

      Let's reverse the role of China and that of USA

      For years and years the US of A pays hard earned money to China for hardware and software only to have the hardware / software having (China's version of) NSA's backdoor built-in

      As a USians, how would you feel?

    3. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of that information is only valuable if it's applied.

      How expensive and difficult is it to apply in the USA vs China?

      IBM can keep it in the USA, where it with whither in an atmosphere of economic stagnation, or sell it to China, a nation that will take it and use it in industry.

    4. Re: Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The MBA that decided this will be long gone with millions in bonuses.

    5. Re:Buy american only. by parkinglot777 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most of that information is only valuable if it's applied.

      How expensive and difficult is it to apply in the USA vs China?

      IBM can keep it in the USA, where it with whither in an atmosphere of economic stagnation, or sell it to China, a nation that will take it and use it in industry.

      You are too optimistic about the situation. History has been shown how things go. Also, you are short sighted about the cost applied. You underestimate and assume that Chinese are too stupid to gain values from the information (or too stupid to reverse engineer) without USA? Have you ever thought of the situation could be reversed in, let say, 10 or 15 years?

      Look at Trepidity post. His post nailed it. This is just for the current CEO who wants get credit right now. When shit hits the fan, the CEO is no where near by and the one in place takes all the blames.

    6. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      To Godwin this thread early; didn't IBM help the NAZIs to round up all the jews, gypsies, black, feeble-minded, etc.? So this is just a continuation of their traditional behaviour.

    7. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad idea. they will get all the information and ditch IBM take it all for themself.

      Yes, that's the point. The NSA has left them little choice. Would you want your country to keep buying backdoored equipment from a semi-hostile foreign power?

      China is doing what it has to do: transfer tech to Chinese companies to stop their reliance on US tech companies.

    8. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      China builds backdoors too. What's the diff?

      The USA is hanging themselves. Besides that these companies should be tried for treason, they are giving all of their country's power away to a hostile nation and dooming their future.

    9. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For us non-americans, why would we buy American? With China we can go in eyes open, with America you get stabbed in the back and screwed anyway.

      I'm happy for the Chinese, and am hoping they continue to make grounds building their industry. America blew it by pretending to be friendly while screwing everybody over. How can we trust US companies? How can we trust US administration? And how can we trust regular americans when most seem pretty happy about hacking into everything we own whilst giving us a friendly smile?

      You need a reality check, outside the US there is nowhere near the animosity towards China that you guys have and confidence in US companies is completely gone. The Chinese are going to eat your supper and nobody will care. The world will move on.

    10. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda like offsetting the wing from Airframe (Michael Crichton)

    11. Re:Buy american only. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      The horse was out of the barn decades ago. All the hand-wringing in the world achieves nothing. China will be just as hard hit once automatic robots can do anything - their massive job losses will really irk their new middle class, same as is happening hear.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    12. Re:Buy american only. by Bonzoli · · Score: 1

      If you think trusting the Chinese is a good idea, then you should go back to that school and study up really close what happens in China to average people like yourself.
      We spent years building Democracies and some security so our businesses can sell it to the highest bidder for a short term bonus check. Do not look at the US gov to stop this, its been bought and paid for by big interest groups.

    13. Re:Buy american only. by wideglide · · Score: 0

      Building democracies ? Like in Lybia, Irak etc ? Give us a break ...

      --
      The sum of intelligence on a planet is constant. Nowadays we have more people. When classic goes away, so do I. Copy
    14. Re: Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but the CEO gets a nice bonus so its ok because capitalism.

      I wish all the idiots who consistently vote against their own interests and those of their country would realize this, but they won't because they keep falling for divisive fringe politics.

    15. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The past 30+ years has seen the average Chinese life improve immensely, in no small part to the Chinese government. So why don't you go back to school and compare how the lives of the average citizen of the USA and China over the past few decades?

      See the stagnation of middle class wage (in real terms) for the past 50 years in the US. And learn about how the US has spent years promoting dictatorships friendly to US interests and years destroying democracies not willing to bend to US interests.

    16. Re:Buy american only. by Kagato · · Score: 2

      My experiences with IBM is you get a couple true blue IBM guys that act as front men that go to meetings while the real work is done by off-shore workers. Sometimes the offshore folks are IBM, but a lot of the time they are someone IBM has contracted to do the work. Which is why increasingly American companies have been dumping IBM and cutting deals directly with the offshore companies. Why pay IBM to be a middle-man? It's unclear to me exactly what value IBM brings in China outside a name to make executives and investors feel like good decisions are being made. Maybe that's enough.

    17. Re:Buy american only. by jsepeta · · Score: 1

      I'd gladly choose to live in the stagnant US Middle Class where i have the freedom of the internet than to live in a burgeoning Chinese middle class where I would not. I bet most Chinese can't even read /.

      --
      Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
    18. Re: Buy american only. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Actually, for the last 40 years, America has pushed democracies and not been willing to back totalitarian nations. Prior to that, we were just like European nations in that we backed anybody.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    19. Re:Buy american only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OP here. I didn't say anything about trusting the Chinese, I said we can go in eyes open. We know what the Chinese are doing, they don't pretend otherwise. They also don't threaten us with 'act of war' rhetoric whilst backhandedly stealing everything we have.

      From where I sit the Chinese have a much more respectable position. There is nothing left to respect about the US, there is zero decency. You have a massive military and are better at killing large amounts of people than anyone else. Yay. Whoopdee-fucking-doo.

  2. Do business with China get robbed by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    Everyone knew it.
    The people who swarmed there must have figured they could kick it down the road past their retirement just leave the mess for those that came after.

  3. It's not sharing, it's profiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazing the spin Reuters is willing to put on this. It's not sharing, IBM isn't doing this out of the goodness of its own heart, they are profiting from this.

  4. Corporate suicide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They are ready to do anything to bring the dividend to 15$/share. And the fact that they can just give away their technology to the Chinese shows how much of a guaranteed income IBM gets.

  5. Partnerships are the only way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The actions of the NSA et.al. has ensured that no countries could possibly take any American company's word for the integrity of their technological products. Because even if the companies themselves are honest, their executives are under legal threat of jail and the company the threat of crippling fines if they reveal the extent of their cooperation with NSA. The only way that companies like Google can be trusted is if they protest the interference of the US government by leaving the US market (just as they protested the interference of the Chinese government by leaving China).

    Otherwise, the only reasonable trade exchange is to either boycott all American companies, or require a full and open technological exchange and even then it's possible that something malicious might slip through.

    1. Re:Partnerships are the only way by Bonzoli · · Score: 1

      Yea NSA did some shit to American Citizens, but its job is to know/spy on other countries. Because every few years Tanks seem to roll west out of some jackass despots country.
      When the crap hits the fan though, I'm sure you will be first in line demanding those same NSA or US gov troops protect you from those Chinese and Russian tanks, troops, sci corp, etc...

    2. Re:Partnerships are the only way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Russian and Chinese military is tiny compared with the US military. Even during the Soviet era, when America was under the greatest threat, the Soviets (who posed sufficient threat to give US a blood nose) were always significantly outgunned by the US rather than the other way around. Currently, the US has about 10 times more aircraft carriers than China and Russia combined. Imagine if the ball was in the other court?

      On the other hand, look at the militarization of our police force. At the imprisonment and ill-treatment of blacks in our society. Look at our country's poor infrastructure. Healthcare. When will there be enough spying and guns for you?

      The answer is that if you live by the sword, you die by the sword. The technologies created to not just to protect America, but to make it an overwhelming force internationally will eventually find a use domestically -- the weapons manufacturers will see to that in the name of profit. We've already seen the NSA spy on citizens locally and over time, they'll inch forward, a little bit at a time. See the selling (and usage) of surplus equipment to police force all around the countries. The torture of suspects by the Chicago PD.

  6. OK, the NAZIS were bad enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But now Red China? Jesus Freakin Christ already!

    1. Re:OK, the NAZIS were bad enough by halivar · · Score: 1

      The criticism is finally apt. I've always defended IBM against accusations of Nazi collaboration on the grounds that the Hollerith machines (used to make the holocaust more efficient) were built in Germany by a German IBM subsidiary, and they were sold for peaceful, legitimate purpose. That branch came under Nazi control, and IBM was not able to reclaim it until after the war. So far, not IBM's fault.

      But now? To perform the same exact action, with a state that has killed many times over as the Nazi's? NOW they are culpable for everything the Chinese do with their technology. They are going into this eyes wide open.

    2. Re:OK, the NAZIS were bad enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you confused with Japan? Japan is the leader on the death-by-nefarious-means tote board by far. Japna wins. So far. On this planet. Russia places byt isn't even close. China comes in to show.

  7. Are they nuts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, this one is going to end well. I can really see IBM generating colossal profits out of that.

  8. Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Especially since IBM sold their PC and Server divisions to Lenovo.

  9. Training Your Competition by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And this will be the last of the money made by IBM in China. They're going to spend a few more years teaching other companies everything they know, and then the Chinese will kick them out and undercut them with their own technology. Just brilliant, IBM. *golf clap* Now they're actually training their own competitors for some short term profits.

    If you haven't yet sold your IBM stocks in the last few decades, now might be the time to do so.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    1. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you haven't yet sold your IBM stocks in the last few decades, now might be the time to do so.

      Got any tips on the Chinese companys to invest in?

    2. Re:Training Your Competition by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      If you haven't yet sold your IBM stocks in the last few decades, now might be the time to do so.

      Got any tips on the Chinese companys to invest in?

      I hear Lenovo's got some good stuff.

    3. Re:Training Your Competition by renzhi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First off, I've been living and working in China for 11 years, even founded my own software company and ran for 6 years, before merging with another company. So I'll comment on this one.

      You took a very simplistic view.

      An IT industry can not be built overnight, it took many generations to build up the experiences, the talent pool, the mind set, the mentality that people had on software (A lot of Chinese people, especially those in the power to make decision on IT purchase, have a very different mind set on software/service values), etc, etc. I've been here for over a decade now, although there's been some progress in software engineering here, mainly in the few big Internet companies such as Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, etc, there's not much progress. Enterprise software? Frankly, due to the mentality toward the values of software/services, there's not much changes over the decade. The local software companies in the field are extremely small, compared to the western giants such as IBM, HP, SAP, Oracle, etc. The enterprise software, and that includes systems acquired by government, is dominated by these foreign companies. They took the big profit, and leave the hard work to the locals to slave over. This situation is stupid to all parties. Very stupid of the government, especially to let this kind of shit happen over two decades without doing the proper thing. Very stupid of the foreign companies, as they could have made their life easier and made the cake larger. Very stupid of the local companies, as they are slaving to death, as most projects are losing money for them. And as a matter of fact, a lot of the local IT people, the smarter ones besides that, are giving up on a career in IT, they make more money selling pancakes and without the stress and overtime.

      Second of all, if these foreign companies are not trying to share, they will fight over a cake that will never grow. Look, none of the Internet biggies, the fastest growing sector, are buying anything from them. Their markets are in the enterprise software (and government sector). And these markets are not growing, and if you look seriously into the numbers, these companies are making their money by selling hardware and to a certain extent, software licenses, which are quite small as compared to the hardware portion. And software licenses are getting smaller still, as more and more open source softwares are made available. And selling services? Haha, don't make me laugh. Service is money-losing on all fronts. As the policies changed, if these foreign companies are not trying to change, their cake gets smaller and smaller, and their profit will be significantly squeezed, as they would have to sell via local distributors.

      Thirdly, even if they share, you are not going to think that they will share their crown jewel, are you? They will probably just play the games to comply, to make sure their cake is still there. These companies are exploiting like crazy, without actually investing much here. They have a very strong sale department, and very small tech support, nothing technically challenging. The technical works they do here? Could be done by any code monkey in any country.

      Fourthly, you might want to look at other industries, such as the car industry, for example. They had shared something, but look at how much more they have earned back? Just take a look at the chinese branch of GM, Volkswagen, Honda, Toyota, etc. They only share the parts that they do not have the competitive edge, or are on the edge of losing it, and still keep the core technologies. They think long term. In 15 years, the car market became the largest one in the world. Sure, they have now more and stronger local competitors, but so what? Their cake is so much bigger, they made so much money than before. Try to imagine the enterprise software market, if you can. If we can make it like the car market, this is going to be gigantic. I can tell you that most Chinese firms, even the big ones, have very little IT deployment.

      Anyway, my point is, it is stupid for

    4. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sorry Dutch, you are perhaps short sighted.

      If IBM will not do it, someone else will. If no one will teach for money then they it will be stolen for less.

      Ultimately when your product is good competition and copycats come to the party. Only knowing a couple of tricks will not keep one in business because it's innovate or die.

      Something tells me that IBM has a few people that may know what they are doing and found good reasons to do so. Perhaps the competition will bring more innovation, faster progress and at a lower cost. If you cannot compete then make way for those that can.

      There's a big market out there, maybe after you train one country you train another...new markets, repeat business, a strategy, expertise in training what's all that? a business model.

    5. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did you type this message through all the smog?

    6. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your points sound sensible on the surface. But the experience of US companies is exactly what GP said. Chinese companies want the other guy to share, then they use that technology to undercut him. It isn't a two way street.

    7. Re:Training Your Competition by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you're underestimating how easily and quickly both technology and infrastructure can be copied given a concerted effort. The Chinese are absolutely brilliant at creating clones of American-designed products. What can take generations to invent for the first time can be duplicated in mere years. Consider the case of the Americans and the atomic bomb technology, and how quickly the Russians achieved parity. Or consider Germany's initial lead in rocketry and then the US / Russia catching up to them in mere years. This is all done with high-level transfer of knowledge. Once you know how something is done, it's much, much easier to duplicate those results rather than inventing all that technology through expensive R&D the first time.

      China has clearly indicated that they're not interested in long-term relationships with the west in terms of critical technological infrastructure, and honestly, I can't really blame them. Would we want to buy Chinese-designed operating systems and computer systems? We're already starting to become wary of products *built* in China, let alone designed there. They're going to absorb and utilized the knowledge gained from IBM far faster than people are predicting, and once their industry is kick-started, they'll say goodbye to IBM. This is essentially a one-time sale for IBM - they're just selling off their IP and expertise for short term profits.

      However nuanced you believe this move to be, I just don't see it that way. It's nothing but a short-term profit grab that will hurt IBM in the long run. You don't see the most successful tech companies racing to sell their IP or expertise to the Chinese... only their manufacturing. And that's only if they feel it's worth giving up their control over that process - note that Intel keeps it's fab plants mostly in the US or other first-world countries. That's because IP/expertise *is* the crown jewels of a tech company.

      IBM is already dying a slow death, desperate to snap out of years of declining revenue. This will just hasten it by a few more years.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    8. Re:Training Your Competition by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "First off, I've been living and working in China for 11 years"

      Great news.

      "there's not much progress"

      Hummm... in one word: Huawei.

      Huawei is not only selling networking gear but quickly becoming an all-encompassing IT behemoth with only two problems to solve in order to be the one-and-only, neither of which will last forever: bad press in international markets and a too slowly growing (for Huawei's pace) internal market.

      Currently the likes of IBM have only two clear paths: join ventures with Chinese companies (no other way to get into China), get the money today and hope for the better for tomorrow, or not going into China and just perish in ten to fifteen years -oh! and still letting go today's money to other companies that go with option 'A'.

    9. Re:Training Your Competition by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "It's nothing but a short-term profit grab"

      What else have US corporations become in the last 20 to 30 years?

      "that will hurt IBM in the long run"

      So what? This will be the problem of another CEO. I already got my big bonuses.

      "IBM is already dying a slow death, desperate to snap out of years of declining revenue."

      Or is it USA?

      On the other hand, don't count your chickens before they are hatched; remember IBM was also dead back in the nineties -I think even Netcraft confirmed it.

    10. Re:Training Your Competition by plopez · · Score: 2

      Well, you cannot buy stocks directly, just derivatives which I do not trust. You could directly lend or invest in a company there but the cash out mechanism can be highly restricted. So good luck with that.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    11. Re:Training Your Competition by Bonzoli · · Score: 2

      Or fix NAFTA and the WTO, and actually penalize incoming products where the servants are bonded and jumping off buildings because they lost all Hope. hmmm..... Nope, lets just give it to china so they can shoot down satellites faster.

    12. Re:Training Your Competition by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      "It's nothing but a short-term profit grab" What else have US corporations become in the last 20 to 30 years?

      Amazon is a pretty good example of bucking the trend. They've caused plenty of conniptions among the Wall Street "in-crowd" by eschewing short term profits, and instead investing in long term strategies. Look at where they're at compared to IBM now. Wall street only cares about the next quarter's earnings.

      Or is it USA?

      The US doesn't have the explosive growth of China (which is showing signs of slowing, btw), but that's only because China is transitioning from third-world to first-world status. That doesn't mean the US is necessarily in decline, just that it's relative dominance is decreasing. There's nothing wrong with that. We'll remain competitive for the foreseeable future, because this is still a country where start-ups can make it big. When that changes, you know we'll be in trouble.

      On the other hand, don't count your chickens before they are hatched; remember IBM was also dead back in the nineties

      Notice I said a *slow death*. They've been declining for a while. Given their size, they can still probably hold out for another couple of decades, but unless they take some radical reforming steps, like cutting down it's 13 layers of management and bureaucracy, and actually attempting to innovate rather than simply grabbing onto anything that looks profitable (like this boneheaded move), they'll just dwindle down to nothing. Remember, it took about fifteen years for Kodak to implode from when they were still a behemoth. Sheer inertia can keep a massive company going for a very long time.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    13. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think GP didn't see the Beijing olympics. We're talking about the people that pulled *that* off. They know what they're doing. And they're not about to let anything stand in their way.

    14. Re:Training Your Competition by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I think you folks are all barking up the wrong tree.

      Lotus (err, IBM) Notes.

      Ever heard of a fifth column?

      USA! USA!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    15. Re:Training Your Competition by blind+biker · · Score: 2

      You are writing your comment assuming that the IBM CEO actually gives a shit about the company's long (or even medium) term viability. This hasn't been true in the last 35 years in corporate USA. In publicly traded companies where there isn't a clear owner and therefore someone who cares about hi/her company, CxOs have been rampaging, merging, reorganizing, divesting, outsourcing etc. etc. all kinds of buzzword MBA-ese goes. None of those things were actually done to improve the company, but to make more money for the executives.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    16. Re:Training Your Competition by sribe · · Score: 1

      And this will be the last of the money made by IBM in China. They're going to spend a few more years teaching other companies everything they know, and then the Chinese will kick them out and undercut them with their own technology. Just brilliant, IBM. *golf clap* Now they're actually training their own competitors for some short term profits.

      See: Dell ;-)

    17. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed.

      The Chinese probably already have control of IBM anyway, with existing clout etc. Chinese seem to get the best jobs there as well.

    18. Re:Training Your Competition by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Now they're actually training their own competitors for some short term profits.

      Back then, before 1989, we had a motto: "Capitalists will sell to us even the rope on which we'll hang them."

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    19. Re:Training Your Competition by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Imported canned air.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    20. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your bias is ridiculous. I hope you realize this while you're banging your dog ugly Chinese wife who's only with you for the money.

    21. Re:Training Your Competition by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Consider the case of the Americans and the atomic bomb technology, and how quickly the Russians achieved parity.

      Well, considering that they continuously kept getting information from the inside and it still took them four more years, perhaps one could say that it wasn't all that quick.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    22. Re:Training Your Competition by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      I bet importing canned air is more profitable than working for IBM China.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    23. Re:Training Your Competition by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Consider the case of the Americans and the atomic bomb technology, and how quickly the Russians achieved parity.

      Well, considering that they continuously kept getting information from the inside and it still took them four more years, perhaps one could say that it wasn't all that quick.

      Then again, the Russians had to work to steal it. IBM's actively pushing it out.

      Bought a motherboard or LCD TV lately? Don't even bother to TRY to find one built without Chinese labor in it.

    24. Re:Training Your Competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bought a motherboard or LCD TV lately? Don't even bother to TRY to find one built without Chinese labor in it.

      Plenty are built in Taiwan, China's eternal enemy.

      Also have you noticed both these products are almost completely labor-free? The economics of shipping and energy supply matter more than labor in these sorts of products. I have worked in Shen Zhen, and the reason stuff is much cheaper to manufacture there has little to do with labor costs, and a lot to do with transportation and logistics. Everything is right there in the one city with a vast transportation network connecting it together and an enormous port for exporting the finished product. The only place that comes close to this level of logistical integration in the US is New Jersey.

    25. Re:Training Your Competition by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "Notice I said a *slow death*."

      Yes. And notice I said IBM was also said to be on their slow death march back in the nineties and still they managed to recover. Heck, Samuel Pamisano is taken as an example on MBA courses just for that. Maybe this time IBM will be able to go ahead again.

      "That doesn't mean the US is necessarily in decline, just that it's relative dominance is decreasing."

      That's a decline. And, yes, US *is* in decline. That it will be able to revert the tendency or not, is still to be seen, but a look at History and how past empires managed their decadence wouldn't allow for optimism.

  10. Re:fucking chinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just so you know, you have never dropped nukes in china.

  11. already happened! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    share technology with Chinese firms and will actively help build China's industry,

    I think most American firms already share technology with Chinese firms to help build China's industry.

    Wittingly or not.

  12. And USA never rob anybody else?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is selling wares with built-in NSA backdoors an honest business practice?

    Boo-fricking-Hoo !

    1. Re:And USA never rob anybody else?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it is.
      People who buy hardware/software for sensitive purposes and don't validate them themselves are idiots.

      I'm not an American, but if my own country counterpart agency did the same, I wouldn't blame them.

  13. Patent Troll Tech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    IBM has long ago become a services company, selling over priced, vague, business services, mostly to US Government and other companies already locked in. That business is not exportable since its bums on seats and the bums are H1Bs in America.

    The only other business it has is the world biggest patent troll, patenting variations of other peoples inventions. (Remember the stack boundary check that IBM patents with the tiny addition of 'in an OS')? And hitting them for money (Twitter hit for $36 million rather than challenge 900 crappy troll patent).

    And I'm sure many here have experienced IBM 'Business Consultants' coming in and throwing in their chaos. I remember IBM convincing top management that they should do QA, then rejecting non-IBM software as sub-standard on specious claims.

    They have nothing to offer a company but pain and politics.

    On the plus side, they're attacking China! So perhaps they can undermine that economy the way they did in the US, and are trying to do in Europe with software patents.

  14. Well that should make it easy by wiredog · · Score: 1

    for IBM to lay off another couple hundred thousand.

    1. Re:Well that should make it easy by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      for IBM to lay off another couple hundred thousand.

      The last time Ginni Rometty fired a bunch of IBMers . . . just a few months ago . . . she was rewarded with a $7 million bonus.

      Why would she not want to lay off another bunch? She will get another $7 million for that again.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  15. She should be fired by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And sued into the poor house by the shareholders and board of directors. This is not just training competition, but competition in a country notorious for wiping its ass with IP and trade secrets, using every other dirty trick to get ahead and using hyper nationalist politics to freeze out companies like IBM. Were she a politician and not a business executive, it would be roughly grounds for treason.

    1. Re:She should be fired by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ginni Rometty is pushing 60 years old. She will probably dead in twenty, or so Alzheimered out, that there is no difference anyway.

      What does she care, how her decision affects the position of IBM or the US in the future?

      She is concerned with cashing in, like, now.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:She should be fired by supremebob · · Score: 1

      It's been well over a decade since IBM cared about much more than meeting their quarterly earnings projections.

      This just buys Ginni some time that she desperately needs to deploy her golden parachute out of the company. Their existing consulting customers are getting sick of the poor quality work that they are receiving, and the loss of business is hurting the bottom line hard.

  16. Somebody tell Dept of State Please by kjhambrick · · Score: 1

    Geebus ! god save us from these short-sighted MoFos.

    I would like to say that the Dept of State needs to know about this.

    http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt22.1.121

    However, too many members of the Executive Branch in DC seem to hate the USA more than they hate the Chinese and are likely to WANT this to happen to all our Corps.

    -- kjh

    1. Re:Somebody tell Dept of State Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a direct result of the NSA clusterfuck.

      Other countries are now refusing to buy American tech products, and understandably. The only option to sell in the future will be transfer all the tech outside the USA.

      This is only the beginning. You shot yourselfs in the foot. Nobody wants USA made tech any more after Snowden showed what was going on with it.

    2. Re:Somebody tell Dept of State Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/20696000-the-hundred-year-marathon

  17. A japanese way of saying ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Those who grow snakes die poisoned.

  18. thanks, NSA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks NSA! Great going!

  19. Who is going to buy all their stuff? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    After all of the American workers are fired, who is going to buy all the cheap stuff they make in China? The Chinese? Well, first you would have to pay them more. So the goods would cost more to produce. Doesn't seem to make much sense from a business point of view. Maybe from a charity point of view. On the other hand, hurting 1/3 of a billion in order to help 1 billion is not really a great ratio for a charity either.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    1. Re:Who is going to buy all their stuff? by gtall · · Score: 1

      To some extent, the C party in China sees the problem with putting foreigners out of work, i.e., lose the market for their crap. They are attempting to simulate domestic consumption. It takes a government to wage screwups on a massive, country-defeating scale. And the C party is certainly up to the challenge. The only reason it hasn't yet quite caught up to them is that they are providing a marginally better life for enough of their pop. to keep the malcontents stifled (or shot, they aren't particular about which it takes). However, it is in the process of catching up with them. Their growth is slowing. Their environment is degrading.

      The basic problem for China is their C party of government has no reason for being. They don't anything particularly well. They are rife with corruption. And they know it, that is why they need to censure so heavily.

      Bahrain is a good example of what the outside world, and specifically technologies and ideas spawned by the U.S. and the West, can do. Bahrain is run by the usual assortment of incompetent Sunni "sheiks". They have a predominately Shi'ite pop. The Shi'ite pop. was more or less cowed sheep until Google Earth arrived. Then they started to get politically active. One fellow summed it up properly. He said they could see on Google Earth how all the development was happening in Sunni areas and they were relegated to the backwoods (backsands?) part of the country and then could see what a raw deal they were getting. So the Sunni alleged sheiks are clamping down...which will probably work until the Shi'ites work out how to have them all killed.

      It won't be Google Earth that dooms China's government, but once the people start comparing their incompetence with how other countries are governed, the C. party is toast.

  20. If you want the Chinese to use your tech by sabbede · · Score: 2

    just work with them. They'll steal it before long.

  21. IBM by johnsmith2708 · · Score: 1

    I think, American company will use the chep workers for developing their production, but who knows=)

    1. Re:IBM by moeinvt · · Score: 1

      IBM isn't actually producing a lot these days.
      Their PC and X86 server businesses have already been sold to Chinese companies. They're divesting themselves of their semiconductor business as well. I assume they'll keep the P-series and Z-series servers for a while, but "International Business Software and Services" would be a much more appropriate name for the company.

  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. Re:Yes but what about sexism in FL/OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes! And not only that!
    Opensource should be renamed to Social Source because opensource is an obvious sexist reminder of how desperate are male developers of getting women to open their 'source'.

  24. In other words, a very very by Grey+Geezer · · Score: 4, Informative

    small number of wealthy people, will become even more wealthy at the expense of American, middle class, workers. Welcome to the global economy!

    --
    The USA is only 4X older than me...perspective
    1. Re:In other words, a very very by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't share my daughter's crap-filled diapers with China

  25. Re:fucking chinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bluto: What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

    Otter: [to Boon] Germans?

    Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.

  26. IBM is in it for IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They did business with the Nazis in WWII, why not the Chinese.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

    1. Re:IBM is in it for IBM by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      They did business with the Nazis in WWII, why not the Chinese.

      Are you comparing the Nazis and the Chinese?

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:IBM is in it for IBM by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Comparing, as in saying that if Nazis were good enough for IBM, surely the Chinese are even more palatable? Makes sense to me.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:IBM is in it for IBM by jsepeta · · Score: 1

      Why not?

      --
      Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  27. None here yet said this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've looked at all the comments so far and no one has mentioned something: IBM has been shipping technical work overseas for many years. Two regional offices where I worked at as a developer were closed and IBM told us that we could keep our jobs if we moved to India and took Indian pay.

    India is becoming more expensive and IBM has to keep their margins growing to appease Wall Street and CEO can get her millions and millions of dollars in bonuses.

    I see IBM setting up a Chinese outfit and then sending technical work to them at a huge discount.

    They did it before. Where do you think Lenovo came from?

  28. So if we... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, if we suck their @#$% long enough they will be our friend?

  29. Re:fucking chinks by belthize · · Score: 1

    Maybe we could put China on double secret probation.

  30. We do not trust China ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and we do not trust USA MORE

  31. Glad to see whoring yourself out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... for short term profitability is alive and well.

  32. Re:fucking chinks by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    The planes had to drop them early because they'd have run out of fuel had they flown farther. It was a simple fueling mistake.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  33. Re:fucking chinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually General McArthur (or was it Patton) wanted to nuke Beijing also, but was denied...

  34. What exactly have they stolen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would hate to be the one to stop this wonderful asian bashing session, but in the interests of rational conversation, could the American folk on this board quickly summerise what exactly the chinese have stolen?

    Some rules:
    1. Defence IP does not count.
            Project Azorian, and the flagrant dismantling of Viktor Belenko's Mig 25 by the USAF have already validated this.
    2. If your IP was not protected by the Paris Convention or a private non-compete then it is fair game.
            "know how" - I am welcome to figure out the formula to Coca Cola.
    3. If your patent was only taken out in the USA, and no validated in China, then silly you.
            Unless you expect American companies to honour my Zimbabwean patents.
    4. If someone broke into your offices or computers, please provide the case number from the local police you reported it to.
            If you cannot be arsed to report this theft to the local constabulary, then it never happened.
    5. If you showed/told some chinese company all your know-how in the hope of making a sale, then you are dumb.
            If you think the chinese are cunning at this "one-more thing, then we'll buy", you should try selling to American, Indian, or Israeli companies.
    6. If you agree to "localisation" or "knowledge transfer" to get the gig, it is not theft.

    I await details.

  35. neo-cons continue to destroy business by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Seriously, neo-cons are the ones destroying american business just for short term profits. GE, HP, att, gm, Boeing Cisco, and IBM are companies being ran into the ground by fucking neo-cons who look at stock manipulation rather than profits as ideal.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  36. The terminal decline of the US economy by TheMathemagician · · Score: 1

    We are simply witnessing another small step in the process by which China becomes the world's economic superpower and the US economy withers away. It seems fine while it's happening, another few years revenue locked in, share price rising. But no-one notices another round of layoffs for US employees replaced by offshore contractors. Might take 10, 20, 30 years, I can't tell, but there's going to be an almighty reckoning when the last white-collar job has been shifted offshore and the US shell companies have nothing left to sell.

  37. Time for the other one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, American companies chewed their own right arm off, why not the left?

  38. Is China a fascist state? by nickmalthus · · Score: 1

    There is a strong argument that China is more of a Fascist state than a Communist state. I sincerely doubt that Karl Marx would agree that the crony capitalism instituted in China is anywhere near an ideal communist state.

    --
    If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
  39. I see a supercomputer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... covered in flies.

  40. Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't IBM do something like this with NAZI Germany?

  41. Re:fucking chinks by quantumghost · · Score: 1

    Actually General McArthur (or was it Patton) wanted to nuke Beijing also, but was denied...

    President Truman had reprimanded MacArthur on several occasions for publicly disagreeing with him over the general's proposal to pursue the Chinese across the Yalu River into China during the Korean War. The president relieved him of his command in April 1951. In secret, they had even discussed the possibility of using nuclear bombs against the North Koreans and the Chinese.

  42. Re:fucking chinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    May I say you fucking descendants of dirty genocidal colonizers?

    It doesn't matter how militarily strong America is, you forget that China has nukes now, too. If you want to make sure that you destroy the whole country, you have to run the risk of losing half of your own country. They won't stand still after being nuked.

  43. That's the company that Nortel unwillingly built. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Huawei is not only selling networking gear but quickly becoming an all-encompassing IT behemoth with only two problems to solve in order to be the one-and-only, neither of which will last forever: bad press in international markets and a too slowly growing (for Huawei's pace) internal market.

    For nations that have seen the truth (US and Australia), they've rightfully limited their presence.

    Currently the likes of IBM have only two clear paths: join ventures with Chinese companies (no other way to get into China), get the money today and hope for the better for tomorrow, or not going into China and just perish in ten to fifteen years -oh! and still letting go today's money to other companies that go with option 'A'.

    There's a third option - survive by using a combination of influence over the US(to handle Door A folks) and business strategy to minimize the Chinese threat.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  44. Re:That's the company that Nortel unwillingly buil by turbidostato · · Score: 1

    "There's a third option - survive by using a combination of influence over the US(to handle Door A folks) and business strategy to minimize the Chinese threat."

    The problem is that China is hugh and has a lot of wealth. Taking it to an extreme, China right now could afford 20 years of autarchy just growing its internal market and still come out of it with the biggest companies on each market to blow out competition once they go international. Both governments and corporations know that; this is why they want to take positions (and getting some money right now) so to minimize their loses.

  45. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Rometty announced that IBM had contracted to supply Lucifer, Prince of Darkness with an annual supply of damned souls, All employees below VP level will in future be required as part of their annual assessments to demonstrate an adequate level and depth of involvement in antisocial and immoral behaviour outside of company time. When challenged that junior managers were being set annual percentage targets of souls irretrievably damned, Rometty was quick to deny the allegation, replying that the company was embarking on a strategy of increased and accelerated promotion of promising candidates through the company management heirarchy, which it was anticipated would more than make up for any shortfall amongst the professional ranks. Rometty was reluctant to disclose precisely what IBM expects to receive from the agreement, which she described as "an excellent deal for the shareholders", but it is believed to relate to maintenance of the IBM share price for a future period of some few years. When asked why only lower-ranked employees would be subject to the annual requirements, Rometty replied that, company senior management having in most cases already sold their souls to the Dark Lord in any case they were adopting their preferred approach of leading by example.