Fujitsu is a world-wide manufacturer of computer systems, including the ownership of Amdahl and the competing products to IBM's mainframes that Amdahl has produced for 30+ years. Fujitsu also produces and markets the the Sparc64-based PrimePower series, which do pretty well from a price-performance point of view viz Sun, and scale to the same levels as Sun's big machines. At this time, however, they have decidedly smaller market share than Sun even in Japan. If Fujitsu sees IBM as the long-term competitor globally, then locking down this front and buying into a readily-compatible customer base might make sense. (Some PR on Fujitsu Sparc roadmap here: http://www.ftsi.fujitsu.com/doc/press-releases/200 30312-001.pdf)
This is in fact one of the problems with any 'analysis' based on anecdotal evidence. "First mover advantage" in the dotcom world turned to "first mover disadvantage" almost as quickly as the bubble itself burst, generally based only on a few examples, rather than real research.
For some interesting insights on what makes for long-term success, take a look at the analysis in Jim Collins' book "Good to Great", which is based on an examination of almost 1500 companies over a period of years.
Remember...
"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home".
'Undervalued' or 'overvalued' is context-sensitive. My company spent literally millions implementing a major CRM package in a way that a) doesn't address the needs of 95% of the potential users b) will never be allowed to address those needs because of the grip the other 5% has on how the product is used and c) did not bother to examine the enterprise's overall needs and business processes prior to install (hence no reengineering and no value). If IT is perceived as being responsible for this state of affairs (as is often the case), then the business did not get good value. Not fair, but most of us have experienced this situation.
Organizations will still invest in IT given good CBA / ROI models. Good organizations will insist on business ownership and business process redesign as the starting point for these investments.
Slashdot Mirror
Fujitsu is a world-wide manufacturer of computer systems, including the ownership of Amdahl and the competing products to IBM's mainframes that Amdahl has produced for 30+ years. Fujitsu also produces and markets the the Sparc64-based PrimePower series, which do pretty well from a price-performance point of view viz Sun, and scale to the same levels as Sun's big machines. At this time, however, they have decidedly smaller market share than Sun even in Japan. If Fujitsu sees IBM as the long-term competitor globally, then locking down this front and buying into a readily-compatible customer base might make sense. (Some PR on Fujitsu Sparc roadmap here: http://www.ftsi.fujitsu.com/doc/press-releases/200 30312-001.pdf)
This is in fact one of the problems with any 'analysis' based on anecdotal evidence. "First mover advantage" in the dotcom world turned to "first mover disadvantage" almost as quickly as the bubble itself burst, generally based only on a few examples, rather than real research.
For some interesting insights on what makes for long-term success, take a look at the analysis in Jim Collins' book "Good to Great", which is based on an examination of almost 1500 companies over a period of years.
Remember...
"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home".
(Ken Olson, President, Digital Equipment, 1977)
'Undervalued' or 'overvalued' is context-sensitive. My company spent literally millions implementing a major CRM package in a way that a) doesn't address the needs of 95% of the potential users b) will never be allowed to address those needs because of the grip the other 5% has on how the product is used and c) did not bother to examine the enterprise's overall needs and business processes prior to install (hence no reengineering and no value). If IT is perceived as being responsible for this state of affairs (as is often the case), then the business did not get good value. Not fair, but most of us have experienced this situation.
Organizations will still invest in IT given good CBA / ROI models. Good organizations will insist on business ownership and business process redesign as the starting point for these investments.