Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment report findings (Score 4, Informative) 68

This report is largely an advertisement for Originaâ(TM)s contract negotiation services. It is sparse on detail and should be viewed skeptically.

Methodology

* Research firm: Censuswide
* Commissioned by: Origina
* Fieldwork: May 11â"19, 2026
* Sample: 2,018 senior IT decision-makers
* Geography: US 1,011; UK 1,007
* Seniority: Director level or above
* Eligibility: Direct influence over software budgets and renewals
* Organisation size: Revenue of $1bn+ or 10,000+ employees
* Vendor exposure: IBM, HCL, VMware/Broadcom or SAP at meaningful scale
* Industries: Financial services, insurance, telecommunications, public sector and retail

Key findings

* 95%: Had paid for a vendor-driven change they expected to reduce performance, reliability or business value.
* 78%: Said their primary vendor controlled the timing and terms of change.
* 76%: Reported little real negotiating leverage.
* 80%: Said switching major vendors would cause significant disruption.
* $12.87m: Average reported cost of the most recent vendor-driven change.
* 28%: Average share of enterprise software budgets spent on vendor-driven changes organisations would not have actively chosen.
* 84%: Said senior engineering staff often or always maintained vendor-driven changes instead of building future capability.

Contract negotiation priorities

* Renewal pricing: Cap annual increases and define expansion prices.
* Support: Set minimum support periods and advance notice of withdrawal.
* Upgrades: Limit mandatory changes; require written justification and cost estimates.
* Exit: Agree migration fees, assistance and transition rates in advance.
* Portability: Guarantee data export, documented APIs and transition access.
* Maintenance: Permit independent support where feasible.
* Security: Define patching obligations and response times.
* Cost tracking: Include engineering time, downtime and hardware replacement in change assessments.

Note that considering a thriving open source community is missing from their messaging.

Comment this may create challenges in their boarding metho (Score 1) 86

Itâ(TM)s unclear what happens when one aspect of their system changes unless other parts also change. The bags flying free was designed to make boarding more efficient, which reduces gate time. If bag check is not free, then itâ(TM)ll mean more people bringing their bags on plane. This means boarding will be more complex and time consuming. Itâ(TM)s not clear their âoefirst come first chooseâ seat process will work as well, as people trying to backtrack, or holding up the entire boarding process.

Comment since when is everything API ? (Score 5, Interesting) 24

I get that AI is costly, hard to run on the average desktop, and hence APIs. However, it seems we've shifted as a community to fully supporting proprietary web APIs where we not only don't have source code but even lack the binaries. Couldn't slashdot moderators help by promoting truly open source tools, especially AI, that can be run locally, even if it requires a 10k hardware? It seems very reasonable if a company sells API as cost-sharing model. Even so, at least we could support entities that fully open their models and have active "hacker" communities that are not bound to a proprietary service.

Comment any stats double dipping? (Score 1) 99

Presuming they used DNA to find the suspect, located with some statistical certainty (say one in a million). I'm wondering then if that person's DNA match was the presented as proof, eg "one in a million this isn't the killer"? If so, isn't this a form of double dipping? If you "used up" the one in a million chance to find the suspect, can you use the statistics dice again to claim that this suspect is also the killer?

Slashdot Top Deals

You are an insult to my intelligence! I demand that you log off immediately.

Working...