Comment Gartner sees the light... (Score 1) 98
I use Gartner, Foresters and Burton to help me select computer functionality of my company.
Note I said "help".
I also use Slashdot, Economist, WSJ, Industry Standard, Byte (that was), conference information, O'Reilly and whatever else I can lay my hands on.
Gartner is an interesting one. Their Symposium is worth attending - the information is very helpful...but...
They are very conservative and cannot be relied upon to recognise the breaking wave. Their coverage of Open Source in General and Linux in particular has been weak. They have represented a credible independence from what I term the BOHICA boys who greet Microsoft pronouncements with obsequious handwringing, but their caution in describing OSS when weighed against the blare of publicity from Redmond is unhelpful.
Many corporate managers, mine included are pissing in their pants when faced with this cheaper, more-reliable, better-throughput operating system than NT. It brings a real world of decision to their door. Do they want to save money? Do they trust their own staff?
Well, of course...what about support? ...and who do I sue if things go wrong?
They obviously haven't hung on a line waiting for service themselves...nor have they ever sued any vendors. The technique is for managers to push the problems down to the technicians (that's why we earn the big bucks) and to hob-nob with the pretty sales-people. Those lunches are so much fun.
The problem with Gartner and Linux is that Gartner is about commerce...and Linux...and all of Open Source just doesn't seem commercial.
The message will get through, but don't rely on Gartner...as someone said, they just contribute to FUD.
Note I said "help".
I also use Slashdot, Economist, WSJ, Industry Standard, Byte (that was), conference information, O'Reilly and whatever else I can lay my hands on.
Gartner is an interesting one. Their Symposium is worth attending - the information is very helpful...but...
They are very conservative and cannot be relied upon to recognise the breaking wave. Their coverage of Open Source in General and Linux in particular has been weak. They have represented a credible independence from what I term the BOHICA boys who greet Microsoft pronouncements with obsequious handwringing, but their caution in describing OSS when weighed against the blare of publicity from Redmond is unhelpful.
Many corporate managers, mine included are pissing in their pants when faced with this cheaper, more-reliable, better-throughput operating system than NT. It brings a real world of decision to their door. Do they want to save money? Do they trust their own staff?
Well, of course...what about support?
They obviously haven't hung on a line waiting for service themselves...nor have they ever sued any vendors. The technique is for managers to push the problems down to the technicians (that's why we earn the big bucks) and to hob-nob with the pretty sales-people. Those lunches are so much fun.
The problem with Gartner and Linux is that Gartner is about commerce...and Linux...and all of Open Source just doesn't seem commercial.
The message will get through, but don't rely on Gartner...as someone said, they just contribute to FUD.
