24
August
2005
|
21:00 PM
America/Los_Angeles

Are IT markets "deadly dull" or "quite interesting? The Gallant/SVW debate heats up...

. . .the Vorticians are coming! (SF Palace hotel October 24-26)


By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

Tug-O-War.jpgJohn Gallant is truly one of the leaders among thoughtleaders in the global information technology industry ($1 trillion plus).


My colleague Richard Koman has put together a fine piece of reporting on our respectful digital tussle: It was the most dull of times...


I just wanted to say I am flattered that Mr Gallant, Editorial Director of IDG's flagship IT publication Network World, continues to engage in discussion about my contention that IT markets are deadly dull.


. . .


I still say that information technology is not strategic. What is strategic is the thing that is yours, yours alone, that thing that is proprietary, that is your intellectual property, that only you can do--you can only get it here. That thing that is unique to you.


Information technology markets are open to any buyer. Information technology is like every part of your business, it expresses your strategic value. Your entire business is an expression of your strategic value. Your entire business is an expression of your uniqueness.


. . .


Another reason IT is not strategic:


The entire IT industry has barely been able to measure any value to white-collar productivity from more than 40 years of information technology use and investment. Let alone strategic value!


I would print that in capital letters but it looks ugly, as you can see:


THE ENTIRE IT INDUSTRY HAS BARELY BEEN ABLE TO MEASURE ANY VALUE TO WHITE-COLLAR PRODUCTIVITY FROM MORE THAN 40 YEARS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND INVESTMENT. LET ALONE STRATEGIC VALUE!


What about bold?


The entire IT industry has barely been able to measure any value to white-collar productivity from 40 years of information technology use. Let alone strategic value!


The times IT might have been strategic are so few that they are probably accidental and an artifact of the law of large numbers.


Most burning question in IT


But Mr Gallant this week has written another column on what is rapidly escalating into the most publicly debated question about the state of the future IT industry today on our respective blogs.


Please read Mr Gallant's column and his Vorticians, and let us know what you think. I'll post more when I finish packing and moving apartments...


[Actually, I think John and I are most probably in larger agreement than smaller. And that the divide between us is narrow, and mostly semantic.]



Network World: Agreeing to disagree, part deux (with some small agreement this time)


Here is a taster/teaser for you from John Gallant's column in which he attacks Steve Jobs (Silicon Valley's Babe Ruth), iPod business calling it (gasp!) the iCon...


-------

(SteveJobsisprobablycrushinghisheadbetweentwowellmanicuredfingersrightnow...[hereletmegetoneforyouSteve:]) thumbcrushing.jpg


Here's John:



First off, I'm not arguing that information technology itself is exciting or fascinating. Yes, some of this stuff is innovative and quite interesting. But far be it from me to extol the sexiness of, say, storage virtualization versus an iPod, the iCon of successful consumer technology...

and the most oft-cited product I can remember. (And, Tom, I'd argue that Apple's marketing prowess was equally, if not more, responsible for the iPod's success as marrying the MP3 player with a great online music store. I don't have an iPod - imagine that! - and I still love the ads.)

Rather, what's fascinating to me - and what I argued - are the changes the enterprise IT industry is going through - changes that rival the scope of the most significant market shifts we've seen in the past. These changes are being driven by the death of client/server and the emergence of Web services-based applications. How successfully customers and suppliers navigate this transformation will make all the difference in their success or failure in the years to come.




Tom's right about a couple points in his column...




Network World: Agreeing to disagree, part deux (with some small agreement this time)




*Please remember, our comments section is back up and running!*