netinmate

Customization is key, you CAN't customize. I worked on an SAP implementation, a Fortune 500 company, complexity like crazy, sub-companies, of sub-companies, of sub-companies, federal, state and local compliance for what the company did, operating in 50 states, with an International supply chain, and our integrator was nothing special.

We held firm to the NO CUSTOMIZATION rule, we re-engineered our processes to fit SAP. Other than a few hiccups when integrating all aspects of a company that has 100 sub companies, and is under federal, state and local regulation the project basically went off without a hitch.

They are still taking upgrades 6 years later, without issue.

Most companies think they are unique, and special, and feel justified in needed to customize, all those companies are wrong.

IBM was considered resilient, now they are on the way to becoming Unisys.

IBM has become Unisys, they just don't know it.

You are right the economy is very complicated, but it seems that the only factor anyone discusses is what's good for the "consumer".

I think the "consumer" is a really bad success criteria. I don't really care about what's good for the "consumer", I care about what's good for "the employee", highly skilled jobs, higher wages, and more jobs. These things can't be driven by lowering the cost to consumers, we'll get what we have now, more money flowing to the 1%, and the middle class being eliminated.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect

Of course when you crash into me and it's your fault, you'll just walk away because I doubt that you'll be able to pay for your mistake, and MY insurance and my money will be spent to cover for your inadequacies.

Freedom is not free, except you just want others to pay, it's the classic argument against government.

I was an insider at Netscape, not "name" person but I was there for all the important moments. I wish I could tell all my stories, but then it would be easy to identify me and I'm content not being identified.

Having watched the game from a front row seat, there was no honor in what he did, not just to Netscape, but to everyone that crossed his path. I was embarrassed for him on numerous occasions. The usual yardstick by which we measure success is monetary, and by that measure Gates is one of the best, as a person he left more than a lot to be desired. He is currently doing good work, but he still leaves a lot to be desired as a humanitarian, it's more self serving than it should be, but than again, Gates just wants to let us all know that it's his world and we are just living in it.

It takes a certain personality type to step on the throat of a tiny competitor just because you want an extra dollar or two of profit, I'm not referring to Netscape in this example. Of course I can't imagine how Larry Ellison would have acted had he Microsoft's monopoly, that thought really makes me shudder, and I got to see Larry up close and personal as well.

Gates did what the government allowed him to do, he was able to exploit IBM's former monopoly and create a new monopoly.