The Best of Both Phone, and TabletMarch 10, 2005 4:00 AM PST
Newsmaker: What's wrong with the Java community process?
See all Newsmakers(continued from previous page)
well and we spend a great deal of time crafting the integration plan with the company?usually about a year.
How do you integrate these smaller companies into a large organization like IBM and not lose the employees?
Mills: Our view is you can make (a small company) part of a larger company and sustain the energy and the enthusiasm. Those two things are not contradictory of each other. But in order to do that, you got to have a creative way to make them feel part of IBM, while not losing the intrinsic value of what they were doing.
It's not about separation, it's not about names, it's not about brand--those are all externals. When you make (a small company) part of larger IBM--when your leverage it through enormous "go to market" structure, big software sales force, market reach, much wider portfolio, deep capability--(you) can you make that small acquisition and properly attach it to the rest of the software organization, and make it much bigger marketplace initiative.
When IBM acquired Lotus, the idea was to keep it independent.
Mills: That was 10 years ago. It was June of 1995. If you go back 10 years, we didn't have much experience in this, and there were lessons to be learned. Hindsight is always 20/20. Clearly there were aspects
Look at Rational (which IBM acquired in 2002)?Rational is not a separator from IBM. The customer sees it as part of IBM. So they're dealing with IBM. The name can still be there, doesn't have to be in the way.
It's when your name becomes your reason for being. Instead of being what you do, you're about your name. I don't get up in the morning--I'm not like some of these athletes that talk about themselves, "Steve this" or "Steve that." I don't refer to myself in the third person. It's not about "Steve." It's about what I do.
You can't let companies get so egocentric, where it's all about sustaining this identity. It's really about the purpose you're there for--build a business, succeed, grow. That's where you want to anchor the motivation.
Do you expect the pace of acquisitions will stay the same?
Mills: We've been averaging about a half-dozen a year, most of them being small. So there's no reason we can't continue.
What's your take on the view that industry consolidation in software is going to speed up and that midsize companies are going to get squeezed?
Mills: Look, the bigger companies are going to get bigger. And there are going to be more companies. The amount of venture money is roughly comparable to the late 1990s, in terms of dollar amounts. There are lots of new companies being formed all the time?Those that want to harp on consolidation are not looking at the whole spectrum.
Why the push to sign on business partners in emerging markets?
Mills: To grow our business, we need to go wider and deeper. The software vendor community is made up with thousands and thousands of independent software vendors. We're trying to do more business with more people. So it's widening and deepening our market reach.
You often hear about adoption of open-source software, such as Linux, in China. Is that your area of focus?
Mills: We are the largest software provider in China. Our revenues are greater than other companies selling software in China.
Who is the competition in emerging markets?
Mills: The usual suspects. All the multinationals.
Several times, IBM has said that the small and medium-size business is a "must-win" battle for the company. Is that where the growth in the industry is?
Mills: Oh, for sure. It's not that there isn't growth with larger businesses as well. Given our size and our aspirations, we have to extend into the midmarket.
There's a lot of business there that we're not getting to. And we're not going to get to it without a business partner network that's not bigger in size.
8 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
I guess Mills didn't do his homework...
I guess Mills didn't do his homework...
Awwww... shucks.
Ain't that a bummer?
Awwww... shucks.
Ain't that a bummer?
If Sun would support compiling to machine language, and direct access to memory(keeping the safety nets unlike C/C++), I think Java would start to see some serious success. They have really made speed a non-issue in most standard apps and networking, to the point that Java can run as fast as a lot of C++ apps, although loading a large java app still is painfully slow. Allowing native compilation and direct memory/register access should fix any remaining speed issues. Third party java compilers that compile to machine code are hit and miss, mostly miss. Keep the JVM, especially for applets(they really don't need to get as unsecure as MS proprietary garbage), but for apps as well, but give an option for native compilation.
I think the worse thing Sun could do is completely open up its standards for a free for all. The language would soon become a fractured mess. Even scripting languages that embrace open source, like perl, are kept a tight reign by its creator and a few others, but anyone can add to the language through modules. Perl has gone far beyond it original intent, alot of that is due to 3rd party developers, but the core has remained a fairly small language that can be extending in countless directions at need.
Java can be extended by IBM all they want, but keep it out of the core standard. Any language needs a firm hand to keep it under control. Two competing corporations that profit from Java and can direct it is a recipie for disaster.
Even with Sun staying in control they are messing with the language a bit too much. With v1.5.0 they added the needless generic nonsense, but even with that, it is still a fairly clean language, and needs to stay that way.
If Sun would support compiling to machine language, and direct access to memory(keeping the safety nets unlike C/C++), I think Java would start to see some serious success. They have really made speed a non-issue in most standard apps and networking, to the point that Java can run as fast as a lot of C++ apps, although loading a large java app still is painfully slow. Allowing native compilation and direct memory/register access should fix any remaining speed issues. Third party java compilers that compile to machine code are hit and miss, mostly miss. Keep the JVM, especially for applets(they really don't need to get as unsecure as MS proprietary garbage), but for apps as well, but give an option for native compilation.
I think the worse thing Sun could do is completely open up its standards for a free for all. The language would soon become a fractured mess. Even scripting languages that embrace open source, like perl, are kept a tight reign by its creator and a few others, but anyone can add to the language through modules. Perl has gone far beyond it original intent, alot of that is due to 3rd party developers, but the core has remained a fairly small language that can be extending in countless directions at need.
Java can be extended by IBM all they want, but keep it out of the core standard. Any language needs a firm hand to keep it under control. Two competing corporations that profit from Java and can direct it is a recipie for disaster.
Even with Sun staying in control they are messing with the language a bit too much. With v1.5.0 they added the needless generic nonsense, but even with that, it is still a fairly clean language, and needs to stay that way.