-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Microsoft emails reveal a very savvy PR machine
,----[ Quote ]
| For example, the summary of Microsoft's meeting with several Gartner analysts
| in October of 2006 is fascinating, and made more so by Jamin Spitzer, group
| manager of Worldwide Analyst Relations at Microsoft, who suggests that two
| objectives of the meeting with Gartner were to create "confidence in the
| Vista product, OEM/Retail channel, and device/app compatibility," as well
| as "provide Gartner 'wiggle room'."
|
| [...]
|
| More generally, these emails as well as the others demonstrate that Microsoft
| does a good job of managing the media, including analysts and reporters.
`----
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10105304-16.html
The press and Gartner are tainted (if not corrupt).
Recent:
More Analyst Cluelessness
,----[ Quote ]
| Similarly for Wikipedia: nobody gets paid, but look at the results. In just a
| few years it has succeeded in creating an unmatched respository of human
| knowledge, to the point where it is pretty widely regarded as the first place
| to look stuff up, despite its undeniable imperfections.
|
| As with Gartner, this seems to be a case of analysts simply telling their
| clients what they want to hear, rather than what they need to know. Hence my
| general contempt for the breed, with a few honourable exceptions - RedMonk
| and the 451 Group spring to mind - that both know what they are talking
| about, and tell it as it is.
`----
http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2008/11/more-analyst-cluelessness.html
Moody on Gartner: Math Is Right, But Needs to Show Work
,----[ Quote ]
| Moody spoke to Eben Moglen of the Software Freedom Law Center who indicated
| that while license violations happen, a civil phone call explaining the
| situation results in companies willingly complying. Moglen indicates that
| serious consequences for an infringing company would only arise from a
| willing, persistent disregard for the applicable license.
|
| Asay makes the further point -- a good one -- that a company should plain and
| simple have a plan for managing software whether it be open source or
| proprietary. I'd go so far to add that a plan is needed, regardless of
| company size or industry (it doesn't matter that IT isn't the business's main
| focus -- it is necessary to know what is running, where). Part of software
| management is license management -- and though there are differences between
| development licenses, and end user licenses, there are overlaps.
|
| Software has rules -- regardless of whether the source is open or not.
| Businesses (and users) shouldn't think (or be led to believe) otherwise. But
| the open source method -- and approach to upholding the licenses -- seems a
| compelling reason to use it, rather than a liability.
`----
http://ostatic.com/177025-blog/moody-on-gartner-math-is-right-but-needs-to-show-work
The Linux Licensing Labyrinth
,----[ Quote ]
| The land of open source software is awash in an often confusing array of
| various licenses and rules regarding what is and is not allowed once someone
| has written a piece of code. It's enough to scare some vendors away from FOSS
| altogether, and that can be a problem when it comes to creating open source
| drivers. Fortunately, some vendors are coming around.
`----
http://www.linuxinsider.com/rsstory/65185.html
Gartner's FUD
,----[ Quote ]
| So let's just unpick this statement a little. Unfortunately, I can't find any
| details on the Gartner site, so I'll have to make general statements about
| free software and licensing.
|
| First, if companies are simply using open source software as-is, there are
| no "potential liabilities": none, zero, zilch. I'd be willing to bet that
| this covers 90% of open source in companies today. You can even make changes
| to the code and not make them public - provide you don't circulate them
| outside your company. It's only when you start combining open source code
| with other code that licensing issues might arise, but even here, the spectre
| of "huge potential liabilities" is nonsense.
|
| [...]
|
| Gartner's negative spin on the inarguable facts of a massive and increasing
| open source uptake in companies is FUD, pure and simple. Ignore it.
`----
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=1515
85 percent using open source - but still frustrated?
,----[ Quote ]
| The obvious question - is if Open Source Software (OSS) is so frustrating in
| Gartner's view - than how do they explain that 85 percent now and 100 percent
| within a year are using open source?
|
| Apparently it's not so frustrating that people won't use it.
`----
http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2008/11/85-percent-of-companies-using.html
Reality Check: What does Gartner really DO?
,----[ Quote ]
| I have this notion to write a series of columns from time to time under the
| title "Reality Check" -- columns intended to explain how the world of
| Information Technology actually functions. Because like any other entrenched,
| complex, and often closeted industry, things in IT don't really work the way
| many people think they do. I'm guessing the Vatican is a bit like that, too.
| So I'll be looking at various IT players and their roles and trying to put
| them into perspective, much as I did recently with a column or two about the
| role of computer consultants. This week the topic is Gartner Inc., or rather
| all the Gartner-like operations that give advice about technology to
| America's largest businesses: what do these guys actually DO?
|
| Not much of real value I'm afraid -- at least of value in my view.
|
| [...]
|
| Into this knowledge vacuum come the vendors, who want to sell stuff, and the
| consultants like Gartner, Forrester, IDC, and the Yankee Group, who need IT
| managers to feel uncertain about every decision except the decision to buy
| something, anything. Then look at the number of "research reports" that are
| commissioned by vendors. Uh-oh.
|
| The five P's of IT are Pride, Prejudice, Politics, Price, and Performance,
| with the last two being by far the least important. Consultants like Gartner
| are very useful for minding the pride and politics, their real function being
| to provide $2 billion worth of IT management CYA per year.
`----
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080516_004925.html
PC deal could save public sector billions
,----[ Quote ]
| Suffolk told Gartner, “I think we have fundamentally failed on a worldwide
| basis as an IT industry to understand the cost of what we do. And I roundly
| blame Gartner for this, because you guys are the ones who come up with TCO
| [total cost of ownership] benchmarking. It has become a self-fulfilling
| prophecy.
|
| “So, I go out and I pick boring desktop infrastructure. What price do you
| think the suppliers broadly pitch? You will not be shocked to know that it is
| somewhere around the Gartner TCO benchmark.”
`----
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2008/03/31/230047/pc-deal-could-save-public-sector-billions.htm
Related:
Need some data to support your cause? Hire an analyst
,----[ Quote
| CIO.com raises an important issue about the integrity of research being done
| by industry analysts. Namely, if a sponsor pays for the research, do they get
| favorable treatment in that research?
|
| [...]
|
| I'm not suggesting that the research is corrupted. I'm just suggesting that
| it's hard to remove the taint of sponsored research. Just take a look at
| Gartner's "Hype Cycle" on open source, which is woefully inaccurate, probably
| in part because Gartner gets its information from the vendors who sponsor its
| research, not the customers who are buying into open source in droves.
|
| So, the next time you read a report, blog entry, or article, consider who
| pays the writer (including when reading this blog).
`----
http://www.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9894178-16.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=TheOpenRoad
http://advice.cio.com/thomas_wailgum/it_research_brought_to_you_by?page=0%2C0
Gartner analyst: OOXML important domino
,----[ Quote ]
| Businessweek (Jennifer L Schenker) quoted Gartner analyst Michael Silver last
| week who puts OOXML in a wider commercial perspective...
|
| "appear more open". This is how Gartner views the credibility of the new
| [OOXML] openness....
|
| Look how optimistic Gartner's Silver is...
`----
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-44362/gartner-analyst:ooxml-important-domino
NY Times bans Microsoft analysts from Microsoft stories
,----[ Quote ]
| Just days after banning Enderle from discussing Microsoft because
| he has Microsoft as a client, the Times quoted Gartner analyst
| Michael Silver and AMR Research analyst Jim Murphy in a story
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| about Microsoft's Windows and Office software.
|
| If the paper would prefer not to quote an analyst who has
| experience with a client, it did a poor job. Silver is Gartner's
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| vice president in charge of client computing. Microsoft happens to
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| do lots of business with Gartner and also happens to have a
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| client-software monopoly. We're guessing that Silver knows
| Microsoft's products well and has direct involvement with the
| company.
|
| And, sure enough, he appears a number of times on Microsoft's
| own site and thousands of times in stories about Microsoft.
|
| Jim Murphy - wait for it - covers Microsoft too and is even more
| prolific than Silver.
|
| [...]
|
| Part of the problem stems from the reticence of companies such as
| IDC and Gartner to reveal their clients. That should make everyone
| nervous, but it doesn't. So called objective technology publications
| keep publishing material bought by vendors without telling you this.
| They're also too lazy or scared to ignore the likes of Gartner and
| IDC until the firms change their disclosure rules.
`----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/15/nytimes_ms_ban/
Buy Vista or die
,----[ Quote ]
| Gartner research vice president Michael Silver said that outfits have delayed
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| their Vista migrations to the point of stupidity and now some are considering
| late 2008 or even 2009, while others mull skipping the OS completely.
`----
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/12/07/vista-die
Other Underreported Stories: Analyst Integrity?
,----[ Quote ]
| There was a pretty interesting discussion with views on both sides. Some felt
| that the rumors have been so persistent that, well, where there's smoke
| there's fire. Others saying they have heard from someone who heard from
| someone that once they started paying their exposure improved. Others saying
| it's just like the rumors that magazine advertisers get better reviews, an
| accusation that has been levied to Ziff-Davis publications, as well as
| photography and stereo equipment magazines for years.
`----
http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2007/12/other_underrepo.html?source=rss
Credibility Of Analysts
,----[ Quote
| Research firms make their living by offering expert advice to business and
| technology people about the best ways to invest their IT dollars. It can be
| invaluable insight, but only if that analysis comes with no strings attached.
| And on that, there's no guarantee.
|
| Forrester, Gartner, IDC, and others insist their output is squeaky clean, yet
| they also rake in millions providing services to the very same companies they
| monitor, heavyweights like Cisco, IBM, Microsoft, and Oracle. Which leads to
| a question that continues to dog the research firms: How much influence do
| technology vendors have over their work?
`----
http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=CTCBZVQX5MTSCQSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=178601879&queryText=analyst+influence
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkkqmFcACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7ILACcDnNvaX6oA/M+Hwg6oZFxSvwE
PZ0AmgI9jNE4E7tPt0MMbSjMGh3+NLjE
=kKfU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
