Slashdot Log In
Tech Companies That Won't Survive 2009
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Mon Jan 12, 2009 01:30 PM
from the in-a-blaze-of-glory dept.
from the in-a-blaze-of-glory dept.
buzzardsbay writes "Fresh off their annual market survey, eWEEK channel folks have compiled the list of tech vendors their readers think will fail, falter, or be sold off in 2009. It's important to note that these aren't the opinions of the magazine or its editors. The list comes from folks who work in IT, mostly technology resellers, who are out in the field selling, installing and maintaining this stuff. If there were ever canaries in the tech coal mine, they'd be these service and solution providers who live and die by the slightest shift in the markets. Some of the companies on this list, like Sun and AMD, are shocking because of their size. Others, like CA and Symantec, not so surprising." What other companies are headed for implosion, or should be if all were right with the universe?
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
The list (Score:5, Informative)
1) Novell
2) NetApp
3) Checkpoint
4) McAfee (let's hope so!)
5) Salesforce.com
6) Juniper, CA, and AMD are tied for sixth place.
7) Sun, no surprise there
8) Citrix
9) Symantec (again, let's hope so!)
10) VMware
Re:The list (Score:5, Funny)
If you believe the "Channel Insider" predictions, this is more a list of the companies that are highly unlikely to go out of business in 2009.
Summary of article:
"Our readers predicted these companies will fail. Our readers are idiots, all of these companies will be fine."
Parent
Re:The list (Score:5, Insightful)
My first impression reading that article (can I say it is an article? I think that flash slideshows are not articles) was that my Engrish tricked me, but no...
Parent
Re:The list (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know... I guess it's somewhat interesting that lots of people believe these companies will fail. If nothing else, it says something about their PR challenges. People aren't as likely to purchase products from companies they feel have an uncertain future.
Parent
Demise *not* predicted ... (Score:5, Informative)
Those who read the article will see that the survey hedges in every way possible and that the above list is _not_ a list of companies that people expect to see disappear. It's a list of companies that people discussed, looked up the turnover of and then wrote noncommittal "analysis" next to.
Please Anonymous, if you're going to try and summarize the article for those too lazy to click on a link, at least make sure you get it right. This is rubbish.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:4, Interesting)
The we get to AMD, Sun, Citrix, Symantec, where about 1 out of every 6 people think these companies will fail. Certainly these companies have problems, but each has products that could keep or gain marketshare. Some mght be in trouble, again, those that align themselves with MS, such as AMD and Symantec, are at the whim of MS, which can be dangerous, but, OTOH, about 85% of the respondents believe that these companies will be ok.
Then there is VMWare, in which a whopping 89% predict stability. They might be in trouble if a traditional OS continues to be utilized as a base OS, rather than relegated to guest status. On wonder why one would want MS Windows eating up resources with IE and Media Player and all the other stuff that gets loaded in, when one could run a custom version of *nix and VMWare, and then run MS Windows as a guest OS only when needed. I am sure for many with enterprise licenses to MS Windows, running it might virtual windows might make sense, but 90% of the respondants indicate that VMware has the better idea.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's the list for those who are too lazy to read TFA or allow Flash:
Cool. Thank for saving the click.
1) Novell
Odd. SUSE Linux is a popular product with many tie-in deals. They will be fine.
2) NetApp
Overpriced products easily duplicated with FreeNAS or any number of products at a fraction of the cost.
3) Checkpoint
Too many corporate support deals to go away quickly.
4) McAfee (let's hope so!)
Horrible products for years. Illicit money has been propping this company up for years.
5) Salesforce.com
Won't go away, but may have to scale back the development staff. Their product is too close to helping SaaS succeed.
6) Juniper, CA, and AMD are tied for sixth place.
AMD is stable. Juniper I could see going away.
7) Sun, no surprise there
Sun is a good company. Why do people harp on them?
8) Citrix
Their product is licenses by MS and integrated into Windows Server. I just don't see them going away.
9) Symantec (again, let's hope so!)
This is wishful thinking. Despite many years of bad product, their tie-ins with OEMs keep them afloat.
10) VMware
Now this is just crazy talk. VMware is a good product with a strong user base and good support. The free solutions simply don't compare in scope and flexibility.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:4, Funny)
I note that SCO is not on that list ... it's like a cockroach, it'll survive nuclear holocaust.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:4, Informative)
For testing individual files; I highly recommend trying Virus Total [virustotal.com]. Upload a single file and they'll test it with a LOAD of different antivirus programs. Worth it for those small files you don't trust.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:5, Informative)
Nod32 for the win. now.
(And I still have 5 valid licenses for AVG that I PAID for and will not use)
Parent
Re:The list (Score:4, Funny)
From personal experience, Avast! is rubbish. It failed to find 8 viruses on my system.
If you have that many viruses on your system, I think that scrapping the whole thing and buying a new hard drive is the only solution for you. ...it's the only way to be sure.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:4, Funny)
Don't blame an innocent computer for the failure of it's operator.
Scrap the operator, and give the computer to someone who can properly care for it.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm beginning to believe there's no such thing as a good antivirus...
The reasons Norton and McAffee don't qualify should be obvious...
AVG was nice until version 8. Then it decided it wanted to start acting like Norton (Slows system, misses a lot)
Antivir might be tolerable (still misses some, but that nag screen is a dealbreaker)
Clamav is close, but others already mentioned the lack of on-access (I'd be prefer on-write) scanning.
How depressing.
Parent
Re:KVM (disambiguation)? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
An Exemplary Article for Making Stock Picks! (Score:5, Insightful)
Fresh off their annual market survey, eWEEK channel folks have compiled the list of tech vendors their readers think will fail, falter, or be sold off in 2009.
Wrong. Everyone falters at some point. You could probably make a claim that 60% of companies will "falter" this year and be able to point to some debacle, low quarter or misstep to claim you were accurate. Hell, in one of the many fields it's in, Microsoft will falter in 2009--I guarantee it. From the actual article:
In the Channel Insider 2009 Market Pulse Survey, we asked solution providers which vendors they thought would go out of business or be acquired in 2009.
So you're underscoring just how stupid the people that filled out this survey are. Because to say that Sun, AMD or even Novell will be acquired or out of business by December 31st, 2009 is like betting on your favorite American Football team to win the Super Bowl in 2025.
The Channel Insider Prediction at the bottom of these reveals just how unlikely every single one of these predictions comes across as. They predominately disagree with every single reader prediction.
It means that not only are we, the readers, being presented with completely contradictory statements on every page but every single statement is unfounded and backed up by nothing. No market saturation analysis or even talk of operations and profits. Market cap and revenue are good indicators but they don't mean everything.
Others, like CA and Symantec, not so surprising.
"Not so surprising?" Tell me, what has changed so dramatically for 2009 that makes you say that these companies will be acquired or go under?
So tell me, what is a list of reader predictions dealing with the finances and markets of tech companies doing on a 'news for nerds' site?
What other companies are headed for implosion, or should be if all were right with the universe?
Ah, the coup de grÃce for this article ... I'm certain that the Slashdot community will proffer only on the most unbiased and strongly founded suggestions for this objective question.
Not Very Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the same sort of stuff we hear on Slashdot every day. The actual evaluation at the end of nearly every entry says, "Not very likely".
Though I do think that Sun needs to expand their product strategy or face extinction. Their current high-end market may be lucrative, but it's continually being eaten away at by cheaper and cheaper equipment.
Personally, I think Sun would do well to enter the desktop market. Their Mad Hatter system was a good first try, but they abandoned it before it had a chance to mature! (Speaking as one of Sun's customers who paid money for the software just to be left out in the cold.)
Re:Not Very Interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
Desktop market? You must be joking.
Hey, I'm as much of a Sun fan as they come, but Sun doesn't have any expertise in writing user-friendly GUIs. There's no way they could compete with companies like Microsoft and Apple that have been doing this for decades.
The best that Sun could do is make OpenSolaris as much of a developer workstation OS as they can, in competition with Linux. Still, as much as OpenSolaris has improved, they still have a long way to go to catch up to Linux distros like Ubuntu. Perhaps they could make is a Java developer OS, with a wide array of Java packages in their IPS packaging system.
Parent
Well that's it (Score:5, Funny)
Well now they're doomed! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well now they're doomed! (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely - we should stop giving articles like this publicity. ~ This is what's been happening in the UK over the last few months:
STOP IT! STOP IT! STOP IT! you're killing perfectly viable companies!
Parent
Re:Well now they're doomed! (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I could see PHBs reluctant to purchase their products if they believe they will be sold out and potentially have a sharp decrease in product lines, quality or most-importantly, support quality on their existing purchases. However, there is nothing to say that any company at the drop of the hat won't see off a division or exit a market, and I'd do a little more research before changing a vendor... particularly a one we've had good experience.
Parent
Re:Well now they're doomed! (Score:5, Insightful)
AMD not of value? Are you insane? Why do you think Intel invests so much in making their chips better/faster? Hint, it's because they have competition...
Parent
No problem (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks Slashdot! (Score:5, Funny)
So THIS is where I find out I'm being downsized?
Virtualization (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Virtualization (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd like to see /.'s predictions on that, especially with regards to VMWare. In my own ad hoc findings, it is true that Microsoft shops are leaning towards HyperV but isn't that to be expected? I find non Microsoft shops to be leaning towards VMWare. What are you finding?
Parent
Re:Virtualization (Score:4, Insightful)
We're mixed. All the desktops are on Microsoft. The servers are on a mix of Linux, BSD, and Microsoft. However, one of the admins has decided that Unix "isn't worth the hassle" (read: it doesn't work with all the proprietary junk he wants to throw into the system) so our installed base of Unix servers has been slowly dwindling.
Anyways, we're on VMWare virtualization products exclusively. Hopefully we can keep it that way. That same admin has been trying to talk up "How much better the Microsoft virtualization products have gotten" lately.
Parent
Re:Virtualization (Score:5, Interesting)
Vmware isn't going any place.. to have them on the list just shows how much of a joke this is
Parent
Can I be the first to ask (Score:5, Insightful)
Why the fuck is this presented in Flash? It has NO added value and makes the material harder to digest.
Re:Can I be the first to ask (Score:5, Interesting)
Why the fuck is this presented in Flash? It has NO added value and makes the material harder to digest.
Now there is a company I would like to see go out of business. Unfortunately, Adobe [google.com] appears to be doing just fine.
Parent
Re:Can I be the first to ask (Score:4, Insightful)
There is nothing wrong with Flash. There is everything wrong with using Flash in stupid ways. Youtube is not a stupid way to use Flash, this slideshow is.
Instead of blaming the gun, blame the person who used it. It's better that way.
Parent
Re:Can I be the first to ask (Score:5, Insightful)
Youtube's sucess speaks otherwise. The simple fact is that the vast majority of systems have some working version of Flash on them. Youtube leverages this fact to the extent that rather than worrying about system architecture, browser, installed codecs, etc, it simply plays a video in flash. It doesn't look great, but it works almost everywhere and for the quick/stupid content present on Youtube the quality is mostly sufficient.
Parent
Re:Can I be the first to ask (Score:4, Insightful)
flash make things pretty and managers don't want just information, they want it conveyed in the nicest way possible.
Parent
So much for RTFA (Score:5, Informative)
I usually RTFA but in this case there doesn't appear to be an article. There's a bit of an intro but no list of companies that I can see.
"Anti" Virus (Score:5, Insightful)
Sites that are going to die in 2009 (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sites that are going to die in 2009 (Score:5, Insightful)
I predict a growth in marketshare for this site.... They're starting to master the "sensationalistic troll" article, so they should be gaining impressions despite the poor layout and navigation.
I bet you hadn't even heard of them until now.
Parent
And if we're really lucky.... (Score:5, Funny)
SCO!
if AMD went under (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:if AMD went under (Score:4, Insightful)
In the early 90's it was Apple. Sun is a perennial favorite now. I never read one of these things saying Hayes or Zeos would get bought or go under. Where's my Hayes DSL adapter?
Zeos merged with Micron and now they are Crucial and MPC. Now guess who's in chapter 11 [mpccorp.com]? MPC/Micron is.
What poll foresaw Digital going to Compaq or Compaq going to HP? Magitronic sure seems to have failed. eMachines was bought. Alienware is owned by Dell.
These polls are silly. Some of these companies have more cash reserves than small countries have budgets. There's always a risk of a company large or small failing, but this poll means nothing.
Parent
I wish (Score:4, Insightful)
Watching CA and Symantec die would be kind of satisfying, if only from a "revenge for all the problems your shitty fucking products have given me over the years" perspective.
Doubt it, though.
Only one choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Creative Labs.
Have they released a good product in this millenium?
*My* Predictions (Score:5, Funny)
OK, here goes:
10)HP :D
9)eBay
8)Nintendo
7)Adobe
6)Red Hat
5)Amazom.com
4)IBM
3)Microsoft
2)Apple
1)Google
Why flash? (Score:5, Insightful)
C'mon, folks. You've been watching the news in the last, say, two decades and you're asking "why flash"?
Didn't you notice, the less content one has to present, the more you have to put into the presentation to cover it up.
Most of those companies aren't in big trouble (Score:5, Informative)
Big companies with real products and a user base can hang on for a long time. Unisys is still around. NCR (National Cash Register), amazingly, is still around, and still selling cash registers [ncr.com] (now "Point of Sale Workstations"). Most of the names on the list, like CA, Sun, VMware, and Novell, still have an installed base to service. They can shrink and remain profitable.
I'd look for collapses in advertising-funded companies. We'll probably see some of the social networks go bust. Companies that get most of their revenue from Google ads are at risk. Marchex (the people with "www.90210.com" and hundreds of thousands of similar junk domains) have had their stock drop from 25 to 5. Expect to see free hosting sites, free mail services, and free blog services shut down.
I did a list like this [downside.com] back in the dot-com area, based strictly on cash-flow analysis. That was quite accurate. It's easy to do this analysis for money-losing startups. The definition of "dead" used was "stock dropped 90%". From a stockholder perspective, that's "dead", even if some vestige of the company hangs on. That's was quite common with overfunded startups, by the way. Some of them succeeded, some of them went bust, but many of them become what VCs call "zombies"; they could generate enough revenue to cover their costs, but they couldn't pay back the money invested in them.
Infinite refresh? (Score:4, Funny)
What is
What is with
What is with the
What is with the infinite
What is with the infinite refresh?
???
If AMD goes Intel will have a problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe not today, maybe not tommorow, but some times and soon...
Someone will notice that Intel has beccome a full-scale monopoly that does indeed prevent other competitors from entering the market and competing.
With AMD, Intel has a nice biopoly which it can easily and truthfully claim competition(not fair market competition mind you). AMD is all too happy to allow this and even lend a helping hand sometimes.
If AMD goes then someone will pick up the pieces, and if they don't eventually you'll get back to monopoly litigation. Might not happen within the year, but it will eventually happen. That sort of litigation can force Intel to split and worse.
Re:The list (Score:5, Insightful)
The list is obviously bull. Most of the companies on there could survive in some form for years just on legacy support contracts. Sure, some of them might shrink, have some layoffs or toss out a department or two, but go under? Not on your life.
Parent
Except for NetApp (Score:4, Informative)
The NetApp vs Sun lawsuit over ZFS isn't going the way NetApp would like it to ...
http://www.sun.com/lawsuit/zfs/index.jsp [sun.com]
To the contrary, NetApp may end up like SCO vs Novell, where the initial complainant ends up owing the respondent. Sun could very well end up both pwning AND owning NetApp.
As for the antivirus companies - I wish, but there will always be *some* "useful fools" around, and people whose financial self-interest aligns with enabling them to stay dumb and foolish.
Parent
Re:The list (Score:5, Funny)
0. SCO
Parent