IBM's days of having a voice in that conversation are probably more limited than they realize.
IBM's days of having a voice in that conversation are probably more limited than they realize.
Cool! https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/sep/23/austr...
Now that you enlightened me I can see the stock markets, hospitals, banks and all enterprise consumers embracing Swift and eager to upgrade once Swift 4 is released.
However, Smalltalk later suffered when Visual Age for Smalltalk became Eclipse and IBM switched focus to just Java.
They're still making money hand over fist in maintenance keeping the mainframes up (your state's DMV won't move off MVS/zOS as long as support for their old JCL/REXX stuff is still available, especially those 'cheap' z13s which come in at under 100k) but that's an entirely different tier of customer.
Blame assignment isn't really about who made good decisions, or who worked hard, or any of that, it's a combination of how bad it went and who made uncommon choices:
common choice + failure = external blame (who could have seen it coming?)
uncommon choice + failure = it's your fault for doing it weird
common choice + success = great job!
uncommon choice + success = I don't trust you, but you might be a genius
Since hierarchical relationships function using blame ("responsibility"), making predictable decisions becomes more important than making good decisions at some depth of hierarchy.
(If this sounds strange to you, just replace "node.js" with "Rails 2" and you'll see why ASP.NET and Java's still king in any company with a market cap > 100MM && age > 20 years. It's about continuity of support, and Windows 2016 servers can still run ASP Classic and .NET 2 WebForms apps just fine.)
"Responsibility" == risk mitigation for that purchasing authority.
"Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM"