Pete Dashwood wrote:
> <howard.brazee@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:tg9fu35t54b3t81rr6i4lv0kvcbo0ci225@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=666
> >
> > (Not from where I'm standing - but I might not be standing the right
> > place)
>
> I have been saying similar things for some time.
>
> The arrogance of IT alienated it from the rest of the organization...
>
> (I believe this was a major factor in the demise of COBOL; users just
got
> pissed of with being treated like crap and grabbed any alternate
solutions
> (packages, outsourcing, SaaS) as soon as they became available. Added to
> this, you have a rising generation who are much more computer literate
than
> their parents were and are quite cappable of devising their own (albeit,
> "imperfect and disintegrated" from an IT perspective) solutions with
> spreadsheets and databases. The resulting chaos is what we're seeing
today.
> Getting a hold on this and integrating disparate IT operations
throughout
> the company so that a coherent picture can be derived is a large part of
> what some IT departments are doing. This represents a ****ft in IT away
from
> technical service and into management of information. the role of the
> Technocrats is being ever diminished.)
>
> The split between the Business and IT has always been a contrived one.
Agile
> methodologies recognise this and are successfully (re-)combining the
two.
>
> Is IT becoming extinct? Depends what you mean by "IT"...
>
> I don't think IT is becoming extinct (yet...) but the need for
businesses to
> develop in-house IT applications is definitely under threat. There are
many
> alternatives and some companies are getting really good value from
dropping
> their IT departments. It is MUCH cheaper to simply buy the service than
to
> do it yourself.
>
> In-house IT development is expensive (prohibitively so if you insist on
> using procedural languages like COBOL with line-by-line hand carved
> solutions...embedding your business into millions of lines of archaic
> geek-code), and nobody likes the IT department anyway... they
consistently
> treat people who are not technical with condescension and arrogance and
are
> not exactly warm and friendly when you need an IT service. Their track
> record is abysmal, and most of the organisation would be very glad to
see
> the back of them. Why would you go to IT. cap in hand, when the new
students
> in your department can knock you up a desktop solution in a day or so
that
> is exactly what you need?
>
> The role of the in-house IT department to develop and provide services
will
> definitely be taken out of the cor****ate environment and relegated to a
> handful of software companies.
>
> Long term, the Nirvana is for people to interact with, and utilise the
power
> of, computers, without requiring specialist knowledge or interfaces or
> go-betweens (like the Priests of COBOL). When this is attained (and it
is
> still a fair way off, although steps are made towards it every year...)
THEN
> you could say IT was extinct.
>
> Meantime, there are ASPECTS of IT which certainly are becoming, or even
have
> become extinct.
>
> Have you heard anyone discussing "EDP" recently?
>
> Pete.
> --
> "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
The demise of Cobol, eh?
Odd then, that the estimated value of Cobol code currently in
production is over $10,000,000,000,000. That's TRILLION.
And I'm not a Cobol coder, I code in a FAR more civilized language,
Rexx.
Mickey
|
