Latest Entries »


Sony is reportedly planning a smartwatch with a wrap-around e-paper screen next year, as part of an experimental program to create more innovative products.

According to Bloomberg, the entire surface of the watch will be covered in electronic paper, using a patented material. This could allow users to change the appearance of both the band and the watch face, and display information on different parts of the band. While there’s no word on what features the watch will include, the emphasis will reportedly be on form over function.

The watch may be part of a larger effort by Sony to find sparks of creativity within its walls. As Bloomberg points out, Sony CEO Kazuo Hirai created a new “business creation” division earlier this year, aimed at funding and fast-tracking fresh ideas from Sony engineers. The program has several components, including one in which Sony employees can pitch their ideas to the company or to an outside expert panel in hopes of getting venture financing.

The idea is to restore a culture of innovation to Sony, which transformed the tech industry decades ago with products like Walkman. In recent years, however, the company has abandoned the PC market and has struggled with mobile devices, and it’s still hemorrhaging cash in its once-dominant TV business.

The story behind the story: Sony has already released a few smartwatches and a fitness band with an E-Ink display, none of them really stand out from the wearable pack. A watch fully covered in e-paper at least sounds unique, but that’s not always enough. As we’ve seen from smartphones with dual-screens and edge-to-edge displays, these kinds of innovations risk being different for different’s sake, and not actually more useful than what’s already out there. The real challenge for Sony’s new business creation division will be to steer clear of the former category.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


I’m not going to call them out by name. I’m not that fond of getting nasty calls from PR folks, but I’m going to list what I think the conditions are for failure and you can then apply those conditions to your vendors to see how they fit. This goes beyond technology and into most areas of business.

Let’s walk through the danger signs.

1. Massive Change

There are a number of massive changes set to hit the market this decade. Artificial Intelligence is the scariest and a growing number of folks believe that this may be the thing that ends the human race if we aren’t a lot more carful than we have been.

Granted they said that about the atomic bomb and Hadron Collider, but those also posed huge risks. Comprehensive converged data centers, whether they are inside or outside of firms (public or private clouds) are changing massively how we buy technology and, once in place, tend to lock out everyone else.

Social Manipulation from products like Plague will make it far more effective to manipulate people’s opinions rather than just respond to them. And robotics, which encompass everything from self-driving cars and scanning 3D printers to robots like Baxter which can easily replace individual workers, all converge to make the world of 2020 vastly different than the world of today. Past misses of PCs, the Internet, search, social media and consumer electronics all pale in significance to what is coming and most vendors just aren’t prepared for this level of change.

2. Unprofitability With Low Reserves

If a firm isn’t making money it isn’t building up reserves and firms will need large reserves as the retool for the coming massive change in this segment. A small firm that can’t find profit, or a large one that can’t simplify to create it, simply won’t have the operating headroom to survive the change that is coming.

There is one segment where this may not be true and that is software because the capability for software to pivot quickly is unmatched in hardware or services. If a company is basically on life support, unless it has some kind of amazing breakthrough hit (which is statistically unlikely), it probably won’t be around in 2020.

3. Excess Complexity

To survive the coming changes firms will have to identify the risk and then pivot quickly to address it. Large complex companies can’t pivot, which is why the majority of companies that were around in the ’80s weren’t around by the end of the 1990s.

If you are big and complex your capability to pivot timely is vastly reduced as is your capability to address changes like this in a timely fashion. There are too many distractions, too many executives who will actively refuse to see the change and then when they finally do, or are replaced, too little ability to drive change into the firm. Sony is a good example of this. It got overly complex and both Apple and Samsung took them out at the knees as a result.

4. Being a Public Company

While being public doesn’t assure failure the “activist investors” are using their increased clout to drain public firms of the resources they’ll need to pivot when the market moves. Private firms are far more able to invest in anticipating the future and build reserves without massive pressure to pay them out in dividends or through stock buyback programs. Private firms, whether they are pre-public or taken private, are able to take the necessary risks without the fear of being pounded in public by traders needing a financial fix.

5. Lack of Vision

If you can’t see the future you can’t anticipate it. There are a lot of firms currently being run by people who likely would be better in COO roles than in CEO roles because they are great at keeping the lights on but couldn’t spell “vision” if they had the word in front of them.
We saw this in spades with Microsoft last decade and while that firm’s massive resources allowed it to survive, Steve Ballmer clearly didn’t and it was largely because he was the wrong kind of CEO for a firm that needed to change massively to adjust to the changing market. Operational types will run from change because they are best at managing to the status quo. But you are not only looking for someone with vision but someone that clearly is anticipating the changes that are coming.

No One Thing Assures Failure

I’m not suggesting that if a firm has one of these problems it will fail, but if it has several its prognoses won’t be that good. This isn’t as much an issue if you are buying a generic device because you can easily switch to another, but if they are offering either a unique solution you’ll depend on or one that is so massive you can’t easily replace it, your vendor’s risk becomes your risk and you’ll want to avoid that.

So as we approach the end of the year, step back and look closely at the vendors you can’t replace and if you determine they are at high risk of failure you should put in place contingency plans to replace them. If you agree with the massive amount of change I’m anticipating you may want to put in place contingency plans for every critical vendor just in case because no firm is totally assured of surviving what is coming.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


IBM appears likely to launch the first products of its mobile partnership with Apple in December, a bit later than Apple CEO Tim Cook had predicted last month.

The two companies joined forces in July to help enterprises mobilize their employees and applications. In the exclusive partnership, IBM plans to develop applications for specific industries that will run on Apple phones and tablets, which IBM will resell with its software pre-installed. IBM activation, management and security software are also involved in the deal. The partnership could give Apple the credibility it’s never quite achieved in IT departments and link IBM to a popular mobile ecosystem.

On an Oct. 20 call to discuss Apple’s fiscal fourth-quarter earnings, Cook said developers were working closely on the first set of solutions from the partnership, which would be ready “next month.” Those solutions would cover six business sectors: banking, government, insurance, retail, travel and transportation, and telecommunications, he said.

With November winding down toward the Thanksgiving holiday Thursday, no products have yet launched publicly. A source who was briefed by IBM said the company expects to have some news about the products Cook mentioned in December.

Apple and IBM could not be reached for comment on the product timing.

Complex combinations of enterprise products don’t live and die by firm ship dates the way consumer devices do. There’s no holiday shopping season to miss, and customers can’t exactly take these products home from the store and start using them immediately. It’s likely anyone interested in buying one of the solutions is already consulting with IBM and knows where development stands, said Pund-IT analyst Charles King.

“Very often in the enterprise IT space, vendors communicate very clearly with the large customers that they’re dealing with,” King said. “If there are any sensitivities, I think they are being addressed behind the scenes.”

Developing potentially hundreds of software components, mixed and matched in various combinations, takes place on a different timeline from an iPhone or an iPad, said analyst Roger Kay of Endpoint Technologies Associates. “It’s not like they were just going to pop out this whole suite of products,” Kay said.

Yet Cook’s comments stood out because the solutions he was discussing basically will be IBM’s products, not Apple’s, Kay said. It’s rare for a tech executive to discuss ship dates for another company’s products, even if that company is a partner, he said. “Almost everyone declines to do that,” Kay said.

“My sense is that Tim Cook did not really mean to promise when IBM’s products were going to come out,” Kay said.

And Cook surely hasn’t been in the dark about the project’s progress, analyst King said. But running the world’s most valuable company comes with a certain amount of confidence. “Tim Cook is not known for being shy,” King said.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


Opera Software thinks users are ready to subscribe to mobile apps just like music and is pitching curated versions of the company’s Mobile Store to operators.

With the Opera Subscription Mobile Store, operators can create their own stores and users pay a weekly fee to download as many apps as they want. The shorter subscription length was chosen to let users dip in and out and to keep the cost down, said Jay Hinman, vice president for Operator Solutions at Opera.

Taking inspiration from the success of the likes of Netflix and Spotify is a good way to try to differentiate a service. But competing with Apple and Google continues to be very difficult, and the all-you-can-eat model doesn’t take into account the popularity of in-app payments, according to Paolo Pescatore, director of multiplay and media at market research company CCS Insight.

But Opera is convinced more competition will be good for both developers and users, according to Hinman. For developers, the mobile operator stores offer more flexibility as they can sell apps for Android, BlackBerry and Java. The public Mobile Store adds iOS and Windows Phone. Users will have the freedom to download as many apps as they like.

The mobile operator stores will be curated versions of Opera’s existing Mobile Store, offering between 10 percent and 30 percent of the public store’s 300,000 apps. The company has already rolled out stores for MTS in Belarus, Russia and the Ukraine as well as for TIM in Brazil, and XL in Indonesia. The cost per week is less than US$1 for all of them.

The number of apps Opera offers still pales in comparison with Google and Apple, which have about 1.47 million and 1.4 million apps and games for their respective OSes, according to app store analytics company Priori Data. But Opera’s 300,000 titles and about 100 million visitors every month are still enough to make it a contender, it said.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


Twitter, hungry for new data to fuel its targeted advertising, will start looking at what other apps its users have downloaded.

Starting Wednesday, the company will begin collecting data on which other apps its users have on their iOS and Android smartphones. The data, Twitter says, will help it deliver better “tailored content” to its users. That’s sure to include ads, but maybe also better recommendations about whom to follow when users sign up, or more relevant first tweets in the feed, which could help Twitter hook people early.

It’s strictly a list of the apps users have installed, Twitter says, not data pertaining to what people do inside those apps. So Twitter would know if you have a ride-hailing app, but it wouldn’t see your rides taken with the app.

Twitter is not the only company to collect this sort of data — other major Internet companies like Google and Facebook do it too under certain circumstances. Facebook, if a developer has integrated its software kit, might use the data for mobile app ads.

Still, Twitter’s move stands to raise privacy concerns at least among some people, perhaps depending on which other apps are on their phones.

Twitter’s data collection will start automatically, unless users have already turned on the built in “limit ad tracking” or “opt out of interest-based ads” option on iOS or Android phones, respectively. Twitter users will be notified of the data collection, but they can turn it off at any time from within their app’s settings, Twitter says. If users turn it off, the data is removed from Twitter’s servers, the company says.

Twitter currently relies on several other types of data to target ads. This data include whom individual users follow on Twitter, the composition of their social network, how they tweet, and how they interact with other tweets. Ads might also be targeted using a person’s profile information, their location, or IP address.

Adding people’s downloaded apps to the mix could help Twitter add more smarts to its ad targeting. Or not. Twitter, again, won’t be tracking how people use the apps. So if someone has a bunch of apps sitting on their phone that they rarely use, it might not help Twitter all that much just to know that they’re there.

News of Twitter’s new app collection data was first reported by Re/code.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


Google on Monday gave traditional Google plug-ins a stay of execution and instead outlined a three-step plan that will finalize their demise in 10 months.

The delay was the latest move in a year-long plan by Google to ban plug-ins built to a decades-old standard, a decision it has pitched as a security enhancement.

NPAPI (Netscape Plug-in Application Programming Interface) is the plug-in standard that harks back to Netscape, the 1990s browser that Microsoft buried in its antitrust-triggering battle over the browser market. NPAPI has long been the most popular plug-in standard, and is still supported by Apple’s Safari, Mozilla’s Firefox and Opera Software’s Opera. (Microsoft’s Internet Explorer (IE) has always relied on its own proprietary ActiveX architecture.)

But NPAPI has been criticized for slack security, with years of plug-in hacking proving opponents right. In response, Google has pursued its own plug-in architecture, dubbed PPAPI (Pepper Plugin API), pronounced “pepper,” that runs code inside a “sandbox,” an anti-exploit technology designed to at least hinder hackers from pushing malware onto machines.

Opera is the only other browser that currently supports NPAPI — not surprising, since it’s built atop the same browser engine that powers Chrome.

In September 2013, Google announced it would pull support for all NPAPI plug-ins from Chrome by the end of 2014. The Mountain View, Calif. company reiterated that pledge in May, although it hedged by applying the word “probably” to the timeline.

The end-of-2014 deadline has now been extended.

In a blog post Monday, Justin Schuh, a Google software engineer, provided an update that spelled out a new three-step process to gradually reduce NPAPI support rather than yank it in one quick move.

“Although plug-in vendors are working hard to move to alternate technologies, a small number of users still rely on plug-ins that haven’t completed the transition,” Schuh said to explain the change.

Those “alternate technologies” for managing and playing video and audio, generating other content, and serving as foundations for Web-based apps are predominately, but not exclusively, based on HTML5 and JavaScript.

In January, Google will discontinue the “whitelist” that currently lets only a handful of NPAPI plug-ins, including Oracle’s Java and Microsoft’s Silverlight, run without popping up a warning. At that point, NPAPI plug-ins will continue to work within Chrome, but all will present a pop-up alert and require user approval.

Come April 2015, Chrome will stop supporting NPAPI plug-ins by default, although users can override the ban. Consumers can switch support back on via the chrome://flags options, while corporations running the browser can do the same through the Google Apps control panel or Windows’ Group Policy. Also in April, Google will pull add-ons that require a NPAPI plug-in from the Chrome Web Store.

Chrome will finally be stripped of all NPAPI support in September 2015, when even an override won’t work.

As Google continues to deprecate NPAPI plug-ins and eventually eliminate support, some users may need to run an alternate browser — such as Firefox, Opera or Safari — to interact with sites that require the older technology.

“What about Web pages, like most — if not all — banks in Brazil, that need Java?” asked one user in a comment appended to Schuh’s blog.

Google offered more information on its Chrome plug-in strategy in a developers guide available on its website.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


Everybody wants to join the DevOps movement. Everybody wants their developers and their operations people to work more closely together and take advantage of greater internal IT harmony with the result of higher agility and a faster time to market.

But a new study sponsored by Microsoft finds that while everybody wants to adopt DevOps, the cultural barriers between developers and operations are way more of an obstacle to getting there than any shortcomings of technology. The study — conducted by Saugatuck Research and given the lofty title of Why DevOps Matters: Practical Insights — found that overcoming those barriers are both the primary challenge and biggest opportunity for helping customers get there.

The survey polled “over 300 development and IT operations professionals and managers,” and found that 71% of IT shops had pockets of automation, and 54% were testing DevOps practices on individual small projects. That’s a good start, but only 37% say they have formal DevOps strategies.

Why? Because getting people to overcome personal habits and established workflows is a huge challenge. More than half of respondents said that “overcoming cultural habits inside my organization/company” was the primary hurdle to formalizing DevOps practices, with 37% saying that the real issue is that they simply don’t understand it.

“Technologists are good at new technology, but less at introspection and changing themselves,” says Mike Bauck, co-founder and co-CEO of configuration management startup ScriptRock, which advised Microsoft on this study in particular and DevOps in general.

In other words, the issue isn’t a lack of good, mature tools — just look at the big success of products like Chef, Puppet, Ansible, and ScriptRock’s own GuardRail. The problem is getting people to use them across the entire organization and not just in isolated pockets. The network effect is real and strong, and change can only occur when everybody’s invested.

The real way forward, says Volker Will, Microsoft’s chief DevOps evangelist, is to push tools that help the disparate operations and development teams work together. He also says that you know, users of the Microsoft platform are uniquely positioned to better join the movement toward agile, flexible development and management thanks to the extensibility of Microsoft tools on the Microsoft platform, especially once the DevOps mindset is extended to the Microsoft Azure cloud.

It’s a Microsoft-sponsored study, after all. But it raises yet more evidence of the newer, developer-friendly Microsoft: Will says that it’s the company’s position that real DevOps change will only come when the huge population of Windows-running IT shops out there are allowed to use the tools they want to use on the platform. If developers can’t use the tools they want to use, it just makes more headaches for operations and deepens the divide. But it also leads to enabling the integration of the kinds of third-party, open source, collaborative tools that makes DevOps possible.

“It will enable all the players to get what they really need,” Will says.

The study concludes with the finding that maybe, just maybe, Windows shops are more likely to successfully adopt DevOps, just because a more homogenous platform makes it easier to find and deploy the necessary tooling. But the real takeaway here is that DevOps is desirable and coming, and getting people to actually work together isn’t easy. The study’s advice: Start with small projects and grow your DevOps culture from there.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


Three days after saying stock of its new Band smart wristband would be replenished throughout the coming holidays, Microsoft changed course.

In an email to potential Band customers sent late Monday, Microsoft said “we no longer have any [Bands] available for online sale” and urged customers to check local Microsoft stores that “may” have some in stock through the holidays.

Customers were given a one-time $10 promo code to use with a future online purchase of $50 or more to “make it right,” according to the emailed letter.

After an inquiry by Computerworld on Tuesday, a Microsoft spokeswoman said via email that “there are indeed plans to replenish inventory through the holiday season and we’re working first to fill back orders in [physical Microsoft] stores.”

Inventory for Band has been on again and off again. After it first went on sale Oct. 30, online orders were suspended after about two weeks, then reinstituted Nov. 18, only to sell out in the next day or so.

Customers and analysts criticized Microsoft for its handling of the matter. Microsoft had clearly intended the $199.99 Band to “showcase the power of Microsoft Health” software for multiple smartphone platforms, but some said the company didn’t give enough attention to Band stockpiles.

Microsoft Health is health and fitness-related software that can run on multiple smartphone operating systems — Windows Phone, Android and iOS. Microsoft also is making software tools available to developers to design wearables that can run Microsoft Health.

The Band has multiple sensors for detecting heart rate and other inputs. It includes a tiny microphone to take voice commands that can be relayed to a Windows Phone smartphone running the Cortana digital assistant. It also can be connected via Bluetooth to other smartphone platforms for various functions.

Interest in Band is partly due to a heightened interest in wearables generally, including smartwatches such as the Apple Watch, due to ship in early 2015.

Dan Schliebe, a potential Band customer who works at a health club in the Denver area, called Microsoft’s email on Monday and decision to give a promo code for $10 a “bogus decision” and “unbelievable.”

Schliebe went online to buy a Band on Nov. 18 when sales were restarted after the first stoppage. He also talked by phone that day with a Microsoft employee who assured him that his online purchase had been made. Later, he discovered it wasn’t actually made.

Schliebe then sent an email to Microsoft which he copied to Computerworld on Tuesday calling the decision not to sell online “a poor one” adding he “wouldn’t waste … time waiting in line at a local store which is … very crazy, especially during the holiday season.”

Schliebe is a solid Microsoft customer and owns three Surface RT tablets that he and his two sons use. “This [complaint] comes from someone [who] really wants a Band,” he said.

While Microsoft’s shortage of Band inventory won’t affect large numbers of customers, analyst Patrick Moorhead of Moor Insights & Strategy called it a bad business move. He said Microsoft didn’t want to produce too much Band inventory after losing nearly $1 billion on unsold inventory of the original Surface tablets.

“Business-wise, running out of inventory is always better than having to write-off millions or billions of inventory, but running out before the holidays just isn’t good business management,” Moorhead said.

In one example of too much inventory, Samsung reportedly ordered production of far too many its Galaxy S5 smartphones that haven’t sold well globally, contributing to a number of changes at Samsung, including in upper management.

Microsoft’s primary objective with the Band was to be able to “check the box that they did a wearable in 2014 and provide a development vehicle for Microsoft Health,” Moorhead said. “They were burned on Surface inventory from being very bullish and now it appears they went the no-risk inventory path. To sell out online before the holiday season starts clearly demonstrates this.”

A Microsoft spokeswoman last Friday sent Computerworld an email saying the company was “excited by the response… to Microsoft Band.” She said that Microsoft would not comment on how many were made, but that sales went “well beyond” the 5,000 that many reports said were initially produced.

She concluded: “We will continue to replenish inventory throughout the holiday season.”

It appears that was still the case as of late Tuesday, despite the Monday email to customers. For Schliebe, he said he’s given up ordering a Band online after his experience.

Carolina Milanesi, chief of research at Kantar WorldPanel, said Microsoft might not have planned well for the demand, but predicted the problem with Band inventory will blow over. “In the big scheme of things, I do not think this really matters,” she said.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


Chip-and-PIN payment cards have a strong supporter in the hotbed of payment technologies, with San Francisco’s district attorney promoting the new technology as a way to cut down on fraud.

As nearby tech startups like Square and giants like Apple and Google invent new ways to buy things, San Francisco DA George Gascon is pushing for stores to accept chip-and-PIN, an updated version of the tried-and-true credit card.

“We’re still using old technology that’s very easily skimmed,” said Gascon, referring to malicious software and devices used by fraudsters to collect people’s card information and duplicate their cards.

That’s why chip-and-PIN card technology is needed to thwart payment card theft, he said. The chip in the cards creates a one-time code for each transaction, making it harder for criminals to create a fraudulent card that’s of any use. In combination with other improvements such as point-to-point encryption, chip-and-PIN may help to prevent thefts of payment data like the large-scale attack at Target last year.

With chip-and-PIN, customers insert the card into a slot in the store’s reader instead of swiping the magnetic strip through the machine.

“This will provide tremendous protection for consumers,” Gascon said Tuesday at a local bookstore in San Francisco. He was kicking off a campaign to build awareness around chip-and-PIN (also known as EMV for EuroPay, MasterCard and Visa) and get more merchants to accept the cards.

Gascon hopes to translate growing awareness of EMV into action by consumers, businesses and banks. He’s no stranger to issues of crime and tech, having also pushed for a kill switch in smartphones to curb theft.

EMV is already commonly used in Europe, but it’s been slow to catch on in the U.S. That may soon change, as American stores face a looming deadline to install readers for the cards. Come October of 2015, businesses that don’t accept chip-and-PIN cards could be held liable for card fraud, something that the cardholder’s bank normally takes care of.

Gascon’s campaign is aimed at helping more merchants nationwide, but particularly in San Francisco, get on board.

“We’re trying to move ahead of this,” he said on Tuesday, during an event at Green Apple Books. The store started accepting chip cards in August, and roughly 10 percent of shoppers use them, workers there said on Tuesday.

American Express, Discover, MasterCard and Visa have all announced plans to move to EMV in the U.S.

More businesses need the right terminals to work with the cards, but hardware isn’t the only issue. About 30 percent of businesses already have terminals but may need to update their software, said Stephanie Ericksen, VP of global risk products at Visa. By the end of next year, roughly half of all merchants will have updated their terminals and half of all cards will have chips, she estimated.

The federal government is also getting into the act, with President Obama recently ordering chips be placed in government payment cards.

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images


Breaking up Hewlett-Packard is “totally the right thing to do for this company,” CEO Meg Whitman said Tuesday, after HP reported declines in revenue and profit for the last quarter.

“We’re going to make more progress as separate companies than as two companies together,” Whitman told financial analysts on a conference call.

But it’s a monumental task — “the biggest separation that’s ever been done,” according to Whitman.

And it’s not a typical break-up, where a company spins off a small part of its business. Each of the new HPs will be a behemoth in its own right, with about US$57 billion in revenue.

HP announced last month that it will divide itself in two by around this time next year. One company, HP Inc., will sell its printers and PCs, while the other, Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, will sell its data center products and services.

Around 400 to 500 executives will manage the split, Whitman said Tuesday, while the other 275,000 employees try to get on with running the company.

“We’ve got deadlines every month on decisions that have to be made and operations that have to be changed,” she said.

HP has 786 legal entities around the world, and each needs to be “rationalized” and studied for the legal and tax ramifications of the breakup.

Still, she insisted it’s the right course. By splitting in two, the rationale goes, each company will be more focused on the products it builds and the customers it serves. And it gives HP a chance to review “every line item” and reshape the new companies almost from scratch.

Whitman has faced a huge task trying to turn HP around, after several big missteps by her predecessors. She was opposed to a break-up in the past, saying last year that “we are better and stronger together.”

She didn’t say why her thinking changed, but HP’s results have improved little since that time.

On Tuesday the company reported a 2 percent drop in revenue, to $28.4 billion, its 12th quarterly decline in 13 quarters. Profits were also down, by 6 percent, even though HP has cut 45,000 jobs to reduce its costs. Excluding some one-time items, its earnings climbed 5 percent to $1.06 per share, in line with its forecast.

HP’s huge PC division continued its growth spree, with sales up 4 percent. But that division has benefitted from businesses that were slow to upgrade from Windows XP, and most of those upgrades are now complete.

The company’s printer, server and storage divisions all reported declining sales, with networking the only other bright spot.

HP increased its spending on research and development by 10 percent this year, Whitman said, and it’s been innovating on several fronts. Its Sprout PC broke new ground in 3D printing and touch computing, and it’s designing a whole new type of computer architecture called the Machine.

But it’s unclear when those and other initiatives, like its low-power Moonshot servers, will pay off. At one time, Whitman predicted a return to growth for HP in 2014, but that hasn’t happened, and on Tuesday she said it probably won’t happen in 2015, either.

So HP is starting the fiscal year with its work cut out for it — even without the distraction of breaking up the company.

Customers and employees are “excited” about the split, according to Whitman, but big structural changes rarely lead to increased sales in the short term — just ask Dell.

“I have a lot of confidence that we’ll deliver in fiscal year 2015, which is critical,” Whitman said. “The most important thing we can do to get these two companies off on their own is to deliver this year.”

News Source : (itnews.com) | Image Source : Searched via Google Images

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 10,367 other followers