←back to thread

IBM to acquire Confluent

(www.confluent.io)
443 points abd12 | 2 comments | 08 Dec 25 13:43 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
notepad0x90 ◴[08 Dec 25 15:01 UTC] No.46192971[source]▶
This is so fascinating to me. I mean how IBM keeps taking over other companies, but they consistently deliver low quality/bottom-tier services and products. Why do they keep doing the same thing again and again? How are they generating actual revenue this way?

Ok, so does anyone remember 'Watson'? It was the chatgpt before chatgpt. they built it in house. Why didn't they compete with OpenAI like Google and Anthropic are doing, with in-house tools? They have a mature PowerPC (Power9+? now?)setup, lots of talent to make ML/LLMs work and lots of existing investment in datacenters and getting GPU-intense workloads going.

I don't disagree that this acquisition is good strategy, I'm just fascinated (Schadenfreude?) to witness the demise of confluent now. I think economists should study this, it might help avert larger problems.

replies(20): >>46193157 #>>46193166 #>>46193230 #>>46193283 #>>46193377 #>>46193425 #>>46193477 #>>46193667 #>>46194024 #>>46195332 #>>46197840 #>>46197983 #>>46198495 #>>46198575 #>>46199548 #>>46199797 #>>46200151 #>>46200251 #>>46201636 #>>46203121 #
Lu2025 ◴[08 Dec 25 21:23 UTC] No.46197840[source]▶
> they consistently deliver low quality/bottom-tier services and products

I worked with IBMers. The main priority for a lot of them is to ensure continuous employment for themselves and their buddies. They'd add unnecessary complexity to a product to stretch out the development for another couple of years. And they work at leisure pace for tech. Actual 9 to 5, many coffee breaks. They can't compete.

replies(10): >>46198066 #>>46198189 #>>46198236 #>>46198279 #>>46198534 #>>46199377 #>>46199737 #>>46199932 #>>46200011 #>>46200871 #
phyzome ◴[09 Dec 25 00:50 UTC] No.46199932[source]▶
"Actual 9 to 5", meaning the standard 40 hour work week?

If someone is telling you to work more than 40 hours a week in a salaried position, and they're not paying out the nose, you're being scammed.

replies(2): >>46200611 #>>46201641 #
1. willsmith72 ◴[09 Dec 25 05:42 UTC] No.46201641[source]▶
depends, "out the nose" is relative based on what else you could be doing and what else is out there

and no job i've had considered 9-5 40 hours after a 1 hour lunch break

replies(1): >>46205201 #
2. phyzome ◴[09 Dec 25 14:22 UTC] No.46205201[source]▶
Well, I don't know anyone who takes a full 1 hour lunch break -- back when I was in the office, I reckon it was more like 30-45 minutes? But people at all 4 office jobs I've worked did a standard 9-5 schedule.

But yes, "out the nose" is qualified by your particular situation. For me, that might be 2-3x my normal salary, which would mean I could take breaks for a few years or retire sooner.