Not to be confused with Radiculopathy; Ridiculopathy is “The state or chronic condition of being pathologically ridiculous” according to Urban Dictionary. After reading this article I think the article and its author can be labeled as this state.
There are a couple of valid points and observations but to say things like this:
IBM launched its Social Business initiative at Lotusphere Lotus is two decades old technology! IBM first talked about On-Demand computing in 2001 a decade later we are still waiting for its version of Azure.
is just ludicrous. Lotus is clearly the lead in social business, just ask any research company. Every company mentioned is 20+ years old and each of their products are just “re-invented” every 5 or so years – including Lotus Notes and Domino. I will say Apple is probably the most inventive company with their user products but IBM is more inventive in business products, processes, and integration platforms. IBM is also the only company who fully embraces open source and pulls in valuable open source projects into its portfolio more frequently than the other companies mentioned – Google comes in a close second. To also state that Watson was based on an open source project, Apache Hadoop, and that IBM had little to do with that and it was primarily Yahoo is just crazy.
Little has been written about the fact that underlying Watson for which it has received so much praise is Apache Hadoop, and that another consumer focused company Yahoo! has been the biggest contributor to that open source tool.
Then why didn’t Yahoo create Watson? That is the entire point of open source, some companies continue down the open source path and others utilize them in actual solutions – like IBM.
I also think its funny how the author only calls out Lotus. What about all of the other brands? Tivoli, WebSphere, DB2, Rational? This is just another FUD post to tarnish the Lotus brand and bring IBM in with it.
Of course these are my opinions alone and do not reflect the opinions of IBM.