Developers love to complain about vendor infomercials at conferences and in press articles, and rightly so. No one wants to have marketing pitches shoved down their throats. They're boring and quite possibly counterproductive. And yet so much of our media revert to vendor content because developers, so determined not to be …
Which vendors would suffer most if the truth got out?
Which vendors have the biggest divide between marketing and outcome? Which vendors would suffer most if the truth was available?
Re: Which vendors would suffer most if the truth got out?
Well, you only need to scratch the Surface..
/me walks away whistling..
"...enterprises seem to understand the value that accrues to them by being publicly affiliated with cool technology..."
Buzzword-oriented hyperbole from the sales department has nothing whatsoever do to with the sharing of technical knowledge or resources.
Re: Wrong again.
Once the sales department has derisked the buzzwords, the hyperbole can go big time!
I give up
would this site please stop using stupid internet memes like fails.
failures is the correct word
Re: I give up
Failure is often too long for a headline. We like punchy, fun, attention-grabbing words - and we appear to have grabbed your attention ;-)
Re: grabbed your attention
"Use cases" grabbed mine.
Anything like suit cases? Or nut cases?
Re: I give up
I can be a grammar Nazi at times, but objecting to expressions that are common on the internet, while on the internet seems a bit pointless & just makes the complainer sound like a reactionary killjoy.
Many years ago I was told that its all down to "competitive advantage" - i.e. if you've spent months failing to get technology X to work then the last thing you want to do is to save your competition from the same fate.
What's the point?
I'm sorry I have to rate this article as a fail.
The truth is that any cool project would take months to years to hit the street before any discussions about who is doing what hits the street.
There were times that some of the work I did at a client couldn't be released because of the potential IP. It wasn't until we saw articles or other groups talking about doing something similar that we could talk about some of the projects.
The point is that while we couldn't talk, that didn't mean that something in parallel wasn't happening independently at another company. So eventually the truth gets out.
Or one could take the paranoid track of thoughts and that the vendor under NDA shared at a high level of what was being done at company A and then reinvented it at company B. I mean heck, over half of the solution is dreaming up what can be done in the first place....
Said anon for obvious reasons.
I've been assaulted ---- "Fast followers"? "Derisk"??
I thought it said Derek