Business @ the speed of thought
-
How is this NOT spam? :mad:
I will be faarrrkkkking legless before I am carriedcto the car ftombhere. - Michael Martin - Christmas 2015
It sells nothing?
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
It sells nothing?
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
The only two options I get are Spam and Abusive. Take your pick. Its a bloody survey...at surveymonkey no less.
I will be faarrrkkkking legless before I am carriedcto the car ftombhere. - Michael Martin - Christmas 2015
-
I have long been frustrated by the fact that after 20 years we still have not come anywhere near "business @ the speed of thought" the vision of Bill gates and co. I am currently researching this area towards a Masters thesis and I would appreciate greatly anyone willing to commit 10 minutes to a survey to help determine the barriers to integration. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SGLLNTL[^]
Matt C.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
"business @ the speed of thought"
I completed the survey - however after some 20+ years of IT experience in the world of business(retail/wholesale, clinical and bio-research) the one killer is people's inability or poor skills at thought/logic. It doesn't matter how fast or how cool your computer systems are - if those leading the project get in the way of clear thinking or lead a project down poorly thought out avenues, the project at it's best is going to be poor and at its worse may well bring the company down. Yes, I have seen a retail/wholesale business fail largely because of IT leadership/decision issues that I had made clear to the senior management, however evidence was not something that they were interested in.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
"business @ the speed of thought"
I completed the survey - however after some 20+ years of IT experience in the world of business(retail/wholesale, clinical and bio-research) the one killer is people's inability or poor skills at thought/logic. It doesn't matter how fast or how cool your computer systems are - if those leading the project get in the way of clear thinking or lead a project down poorly thought out avenues, the project at it's best is going to be poor and at its worse may well bring the company down. Yes, I have seen a retail/wholesale business fail largely because of IT leadership/decision issues that I had made clear to the senior management, however evidence was not something that they were interested in.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
The only two options I get are Spam and Abusive. Take your pick. Its a bloody survey...at surveymonkey no less.
I will be faarrrkkkking legless before I am carriedcto the car ftombhere. - Michael Martin - Christmas 2015
-
Or that Huxley described that 'Brave New World' too correctly, and we not really want it (including those that talk about it endlessly, but see it only as a source of money and not as a foundation of something better)...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
I have long been frustrated by the fact that after 20 years we still have not come anywhere near "business @ the speed of thought" the vision of Bill gates and co. I am currently researching this area towards a Masters thesis and I would appreciate greatly anyone willing to commit 10 minutes to a survey to help determine the barriers to integration. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SGLLNTL[^]
Matt C.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
I have long been frustrated by the fact that after 20 years we still have not come anywhere near "business @ the speed of thought" the vision of Bill gates and co.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
I have long been frustrated by the fact that after 20 years we still have not come anywhere near "business @ the speed of thought" the vision of Bill gates and co.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Nice one Eddy thanks. There certainly are some impressive examples where networks are exchanging information without problem and at high speeds. Even if you take email for example, the format is basically unchanged for a long time and it is easy for people to exchange data in this format. The problem was laid out by a man named Hasselbring who said there were three problem dimensions to integration: 1. Distribution 2. Autonomy 3. Heterogeneity (which amounts to basically models and structures that change rarely) The problem we have in *most* businesses is that we have distributed autonomy, changing data models and therefore different approaches to distribution with each system. Trading may be the exception due to the relatively simple nature of the data packets and the incredibly high volumes that are traded. I shall use it as a counter example in my thesis however, thanks for the contribution. Best Regards.
-
Nice one Eddy thanks. There certainly are some impressive examples where networks are exchanging information without problem and at high speeds. Even if you take email for example, the format is basically unchanged for a long time and it is easy for people to exchange data in this format. The problem was laid out by a man named Hasselbring who said there were three problem dimensions to integration: 1. Distribution 2. Autonomy 3. Heterogeneity (which amounts to basically models and structures that change rarely) The problem we have in *most* businesses is that we have distributed autonomy, changing data models and therefore different approaches to distribution with each system. Trading may be the exception due to the relatively simple nature of the data packets and the incredibly high volumes that are traded. I shall use it as a counter example in my thesis however, thanks for the contribution. Best Regards.
My pleasure.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
changing data models and therefore different approaches to distribution with each system.
I tend to disagree; we have formal specifications of what a message is, and how it is encoded. We can communicate faster than we can think. Any forum will prove the latter point.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
My pleasure.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
changing data models and therefore different approaches to distribution with each system.
I tend to disagree; we have formal specifications of what a message is, and how it is encoded. We can communicate faster than we can think. Any forum will prove the latter point.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Actually both Hesselbring and I would agree with you that if standardized messages were used, integration would be a lot simpler. Unfortunately thats not the case for most cases. Let me give you an example of what "Business @ the speed of thought" really means. Imagine if I had the thought "I wonder how many 1969 Camaros there are selling around the world for < $10,000" That thought took milliseconds, but how quickly could it be actioned? It would require data mining many auctioning sites to achieve the thought, that would not be something you could achieve in a matter of moments
-
Actually both Hesselbring and I would agree with you that if standardized messages were used, integration would be a lot simpler. Unfortunately thats not the case for most cases. Let me give you an example of what "Business @ the speed of thought" really means. Imagine if I had the thought "I wonder how many 1969 Camaros there are selling around the world for < $10,000" That thought took milliseconds, but how quickly could it be actioned? It would require data mining many auctioning sites to achieve the thought, that would not be something you could achieve in a matter of moments
That is not business, that is an example that simply looks a lot like a SQL statement. It is not a tought, nor a valuable question. In practice computer-speed will be irrelevant to this example-question; you'd first have a hard time identifying everyone who wants to make a sale, nor will there ever be a global register of all things available for sale.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
That is not business, that is an example that simply looks a lot like a SQL statement. It is not a tought, nor a valuable question. In practice computer-speed will be irrelevant to this example-question; you'd first have a hard time identifying everyone who wants to make a sale, nor will there ever be a global register of all things available for sale.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Hi Eddy, I think we're talking at cross purposes. You seem to be fixated on the physical speed of the "network" the network constitutes a very small part of what integration is about. Integration is pervasive within strategic, business and technology levels within business. The desire to synchronize data between companies is not solely based on whether or not the speed of the link is fast enough, its about whether the companies are talking the same terminology, whether they share similar security models, whether the data objects can be transformed between them. Integration is a highly complex process. Additionally you are very much mistaken if you consider the concept of selling Camaros not to be business related, automotive sales is of course a business and like all business having reliable and timely information is what can give you the competitive advantage. The ability to be able to interlink systems of similar data is critical in believing Bill Gates' vision can be achieved.
-
Hi Eddy, I think we're talking at cross purposes. You seem to be fixated on the physical speed of the "network" the network constitutes a very small part of what integration is about. Integration is pervasive within strategic, business and technology levels within business. The desire to synchronize data between companies is not solely based on whether or not the speed of the link is fast enough, its about whether the companies are talking the same terminology, whether they share similar security models, whether the data objects can be transformed between them. Integration is a highly complex process. Additionally you are very much mistaken if you consider the concept of selling Camaros not to be business related, automotive sales is of course a business and like all business having reliable and timely information is what can give you the competitive advantage. The ability to be able to interlink systems of similar data is critical in believing Bill Gates' vision can be achieved.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
you are very much mistaken if you consider the concept of selling Camaros not to be business related
Selling cars is business-related, the query you posted isn't.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
You seem to be fixated on the physical speed of the "network" the network constitutes a very small part of what integration is about.
You are talking about business (and thus, communication) at the speed of light. The speed of the medium you choose to communicate would rather have a large impact on that, wouldn't it?
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
Integration is a highly complex process.
If it is what you described, then it isn't. Yes, different companies will save their employee-info in different table-structures that are not compatible, but if they wanted to exchange that info (which they usually don't, regardless of claims that management makes) than it is simply a matter of communicating a formalized structure. Yes, companies would like to "mine" the data of the competition. Does that mean that they will share all their data? Short answer; not if it is worth money :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
you are very much mistaken if you consider the concept of selling Camaros not to be business related
Selling cars is business-related, the query you posted isn't.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
You seem to be fixated on the physical speed of the "network" the network constitutes a very small part of what integration is about.
You are talking about business (and thus, communication) at the speed of light. The speed of the medium you choose to communicate would rather have a large impact on that, wouldn't it?
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
Integration is a highly complex process.
If it is what you described, then it isn't. Yes, different companies will save their employee-info in different table-structures that are not compatible, but if they wanted to exchange that info (which they usually don't, regardless of claims that management makes) than it is simply a matter of communicating a formalized structure. Yes, companies would like to "mine" the data of the competition. Does that mean that they will share all their data? Short answer; not if it is worth money :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
In what way do you think the business scenario I stated is not business related ? Competitive analysis, strategic analysis, SWOT analysis, Inventory Management the list goes on, and all would be supplied by data from the scenario I have stated. Regarding speed, you're still missing the point. Speed of the network is important (I never said it wasn't) but it is the easiest integration factor to achieve. We have fibre optic, the network is fast. What is difficult is getting it to the point where data can be published, distributed, consumed and controlled equally as fast. Integration most definitely is a highly complex part of information and computer science, you have stated: "Yes, different companies will save their employee-info in different table-structures that are not compatible, but if they wanted to exchange that info (which they usually don't, regardless of claims that management makes) than it is simply a matter of communicating a formalized structure. " Lets say you share data with 100 companies, it is statistically improbably that all 100 companies would support the same data structure. When the next company (101) comes along and wants to share the data and finds that they do not support the model, one of the parties is going to have to change, if the first company changes their data, then 101 companies need to change data (including themselves). So you would suggest the new company change their structure, unfortunately they also have 200 companies working with their model. Change Management is a big part of the problem and is covered with Hesselbring's "Heterogeneity" problem dimension. Sorry mate, its not as simple as you think
-
I have long been frustrated by the fact that after 20 years we still have not come anywhere near "business @ the speed of thought" the vision of Bill gates and co. I am currently researching this area towards a Masters thesis and I would appreciate greatly anyone willing to commit 10 minutes to a survey to help determine the barriers to integration. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SGLLNTL[^]
Matt C.
-
Actually both Hesselbring and I would agree with you that if standardized messages were used, integration would be a lot simpler. Unfortunately thats not the case for most cases. Let me give you an example of what "Business @ the speed of thought" really means. Imagine if I had the thought "I wonder how many 1969 Camaros there are selling around the world for < $10,000" That thought took milliseconds, but how quickly could it be actioned? It would require data mining many auctioning sites to achieve the thought, that would not be something you could achieve in a matter of moments
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
Let me give you an example of what "Business @ the speed of thought" really means.
Better - real example. In the 90's I worked for a telephone company. They needed to account for different tariff systems in Europe. I was working on a team that had a generic framework used for a different product of which two developers took exactly two days to come up with a new product (with the framework) that would present a simple, very simple, visual interface to a user to allow them to change handling immediately. This was presented to some sort of committee which had a person who was responsible for delivering that solution. That person's solution involved a new project group with probably like 15 people and a year delivery time. So 15 people and year to produce exactly the same thing that our group was already demoing. Guess which one won?
-
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
we still have not come anywhere near "business @ the speed of thought" the vision of Bill gates and co.
So a marketing blurb hasn't actually met expectations, not even close, and that is a surprise?
-
In what way do you think the business scenario I stated is not business related ? Competitive analysis, strategic analysis, SWOT analysis, Inventory Management the list goes on, and all would be supplied by data from the scenario I have stated. Regarding speed, you're still missing the point. Speed of the network is important (I never said it wasn't) but it is the easiest integration factor to achieve. We have fibre optic, the network is fast. What is difficult is getting it to the point where data can be published, distributed, consumed and controlled equally as fast. Integration most definitely is a highly complex part of information and computer science, you have stated: "Yes, different companies will save their employee-info in different table-structures that are not compatible, but if they wanted to exchange that info (which they usually don't, regardless of claims that management makes) than it is simply a matter of communicating a formalized structure. " Lets say you share data with 100 companies, it is statistically improbably that all 100 companies would support the same data structure. When the next company (101) comes along and wants to share the data and finds that they do not support the model, one of the parties is going to have to change, if the first company changes their data, then 101 companies need to change data (including themselves). So you would suggest the new company change their structure, unfortunately they also have 200 companies working with their model. Change Management is a big part of the problem and is covered with Hesselbring's "Heterogeneity" problem dimension. Sorry mate, its not as simple as you think
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
In what way do you think the business scenario I stated is not business related
In the sense that the resulting information is useless, incomplete and incorrect - it is a useless academic example. It would require each seller to register and have a fixed price. Would also require to have access to each sellers' database. Yeah, sounds very likely to happen.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
it is the easiest integration factor to achieve
Perhaps you should have omitted the words "speed" and "business" from the topic and used the word "integration".
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
Sorry mate, its not as simple as you think
It is, until you can convince me otherwise. Taking your example, the worst thing you can do is to suggest that the problem is their different structure. It doesn't matter how you save your emails locally, what matters is the format in which it is exchanged. As is being educated in schools, it would not require any of those 300 companies to change their structure - what matters is the common interface.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
Change Management is a big part of the problem
I am a rather simple person, so yes, we might be talking about totally different things. AFAIK, change management is simply part of the software lifecycle and something one anticipates. ..which is often simply neglected completely - but that is not a problem either :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Are you suggesting that Bill Gates wasn't a visionary, and/or that the vision is unrealistic ?
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
Are you suggesting that Bill Gates wasn't a visionar
No one is a "visionary". Of the incredible vast array of things that people predict about the future a very few come true. Some come true because when you shoot a shotgun (a very large shotgun) at a small target one pellet might still hit.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
and/or that the vision is unrealistic
If you want to be specific about exactly what technologies you think that marketing blurb meant I am willing to address the realism of those. But in broad terms it is not only unrealistic but impossible. Note again that is very broad.
-
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
Are you suggesting that Bill Gates wasn't a visionar
No one is a "visionary". Of the incredible vast array of things that people predict about the future a very few come true. Some come true because when you shoot a shotgun (a very large shotgun) at a small target one pellet might still hit.
Beefcake 5000 wrote:
and/or that the vision is unrealistic
If you want to be specific about exactly what technologies you think that marketing blurb meant I am willing to address the realism of those. But in broad terms it is not only unrealistic but impossible. Note again that is very broad.
