Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Aug 2011 21:19 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 486440
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-10-28
That makes for a quick explanation but there are many other factors to consider:
1) Companies (and HP is certainly not the only one in this respect) expect a much quicker turn around for their investment than it used to be. For instance when Xerox funded the Palo Alto Research Center in the early 70s they were expecting a profit in 10 (ten) years! (see "Dealers of Lightning: Xerox Parc and the Dawn of the Computer Age" for some perspective).
2) HP's CEO comes from SAP, a software colossus, and knows absolutely nothing about hardware -- and probably doesn't understand it either.
RT.