Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Sep 2013 23:17 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems

Michael Dell has the won the battle for control of the computer company that he created, after shareholders backed his $24.8bn offer to take Dell private and revive the struggling business away from the incessant pressure of Wall Street.

The vote clears the way for the huge buyout, in which Dell is working with private equity partners Silver Lake after seeing off a challenge from activist investor Carl Icahn.

Must have been hard for him to see his baby slide into irrelevance. I hope for him he can turn things around, but I'm not sure if they'll be able to - they missed the boat, and it's probably in Fiji by now.

Thread beginning with comment 571992
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 13th Sep 2013 07:07 UTC
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12

We do business with Dell and I'm quite happy with them. They provide a wide range of excellent products.

The only thing that's perhaps a little bit sad is that all these great things are acquired. They don't develop anything themselves. AppAssure and EqualLogic were both bought for example. Other stuff, like printers and UPS units, are just rebranded devices. We have a Dell printer, when you open it it says Lexmark, which is owned by IBM. UPS units are referred to internally as APC's.

If you ask your account manager nicely he'll send you goodies. I have a Windows 2012 server baseball cap and a Dell vest, which is great if your co-worker keeps putting the airco in cryogenic mode.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by talaf on Fri 13th Sep 2013 07:24 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
talaf Member since:
2008-11-19

Yeah, the latest Dell business notebooks are actually good. I wasn't happy with the version I had 3 years ago, but the Latitude E6230 is very decent. Lightweight, awesome battery life, great performance, good keyboard (miles ahead compared to the previous lines). With a hi-res IPS screen, this would be a killer machine.

It took a while, but they got the business laptops right in the end.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by p13. on Fri 13th Sep 2013 07:35 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
p13. Member since:
2005-07-10

Rebranding and "added value" reselling. HP does it too.
Try and get a quote from dell on a compellent array. It's pretty laborious. They say they have to consult a separate "department" (in sweden or something, i believe, correct me if i'm wrong), but what's really happening is ... you're talking to the company they bought.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by Lennie on Fri 13th Sep 2013 09:56 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

What is the real problem is, they used to make their own products. Then they outsourced some of the work to Asia. More and more parts of the production process were outsourced to Asia. Eventually even product design was outsourced to Asia, because the people in the US didn't have the knowledge about the production process.

And then other companies in Asia were created that now compete directly with Dell.

As an example organisations like Facebook buy their servers parts directly from Asia (the OpenCompute project might design certain parts though). There is a company in the US which puts them together before it arrives at the datacenter.

Companies like Dell aren't selling servers to these organisations anymore.

Dell does have a smaller server design team that tries to make custom parts for large customers now, but that is all after the fact...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by Antares on Fri 13th Sep 2013 11:38 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
Antares Member since:
2013-09-13

Most of these observations are rubbish.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by CapEnt on Fri 13th Sep 2013 12:40 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
CapEnt Member since:
2005-12-18

Running your own manufacturing operations costs a lot. And if it is American territory, it costs even more. To make worse, if you can't keep your backlog filled with orders, running a manufacturing plant can send you to bankruptcy very fast due a simple feedback loop: factories generates expenses, accumulated expenses makes hard to lower product price, unable to lower the product price makes harder to get new customer to pay the expenses.

The whole point of outsourcing to companies like Foxconn and Asus is that they can keep huge manufacturing operations running at a optimal level all the time by relying on the orders of dozens of different "design and marketing companies".

Dell had no option at all other than outsource to remain competitive while keeping a large portfolio of products. Not even a industrial behemoth like Samsung can keep themselves competitive without some degree of outsourcing.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by znby on Fri 13th Sep 2013 12:49 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
znby Member since:
2012-02-03

We have a Dell printer, when you open it it says Lexmark, which is owned by IBM.


Just an FYI, Lexmark are not owned by IBM, in some ways it's quite the opposite - they were formed when IBM's Office Products Division was divested and turned into an independent company.

As pointed out above, I'm not sure what the point of Dell making their own printers and UPSes would be. It would cost them a lot of money to set up production, and distract them from their core business. It also wouldn't provide any value to the customer, quite the opposite in fact given that Dell are not going to churn out as many printers as Lexmark, or UPSes as APC.

Edited 2013-09-13 12:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 13th Sep 2013 12:54 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Ah, thank you for the correction!

Reply Parent Score: 2