Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
IT Technology

Gartner Reveals Top 10 Technologies For Next 4 Years 163

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the guessing-game dept.
Dr. Jim writes "The good folks over at the Gartner Group have revealed the top 10 technologies that they believe will change the world over the next four years. The usual suspects including multi-core chips, virtualization, and cloud computing are on the list. Multicore servers and virtualization will mean that firms will need fewer boxes, and apps can be easily moved from box to box (and right out the door to an outsourced data center). Workplace social networks and cloud computing means that the need for a centralized IT department will go away. Firms will no longer need to own/maintain the boxes that they use to run their firm's apps. With no need to touch a box, there will be no need to have the IT staff co-located with the boxes."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gartner Reveals Top 10 Technologies For Next 4 Years

Comments Filter:
  • by TJ_Phazerhacki (520002) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:33PM (#23603277) Journal
    Right. Completely virtualize and decentralize your environment. Save money! Work faster!

    What security?

    • Cloud Computing while a cool CS Concept and can be used in some cases. The fact that most apps are single threaded design will not gain any benefit from this and most companies don't need that level computing power. They would wast money and get small benefit. Unless they do some massive computing.

      • by laddhebert (570948) on Friday May 30, 2008 @09:30PM (#23606633)

        Cloud Computing while a cool CS Concept and can be used in some cases. The fact that most apps are single threaded design will not gain any benefit from this and most companies don't need that level computing power. They would wast money and get small benefit. Unless they do some massive computing.
        I had to reply to this.

        If you have a shop that has a very large compute farm that runs exclusively, batch jobs, then you can clearly understand where cloud computing can be a tremendous advantage. A lot of users of batch compute resources find creative ways to serialize and/or parallelize their overall process using scripts, multiple hosts, dependencies, etc. With cloud computing, all of this can be implemented automatically.

        That's a huge time and cost saver right there alone. Additionally, with our cloud computing solution (Electric Cloud), we get an additional advantage with the built in virtualization that comes along with the system. In the old days, we were forced to manage multiple development build stacks to satisfy the needs of multiple business units or departments. Now, we manage a cloud of hosts that are baseline installs, with bare minimal configurations, and the submit host's environment is replicated to the cloud nodes when a build is kicked off. This saves money on hardware resources, hardware resources, engineering resources, etc.

        You may think, well, most developers use the same build stack or tool stack - but that's an assumption that has been proven incorrect time and time again where I work. We work with embedded device developers and they have a very specific tool stack requirement, with specific versions, or may need a pristine build environment without the possibility of conflicts from various packages that may be installed on the build host.

        /-l

    • by Maint_Pgmr_3 (769003) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:49PM (#23603539) Journal
      http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=530109 [gartner.com] for the real thing
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by jpedlow (1154099)
      I'm the I.T. guy for a company that has 20 staff in the office, and 200 employees, and also owns 3 other smallish companies. Good luck with virtualizing...we run tons of proprietary apps that the devs cant even figure out how to turn them into a service, let alone make them portable to use from a datacenter in god-knows-where-istan (or california, whichever has more crazies :P ) Then, there's our connection, which, lets face it, is business cable, and goes down on occasion...so we need an in-house server
      • by Bandman (86149)
        You're right. Large corporations will be the only "technology" companies to do stuff like this within 20 years.

        Small companies that aren't IT based could hire a contractor to take care of it for them without any issues.
      • by CBravo (35450)
        1st line incidents can be solved by outsourcing which can do a pretty good job.

        Dinosaur age mainframes (and their applications) however... I've never seen it work properly because all systems are just 'too different' from each other and too much documentation has to be written (which isn't read or available).
    • by Lord Ender (156273) on Friday May 30, 2008 @04:54PM (#23604393) Homepage
      It is true that virtualization technology allows businesses to do more IT functions with less IT staff. But it is also true that businesses are doing increasingly more IT functions all the time. So long as these factor balance each other out, IT will maintain its relatively low unemployment rate and its relatively high payscale.

      However, if this balance tips, companies will benefit while IT staff loses. I consider this a possible future scenario, so I live well within my means and use a large percentage of my salary to buy ownership positions in those very companies that stand to profit from my obsolesce. That way, even if I lose in one way I win in another.

      The stock market really is an amazing force for blurring the line between the working class and the ownership class, and I take full advantage of this power.
      • by Bandman (86149) <bandman@@@gmail...com> on Friday May 30, 2008 @06:44PM (#23605467) Homepage
        It is true that virtualization technology allows businesses to do more IT functions with less IT staff.

        Actually I think it allows businesses to do more IT functions with less hardware. The staff still have to manage it. Otherwise you have an excellent strategy for retirement :-)

        • Before, if I needed a new server, I had to request the hardware, then get it racked, then get the OS installed, then get the network cables hooked up. I had to create DR plans and make sure backup systems were working.

          Now, an entire system is created almost instantly by duplicating an existing VM image. DR and backups are automatic. This requires much less time (= less IT staff).
    • by severoon (536737)

      You're right if you mean to say that most companies don't do security properly. You're wrong if you mean to say that most companies can't or won't make moves to do security properly in this new world.

      The fact is that hackers will have access to the power of massive parallelization in the cloud just as companies will. The difference is that hackers will have to find a way to continuously monetize the cycles and bandwidth they use if they're going to attack on a massive scale using the cloud. Either that,

  • by bbasgen (165297) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:36PM (#23603329) Homepage

      The article summary quotes a blog posting, *NOT* the Gartner study. Further, the blog posting only quotes the top ten items from Gartner, and provides no further data.

      The blogger is passing around FUD, without supporting those statements with any information from Gartner. This is a non-article with so little data.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by LMacG (118321)
      > The article summary quotes a blog posting

      Well of course it does. The submitter is the blogger, who must have needed some page hits for some reason. That's the second reason I didn't RTF(blog). The first is the name "Gartner" who will, of course, say anything as long as you're paying them enough.
      • by thanatos_x (1086171) on Friday May 30, 2008 @04:13PM (#23603859)
        I've read more than a few of their full tech summaries on the emerging trends, both by industry and year.

        Generally from year to year half the items would disappear from the lists (even though they were supposed to cover the next 5-10 years). In addition another quarter would randomly move about the "You'll see this technology in X years".

        Most of the rest were so obvious that it really wasn't worth mentioning, an up to speed person would have known that. Wireless will be big in the future (published 2005ish)? No way!

        The descriptions given for a technology(typically 2-3 paragraphs) were filled with jargon, and not terribly useful. Reading Popular Science and Mechanics was about as useful and far cheaper.

        So yes, the lesson is that you can't buy innovation or management skills for a company by spending 20,000 a year, but you can make a nice sum pretending to sell it.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by glitch23 (557124)

          Most of the rest were so obvious that it really wasn't worth mentioning, an up to speed person would have known that. Wireless will be big in the future (published 2005ish)? No way!

          The best part is that the Gartner reports I've seen ususally cost about $400 and probably average 8-10 pages. Not worth it in my opinion but then again for corporations who believe Gartner reports are prophecy I guesz $400 for a multi-billion dollar company isn't a big deal.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by laddhebert (570948)

            Most of the rest were so obvious that it really wasn't worth mentioning, an up to speed person would have known that. Wireless will be big in the future (published 2005ish)? No way!

            The best part is that the Gartner reports I've seen ususally cost about $400 and probably average 8-10 pages. Not worth it in my opinion but then again for corporations who believe Gartner reports are prophecy I guesz $400 for a multi-billion dollar company isn't a big deal.

            Right, in a large corporation, when a new tool or application is brought in, it usually has to go through an architectural review, a readiness review, and various other reviews. One thing corporations like to know is whether or not the company that they are about to dump $10k per seat (much, much more in a lot of cases, I'm just throwing that number out there) license on is going to be around in 5 years when the corporation is neck deep in the implementation of that product. This is where the Gartner group

    • by antifoidulus (807088) on Friday May 30, 2008 @04:01PM (#23603711) Homepage Journal
      The blogger is passing around FUD, without supporting those statements with any information from Gartner.

      And this is different from stuff actually by Gartner how? This is Gartner we are talking about, so if they did publish such a study, a more accurate title might be, "Top 10 technologies we have a vested financial interest in promoting"
    • The blogger is passing around FUD, without supporting those statements with any information from Gartner.
      Would you rather that the blogger have linked to a page where one can purchase a download of the Gartner report for at least three figures USD?
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by ihatethetv (935399)
      What are you going reading TFA!?!?!?! Get out of here with your fancy pants facts!
    • without supporting those statements with any information from Gartner.
      Well who'd have guessed - it doesn't contain unicorn feathers or mermaid toes either.
  • by moderatorrater (1095745) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:37PM (#23603339)
    'Duh'. Multicore processing? Are you fucking kidding me? You have to go out of your way to buy a computer that doesn't have multiple cores. Hybrid core? Wouldn't that be covered with the video cards opening up and letting generic code run on their processors? The rest are completely obvious in the same way. Anyone who's been watching computers for the past year could have compiled that list.
    • by TooMuchToDo (882796) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:50PM (#23603553)

      The rest are completely obvious in the same way. Anyone who's been watching computers for the past year could have compiled that list.

      You've just summed up most Gartner reports. =)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rinisari (521266)
      The hardware is there, yes, but the software is not. Not many applications are multithreaded/multiprocess.
      • The hardware is there, yes, but the software is not. Not many applications are multithreaded/multiprocess.

        That's true, but you can always run multiple applications on each server, thus getting the utilisation you want.

        These days people want to run one OS per application as well, for no good reason in most cases. If you go down that path you'll need to virtualise the OS.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by arktemplar (1060050)
      Well I'm not sure about how they have used hybrid cores, but try multicores with one core being an - on the fly reconfigurable FPGA' these kind of things would be so totally awesome if used properly. I think IBM is moving along similar lines for it's CELL series, there may be a tie-up with Xilinx involved - that I'm not so sure of, but it can be used most interestingly.

      And is not all that obvious to most of the people who are just keeping up with computers rather than computing.
      • on the fly reconfigurable FPGA

        I've often thought that was the eventual course for making computers more like the human brain. We give up speed in specific, pre-defined problems for flexibility and higher speed for general problems with the ability to adapt to new ones (at least theoretically). With scripting languages, you could swap out, in real time, the most used functions into FPGAs. Need a fast string analyzer for the next ten minutes? Done. Need some fast array sorting for an hour? Done.

        Of course, I'm a software guy, so I can

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by chthon (580889)

          It looks to me a solution with the same problems as microprogramming : looks good in theory, but too many strings attached in practice.

          One of the biggest obstacles I see is the fact that this FPGA does not run on its own : you need several interfaces (hard and soft) to the chip.

          • A programming interface
          • A data exchange interface (byte or block oriented ? or maybe both)
          • A driver of course, based upon the above byte or block oriented interface
          • An application library, containing the code to reprogram the FPGA
    • Yeah, this is How Gartner Works [bfccomputing.com]. You're not the target audience; it's middle managers at Fortune 1000 companies - you know, the kind who can pay for reports.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Red Flayer (890720)

      Anyone who's been watching computers for the past year could have compiled that list.

      Duh. Gartner's target readers are not people who've been watching computers for the past year. Gartner's targets are the people who pay other people to watch computers, so that those people can pretend to know what they are talking about when they discuss new technologies with their minions.

      That's for generic articles like this one; Gartner does some targeted research and analysis that's better, particularly if you pay a

    • by afabbro (33948) on Friday May 30, 2008 @06:28PM (#23605335) Homepage

      'Duh'

      Gartner is mainly known for two things:

      • "Duh"
      • Being wrong.
      Oh, and charging a lot. cf. Cringley's fine column on Gartner. [pbs.org]
  • "Firms will no longer need to own/maintain the boxes that they use to run their firm's apps. With no need to touch a box, there will be no need to have the IT staff co-located with the boxes."

    ...and in further news: Rocks, Paper, Scissors poised for a comeback as non-IT personal try to establish who it is that has travel half way across the continent to push the "on" button.
  • by Kohath (38547) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:38PM (#23603359)
    If you make your predictions vague enough, they have a good chance of being correct (for generous interpretations of correct).

    I predict the next 4 years in technology is going to be similar to this year. This will end up being correct for generous definitions of "similar".
    • by Gat0r30y (957941)
      Its like the horoscope - Augmented reality? Dude, I know I'll be getting high in the next four years, but seriously, I don't see how that's any of IT's business.
  • From TFA (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    1. Multicore and hybrid processors
    2. Virtualization and fabric computing
    3. Social networks and social software
    4. Cloud computing and cloud/Web platforms
    5. Web mashups
    6. User Interface
    7. Ubiquitous computing
    8. Contextual computing
    9. Augmented reality
    10. Semantics
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by sm62704 (957197)
      1. Not future; in fact may have already jumped the shark (as has the phrase "jumped the shark")

      2. "Fabric computing"? WTF is "Fabric computing"? Wikipedia leaves me ignorant, as does TFA. When I saw the phrase I thought of the first computer I ever saw [kuro5hin.org] in 1964. It was attached to a loom and wove a cloth bookmark out of thread with a design you entered with a very primitive light pen. It was the coolest thing I'd ever seen in my life, but I doubt it's what these stupid yuppies are referring to.

      4. Cloud compu
  • In an article describing Microsoft's mainstream containerized data centers (named "C-Blox") Microsoft general manager of data center services Michael Manos says his vision of the future of IT is IT workers who look more like "truckers and longshoremen than traditional IT workers". [informationweek.com]

    So are we now to believe that a "truckers and longshoremen" skills shortage shows need for an increase of the 85,000 H-1B visas already available?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by DAldredge (2353)
      Quote mining for the win! "In the C-blox world, a truck drops off a data center container and then picks it up again in a few years when Microsoft is ready to switch over to new hardware. Administrators will only enter the physical C-blox in the rarest of occasions. "In that sense, your IT workers look more like truckers and longshoremen than traditional IT workers," Manos said. It will also allow Microsoft to run the entire Northlake facility with a continuous staff of little more than 20 or 30 employees.
      • by PoliTech (998983)
        The "Quote mining" term is usually used as a pejorative. So are you accusing me of misquotation? Of an attempt to represent the views of the person being quoted inaccurately? Of taking the quote out of context?

        The summary says, "the need for a centralized IT department will go away. Firms will no longer need to own/maintain the boxes that they use to run their firm's apps. With no need to touch a box, there will be no need to have the IT staff co-located with the boxes."

        This is similar to what Manos

        • by DAldredge (2353)
          I apologize - I should have not used the term "quote mining" instead I should have said something like 'selective use of the linked article in a deliberate attempt to give your audience a distorted view of the subject at hand" Is that better?
          • by PoliTech (998983)
            If so, then "Trolling" should be a sufficient description of your comment.
            • by DAldredge (2353)
              So it is now trolling to point out that someone is paint a deliberately false picture?
              • by PoliTech (998983)

                So it is now trolling to point out that someone is paint a deliberately false picture?
                Since I debunked your claim using your own quoted text, and yet you continued on with the sole intention of baiting myself or other users into an emotional response, and since you initially disrupted normal on-topic discussion with a spurious claim of "Quote Mining"...

                Why yes! It is trolling.

  • Not the case... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by HaloZero (610207) <protodekaNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:39PM (#23603369) Homepage
    Workplace social networks and cloud computing means that the need for a centralized IT department will go away.

    But borne from the ashes of the 'centralized IT department' come the 'social networking support department'. Because no matter how intuitive you make it, someone won't get it. That fact, combined with the problem that the larger your corporation becomes, the more obfuscated every little thing is (I work for GE).
  • by AtariDatacenter (31657) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:39PM (#23603371)
    Anyone remember the guy who's TiVo started recording a lot of gay movies? "My TiVo thinks I'm gay!"

    There is a lot of room to make big mistakes in this area of computing. Contextual Computing can lead to hilarious failures.
  • by compumike (454538) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:42PM (#23603417) Homepage
    While the article and summary want to scare IT workers ("Oh, oh -- can you hear your job going away?"), perhaps it's time to get back to the big picture: Information Technology is supposed to help people do their jobs more efficiently. So, while the article does much to suggest that server-side stuff might be getting "outsourced" to the cloud, people still need to interface with it. It'd be nice to see client systems taking steps forward in terms of reliability and ease of use, but nothing monumental is changing on that side of the equation.

    But, by outsourcing/concentrating the server-side administration to the "cloud", you might free up IT workers to do less grunt work and do more in terms of process innovations, making the whole enterprise more efficient. IT workers will have to think about how they can make the business operate more efficiently, and be creative and get it implemented. Are today's IT workers ready for that level of thinking?

    --
    Hey code monkey... learn electronics! [nerdkits.com]
    • Unforntunaly not most. And espectially IT managers.

      IT Departments tend to work on keeping things running and less time analysing the buisness needs and seeing how IT can help improve it. In places that have such departments they companies run very well. When they focus on keeping things running... Things just fail.
    • by zappepcs (820751) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:59PM (#23603687) Journal
      Not only that, and you do make a hugely valid point, but all this IT infrastructure is ... well, it would grind office productivity to a halt if the printer is broken. Despite all the hardware, the paperless office has not yet taken off in any meaningful way. When the connection between your desktop and the printer is through a router that is on the other side of the country, and it takes 2 hours to get it working, productivity will drop significantly. To simply bleat on about moving the data center out into the cloud is blindly spewing PR like the run up to the invasion of Iraq.

      Much like outsourcing has come to be more expensive, so too will 'outsourcing' your data center. I'm sure that we've all heard of DDoS attacks. How convenient will they become when your data is on the other side of a router from your workers? Yeah, the SLAs sound good on paper, but oat 4:30 on a Friday of a long weekend, when your billing processes grind to a halt, how long will it take to get fixed? My personal favorite is the data center people telling me it is an application error. The billing department is telling me that their application is giving an error that a server can't be found. My code says that there is a permission problem on a network directory, and no one left in the data center has admin rights on that box.

      Yep, this outsourcing thing will work out well.

      What was that old saying? If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself? Sometimes it is true, ya know?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Bingo! That's more correct than most IT managers would ever realize. Outsourcing is just that; too expensive and even more work than to keep it in-house. I've personally seen two, local, big corp data centers get sucked into the "let's let do this and save on our expensive in-house help!" Worked out great in both situations. One company scared off any good talent and got a name around the area as a lame data center to work for, plus they're paying through the nose for their administration now! They w
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by chthon (580889)

        as always : out-sourcing or off-shoring ? Our IT department consists of only a couple of in-house people, the rest is out-sourced. However, these out-sourced people are always on-site, so this does nor make a difference in head count, only in bookkeeping strategy.

    • by pla (258480) on Friday May 30, 2008 @05:48PM (#23604961) Journal
      IT workers will have to think about how they can make the business operate more efficiently, and be creative and get it implemented.

      Puh-lease. Today's IT workers can't get our users to access network file shares rather than filling the mail spool with the same attachments (And a million revisions thereof) over and over and over... And in the few cases I've seen where people (always at least "engineers", not just your typical office staff) do use a NAS, they constantly come asking for help when they try to send outside contacts links to internal files. It seems that people have some sort of mental wall around the ideas of "local" and "not local", with no middle-ground possible. And god forbid you actually make such access secure - Users will actually burn CDs and pass them back and forth rather than even attempt to navigate the simplest of login prompts.

      So no, I don't worry about finding myself unneeded any time soon - Regardless of how easy the technology gets to use, the actual users still won't get it. And they'll need us to help them get that 10.1MB file (that the email system keeps rejecting) to Fred in Accounting - Who will then need our help opening the file.
    • The jobs are not going away, but every year there are fewer of them. The ratio of users to techs has grown every year since the late 1990's. That's nothing new though, and it will continue for a bit before finally hitting a ratio where you really can't do with fewer people.
    • My experience with IT at my job is that the people who do SAP have the knowledge (they come from the mainframe era), but the people who do the PCs don't (they are people that think they know about computers because they can find the on switch and know how to reboot using Ctrl-Alt-Del).

  • Old! (Score:5, Funny)

    by neokushan (932374) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:42PM (#23603421)
    Cloud computing is already here, Valve invented it this morning!

    On another note, an unknown company is bringing out a sewing application that promises to push multithreading to it's limits.
  • by Opportunist (166417) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:44PM (#23603451)
    No later than when companies notice that suddenly, surprisingly someone patents something they were on the verge of patenting themselves, when they notice that said company is somehow curiously located where their servers are.

    I guess even our business captains know that putting information into hands you can't control is a BAD idea. They should know. They've been gathering ours for years, and they know what value even trivial information (like your shopping habits) has.
  • by dcollins (135727) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:48PM (#23603519) Homepage
    Client: I can't login.
    Troubleshooting Step #1: Make sure it's plugged in.

    Ergo, there will always be a need for IT staff co-located with the boxes.
  • by Gonoff (88518) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:50PM (#23603543)

    Some/most of these things exist already, some of them are in use and relevant. Others are just excuses for avoiding work.

    1. Most of us have unused processor cores. Multicore is a great idea. Does this mean that someone might actually start writing software that uses them?
    2. We have an ever increasing number of virtual servers. Fabric computing might make for a better PDA or iPod but I can't see it being used in office environments for workers. Mostly for IT techs and Suits
    3. Handy for Sales Weasels but not business related for most of us.
    4. In use already. Many of us use web apps but they have yet to hit the big time. Possible...
    5. I can believe this one.
    6. Yes, computers will continue to have user interfaces...
    7. My phone is ubiqutous. I can believe that I will have a decent PC on me at all times.
    8. Needs more work to show me what that means. In the meantime - a buzzword.
    9. Overlays on the inside of my glasses? In some fields. HUDs for the masses.
    10. Another buzzword and needs clarification to me anyway
    • That post makes no sense at all! You just posted an incoherent list of things that sound like they're a reply to something... ;)
      • by Gonoff (88518)

        Yes, they are a reply to the article. I presume that when you posted, you had not actually read it.

        The purpose of the links in the /. article is to actually inform you. They are not there because they are a pretty colour...

  • by lamontg (121211) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:50PM (#23603549)
    Cloud computing doesn't make centralized IT go away.

    Amazon EC2 only provides you with servers. You still need system admins to configure and run and debug the boxes if you're doing anything remotely complicated.

    It does solve provisioning issues, procurement issues and lights-out management. But that is just a sliver of centralized IT.

    And having Amazon provide "remote hands" for you to replace failed hardware is not even a "centralized" part of IT. Even without cloud computing you shouldn't have your IT organization tightly coupled to where your sites are. All that you need is the occasional physical hardware replacement, and management of the facilities (power, cooling, etc).
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      But half the companies out there aren't actually doing anything complicated.

      I've been looking at open source ERP solutions (ERP5, Adempiere, etc.) and it makes me wonder whether you could set up a company that configures and manages servers and ERP systems. The actual boxes could be at your place or elsewhere.

      Basically, you can offer companies a complete package for HR, order management, invoicing, payroll, etc. without them having to hire a single extra person. You'd have to have a clause in the contract t
      • by lamontg (121211) on Friday May 30, 2008 @10:17PM (#23606839)
        "But half the companies out there aren't actually doing anything complicated."

        Well, I'm responding to a very strong statement saying that cloud computing will "make centralized IT go away". And while it may do so for small business, which needs a couple dozen servers to run some "web 2.0" apps or a storefront or whatever, I doubt it will have much of an impact on the IT staffs at S&P 500 companies.

        If you look closely at Amazon's SLAs as well, they aren't going to be acceptable to most large companies. Financial institutions might be able to outsource some offline batch analysis and model crunching to EC2, but their online transactional processing that needs just stupid reliability isn't going to be transferable to Amazon's cloud.

        You are correct though that by sheer number, most companies are small and most companies don't have very complicated IT needs. However, "cloud computing will make centralied IT go away" is just silly if you've got a background at centralized IT at large companies.

        There will still be a lot of IT out there, it may just be bigger IT, and some of the small IT may be eliminated, or it may turn contract work.
  • Uh, Excuse me! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Master of Transhuman (597628) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:50PM (#23603555) Homepage
    "Firms will no longer need to own/maintain the boxes that they use to run their firm's apps. With no need to touch a box, there will be no need to have the IT staff co-located with the boxes."

    How do you access the "cloud" without a computer next to you?

    You have DSL embedded in your brain?

    Get a clue. Companies may not have conventional desktop PCs in their offices, but they're going to have to have SOME sort of computing device - if nothing but a thin client or even just a flat screen terminal or a BlackBerry - to access the computing resources.

    And those devices need servicing - if not much servicing.

    Anybody who thinks computers are leaving offices is so frickin' deluded I don't know what to say.

    Not to mention that your IT staff exists mostly to solve the problems with the SOFTWARE - not the hardware. And software problems aren't going away regardless of whether it's on the desk, on a server, or in the cloud.

    Who deals with those problems may change. Companies may very well outsource their IT support - I am the outsource for my clients - but all that means is they'll pay more for less (except in my case, 'cause I'm cheap.) Their overall cost may go down, but in many cases they'll get poorer service because the IT staff servicing their problems isn't a member of the company or on site and thus has less comprehension of the company's needs. There's nothing like being on site and in daily contact with the staff to see what a company's problems are.
    • by smbarbour (893880)
      I'd have to agree with you there. I'm a jack of all trades IT worker (formal title: Systems Admin). I'm responsible for keeping both the user PCs running as well as the servers.

      If the servers were no longer my responsibility, my job would change very little.
      • by Bandman (86149)
        Amen. I'm in exactly the same boat.

        Well, close anyway. I work on the servers a lot, but there are more servers than people. I'd still have a lot to do.
    • Oh, they've let you out again?
  • I fail to see how social networks or multicore CPUs have "changed the world" or will. I would think that advances in energy efficient hardware, "green" power generation, hydroponic and other greenhouse technologies (to allow for year-round, local production of food even in places where the climate is totally lame) would be more likely to "change the world," and are things that people actually NEED to happen.

    No one NEEDs Facebook. I'm actively considering deleting my account, personally. No one is going t
  • by alen (225700) on Friday May 30, 2008 @03:58PM (#23603649)
    back in 2002 it was called web services, then it was web 2.0 and a few other things. the 2008 name is cloud computing. come early 2009 they will make up another name to hype at the conventions and get eyeballs to tech news websites
  • what the hell is "Augmented reality"??

    The only thing I could come up with is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borg_(Star_Trek) [slashdot.org]>this

    Is it "more real than real"?

    Or is it just the latest buzzword to describe something nobody has thought of yet?

    I'm completely stumped, really I am.
  • wasn't the internet suppose to do a lot of that stuff?
  • centralized IT department will go away.

    Ohhh yesss.

    Firms will no longer need to own/maintain the boxes that they use to run their firm's apps.

    Ohhh! Ohhh! Ahhh!

    no need to have the IT staff

    Cumshot

    Let's say this isn't another Gartner managerial fairy tale for a minute. Where, ***exactly*** are the cost savings? I just priced a 16-way dl380 g5 for about $5000 with drives and lots of ram. I would run out of bandwidth before I ran out of computing horsepower. That's soon to be the price of a pound of peanut
  • Once again those who "live and breathe" technology attempt to predict how technology will affect the average worker who "doesn't get" the basics of technology or care about it.

    I support over 180 teaching staff and 30 administrative staff + 2000 HS students using about 700 computers.

    Many of the staff are quite comfortable users - but 98% of them have their real job focus "teaching students". Yes they use technology but their focus is staying abreast of new trends in Math - science - History ... and creating
  • Multi-core chips WILL change the world over the NEXT four years? They ALREADY HAVE.

    They've been providing massive crunch in internet routers for years.
    • Now that I look at it more closely, it seems that most of those items have already "changed the world" pretty significantly.

      Listing a bunch of paradigm-shifters that are years old but still on an adoption rampup may be useful when trying to plan for the future. But it's a pretty simple algorithm for generating reports, not something particularly insightful.
  • Most of the enthusiasm for "software as a service" comes from companies selling the services. The problem they face is that most companies have already purchased the hardware and applications they need, and they don't need to buy them again. This is Microsoft's big problem. Really, once you made it to Windows 2000 and Word 97, office applications worked pretty well. So why buy them again? Most of the additions since then benefited Microsoft more than the user.

    The trouble with "cloud computing" (otherwi

  • Ahhh, another good old gartner prognostication.

    Really, the items on this list are so old they smell bad.

    Multicore processors - not exactly novel, plus it's just another way of packaging multi-processor systems that have been around for decades. The only new attribute is that they're coming down in price.

    Social networks? what planet have these guys been on for the last 5 years?

    Even better "user interface" at number 6.

    Frankly I'm surprised that Web 2 didn't make it. Maybe they disguised that as #5, web

  • by faust2097 (137829) on Friday May 30, 2008 @04:39PM (#23604221)
    At #7 they have "user interface" listed like it's some technology you can buy. Same with "semantics" at #10.

    Some poor IT guy is going to have a lot of complicated explaining to do when the CIO pounds his fist on his desk and yells "go get us some user interface and semantics!"
    • Yeah the 'user interface' puzzled me. What the hell does that even mean? Are they referring to touch screens or what? You'd think if they were, they'd have mentioned it specifically .
  • Gartner is missing Unified I/O which will enable servers to have a single adapter (or dual for redundancy) that is carrying both IP and FCoE (FibreChannel over Ethernet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCoE [wikipedia.org]) over a common 10GigE infrastructure. Greatly reducing cabling, management and number of connections to the server.

    This isn't akin iSCSI which had the painful overhead of TCP optimizations. While not aimed at the SMB market (who iSCSI is fine for), users that manage midsize to large datacenters will not be
  • Why are these people still in business?

    I can't remember a single insightful thing they ever had to say.

    Their predictions are usually blindingly obvious or wrong.
  • "IT is going to become much more about information and how it can be used to help the business grow and prosper."

    Management speak just keeps getting more & more powerful. Feel the power of these sentences.

    "you need to know what your firm does, and even more importantly, how it does it."

    We need to take charge people.

    IT is going to be much more about IT. Got to grow & prosper to grow and prosper. Got to succeed to succeed. Got to build the makings of greatness to make greatness.
  • This IT function is going to leave the IT department as we know it today and will migrate into the business unit itself. What this means to you is that you need to know what your firm does, and even more importantly, how it does it.

    Yes! At last some people with common sense. I'd hire them straight away.

    And no, I'm not joking. I will always prefer a moderately skilled IT guy who has a sense of what the firm needs to achieve and how he can contribute to it, over the most brilliant IT mind that's only interested in maintaining his servers in all their glorious gleaming perfection.

    I need the first person. On-site, for direct support and face-to-face discussion of how we can best achieve our goals. If I ever need the second, I'll con

  • Gartner has release another one of their polls and technology talking points! Lets all throw out everything our own experience, and judgement would lead us to conclude and get or strategies in line with their latest top 10 list as quickly as possible. I hear the even put more effort into these things then Letterman does!
  • ...with a couple of deep dish pizza's.

    Man, that pepperoni and cheese with onion was some great augmentation.

    How will you augment your reality today?

    P.S. Web Mashups are soooooo 2 years ago.
  • We don't need Gertner to know that!
    All those buzzwords have appeared dozens of times, at an increasing rate, in all our favourite IT news sites.
    Like SlashDot.
    User Interface and Ubiquitous computing are "the technologies of the future" since 30 years now!
  • ... of xenophobic national security laws, preventing such systems from legally connecting to networks outside of their primary country. While this might limit the loss of IT jobs to outsourcing to some extent, the legal boundaries could prevent such decentralized systems from ever functioning to their true and most efficient potential.

    One only has to look at how lousy the broadband industry is performing within the United States versus most foreign nations broadband networks to get an idea of what to expect

"And do you think (fop that I am) that I could be the Scarlet Pumpernickel?" -- Looney Tunes, The Scarlet Pumpernickel (1950, Chuck Jones)

Working...