CXO

Video: Four trends that will transform IT over the next five years

Gartner has cited its top 10 IT trends to watch over the next three to five years. IT leaders should put these trends on the radar to exploit them for competitive advantage. In this episode of Sanity Savers for IT executives, I share four of these trends and give you my take on each one.

Gartner has cited its top 10 IT trends to watch over the next three to five years. IT leaders should put these trends on the radar to exploit them for competitive advantage. In this episode of Sanity Savers for IT executives, I share four of these trends and give you my take on each one.

Here's the original article that this episode was based on:

Sanity check: 10 trends that will transform IT over the next five years

About

Jason Hiner is Editor in Chief of TechRepublic and Long Form Editor of ZDNet. He writes about the people, products, and ideas changing how we live and work in the 21st century. He's co-author of the book, Follow the Geeks.

48 comments
reisen55
reisen55

Send more jobs overseas to Bangalore (by) Firing more American workers (so companies can) Cut costs, salaries and expenses (result) Increase shareholder value These are the four trends that I see. And I disagree with every single one of them. But American management believes in them totally.

ivan.ms
ivan.ms

Not very brilliand. I still remenber Bill Gates saying "640 KB will be enough"...

dbecker
dbecker

One only look at who really pays the bills for the Gartner Group and decide to whom they are pandering. It was 8 years ago now, that I took a Gartner Group representative aside and asked about the future of Sybase. His response was that there was a .60 probability that it would go out of business in a year. Eight years later and counting, the Gartner Group false prophets are far worse than evening TV weather predictions. One only need look at their long list of failures of predictions to evoke wonder at how they stay in business, but here's the deal: They tell the fools what they want to hear, and there's no better business model than pandering to fools with pockets full of money. The Gartner Group does has its place, of course. Sometimes us technologists can use them to convince management to do the right thing and pursue what we have suggested. It's a double edged sword though, since the Gartner Group sells itself out to the highest bidder and is willing to, if not bite the hand that feeds it, ignore a hand that feeds it when it finds a better deal -- not unlike my 19 year old cat. The one true and accurate prediction probably lies in the direction of more open source related materials. Yes, corporations want the cheap, but they also want assurances that support will be there when they need it, and not be held hostage to geeks who know what they are doing technically, but may not have the same greed for profit at heart so ingrained within the corporate model. So, yes, open source will be very important, it's just that the corporations will pay for what is free, but at a reduced price. So all those wonderful people who give their time, effort, energy and wonderful technical expertise without any thought of gain, just for the joy of geeking and helping their fellows, will again be the foundation for corporate profit -- something they never had in mind. Nevertheless, the little guy out there, moving to the LINUX desktop, hoping to keep ahead of the devastation creeping forward into the Windows environment, does benefit in a big way and does get all that free stuff that's more stable and better written than the stuff you pay an arm and a leg for and indenture your future generations to pay for. No, the safest prediction is the open source one, but for none of the reasons given here, or issued from the Ivory Tower Temple of the gods at Gartner Group.

koby@disklace.com
koby@disklace.com

Today it is a neglected corner in IT. The quality of data is one of the most important issues in the IT world, because it is one of the main reasons that cause performance degradation. We know the defragmentation process but we love to ignore it. In the future it will hit all portable storage devices. If your cellular phone will be able to carry 100GB of storage (Music, video, recordings etc) you will have the same problems you have now with your desktop computer. That is the reason why we refer to any USB device (MP3, Disk-On-Key and Cellular phone) as a storage device, and we check its fragmentation level. Our product LaceWatcher is capable of finding the threshold in which fragmentation is required and perform preventive maintenance. We hope we are ready for the future.

No User
No User

First of all Gartner is full of it's self as always and this is just more vomit being spewed by those morons. Apple's market share is so small that it would not be noteworthy to the market if it doubled so woop-T-do. Apple's biggest obstacle to real market share has always been it's price and proprietary elements. Yes they run windows and have Intel CPUs now and that would be the catalyst for the increase in market share. The price will hold them back. Keep in mind that the long ago days of Apples having superior craftsmanship, graphics and being faster are part of days gone by. The cloud computing and subscription software nonsense I wrote about here. http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=270642&messageID=2562674 As for IT folks being inflexible and abusing the poor users as they bring their home "consumer" devices to work well I have certainly written enough on that BS. The only inflexibility that you will encounter with IT is the nit wits who view IT as inflexible. "JC" spread legs and remove head from rectum. IT is in a perpetual state of change. If you need further explanation then get a job that has nothing to do with IT. The biggest problems with the idea of users determining what IT delivers for them is Number one although they have desires they don't want involved they want and expect it to be done for them. They don't want to be part of the process because they will be required to learn about IT and it's use in a business environment and the personal responsibility of users which they are staunchly opposed to doing. ;) Number two is they don't have a clue to base a real decision on when it comes to integrating their gadgets and toys into the corporate network and the totality of the implications that go with it. With that said they want their toys but not the work and responsibility that goes with it. Number three with our jobs being outsourced not only to foreigners but moved out of the company and creating a situation where IT folks are contractors not employees, where IT budget cuts get even sharper as more and more is outsourced and the same mutton heads that dreamed this nonsense up also consider IT as being separate from the business as if IT stands outside the business. All the while IT is being scolded by those same mutton heads who deliberately slammed the door on IT and left us outside the corporate decision making room hanging to dry "as unbelievable as it seems" they are saying to IT that IT must align it's self with the business. Talk about being blind to your own faults. The problem with that is that they must align themselves with IT so that they can align themselves with the entire business and not a case of IT choosing not to align it's self with business. Given the reality of those circumstances exactly how are those mutton heads going to pull that one off? The shrinking presence of IT folks, budget and operational input make quite the challenge to maintain now how are you going to cram consumer gadgets down our throat in addition to that? I'm sure that since this will be viewed as IT getting it's coming up ins that the corporation will shower IT folks with massive budgets for training, personnel and all that is needed to usher in this new age of liberation of users at the work place. :0 Sadly the reality check on that one would simply result in even more IT "FREE" over time hours and our own personal expense to train and greater friction between IT\user\business folks and both security and legal nightmares. :( This is just another slap in IT's face from those who have the manipulate, dominate and control mentality and hose everything up. Just as with money power should only be put in the hands of those who know what to do with it. Which would be close to a complete dipsey doodle.

billfranke
billfranke

I much prefer text to video, so I didn't bother to watch this one, nor will I watch any video that isn't instructional. Is it not possible to provide transcripts for videos so that READERS can determine by scanning the content whether it's going to be worthwhile? I'm just not a member of any of the generations that cannot pay attention to things that do not move and morph before one's eyes, and I have no intention of joining any of them either. I can't imagine a good reason for this topic to be in video format other than to reach out to the terminally bored and illiterate.

Deadly Ernest
Deadly Ernest

I disagree with some aspects of the subscription model. Some software it makes sense to subscribe as you'll be changing it very regularly - such as accounting programs with regular updates for tax changes and personnel software with regular updates for changes in the industrial relations and privacy laws; subscription will see you have the very latest at reasonable prices. For most of the office use software it is much cheaper and more effective to purchase the software license outright as you can then use it for many years without any additional costs except for expansion of licensed users. A classic example of this is the basic office suite of software; the majority of people doing word processing today are still using only the basic features they were using ten to twenty years ago as they have no use for the many new features. the same applies to most of the general office use software. Many small businesses in Australia are still running old computers with Windows 98 and MS Word 6 - this still meets all their current needs, and this is true of most. To make this worth subscribing the annual price would have to be extremely low, so low that many software companies would think it too low. Having said that, I'm aware Microsoft are in the business of forced software upgrading by making their new operating systems with changes to make them NOT fully compatible with their older software application packages. I expect this to become a burden for them as more people switch to packages that will carry forward and no extra cost. One alternative I see here is the ultimate thin client where businesses combine their existing server farm with the Internet cloud technology and buy licenses for server based software to establish and use in house variants of Google Apps and the like. The staff use basic systems with a browser and then use the company in house server based Internet office package. The rest makes sense although I think other technology trends may evolve to overtake some - with the current development levels it's hard to say which way some will go.

Editor's Picks