Disqus - Latest Comments for cote

Re: If you’re implementing pagination, you’re not doing agile.

cote — Mon, 07 Nov 2016 12:08:04 -0000

Yeah, i think focusing on a handful of those principals is good. It allows you to always ask "are our day-to-day activities helping us achieve out goals"?

Re: A Few Suggestions for Briefing Analysts

cote — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 12:42:57 -0000

Sure, that's true. The issue is more when, every five minutes, people stop and want input. Asking for input at the end, or casually is fine - most analysts, myself, can't help themselves. The problem is more in misunderstanding the "products" available. Giving deep, consultative input is part of what analysts get paid for, so at some point in briefings there's a line of "well, I (the analyst) have been talking for about 20-30 minutes of this 60 minute call...this should really be a paid engagement."

To compare it other consultative domains, if I had an accountant spend 30 minutes giving "feedback" on my annual tax returns...I should probably pay them.

Granted, as I hope I made clear, this is a pretty minor thing and, as you point out, there's much nuance to when it's good and bad.

The broader point this raises is "what's the point of a briefing?" For most people, it's a marketing exercise, getting the word out about their company/product with the hope that the analyst will help promote it by mentioning it, writing about it, etc. In those situations, the "bi-directional flow of value" can be dodgy; these are usually the ones where people ask for the most feedback (I always feel like there's some cheap mind-trick they're doing where if you get someone to agree with you/think it's their idea, they'll be more of a fan of it). In the case of 451, since we write a lot (and many analysts write a report for every briefing they get), there's a PR reward-cycle here for doing briefings.

There are other briefings that are more along the lines of what you're saying, just "syncing" up between two people about the product/etc. at hand. This is the kind of briefing (I'd still assume) that has much value with RedMonk: you want to run it by them and see how they react to it, get involved in their ongoing prattle about the space, and hope to get some feedback; at least that's what I did when I was at RedMonk.

Again, the point of my griping is that there's a certain line where getting "feedback" turns into actual consulting work, like "bullet proofing slides." Perhaps that's also part of the quandary around me complaining about it: can you really do anything valuable in an hour chunk? Well, yes, you can completely pull apart and redo a presentation in that amount of time. You can point out deficiencies in the pitch, point to partnerships and missed opportunities, and give an overall "review" of the subject at hand.

I often think of that scene in Pattern Recognition where they have Cayce just sit down and react to products and logos they're about to release. Seemingly, that should be a free service, but it turns out giving those quick reviews and reactions is her core business. The value to her customers is avoiding releasing crap products.

Of course, if you don't think the analyst (or whoever you're talking to) at hand provides feedback worth paying for, then no problem, really. But if there is value in it, paying for it is always encouraged.

Re: A Few Suggestions for Briefing Analysts

cote — Thu, 09 Oct 2014 13:16:31 -0000

Agreed on the "not thinking about it," hence me not really ever rebuking the request...and trying to type up that point to educate people on how we make money and, hopefully, be a little more understanding ;)

Re: A Few Suggestions for Briefing Analysts

cote — Thu, 09 Oct 2014 11:35:11 -0000

I think point #2 is where people waste the most time. And polite analysts like myself let them do it. In general, discussing "macro" issues is not interesting. We know computers are awesome, businesses want to focus on using IT to make more money, and everything that came before the offering being briefed on is crap.

There's two common patterns I see, at startups and large companies here:

- startups like to re-use their VC pitch deck (or something else weird), which is usually that TED-level 500 slides that takes forever to get to a meaty point.

- large companies often talk about "solutions" and industry needs, and all sorts of high-level nonsense (did you know companies could be using computers to make more money? I know! crazy right?! Check out this picture of a guy in a suit smiling.)

In both cases, what I want to see if the actual product, what it does (feature set), and how it does it. Screenshots and demos are nice.

When looking at a new product - be it from a large company or a startups - the default assumption I have is that the product is crap and does not work as well as promised. Like the rest of the IT world! What I want to see a reason why this product is better and solves problems in a better way.

And, as you note, sometimes there is a genuinely new thing that demands a lot of "macro" talk. Like, remember when you and I had that first briefing with 3Tera long ago? It wrapped up all of the problems here: one, they needed to educate us about what "private cloud" was (this was back in 2007 or so before that concept existed) but at the same time, they needed to tell us the actual technology stack that was supporting it (I remember you badgered them for about 30 minutes before they stopped saying "new paradigm" and started saying "Linux").

As a more contemporary reference, I've had similar experiences (though better) with Mesosphere and CoreOS. The initial Mesosphere briefing I got was very "macro": grandiose, revolutionizing how all applications would run ("So, I can run SharePoint and Lawson on this?" "Well, not exactly...all applications except those," etc.) but once I started asking questions about the stack, it perfectly turned into nerd talk and was great. CoreOS skipped the macro talk with a simple "updating Linux sucks" and moved onto the stack (all etcd, systemd, hot/cold images, containers, etc.) and discussed how that was all different than "the current paradigm."

And, on point 9, another phrasing would be: "so, can you give me some free stuff?" I don't think most people understand that casually and formally giving people advice is a large part of how us analysts get paid (and 80-90% of how RedMonk gets paid - 451 has a paywall, as do others). Again, I'm very polite and never really say anything, but unless I'm "friends" with the person briefing me or they're regular, good clients...and they ask for "input and feedback" I find it rude. It's like asking a doctor or a nurse to just "check out" some ache I have in my back instead of scheduling an appointment: I'm asking them for free stuff.

Re: CotéIndustries.com

cote — Fri, 12 Sep 2014 13:33:04 -0000

For SaaS ("Air,") the answer is "everything," it's just a question of timing over the next 2-3 years, I believe.

Re: CotéIndustries.com

cote — Fri, 12 Sep 2014 11:51:04 -0000

I don't have a detailed breakdown, just high-level. I do have some slides. I'm hoping we'll write some more detailed stuff at/after the BCN VMworld...it feels like it's best to wait until then to let the brand-pie fully bake.

Re: The VMware Cloud Explained, Software Defined Talk Podcast #009 | The New Stack

cote — Tue, 09 Sep 2014 22:05:38 -0000

Thanks, those look interesting!

Re: On analysis | Untitled

cote — Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:04:23 -0000

That's kind of you to say.

Yes, when I've worked for vendors I've always found it odd how difficult it is to get "leaders" to listen to their own people vs. wanting "validation" from 3rd party sources. Things are weird in big companies, to say the least.

Re: On analysis | Untitled

cote — Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:20:09 -0000

RedMonk was the firm started in 2002 that I was referring to.

I think 451 had been started a few years earlier.

Spiceworks seems to be figuring out some "user voice" stuff, and in Austin the firm Wisegate is sorting out what a peer-based analyst approach looks like.

Also, I like the work that people like Horace at asymco.com and Ben Thompson do. I'm curious how much money try make.

Figuring out industry analyst business models (how to get paid) is annoying. I wish there were more options, or, rather that I knew of more.

Re: Welcome to The New Stack

cote — Tue, 29 Apr 2014 17:40:09 -0000

This will be fun! I'm eager to see the stories pop up in my RSS feeds ;)

Re: Dell IR: we're going to go hang with the nerds now

cote — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 10:56:12 -0000

I wouldn't say I'm surprised, it's just a fun comment to document...exactly per your point. I think it's great!

Re: Why you can expect more companies to go private like BMC and Dell

cote — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 14:46:07 -0000

Yeah, that's exactly why I'm curious to observe these companies over time: to test out the validity of the "need to go private to innovate (as a big company)" claim.

Re: Reasons why M&A strategies fail once the cash is blown

cote — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 14:44:53 -0000

I'm just on page 45 of ~300, so l'll have to keep you posted ;)

Re: It Gets Cloudy at Dell World

cote — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 13:50:13 -0000

I'm glad you had a good time, and it was nice hanging out on the Think Tank panel ;)

Re: http://coteindustries.com/post/9460451861

cote — Sat, 27 Aug 2011 17:30:37 -0000

Rick: yeah, you're right to separate "IT that runs stuff" vs. "IT used by (mostly white-collar) workers - that's a good item to point out. And, even more so: I agree that tracking recent browser releases and supporting "post-PC PCs" would be a good step.

Re: \"Twitter for Machines\" Company Nodeable Launches Private Beta

cote — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:17:07 -0000

Maybe its not for car mechanics?

Re: Leaving Porter Novelli, and Jones-Dilworth, Inc. Is Born!

cote — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 11:37:40 -0000

That'll be exciting, and that's a nice out-of-the-gate client line-up. Good luck, and have fun! ;)

Re: Puppet on the IT Management Podcast

cote — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 11:47:51 -0000

Thanks for being on the episode ;)