Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Top 40 IT Vendors Rated

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the rank-'em-danno dept.

Businesses 69

An anonymous reader writes "CIO Insight has asked its readers to rate their satisfaction with their vendors. Not surprisingly, 'CIOs are disappointed and disgruntled with the performance of their most important vendors. In fact, the number of companies with lower scores in 2006 than in 2005 outpaces those with higher scores by a margin of two to one.' In first place was CDW, edging out last year's top vendor, Red Hat, which tied for third place this year. Microsoft came in at number 24. The coverage includes a detailed methodology on how the survey was conducted. 826 qualified respondents participated."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

well, there are reasons.... (4, Interesting)

yagu (721525) | more than 7 years ago | (#17120698)

I worked for one of these companies, and they come in the bottom five.... I'll not name the company, good luck in your quest to figure it out.

They laid me off after 21 years, a RCH away from full retirement with benefits... go figure. I was in the middle of a research project that would've connected the corporate on-line directory to APIs for IP phones (this was 3 years) ago. There was an entire team ready to fund my work and we figured in addition to increased productivity, there would be incredible hard dollars savings (no we hadn't done the business case yet). It was a promising project and there was a lot of buzz around it.

But, meanwhile, my real responsibilities were to be on the team that created the public facing web site...

Here's why a company like this doesn't end up in the top ratings: our team implemented the web site in .net 1.1 after almost completely creating a java version of it -- Microsoft convinced "us" it was important. And of course it was equally important to port it to .net 2 when that came out, what a nightmare.... those were decisions being made at the managerial level. It didn't matter all of the extra work added zero value to the customer experience, it mattered we had .net 2.0.

At the team level, I once forgot to capitalize an object or method correctly and was confronted by a peer. This was a day after the code was checked in, tested, and part of the working code. He insisted/demanded it be made kosher, and we spent a little more than half a day getting it "fixed". (I know someone's going to say that's an easy fix... it isn't when the re-factoring tools don't work the way they're supposed to and you have to start pulling in the threads by hand -- and that's what we had to do.)

And our internal clients? Wow... we spent meeting after meeting trying to all agree on buttons and their shape and their color... mind you this was an argument about the shade of button, not selecting from a pallette of colors.

Attention to service for real outside customers? Nil.

Yeah, I liked the company once, it might be apparent on many levels why I don't now. By the time they booted me, I was reminded of the ill-fated Eastern Airlines crash [] all for the sake of paying too much attention to some landing gear lights while the plane slowly flew into the ground. Way too much attention to virtually irrelevant detail and way too little attention to customer satisfaction.

Re:well, there are reasons.... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17120852)

They probably found out how much time you spent on slashdot karma whoring 10 paragraph first posts.

Re:well, there are reasons.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17121044)

I had a grand total of less than 20 posts back then. I have much more time now. Trust me, karma whoring doesn't pay nearly as well....

Re:well, there are reasons.... (1)

GweeDo (127172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17120960)

You worked for Accenture.

Do I get a prize?

Re:well, there are reasons.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17121386)

Well I can see why you might have gotten fired: your reading comprehension skills are a bit lacking. These are the TOP 40 IT companies listed. Being in the bottom 5 of the top 40 list is pretty damn good.

Re:well, there are reasons.... (1)

tool462 (677306) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121934)

If you read the methodology link, there were only 56 companies in the survey. Also, the way the sentence mentioning this is worded, the "Top 40" should be read as the top 40 most *used* companies, not the 40 highest-rated companies. Regardless of that context though, being at the bottom of that list is not something to be proud of.

Re:well, there are reasons.... (1)

Dabido (802599) | more than 7 years ago | (#17123854)

Ooooo, sounds similar to an experience I had. We had stuff ready to roll on a Sun box, and the software we'd bought was only for Unix, but somehow an IBM sales person convinced a manager we should go with some of their machines. Meant we had to buy the software a second time to run on Windows, buy an operating system and new machines from IBM.

There was a huge arguement over it all, as the Sys. Architect kept trying to explain that the software we'd bought wouldn't run on the stuff IBM was selling, but the manager kept calling the guy a liar and insisted on the IBM stuff as the IBM salesman had claimed the software would run on it. Like I said, we ended up having to buy the software a second time.

Of course, this was the same manager who asked me to find where his programs had vanished to in Win 3.1 He'd minimised his desktop by mistake and it didn't occur to him to click on the little icon on the screen. [Yeah, it was a while ago, before the company moved to NT].
To this day I don't know how that guy was earning half a million plus a year. Oh wait, yes I do, he was mates with the CEO ... who also knew bugger all about IT.

No GNAA? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17120780)

Representin mah nutz

How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (0)

ednopantz (467288) | more than 7 years ago | (#17120900)

Um, last time I checked, they had basically zero enterprise presence. The CIO may like his ipod, but they are hardly a major IT vendor at the corporate level. I mean, Lenovo isn't on the list, but Apple is?


Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (3, Insightful)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121170)

Well, according to the page [] , 17% of the companies questioned dealt with Apple. So I assume it's a case where not too many people do, but those who do are pretty happy.

I was amused by the individual rankings, though. Apple's highest scores came in "increasing revenue", "solves problems", and "high quality." Apple's lowest scores were "costs", "return on investment" (related to cost), and "flexible and responsive." In others words, they love Macs but they think they cost too much.

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (2, Insightful)

killjoe (766577) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121816)

I guess this survey puts a nail in the coffin of the "you don't have somebody to blame" whinging you hear on /. all the time. RedHat not only gives you somebody to blame but they are more responsive and responsible then oracle, MS, IBM, Sun, Novell and just about everybody else.

This has got to be a massive sales tool for a company that relies on service to make money.

Site Testing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17122298)

A lot of companies have an Apple computer lying around just to test their webpage under Safari. 17% of companies probably means they have 1 Apple computer for every 1000 Dells.

Re:Site Testing... (2, Interesting)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 7 years ago | (#17123088)

A lot of companies have an Apple computer lying around just to test their webpage under Safari. 17% of companies probably means they have 1 Apple computer for every 1000 Dells.
Agreed, but I think there's more to it. I can't imagine that those companies would really count Apple as an "IT Vendor" nor have much of an opinion one way or another.

More likely, IMHO, these are companies that have an Art/Video department and use Macs in that department. Also, 65% of the companies depended on Apple as a software vendor. I'll rashly assume this means products like Final Cut, Logic, FileMaker, WebObjects, and the QuickTime server software.

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17124348)

"...they love Macs but they think they cost too much."

Can't say anything on Macs* but this is the other side of the equation why computer/software systems suck, or THE factor if you believe in demand drives supply. The bastards (including us) are too cheap to pay for quality.

*Haven't dealt with Macs since their System 7 days. Hope to get a Mac Mini soon to try out a Mac with UNIX-based MAC OSX. What are the dev tools for Mac?

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17125970)

You can download Apple's dev tools after a free registration, but they also come on the Mac OS DVD (and with any Mac).

That includes GCC 3.3 and 4.0, the XCode IDE (which isn't too bad, esp. for ObjC), lots of other tools if you like to develop actual Mac GUI apps.

I'd go for an Intel Mac though, since the PPCs are rather slow (sitting at one).

Of course, bash, an X server and some outdated versions of Perl, Python, and Ruby are also included. (and there's always MacPorts, Fink, or pkgsrc to get more software)

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121382)

Um, last time I checked, they had basically zero enterprise presence.

Well...except for the US Army, Virginia Tech, you organization of any size.

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (1)

poohsan (1028914) | more than 7 years ago | (#17123970)

at the Army site I'm at I can count the apples without using all of my fingers on one hand - about 2,000 Dells though. Of course there are hundreds of Army bases and they're all different.

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 7 years ago | (#17124796)

I can count the apples without using all of my fingers on one hand

July 5, 2004 [] "With the announcement that it is providing 1,566 servers to an Army supercomputer project, Apple Computer Inc. is making a move..."

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17121564)

Any film/hollywood class VFX or compositing studio will generally be stacked full of Apple hardware and software such as Motion and Shake: [] []

Both of which also happen to cluster nicely, and require copious amounts of XServe render nodes: []

There's a lot more to Apple than iPods. If in doubt, try looking on a company's website next time, or possibly even using more than one of their products before commenting.

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121682)

You're saying there is more to Apple than iPods? You must be mad. Next thing you'll be saying that there's more to computers than PCs, or more to operating systems than Linux and Windows.

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (1)

MsGeek (162936) | more than 7 years ago | (#17123862)

Umm...have you used a ThinkPad lately? Notice the craptastic quality? Have you used any of the Lenovo-branded atrocities out there? The fears of IBM fanboys and fangirls with regard to what Lenovo would do with the ThinkPad brand have come brutally true. The new stuff SUCKS.

The last ThinkPad I would advise anyone purchasing would be the T42. Stuff designed by IBM but executed at Lenovo, including the T43, is OK but not great. Once you get into Lenovo designed/built models, however...whoa nelly. This is not your daddy's ThinkPad. This is a machine that deserves the title StinkPad now. :P

Yes, Apple has had some issues with their hardware. However, they tend to make good on those issues. Lenovo? Not so much. The same can be said about Dell, HP and other PC makers in that tier. The only makes other than Apple that I would recommend would be Toshiba, Fujitsu and Panasonic. The ToughBook is the last of a dying breed. I coddle my MacBook because I have my doubts about its sturdiness. I don't coddle my Thinkpad 600x so much. It's a freaking Tank. Same with the iBook 300MHz Blueberry Clamshell I have. Built for K-12 and it shows. It's a bear to upgrade, unlike my MacBook here.

You could do worse than to buy MacBooks and MacBook Pros. Especially since Boot Camp allows dual-booting with XP SP2 now and will allow dual-booting with Vista later. And even better: Parallels and an upcoming VMWare will allow hosting guest OSes under Mac OS X. You can create a security cocoon around Windows. You can prevent it from phoning home. You can prevent it from using the Internet at all. That's about where my comfort level with the fine products of MS is right now. Keep it in its cocoon. Keep it in the Happy Box. Mac OS X is a great's like Linux or FreeBSD except everything "just works." I want to run Linux on this machine "because I can" but really I am finding all my xNIXy goodness needs well-met by Mac OS X.

Re:How is Apple an important vendor to CIOs? (1)

teflaime (738532) | more than 7 years ago | (#17128356)

they had basically zero enterprise presence.

Most major companies have a graphic design/PR/art design department. And about 85-90% of those departments heavily utilize Macs. No, Apple doesn't sell but a tiny percentage (probably about 4-5) the volume that Dell/HP/Lenovo do to most businesses. Apple his a tiny presence but in most companies. The Wintel competiors have a big presence, each in a slice of companies.

Blame the Management (1)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 7 years ago | (#17120912)

Most of these vendors like to stick a sales guy in your face and sell what you obviously don't need. They could sell you a 3MB piece of software but prefer to bloat it to 3GB DVDs so you "think" you get more for your dollars. These tactics no longer work. Times have changed.

Lol loyalty (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#17120938)

"If our company had a choice we would continue to do business with this vendor."

HP rates higher than Dell? (3, Informative)

dartarrow (930250) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121038)

That seems a bit funny, considering how Dell has usually been more customer/sales focused, as opposed to the focus on technology by HP. The Laptop-that-blew-up must not be helping their ratings either ;)

I don't know how it is in other countries but where I am, the customer support of Dell is outsourced to other companies. Even Siemens is one of the support vendors. And a lot of these people have close to zero knowledge on Linux. Considering the fact that Dell (kindof) supports RHEL, thats pretty stupid.

I've personally had to deal with morons from Dell support. One guy came in to fit a new server on our rack, and he came in with wrongly sized nuts for the rails. We redirected the surveillance cam at him to grab 50 minutes of him RTFM.. which I later showed to the management.

Needless to say our next server will be an HP.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (2, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121146)

So you state that you think Dell should be higher than HP and then relate an anecdote about Dell sucking the big one and your company moving to HP? I don't get it.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17122798)

Dude.. this IS slashdot..

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17126604)


Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121620)

``The Laptop-that-blew-up must not be helping their ratings either ;)''

Having parts manufactured by a third party catch fire is one thing. Pretending the problem isn't there and thus knowingly letting your customers run around with fire-prone hardware is on an entirely different level. This issue _should_ cost them major goodwill.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (3, Funny)

sharkey (16670) | more than 7 years ago | (#17122346)

You mean the "Let's just unplug all the SCSI cables attached to PCs with green lights to try and fix the one with no lights" Dell? Big time agreement on Dell's technical acumen.

On the HP side, we have a DL360.

The choice is between incompetent techs and Sirius Cybernetics-quality hardware.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17123274)

> Dell has usually been more customer/sales focused

We must be thinking of two different companies named Dell. When people usually talk about Dell on a technical site, they mean the company founded in Austin, TX by Michael Dell in 1984. That company has never been focused on customers. They're focused on pushing garbage hardware to users that don't know better. Sales? Ever try to buy from them? It's near freaking impossible. The last set of monitors I bought took almost 20 man-hours for those complete morons to process the order. I talked to more than a dozen people. Does that sound sales focused? Of course they shipped the wrong monitors and have refused to provide us a refund for the bank check we mailed to them before they would ship. Does that sound customer focused? We're currently investigating our legal options because that happened last March, and those thieves still have our money.z

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (1)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 7 years ago | (#17132364)

Sales? Ever try to buy from them? It's near freaking impossible.
Reminds me of DEC... Where conversations with salespeople usually went like this :

Me: So how much are those Alpha stations ?
Dec Guy: Well, it depends...
Me: It depends on what ?
Dec Guy: Oh, it can depend on a lot of things...
Me: Such as ?
Dec Guy: Oh lots of things really. Here's a brochure.
Me: (Looking at content-free drool-proof brochure)
  This doesn't say anything, just that in theory you sell Alpha stations
Dec Guy: Oh but we do.
Me: So how much do they cost ?
Dec Guy: That depends.
Me: Ok, what's the price for the most basic model with no monitor ?
Dec Guy: Hmmmm.... I'll have to get back to you on this.

A lot of vendors actually function that way. It's very odd.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (1)

Morrigu (29432) | more than 7 years ago | (#17128010)

Dell's professional services are, and I mean this in the nicest sense of the word, fucking clueless. We got one guy who had just "graduated" from field tech to storage engineer, and when he got called in to fix our (broken) Dell-badged SAN after it went down and lost several terabytes of data, sat there in front of the rack reading TFM for 2 hours. Yes, we were paying hundreds of dollars per hour for some goon who had never done this before, since that's who Dell sent us. The incident got escalated up to the VP level at Dell before it got fixed.

My advice for storage - go with EMC or NetApp or another vendor who manufactures their own gear instead of someone like Dell who just slaps their corporate logo on it. And if you need engineering or design support, look for a company who's been doing it well and has solid recommendations from other customers, not some fresh-off-the-street hires from that ended up in the vendor's professional services division. Good support costs money, but it's worth every penny when stuff breaks.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (1)

smithcl8 (738234) | more than 7 years ago | (#17128672)

If there is one thing I've learned while being a network consultant it's this: it doesn't matter what company you work for, you still don't know crap until you are thrown into a fire. So, when you go out and spend big money bringing in an "expert" from any vendor, chances are darned good that you are getting a newbie. After all, the best techs are the ones that are promoted into higher-level jobs, leaving the BS calls for the new guys.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (1)

Morrigu (29432) | more than 7 years ago | (#17128904)

I agree entirely with you about experience in fire-fighting. My problem is that when a customer is paying lots of money for "expert" support, they should be getting experts, not someone doing this for the first time. If you want to bring a newbie along so they can learn, that's cool, but for US$150+/hour, I expect someone who knows what they're doing and has done it before, not someone who's still reading TFM. If you're paying US$50/hour, that's a different issue.

I've worked with people who are good at putting out fires and get paid very well to do it. I'm not talking about CCNA-level network techs, or level 2 helpdesk support, or just about anyone who Dell employs :), but six-figure consultants who know their stuff and know how to fix problems. They can be hard to find, especially in the mix of people working in IT support and consulting, but there are customers willing to pay for that level of support, and companies and individuals who provide it.

Re:HP rates higher than Dell? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17174684)

I don't know about Dell, but a lot of places take a RIDICULOUS cut.. so you pay $150/hour, but the guy doing the computer work gets paid like $20/hour. Or less.

I'm still waiting on that wormhole (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17121086)

CDW is known for promising things they can't deliver, like wormhole technology. :)

CDW ranked number 1 (4, Funny)

DreadfulGrape (398188) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121100)

So that obnoxious techie on the CDW TV commercials is actually right?

Re:CDW ranked number 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17121210)

He's sort of right. You or your company will pay for it tho. CDW adds 3% on top of whatever price their vendor gives and passes that on to you. I'm sure any of the top tier companies could score higher on this survey using that 3% to beef up their own support.

Re:CDW ranked number 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17122600)

Must be kick-backs. I have looked through CDW catalogs before (they like to send them to you with the glossy covers and inserts) and they have some of the worst prices I know of in IT for just regular junk you can get anywhere else for much less.

What do CIOs know? (2, Insightful)

ximenes (10) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121286)

Since when do CIOs know about this kind of stuff? I have yet to encounter someone in an upper position like that who is aware of this sort of thing, although they do all have opinions regardless of actual experience.

My manager loves Best Buy for Business and Tiger Direct for instance; even though we get superior service and pricing through GovConnection forget that! Too convenient.

Can't keep Belkin and Belden straight either.

Re:What do CIOs know? (1)

aaronl (43811) | more than 7 years ago | (#17123474)

I was one of the respondents to this survey. I don't know what their selection strategy was, but I'm surprised to find out that under a thousand took the silly thing. I just figured that they emailed requests bugging everyone that they were sending their free magazines to. IIRC, they offered a contest for something or other if you filled it out.

Not everyone that participates in these surveys is a total Office Space style incompetent twit. :)

(I'll have to check out GovConnection. I've been using Florida Micro and been happy, but I'm always on the lookout for the best prices.)

Re:What do CIOs know? (1)

Avatar8 (748465) | more than 7 years ago | (#17132210)

I completely agree.

According to the "how the survey was conducted link," only IT director and higher were considered. Then it was based upon responses that considered themselves knowledgeable of the vendors. Granted there probably are some IT executives out there that do know what's going on with vendors, but in my 22 years in IT, I have yet to meet one.

IT execs have their skills and their place; in every job I've been in, their job is to make decisions based upon what their underlings provide to them or recommend. The only dealings with a vendor an exec might have is a free lunch, free goodies or approval of a very expensive deal.

Any of the past executives I've dealt with would have responded to this survey based upon what fliers, catalogs or magazines were on their desk.

CDW #1?!?! Get real. That invalidates the whole thing right there.

Re:What do CIOs know? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17133268)

In my experience, vendor choices in the private sector are based solely on kickbacks. I don't want to name (PC) names (Connection) here, but at my current job, management has gotten, let's see... free iPods, free GigE switches, free GPS units, free box seats at MLB games, and so on... I used to work in government IT as well, and I suspect the same thing happens there, although I never experienced it firsthand. Sure, there's a list of "approved" vendors you have to buy from-- people who have "won" the competitive bid. So, wait, why does Dell have a 5% markup for higher ed purchases at the department level in Massachusetts? The former case is legal, but not exactly ethical, whereas the latter case is definitely illegal.

Basically what I'm saying is that CIOs don't know shit except what they like to get for free.

Yes! (2, Funny)

edwardpickman (965122) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121378)

Microsoft cracked the top 40 list. Looks like all that hardwork is paying off!

Re:Yes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17122324)

I've never had any trouble working with MS, they are fantastic, always have been, and they hire extremely good people.

Dell is ok, but first- you have to handle any phone support person as marginally knowledgeable (just like everywhere), and second- I never let anyone but one of our people touch the servers. If you are willing to do all the work up front, then tell them what you've done, it should work out fine (it has for me, anyway).

HP just sucks. They were once a good company, but raced to the bottom during the dot-bomb era... where they remain. IMO, they really ruined Compaq, which had been a stellar company prior to the merger.

Apple? WTF is Apple doing on this list? How many companies actually have a vendor or support relationship with Apple? That's just the idiot, pointy-haired CIO effect calling in. You may as well lump Red Hat in there as well. I mean wtf, which companies are they interviewing?

Trend Micro, Citrix, RIM, Check Point, Cisco, all great companies.

Lucent's not on the list, surprise surprise. NOT.

Heh. (1)

susano_otter (123650) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121442)

If these CIOs are anything like my CIO...

I mean, all vendors are going to have problems, and cause problems from time to time.

But if these CIOs are anything like my CIO, their problems have little to do with the vendors getting the blame, and everything to do with the CIO's own ignorance and incompetence.

CIO: I heard great things about this vendor, but whenever we tried to work with them, they sucked.

REALITY: The vendor is quite capable of doing great things... for CIOs who understand the technology, its uses, and its limitations; and have planned accordingly.

Some interesting numbers with MS (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121492)

The MS one.
Not really Happy Happy Joy Joy but many want back in. /14/0,1425,sz=1&i=147743,00.gif []

Re:Some interesting numbers with MS (1)

flying_monkies (749570) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121760)

It's the "Whitney Houston / Bobby Brown" syndrome. They keep thinking if they come back one more time, they won't get slapped silly.

I know, what does a CIO really know? (0)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121844)

I for one cannot blame our CIO. Since I deal with the people between him and me on a daily basis I know what he is up against. Basically the CIO is up against the same problem I am. The people in between. They will rarely, actually never, admit their decisions or lack of ability to make decisions are the problem. We continue down the same path as always because the middle refuses to take responsibility and having done so for so long they refuse to make new decisions to correct it. They collude with each other under the idea that if they all "buy-in" then it will just have to come out okay.

We are nearly 7 years into a 18month, 3 years at the maximum, project and still have years ahead of us. We suffer from all the problems. Software which really doesn't fit. Feature creep which prevents fixing what needs to be fixed. Pet projects which interrupt again what needs to be fixed. Pet consulting groups don't help either.

This of course at times get rolled off to the vendors. After all it "MUST" be the vendors who just haven't delivered. Can't blame the staff with any strength because that faults yourself - after all if the staff is a problem then why hasn't that been addressed? So vendors get to take the heat. Some of those in the middle are big players who do only big projects. No big project comes off without some problems. Little things that really are beyond the control of the vendor are hawked to extreme to cover up middle managements bungling.

I would put that in some cases Vendors are the whole reason much middle management (defined as VPs, Directors, Goverance Committees) survive so long. There are just too many convienent avenues of escape. Eventually it may catch up to them but before then they will have destroyed productivity and morale to a point where the staff will leave on their own; thus providing all new scapegoats. As with many companies the staff and even some CIOs can only hope that people get promoted out of where they cause harm or leave on their own. These days there are just so many "nanny" laws that firing anyone is dangerous. You end up just paying them to leave quietly and hope the new team can dig out before becoming the old team

Newegg (2, Interesting)

wesw02 (846056) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121848)

Where's newegg? Out of the 10 vendors on that list who I have bought from, none of there customer support comes close to newegg. Not to mention newegg ships stuff at record speeds.

Re:Newegg (1)

geekboybt (866398) | more than 7 years ago | (#17124070)

I use and love Newegg myself; I use them for both my own personal purchases, and those "crap, my dvd burner no longer works" purchases at the office. However, Newegg is not an enterprise distributer like, for example, CDW. Try buying a Cisco router, CTO server, and so on from them and let me know how it goes.

Considering McAfee (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 7 years ago | (#17121998)

Considering McAfee is nowhere close to the bottom, that says something about that list :)

Check out the microsoft results (1)

joe_cot (1011355) | more than 7 years ago | (#17122362)

Check out the Microsoft results [] . Even though they rank mediocre in almost every question (average between 50-60%, though sometimes up to a solid C+), 80% of vendors said that, given a choice, they'd still choose Microsoft. Strange O.o

Re:Check out the microsoft results (3, Insightful)

rossz (67331) | more than 7 years ago | (#17122514)

The saying used to be, "No one ever got fired for choosing IBM." These days it's, "No one ever got fired for choosing Microsoft." It's not about choosing the best product/service/supplier. It's all about covering one's ass.

Walmartization of Technology (2, Insightful)

AndrewPlato (1003657) | more than 7 years ago | (#17123064)

This list somewhat confirms what I've been telling a lot of people - the technology industry is becoming WalMartified. Sales of commodity technologies: servers, switches, routers, monitors, phones, etc. are best purchased through national (or global) vendors, like CDW. These places have the size, scope, and presence to consistently deliver the best prices and service. In contrast, regional or local VARs are dying. They can't compete with CDW on price, service or availability. Most regional or local VARs are struggling to survive on their paltry margins from the manufacturers.

However, there is a healthy market for smaller, boutique consultants and specialty providers, especially for security. These places are thriving because they DON'T play into the margin game. They focus on specific services or expertise, areas where CDW isn't a good fit.

If you think about this practice, it makes sense. Where do you go to buy something when you know EXACTLY what you want? If you're like me, you go to BestBuy or WalMart or some such big retailer, because you know they will have the product and at a decent price. A local shop is less likely to have what you want and will probably charge more.

However, where do you go when you don't know what you want? Well, if you're like most people, you hire a professional to help you pick out what you need and implement it. I know nothing about roofing, for example. As such, I hire a roofing expert to help me pick out the right products and get my roof installed. I know I pay more from the roofers, but assuming I trust the roofers, I know that they will guide me into a educated decision.

The technology industry is falling along the same lines. If you know what you want, get it from CDW. If you aren't sure, or need consulting help, look for a local shop with expertise.

CDW Says - "JERK OFF " (3, Funny)

skillrod (555920) | more than 7 years ago | (#17124328) hoto#5005252477500827698 [] CDW Catalog Scan 1 hoto#5005252670774356034 [] CDW Catalog Scan 2

Back in 1998 I ordered WindowsNT Server software from CDW. When an advetised rebate was not included I called them on it. After the call I received this catalog in the mail.

CDW Says "Jerk Off" to it's customers.

(This is the actual scan of my CDW catalog)

-EnJoY My wAste

Re:CDW Says - "JERK OFF " (1)

goodtim (458647) | more than 7 years ago | (#17124744)

The most enjoyable part about these images is the fact that they are advertising a 17" CRT for $399.99. What a steal.

Re:CDW Says - "JERK OFF " (1)

scream at the sky (989144) | more than 7 years ago | (#17125318)

Back in 1998, it was

Only 40? (1)

noz (253073) | more than 7 years ago | (#17124628)

I think it's great that EDS [] didn't make the top 40. Where's the rest of the list? I'd really like to see where they ended up.

AVAYA? Holy carp! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17124666)

These are people who are using the same root password on thousands of network-attached systems all over the United States? The people who still ship machines with an account named oracle, password oracle (which they don't inform their customers about) TO THIS DAY?

Damn, CIOs are clueless... where do I get a job that requires no knowledge of the craft?

Oh, right, tell the world, chump. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17133548)

You just let every script-kiddie in the world know that Avaya has institutionalized truck-sized holes in their security. Thanks, you bastard.

Avaya system owners - find the Avaya Underground, they will tell you how to secure the machines. You have to hide your modifications from Avaya's support organization (because they don't want you to change anything) but it's doable as long as you have physical access. Avaya punishes end-users who share knowledge, so the Underground is, well, underground.

Hint: old guys working for banks.

Give Me the Sys Admins' Survey (1)

Comatose51 (687974) | more than 7 years ago | (#17124672)

Things always look rosy at the CIO level who never have to deal with calling the tech support. CDW is #1? Give me a break. They've screwed up our orders so many times. I want to see a survey done from the techies' level who actually have to deal with these people.

mod Down (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17125156)

since then. More Star7 a 4oly war

The Real Reason (3, Funny)

brajesh (847246) | more than 7 years ago | (#17125222)

The (and with The I mean 'Teh')Real
Reason why CIOs are disappointed
and disgruntled with the performance
of their most important vendors is...

[Click On Ad] [Next]

All you need to know (1)

vtcodger (957785) | more than 7 years ago | (#17127512)

All you need to know is that Symantec came in at 14 out ot 40. If that doesn't indicate that either the study is worthless or that customer satisfaction is at disaster levels, it's hard to imagine what would.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?