Turn on thread page Beta

Big Companies and their compaq's watch

Announcements

    Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT contracts? At our call centre they've
    upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to 1ghz 256mb systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no
    reason. They still run the same software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally
    quicker loading time. It's crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on the systems in our call
    centre alone.

    "Ray Pang" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    [q1]> Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT[/q1]
    contracts? At
    [q1]> our call centre they've upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to[/q1]
    1ghz 256mb
    [q1]> systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no reason. They still run[/q1]
    the same
    [q1]> software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally[/q1]
    quicker
    [q1]> loading time. It's crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on[/q1]
    the
    [q1]> systems in our call centre alone.[/q1]

    Would they notice if you walked home with the new PC and left one of the old ones in it's place?
    (well, if you're home PC is worse than their new ones) That or see if they'd notice any games
    installed on them...

    It is stupid. But it's kinda stereotypical to see big bosses without a clue about technology to just
    splash out on faster machines even if it's not needed. I can't imagine the techies to have demanded
    it, as they'd know it wasn't needed, and just request more money for the department to improve their
    'network monitoring' machine... Why not make a fuss and say you'd prefer better wages rather than
    pointlessly expensive upgrades? Or stand up for the little guy and ask them to pass the savings onto
    the customer. I was going to make some rash comments about improving the call centre, but as you
    work there, it's probably a good one ;-) Hmm, I wonder if all the really good call centres are the
    ones for products/services which actually work, so no-one ever phones them...

    Rikki

    [q1]> Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT contracts?[/q1]
    At
    [q1]> our call centre they've upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to 1ghz[/q1]
    256mb
    [q1]> systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no reason. They still run the[/q1]
    same
    [q1]> software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally quicker loading time. It's[/q1]
    [q1]> crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on the systems in our call centre alone.[/q1]

    They're still running windows 95 on a 1ghz compaq? that does seem kinda stupid I've got to admit.

    perhaps the management was just taken for a ride by the PC sales team?

    "Ray Pang" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    [q1]> Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT contracts?[/q1]
    At
    [q1]> our call centre they've upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to 1ghz[/q1]
    256mb
    [q1]> systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no reason. They still run the[/q1]
    same
    [q1]> software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally quicker loading time. It's[/q1]
    [q1]> crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on the systems in our call centre alone.[/q1]

    "Rikki Prince" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    [q1]> Would they notice if you walked home with the new PC and left one of the old ones in it's place?[/q1]

    If I could get the machines open and swap everything out of them in time, then there is no way
    they'd notice.

    [q1]> It is stupid. But it's kinda stereotypical to see big bosses without a clue about technology to[/q1]
    [q1]> just splash out on faster machines even if it's not needed. I can't imagine the techies to have[/q1]
    [q1]> demanded it, as they'd know it wasn't needed, and just request more money for the department to[/q1]
    [q1]> improve their 'network monitoring' machine... Why not make a fuss and say you'd prefer better[/q1]
    [q1]> wages rather than pointlessly expensive upgrades? Or stand up for the little guy and ask them to[/q1]
    [q1]> pass the savings onto the customer. I was going to make some rash comments about improving the[/q1]
    [q1]> call centre, but as you work there, it's probably a good one ;-)[/q1]

    Well it is one of the biggest companies in the world. It's strangely quiet this year. Admittedly
    we've had bad weather for the last few days, but I find myself twiddling my thumbs, desperately
    hoping for some photocopying or other pointless busy work to keep me sane. Today was a nightmare.
    Going through about 600 accounts (all printed up in 6pt text) and seeing if they're bloody machines
    had been converted, and then ringing them to ask if they needed them converted.

    [q1]> Hmm, I wonder if all the really good call centres are the ones for products/services which[/q1]
    [q1]> actually work, so no-one ever phones them...[/q1]

    If mine is really good, then no.

    "Gaurav Sharma" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> "Ray Pang" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...[/q1]
    [q2]> > Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT[/q2]
    contracts?
    [q1]> At[/q1]
    [q2]> > our call centre they've upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to 1ghz[/q2]
    [q1]> 256mb[/q1]
    [q2]> > systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no reason. They still run the[/q2]
    [q1]> same[/q1]
    [q2]> > software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally[/q2]
    quicker
    [q2]> > loading time. It's crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on the systems in our call[/q2]
    [q2]> > centre alone.[/q2]
    [q2]> >[/q2]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> It might be part of a long-term change-over strategy. And if you think about it, relative to total[/q1]
    [q1]> employee salaries and other ongoing costs for[/q1]
    a
    [q1]> big company, £100,000 isn't *that* much. Compaq probably provides more[/q1]
    than
    [q1]> just the PCs at that sort of price.[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> G.Sharma.[/q1]

    Er, that's £100000 for a a 60 strong team of people. Multiply that by all the other people in the
    building, multiply it by the other, larger, call centre in Peterborough, multiply that by all the
    other computers the the distribution, sales, engineers, reps, etc. use, and you are looking at
    serious amounts of millions. Even to Coke, that's a BIG amount.

    "-=RG=-" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:33%[email protected]...
    [q1]> "Max Power" <[email protected] m> wrote in message[/q1]
    [q1]> news:[email protected]...[/q1]
    [q3]> > > Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT[/q3]
    [q1]> contracts?[/q1]
    [q2]> > At[/q2]
    [q3]> > > our call centre they've upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to 1ghz[/q3]
    [q2]> > 256mb[/q2]
    [q3]> > > systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no reason. They still run[/q3]
    the
    [q2]> > same[/q2]
    [q3]> > > software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally[/q3]
    [q1]> quicker[/q1]
    [q3]> > > loading time. It's crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on[/q3]
    the
    [q3]> > > systems in our call centre alone.[/q3]
    [q2]> >[/q2]
    [q2]> > They're still running windows 95 on a 1ghz compaq? that does seem kinda stupid I've got to[/q2]
    [q2]> > admit.[/q2]
    [q2]> >[/q2]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> You'd think they'd have gone to w2k or something...[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]

    I may have been a bit rash. They got the computers a couple of months back, and Project Refresh (or
    something similarly sillily titled) is happening across GB in all coke outlets. We're moving onto
    2K, Office XP, an alternative to BASIS (presumably they couldn't get it to work properly in
    2k). I don't see why we need office XP at all, or 2K for that matter. The Win95 boxes seem perfectly
    stable as they only have a few apps installed, and the only time we use Office is to do a few
    mail merges and a few simple databases. Maybe it's a standardisation, and in the head office they
    do something a little bit more advanced.

    "Ray Pang" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> "Rikki Prince" <[email protected]> wrote in message[/q1]
    [q1]> news:[email protected]...[/q1]
    [q2]> > Would they notice if you walked home with the new PC and left one of the old ones in it's place?[/q2]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> If I could get the machines open and swap everything out of them in time, then there is no way[/q1]
    [q1]> they'd notice.[/q1]

    Just found our today that in my work it is a disciplinary offence to swap keyboards/mouse(s?)(mice?)
    and probably mouse mats.

    how ridiculous.

    Ray Pang <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    [q1]> Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT contracts?[/q1]
    At
    [q1]> our call centre they've upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to 1ghz[/q1]
    256mb
    [q1]> systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no reason. They still run the[/q1]
    same
    [q1]> software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally quicker loading time. It's[/q1]
    [q1]> crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on the systems in our call centre alone.[/q1]

    Lots of large corporations no longer own their IT systems, and instead lease them on a three-year
    basis or whatever. Basically, if a firm needs 50,000 computers around the world, then they can
    outsource this requirement to a company such as Compaq or IBM who will ensure their global IT needs
    are continously met and updated. So thats probably why - the company probably didn't own the old
    machines in the first place, and compaq will probably reuse components of the old systems.

    Or maybe its just a form of tax avoidance

    b

    "Gaurav Sharma" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected] news-text.cableinet.net>...

    [q1]> Compaq probably provides more than[/q1]
    [q1]> just the PCs at that sort of price.[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]

    Oo-er missus!

    (sorry)

    Rich

    "Gaurav Sharma" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> "Ray Pang" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...[/q1]
    [q2]> > Why do big companies spend stupid amounts of money on their IT[/q2]
    contracts?
    [q1]> At[/q1]
    [q2]> > our call centre they've upgraded al the old P133 32mb systems to 1ghz[/q2]
    [q1]> 256mb[/q1]
    [q2]> > systems (compaq to compaq) for absolutely no reason. They still run the[/q2]
    [q1]> same[/q1]
    [q2]> > software (Windows 95, basis, office 97), albeit with a marginally[/q2]
    quicker
    [q2]> > loading time. It's crazy. They must have spent a hundred thousand on the systems in our call[/q2]
    [q2]> > centre alone.[/q2]
    [q2]> >[/q2]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> It might be part of a long-term change-over strategy. And if you think about it, relative to total[/q1]
    [q1]> employee salaries and other ongoing costs for[/q1]
    a
    [q1]> big company, £100,000 isn't *that* much. Compaq probably provides more[/q1]
    than
    [q1]> just the PCs at that sort of price.[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> G.Sharma.[/q1]

    Maybe. We have a helpdesk in Belgium that we ring. It's not Compaq at the other end of the line.
    They sort out all the hardware, software and anything-computer-related issues. Whether or not Compaq
    provide anything behind that is another issue. It's still ridiculous.

    While I'm on the subject of IT money wasting, I noticed today that all the monitor stands were
    actually Compaq laptop docking stations. About 6 of the 50 or so in the office are used to 'dock'
    laptops (they're never actually taken out to my knowledge) and the rest are just sitting there idle.
    Wouldn't it have been cheaper just to get monitor stands?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like exams?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.