Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!usc!apple!apple.com!desnoyer From: desnoyer@apple.com (Peter Desnoyers) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: X-terms v. PCs v. Workstations Message-ID: <5520@internal.Apple.COM> Date: 30 Nov 89 17:00:36 GMT Sender: usenet@Apple.COM Organization: Apple Computer, Inc. Lines: 32 References:<1989Nov28.125728.6774@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> <40009@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> In article <40009@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom) writes: > Your trite answer of ``Fix the bureaucracy'' is totally worthless and > naive. It just doesn't happen. Bureaucracies must be worked with and > around, but you don't try to change them in order to do your work. > You'll never get anything done if you wait till the bureaucracy is fixed. If a corporate organization is too inefficient and is hurting the company, the problem will be fixed by either : 1. the organizational problems will be fixed 2. its functions will be dispersed to the current users of the organization's services. 3. the company (or division) will lose market share, and in the end there will be no employees to be encumbered by the bureaucracy, or customers to pay for it. For examples - (1) perhaps DEC's sales staff - haven't they been extensively revamping it? (2) shift from central computer centers to departmental or desktop machines (3) Sears. All of it. Don't hold your breath, however. For some educational and government organizations (and some of their contractors) these rules may not apply. Also, they only hold if there is an advantage to actually having the organization in the first place. E.g. if 100% of your computer use is word processing, the best computer center in the world probably can't compete with desktop micros. Conversely, desktop micros probably aren't the appropriate vehicle for payroll processing, so only #1 and #3 apply. Peter Desnoyers Apple ATG (408) 974-4469 Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com