<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.itskeptic.org" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
 <title>analysts</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Abolish the CAB at your peril</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/abolish-cab-your-peril</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a fashion for &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops&quot;&gt;analysts to make rash revolutionary statements&lt;/a&gt;.  I reckon it is in their KPIs.  The normally-temperate &lt;a href=&quot;http://community.forrester.com/message/15756&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Glenn O&#039;Donnell said:&lt;/a&gt; &quot;Abolish the CAB!&quot;.  That is - to put it mildly - a bit rash.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/abolish-cab-your-peril&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/abolish-cab-your-peril#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/2078</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/283">CAB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/153">change</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 11 Dec 2011 22:53:45 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2078 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Dev needs to understand what Ops is for</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.forrester.com/mike_gualtieri/11-02-07-i_dont_want_devops_i_want_noops&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;A recent blog post made me angry&lt;/a&gt;.  This is one cause of the Dev-Ops divide: ignorance of what the other side does.  I expect some of that in the trade, down at the coalface amongst Dev and Ops practitioners.  I don&#039;t expect it from Forrester analysts.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/2006</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/234">agile</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/258">devops</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/249">Forrester</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 18:10:16 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2006 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Hornbill ITIL State of the Nation survey: Viewer discretion advised</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/hornbill-itil-state-nation-survey-viewer-discretio</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Hornbill has released &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.hornbill.com/itilstate/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;an ITIL State of the Nation survey&lt;/a&gt; [registration required].  I think it is a good report, relative to the usual &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/crap&quot;&gt;Crap Factoids&lt;/a&gt; we see.  It doesn&#039;t try to get all worked up about any one number.  Sadly I think it still suffers from all the flaws we see in these industry &quot;research&quot; reports.  It does however point to one interesting result: ITIL V3 doesn&#039;t seem to be taking the world by storm. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/hornbill-itil-state-nation-survey-viewer-discretio&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/hornbill-itil-state-nation-survey-viewer-discretio#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1630</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/211">Hornbill</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/itil">ITIL</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 03:21:48 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1630 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>CMDB federation - making a dead elephant dance</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-federation-making-dead-elephant-dance</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The analysts can beat the drums all they like - they won&#039;t make &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/itil-cmdb-skeptic&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;the CMDB dead elephant&lt;/a&gt; dance [I&#039;m in training for the World Mixed-Metaphor Championship].  I&#039;ve talked before about how the analysts are in a symbiotic relationship with the vendor industry: they have to talk new ideas up so as to have some change to write about.  Never has this been more clearly illustrated than around CMDB.  For one wonderful moment I thought an analyst was going to be skeptical about CMDB but then he beat the drum, or perhaps flogged the dead elephant [there I got another one in!]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-federation-making-dead-elephant-dance&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-federation-making-dead-elephant-dance#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1570</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/55">federation</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:10:40 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1570 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Those who would promote CMDB should promote CMDB</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/those-who-would-promote-cmdb-should-promote-cmdb</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Much of what we read about CMDB is actually singing the praises of asset management, network discovery or other simpler technologies.  Other benefits attributed to CMDB actually come from process improvement and do not depend on the technology at all.  When all you want to sell is a hammer...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/those-who-would-promote-cmdb-should-promote-cmdb&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/those-who-would-promote-cmdb-should-promote-cmdb#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1173</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:14:50 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1173 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>EMA CMDB research: where&#039;s the wave?</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/732</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Recent &quot;research&quot; (in the analyst sense of the word) from EMA shows that even amongst those who say they are working on a CMDB [which &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/663&quot;&gt;other numbers&lt;/a&gt; indicate is 10%-30% of the ITIL population], those with functional CMDBs remain a minority.  This confirms our recent assertion that CMS and SKMS and CMDB represent &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/607&quot;&gt;best practice blue sky&lt;/a&gt;.  There is nothing &quot;generally accepted&quot; about CMDB practice: about 2%-5% of IT shops I reckon.  In true market-hyping fashion Dennis Drogseth of EMA is fond of referring to the &quot;CMDB tidal wave&quot;.  Based on their own numbers I gotta ask: where&#039;s the wave Dennis?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/732&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/732#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/732</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:57:40 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">732 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>BMC&#039;s own CMDB figures - The IT Skeptic </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1075</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;A podcast of the original post &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713&quot;&gt;a back-of-an-envelope re-analysis of Forrester and BMC&#039;s own CMDB research&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Several readers argue well that ROI is not the right measure for a CMDB, but nevertheless management want to know what they get for their money, and BMC&#039;s own research suggests &quot;not much&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <enclosure url="http://www.itskeptic.org/audio/download/1075/bmc_cmdb_figures.mp3" length="4017462" type="audio/x-mpeg" />
 <itunes:duration>9:32</itunes:duration>
 <itunes:author>The IT Skeptic</itunes:author>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1075#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1075</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/57">BMC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/itil">ITIL</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:17:15 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1075 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>a back-of-an-envelope re-analysis of Forrester and BMC&#039;s own CMDB research</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;This post has been &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1075&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[Updated June 2009: the paper, entitled &quot;The Total Economic Impact of the BMC Atrium CMDB Solution&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://media.cms.bmc.com/documents/TEI-CMDB-FINAL-version-2-21-08-V3.pdf&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;is here&lt;/a&gt;.]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Several readers &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/712#comment-3241&quot;&gt;argue well&lt;/a&gt; that ROI is not the right measure for a CMDB, but nevertheless management want to know what they get for their money, and BMC&#039;s own research suggests &quot;not much&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/713</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/57">BMC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:23:24 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">713 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Crap Factoid Alert: CMDB savings of more than $1 million per year </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/709</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;inline inline-left&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/528&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/files/imageskeptic/chokey_extreme.preview.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; title=&quot;&quot;  class=&quot;image image-preview&quot; width=&quot;200&quot; height=&quot;152&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;This post has been &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/722&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;span style=&quot;background-color:red;&quot;&gt;This is a CATEGORY 1 Crap Factoid alert from Chokey the Chimp at the IT Skeptic&#039;s Crap Factoid Warning Service.  &lt;strong&gt;THIS IS NOT A DRILL&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/span&gt;  Be on EXTREME danger alert for CF &quot;CMDB savings of more than $1 million per year&quot;.  BMC and Forrester are shovelling it. [Update: the IT Skeptic&#039;s own &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713&quot;&gt;assessment of the numbers  here&lt;/a&gt;.]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/709&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/709#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/709</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/57">BMC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:31:38 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">709 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>IT analysts produce crap factoids - The IT Skeptic </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/569</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;This is a podcast of the original article &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/544&quot;&gt;IT analysts produce crap - what to look for in analyst &quot;research&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/569&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <enclosure url="http://www.itskeptic.org/audio/download/569/IT_analysts_produce_crap.mp3" length="5916617" type="audio/x-mpeg" />
 <itunes:duration>14:03</itunes:duration>
 <itunes:author>The IT Skeptic</itunes:author>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/569#comments</comments>
 <wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/569</wfw:commentRss>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 04:05:48 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">569 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>

