Broadcom CEO Hock Tan was unsparing in his expectations about remote work during a meeting with his new employees.
Broadcom CEO tells VMWare workers to ‘get butt back to office’ after completing a $69 billion merger of the two companies::In a meeting on Tuesday after completing the $69 billion merger, Broadcom CEO Hock Tan told VMWare employees their days of working remotely were over.
It will. This is just more layoffs disguised as back to office. They'll lose a bunch of good workers, but they bought VMware for the customer base, not the workers.
America needs to start fighting for worker rights, it's just sad how little they have.
They’ll lose a bunch of good workers, but they bought VMware for the customer base, not the workers.
Yeah, vmware has a pretty good stranglehold on companies using on-premises hardware.
My last job was like this. We had basically 2 sysadmins (now 1) that managed hundreds of servers for about 30+ research scientists. There was no way in hell that people were going to adopt kubernetes (nobody in the entire team had any expertise in containerization, let alone k8s), IaaS was too expensive for their meager budgets, and it's not like anyone is going to switch virtualization vendors.
So anyway, the writing is clearly on the wall for them. Pretty soon, you can be sure that the prices are going to get cranked waayyyy up. Current vmware customers will likely find themselves in a pretty unfortunate position soon.
Oh well. But this is what happens when you depend too much on commercial vendors.
Since they already deal with a fair few of VMware's customers themselves, I'd say they probably bought VMW to bolster it's software offerings. They seem to be wanting to get rid of a lot of the staff there, so customers tend to build relationships with their vendors, and burning those bridges ain't going to help there.
VMware has the massive advantage that all the money you're throwing at them gives you support. Yes, communities can and do offer similar if not better support than paid offerings but tell that to the people who decide what software you're buying :)
We have several big clusters built on mixed virtual and bare metal. I would prefer our system engineer to manually build on virtualbox before even touching hyper-v (which we clearly don't!). For some political reasons our IT forced us to test to build a solution on hyper-v (cost saving on some non critical infrastructure proposed by some very non-tecnical people), I still have nightmares. I am not even the person who had to do it in practice.
It is long to explain it here, just give it a try. Windows server and all releted solutions are simply bad for real workloads. Who use it on server is just a company who doesn't need to be productive on the IT side. Their core business is not tech related and they don't care other than getting cheap sys admins
Well, I mean, that. It's very capable but Microsoft gimps it by bundling it with windows server. The fact you have to use RDP to administer it is itself a non-starter.
I have a bit of insider knowledge on this, and you'd be surprised at how demented a CIO can be at getting away from a company that has pissed them off. VMware is no exception, and I personally know of 2 companies, which are top 5 in the world in their field, that have been exploring alternatives to VMware. The internal culture at VMW has been one of upping prices to match what broadcom will want for almost a year, and it's causing clients to go elsewhere. Companies with an effective monopoly can still fuck it all up.
Do workers in other countries have a right to work from home? I'm not trying to argue with you here, I think wfh is a good thing and forcing people back to the office is stupid, I've just never heard of anything like that.