Now that I’ve re-read all 8 parts if “IT Doesn’t Matter” again on Nicholas Carr’s blog, I wonder what all the fuss was about.
The basic arguments that I read were:
- IT is a big spend and is usually mission critical so users should spend wisely
- The hype from vendors about business improvements from each new product or release is usually just empty hype and should be evaluated very carefully for real value
- If you do find something of value, all your competitors will soon find it too so you won’t get much advantage out of it anyway. (He neglects to note that you still have to invest in it, lest you be left behind though)
I don’t remember the reaction in 2003, but was that really news then? It seems like business as usual to me. The only controversy I see is the title, which is almost deliberatey misleading in itself.