[rynop]

former IBM dev here (6 years in different areas). I hope they let you work on an island and don't force you to use their tooling/approve listed of open source software.

IBM has long embraced the OSS community (I loved LTC), but the process to release/use anything OSS was not good (to put it nicely) and was one of the many reasons I left.

I worked on a project that was on an island, and while it was more efficient than normal IBM dev, it was still 10x slower and tons of red tape then what was required to make a competitive product (and stay competitive). IBM is big and ultimately has to protect themselves - IMO ultimately it gets in your way of making a good/competitive product.

I like what StrongLoop does for the node community, and I do indeed hope you are successful and nothing changes. But to be honest I am very skeptical.

[kodablah]

Current IBM dev here (but only speaking anecdotally for myself and my project), can confirm that when we were acquired they let our product and policies remain and did not "blue wash" the project. I would assume the same will occur for StrongLoop and their software practices will probably continue mostly unfettered.

[granos]

I hope it works out for StrongLoop. When a company I worked for was purchased by IBM, about 3/4 of the engineering staff left once we heard about "Work Life Integration (tm)". It's really hard to work inside Big Blue when you are used to the freedom provided by a small company.

[eikenberry]

Care to elaborate on IBM "Work Life Integration (tm)" and why it caused the mass exodus?

[colordrops]

A quick google search seems to indicate that IBM wanted to allow their employees more flexibility with their schedules and ability to take leaves. I don't understand how this is a bad thing.

[granos]

The problem was their justification. It went something along the lines of "Employees are often thinking about their personal lives while at work, so they should also be thinking about their work life while at home."

I'm sure the intentions were good, but the presentation was terrible. Also, it was only one of many factors, but its a catchy line so I chose to call that one out.

Other include:

  * Far worse benefits package and no attempt/willingness to make us whole in that regard

  * About half the team was told they would no longer be eligible for raises because their salaries were above the top of their IBM pay band

  * Several people lost large amounts of 401k matching because they missed their partial vesting date for that year (some by a few weeks) because the transition was done as being fired and then hired again

  * Likewise we were not eligible to start contributing to the IBM 401k for some amount of time

  * The IP agreement was Draconian (and we aren't in a state with nice moonlighting laws)

  * They took away our office's coffee budget, which seems small and petty but it was a damned nice thing to have

  * Two of the worst performers were promoted to be engineering managers because they didn't know what else to do with them....

I was only there for a few months after the merger. Talking to some who lasted longer made me very happy to have left. In all about 3/4 of the engineering team was gone within 9 months.

[funkysquid]

I find it strange that large companies envy the things smaller shops are able to do, and they'll spend the money to buy them up, but they won't spend the time to understand the culture that let them build what they built. Put employees first and you'll find they can do some pretty amazing things.

[johnward]

> The IP agreement was Draconian (and we aren't in a state with nice moonlighting laws)

This caused the most of the problems during our acquisition. I'm still with IBM but we had a few people leave over the "IBM owns everything you ever do" clause.

> They took away our office's coffee budget, which seems small and petty but it was a damned nice thing to have

We had company lunch each Friday that had to end with IBM. It's a small thing but it really changes the culture and moral.

[azth]

> About half the team was told they would no longer be eligible for raises because their salaries were above the top of their IBM pay band

IBM most likely spent (speculating here) several millions of dollars on the acquisition, and they can't afford to pay the devs? This is completely messed up.

[DannyBee]

" * The IP agreement was Draconian (and we aren't in a state with nice moonlighting laws) "

None of these exist in the US (particularly when you work for someone like IBM). Employees who think otherwise are simply misunderstanding the law :)

[freditup]

I worked for IBM for a period and all the teams I was around were very family-friendly when it came to work/life balance. Much more so than other younger/cooler tech companies I've worked for and read about. There were downsides at IBM for sure, but this wasn't one of them.

[greglindahl]

Huh. When Blekko got acquired by IBM Watson, all of the employees thought that IBM's policies about flexible working hours and locations were great. So far I'm the only techie who's departed.

[granos]

We were in their software services vertical (I forget the name)...the one that had never turned a profit and wasn't sexy. I've known one person who had a great experience on the Watson team. So maybe its a different experience?

[johnward]

Were you on a CAMSS team? That seems to be the best area inside of IBM right now as it's a strategic growth area. This includes the Watson PS team I'm on.

[beginpanic]

As an IBMer, many of the complainers I've heard and much of the heartburn around layoffs come from outside of CAMSS. It's like folks at Apple complaining that the iPod team isn't treated as well as the iPad team. Of course, your group isn't making money.

[chiph]

But you were the CTO .. that likely said something to the remaining folks.

Also - Hi Greg!

[mkozlows]

Were you really left alone, though? As in, not even forced to use Lotus Notes? Because even that kind of small-bore enterprisation can destroy the culture of a small tech-focused company.

[cuongpm]

About your point about Lotus Notes: I interned at IBM 3 times, and was never forced to use Lotus Notes. No one whom I worked with at IBM used Lotus Notes either. We used either Open Office or MS Office.

The most popular IBM software we used was SameTime for instance messaging and it was actually not bad at all.

[fishtoaster]

Just as a counterpoint: when I interned at IBM, we were forced to use various Lotus products including Notes. Lotus Symphony was especially painful, and we begged to be allowed to just use Powerpoint (and were told, emphatically, "No.")

[throwawayaway]

Lotus Cacaphony.

[sk5t]

You might be thinking about the Office-like companion to Notes, Symphony. AFAIK (going from some Name/Location/BU-looking email addresses) IBM still uses Lotus Notes for email.

Lotus Notes is actually quite good when used properly and in moderation, but it really does not set a positive tone culturally.

[darkr]

Notes is _terrible_ from a UI perspective. The server side (domino) though was light-years ahead of anything in terms of ideas at least. Combining a CA, distributed, document-oriented database(think mongodb, couchdb), LDAP server, web server and mail server that supports IMAP, POP, SMTP as well as the proprietary encrypted notes protocol.

[jestar_jokin]

Agreed. I worked in Lotus Domino for a short while, and it was absolutely amazing for Rapid Application Development of anything that required e-mail and storing documents (or kinda "schemaless" data). It was even supported multiple languages (a declarative "Formula" language, a Visual Basic derived "LotusScipt", and Java(!)).

You could write a decent Lotus Domino app that served up web pages, so users wouldn't have to use the awful Lotus Notes client.

Amusingly, in I think Lotus Notes 8, they revitalised the GUI by replacing it with... Eclipse RCP. Hrmm.

I did witness some monstrosities, though...

[jsalit]

IBM still uses Notes for email, and a lot of legacy database-like applications. There's Notes-based webmail, but it's still Notes.

[beginpanic]

The new Notes-based webmail is Verse. It's not horrible. It's not great. It's just bad in different ways than Notes was.

[EncaitarUK]

Actually there are two. A web based notes, and the new 'verse'.

[georgemcbay]

> As in, not even forced to use Lotus Notes?

painful flashback! or, I guess, "trigger" in the parlance of today.

I worked for a biotech software company some years ago that wasn't even bought by IBM but as part of becoming an "IBM Business Partner" agreed to use Lotus Notes to replace a bunch of existing stuff we were using for email/collaboration/etc.

Notes isn't even bad or anything but it was no better than the tools we were already using for the tasks we were using them for, and because it is (or was? haven't used it since) a big all-encompassing "enterprise" system it took like a half-year migration period to get everyone to the point where we could do the same sorts of things we could before, not really any better or worse, just different and incredibly disruptive during the transition.

(also, is this mkozlows from qt3? haven't posted there in a long time, used to use the handle Coca Cola Zero).

[rynop]

Curious - how long ago did they acquire you? Your software get rolled into an IBM product or is it self standing? They let you continue to use your productive tools (asana,github,slack etc)?

[Milner08]

Current IBM Dev here. I know several IBM teams that use slack & github. There should be no problem with that.

[rynop]

Private or public repos? From my experience collaborating in public (which will continue to be critical in this space) was painful/impossible in some scenarios

[thomasj]

Have you seen this? http://ibm.github.io/

[rilut]

Sorry, what is work on an island?

[EncaitarUK]

A euphemism for being left to do things the way you used to do things before you were bought.