Originally Posted by
El10
Did you quote the wrong post? Read again what I wrote. The meltdowns are not from CCS or Shares failing.
I specifically state that they have failed in leading. I was purely responding to the part about IT platforms. Thanks again for making my point that people confuse capabilities and execution.
You must not understand the relationship of hardware to software. I'll try to give you a simple explanation so you can understand.
You have 10 ton of dirt to move and only a quarter ton truck to move it. No matter how you work it, it'll take 40 trips to move the dirt and since it has to be done in 8 hour period at 5 trips per hour. (With me so far) everything is working fine.
But on certain days we have 20 tons of dirt to move. Obvious math says all we have to do is increase the tonnage per load to a half ton for the numbers work. The down side is the truck has a tendency to breakdown more or has to move slower to get the job done.
This is exactly what happens with the relationship of hardware to software in a computer system. If the hardware is not capable handling the request place on it by the software it breaks or slow to the point of delaying all functions. As in CCS and Shares.
It's not a hard concept. If the hardware can't handle the software demands at peak times you upgrade the hardware for the peak levels/times. Like in the truck example, they could have bought a second quarter ton or a bigger truck to handle the load. In the case of CCS and Shares the company is off-loading a lot of computer functions to others systems to handle the load to keep CCS and Shares functioning at an acceptable level. Downside is some of the information has to be exchanged between system and that induces other errors. (Payroll comes to mind).
It would have been easier and more cost effective to go with the more capable system(bigger truck) from the get go and avoid some of the pitfalls and melt-downs we've experienced.