IBM's results hampered by slowing hardware sales

Managing its way nimbly through times of economic sluggishness, IBM reported a 6 percent increase in profit for the third quarter even as its revenue declined.

IBM's third-quarter profit was $4.0 billion, compared to $3.8 billion in the third quarter of 2012, the company announced Wednesday. Revenue was $23.7 billion, compared to $24.7 billion in the year prior.

[ For quick, smart takes on the news you'll be talking about, check out InfoWorld TechBrief -- subscribe today. | Find out what topics and issues affect tech's biggest names and news makers in the IDGE Insider CEO interview series. | Read Bill Snyder's Tech's Bottom Line blog for what the key business trends mean to you. ]

"In the third-quarter we continued to expand operating margins and increased earnings per share, but fell short on revenue," said Ginni Rometty, IBM chairman, president and CEO, in a statement.

Most noticeably, hardware sales continued to hamper the company's business.

Revenue from IBM's Systems and Technology segment generated $3.2 billion in revenue, down 17 percent from the third quarter in 2012. System x revenue fell by 18 percent, Power Systems revenue fell by 38 percent and storage system revenue fell by 11 percent.

Much of the hardware decline stemmed from China, CFO Mark Loughridge said in a webcast. The Chinese government is preparing a new and comprehensive economic policy, due to be implemented in November. As a result, government agencies are delaying procurements, which hit IBM's hardware particularly hard.

As a result, IBM's business overall in China was down by 22 percent, and IBM hardware sales fell by 44 percent, Loughridge said. While China's new economic plan aims to reduce its reliance on foreign suppliers, IBM doesn't see the downturn as permanent: Sales in China should resume by early 2014, Loughridge said.

Revenue from the Americas, totalling $10.3 billion, decreased 1 percent from the same quarter a year ago. Revenue from Europe, the Middle East and Africa increased 1 percent to $7.3 billion, while revenue from the Asia-Pacific region declined 15 percent to $5.5 billion.

The services divisions produced middling results for the company. Revenue from the Global Technology Services segment decreased 4 percent to $9.5 billion for the quarter, which ended Sept. 30, while revenue from the Global Business Services segment was flat at $4.6 billion.

Revenue from IBM's software segment climbed modestly to $5.8 billion, up 1 percent from the same quarter a year ago.

IBM is looking to the cloud for growth. In July, the company completed its purchase of cloud hosting provider SoftLayer.

Purchasing SoftLayer "significantly improved our capabilities in public and hybrid cloud," according to Loughridge. IBM's cloud revenue was up 70 percent from the same quarter a year ago, the company said. "For the first time, we delivered over a billion dollars in cloud revenue," Loughridge said.

Joab Jackson covers enterprise software and general technology breaking news for The IDG News Service. Follow Joab on Twitter at @Joab_Jackson. Joab's email address is Joab_Jackson@idg.com.

Source: http://www.infoworld.com/d/the-industry-standard/ibms-results-hampered-slowing-hardware-sales-228939
Related Topics: Texas A&m Football   how i met your mother   The Family   Matt Harvey   megyn kelly  

Radical Republicans

Sen. Ted Cruz may not have helped his party during the debt crisis and government shutdown, but he's a hero to the far right.

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

For the past 20 years, American politics has been defined by Republican revolt. The right-wing radicalism that now worries the whole world first emerged in response to Bill Clinton's election in 1992. It's not that Republicans were never extreme before that time. Challenges to the legitimacy of federal authority from the people who now identify as Republicans trace back to pro-slavery attempts at nullification and segregationist assertions of states’ rights. But it was 20 years ago that the Congressional wing of the GOP, led by House Speaker Newt Gingrich, adopted belligerent noncooperation as its defining stance.

Jacob Weisberg is chairman and editor-in-chief of The Slate Group and author of The Bush Tragedy. Follow him on Twitter.

It was Gingrich who turned bipartisanship from Washington’s greatest virtue to its most reviled vice. Under his leadership, congressional Republicans refused any quarter on Clinton health care reform and supplied no votes for the economic plan that spurred the long boom of the 1990s. In their new mode, Republicans refused to vote on presidential nominations and buried the White House in investigations and subpoenas. It was Gingrich who in 1995 invented the tactic of refusing to raise the debt ceiling as a cudgel to get Clinton to agree to outsize spending cuts. It was Gingrich who invented the tactic of shutting down the government for the same end.

Bill Clinton's view was that the Republican refusal to be reasonable was all about him. Because he was elected in a three-way race without an absolute majority, he thought Republicans never accepted him as legitimate. An alternate view is that the radical Republican style was largely a matter of incentives and rewards. Abandoning traditions of responsibility and civility won the GOP control of both houses of Congress in 1994. Rejecting any compromise brought Republicans the perks and power of majority control for the first time in 40 years. Thus did the politics of total resistance become their path of least resistance.

Wednesday's surrender points to a change in the incentives that have favored two decades of reckless Republican behavior.

In subsequent years, the conservative movement built up an elaborate incentive structure to favor extremist views and tactics by individual politicians. State Republican parties redrew maps to create safe congressional districts where appealing to swing voters would no longer be required. Organizations like the Club for Growth and Americans for Tax Reform targeted Republican moderates for political extermination, recruiting primary challengers to run against them, scripting their attack ads and funding their campaigns. The Tea Party emerged partly out of inchoate anger at social and economic change, and partly in response to these incentives.  

In his first term, Barack Obama did his part to encourage the GOP hostage taking. When Republicans again tried demanded lopsided budget cuts in exchange for a debt ceiling increase in 2011, the president was too willing to negotiate, giving them a victory in the form of the budget sequestration that took effect this year. By the time of his re-election campaign, however, Obama had learned the lesson that compromising with bullies only fuels their aggression. This time, he refused to negotiate, sending a clear message that the debt ceiling could not be used for leverage.

Wednesday's unconditional surrender by House Speaker John Boehner was a watershed because it points to a change in the incentives that have favored two decades of reckless Republican behavior. The party’s Senate elders are chagrined and embarrassed. Boehner’s unwillingness to stand up to the Tea Party has made them look ridiculous. It has driven a wedge between the GOP and Wall Street, which was appalled by the calculated flirtation with default. It has seriously diminished Republican chances of recapturing control of the Senate in 2014, which looked like a real possibility before the latest crisis. They’re not going to try this tactic again.

But for many Republican politicians, the incentives remain unchanged. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has done great harm to his party by instigating the showdown over Obamacare, but in the process he made himself into a national celebrity and the darling of the right. Many House Republicans will be home in their districts this weekend, bragging that they voted against the sell-out. In the mid-term election of 2014, no ultraconservative Republican is likely to face a moderate primary challenger with interest-group support and outside funding. 

What the GOP needs to become a serious governing party again is a set of countervailing incentives and rewards to support what were once its cardinal virtues: respect for tradition and process, aversion to radical change, and willingness to compromise. For the moment, however, the Tea Party remains its dominant force—soundly beaten in this round to be sure, but unbowed, unrepentant, and still deliriously irresponsible.  

A version of this article appears in the Financial Times.

Source: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_big_idea/2013/10/shutdown_and_the_tea_party_the_gop_s_radical_right_wing_is_still_in_charge.html
Similar Articles: bob costas   dexter   GTA 5 Cheats   Jodi Arias   marc anthony  

College Football Playoff selection panel unveiled

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former Nebraska coach Tom Osborne and College Football Hall of Fame quarterback Archie Manning are among the 13 people who will be part of the College Football Playoff selection committee in 2014.

The committee members were officially unveiled Wednesday, though the names had been reported last week by The Associated Press and other media outlets. Earlier this week, Arkansas athletic director Jeff Long was announced as the chairman of the first selection committee for the new postseason system that replaces the Bowl Championship Series next year.

The committee will choose four teams to play in the national semifinals and seed them. The winners of those games, played on a rotating basis at six bowl sites, will meet a week later for the national championship.

Long and BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock, who will assume the same position in the new postseason format, announced the committee members at a news conference at the College Football Playoff offices in Irving, Texas. The panel is made up of current athletic directors, former players and coaches and college administrators, and a former member of the media.

"Our work will be difficult, but rewarding at the same time," Long said. "We have important judgments to make during that process. We realize we represent all of college football."

The rest of the members:

. Barry Alvarez, athletic director, Wisconsin.

. Lt. Gen. Mike Gould, former superintendent of the United States Air Force Academy.

. Pat Haden, athletic director, Southern California.

. Tom Jernstedt, former NCAA executive vice president.

. Oliver Luck, athletic director, West Virginia.

. Dan Radakovich, athletic director, Clemson.

. Steve Wieberg, former college football reporter, USA Today.

. Tyrone Willingham, former head coach of Notre Dame, Stanford and Washington.

. Mike Tranghese, former commissioner of the Big East Conference.

Hancock said term limits for committee members will eventually be three years, but that will not be the case for all the current members because they do not want to replace the whole committee at once.

"We haven't worked out the stagger yet," Hancock said.

Committee members will recuse themselves when a team they have a direct relationship with comes up, and they will be allowed to "examine whatever data they believe is relevant to inform their decisions," Hancock said.

"No one single metric will be identified as paramount over all other data," Hancock said.

Long said the committee likely will release four or five rankings during the season, starting around midseason, before the final decisions are made at the end of the regular season.

Rice was a surprising pick because she has never worked in college athletics. She is currently a professor at Stanford and was provost at the school before serving under President George W. Bush as national security adviser and secretary of state.

"Condi definitely earned her spot on this committee," Hancock said. "She knows this game; she is a student of this game. Athletics reported to her at Stanford. She had to know the game. My conversation with her from the beginning was fascinating to me because it was clear from the start how well she knows the game and what a good, tremendous committee member she was going to be.

"Obviously, part of this is going to be the ability to make judgments under scrutiny, and Condi has that."

Osborne is one of the most successful coaches in college football history. He won three national championships at Nebraska, was elected to Congress and later served as the school's athletic director.

Manning, the father of Peyton and Eli, was a star quarterback for Mississippi and had a long NFL career, mostly with the New Orleans Saints.

___

AP Sports Writer Stephen Hawkins in Irving, Texas, contributed.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-selection-panel-unveiled-182355944--spt.html
Related Topics: nascar   Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them   labor day   EverQuest Next   Chromecast  

Second Child on the Way for Mike Myers

"We are thrilled," the couple tell PEOPLE.
Source: http://feeds.celebritybabies.com/~r/celebrity-babies/~3/4Whk28fUsbA/
Similar Articles: Theresa Vail   sports illustrated   Steve Ballmer   Pga Leaderboard   Justin Bieber Spits On Fans  

Michel Martin's Movie Suggestions For Politicians

Some politicians and commentators amp up their rhetoric at the expense of the facts. In her regular "Can I Just Tell You" essay, host Michel Martin suggests that they get a reality check... at the movies.

Copyright © 2013 NPR. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Finally today, if I ruled the world - which I do not - I would have a list of movies that politicians and would-be-politicians and pundits would have to see before they get to weigh in on any topic that involves anybody other than themselves. Yes, of course, I have a list of books, too, that I would prefer that they read. And maybe a podcast or two that they would download - you can guess which ones. But I'm going to stick with movies for now because movies are the way that anybody can see the world. Now I'm not talking about documentaries, although this country has produced some great ones. I'm talking feature films, because many people will see a feature who wouldn't be caught dead in an art house theater watching a movie about race relations or the Holocaust or farm workers or space. But they will go see a movie and they will be changed.

The movies on my current list aren't necessarily the ones with the big ideas and soaring rhetoric or most exciting visuals, although some of them have that. They are the ones that show the day-to-day reality of being the object of forces bigger than yourself. And that's why "Schindler's List" is on my list. Not just for the incredible scenes at the death camps, but because it shows the day-to-day moments of desperate fear and petty humiliations that are the meat of the oppressed. Demian Bichir's "A Better Life" is on my list because it shows what life is like for illegal immigrants living in the shadows. And "The Children's Hour" is on my list because it shows you that the closet can actually kill that which it seeks to hide. "The Right Stuff" is on my list because it shows why it's important to dream, but why dreaming is not enough. And "Miral", a little indie film about a Palestinian orphan is on my list because, love it or hate it, it offers a version of history that most Americans never see or hear about. And now there's a new one to add to the list. "12 Years A Slave," which will be in theaters this week.

It's a film based on the true story of a free black American named Solomon Northup who was kidnapped from his home in New York, sold into slavery and survives - barely - to tell about it. Now I'm no critic, but I must tell you it's one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen that's almost unbearable to watch. And I say that because it exposes in graphic detail one of the ugliest chapters in our history. More than that, it shows the humiliation and degradation of utter powerlessness of being subjected to the roaming hands, the fits of rage, the petty resentments of another human being with virtually no recourse except death. All this in a nation that says it cherishes the freedom and equality of everybody. As I say, it should be required viewing before anybody throws around slavery as a casual metaphor again.

Now I'm saying this because Dr. Ben Carson, the renowned surgeon, compared the Affordable Care Act to slavery last week in his remarks to a conservative political group. Dr. Carson, like the president, is African-American. And, like the president, has a compelling personal story behind his professional success. But he's no fan of President Obama and he likes the Affordable Care Act even less. He said that Obama Care is, quote, the worst thing that's happened in this nation since slavery, unquote. He went on to say that, quote, it is slavery in a way. Can I just tell you - he has a right to his opinion, but if Dr. Carson were as careless with his scalpel as he was with his words, he would not be the famous figure he is now. The healthcare law may be many things, but slavery it is not.

Comparing a law to extend health insurance to millions of people who don't now have it through a combination of private insurance, government-sponsored exchanges, and expanded subsidies, however flawed it may be, is not a system for owning human beings in perpetuity. To subjecting them to forced sex, forced work, forced ignorance and utter brutality. In the words of a former colleague and mentor of mine, it is not that words fail - it's that we have degraded them. There are slaves in the world right now. They are trapped in brothels, in fishing boats, making bricks, tending children not their own. They are hiding in plain sight. Let's not degrade their suffering and the suffering of generations by equating it with our disagreements of the moment. And that's our program for today. I'm Michel Martin and this is TELL ME MORE from NPR News. Let's talk more tomorrow.

Copyright © 2013 NPR. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to NPR. This transcript is provided for personal, noncommercial use only, pursuant to our Terms of Use. Any other use requires NPR's prior permission. Visit our permissions page for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio.

Source: http://www.npr.org/2013/10/16/235384253/michel-martins-movie-suggestions-for-politicians?ft=1&f=46
Similar Articles: denver broncos   tina fey   Navy Yard shooting   Insidious 2   gizmodo  

Jury Clears Mark Cuban of Insider Trading

Maury Phillips/Getty Images for DIRECTV

In a victory that could be as satisfactory as his Dallas Mavericks winning the NBA championship, Mark Cuban has beaten the Securities and Exchange Commission in a long-running contentious legal dispute.

The billionaire owner of Landmark Theatres, Magnolia Pictures and AXS TV, who also stars on ABC's popular Shark Tank, was charged with violating federal securities laws by trading on alleged inside information in the sale of Mamma.com. The SEC accused him of learning through the company's chief executive of a plan that would hurt the company's stock price. Cuban quickly sold his shares, avoiding $750,000 in losses, but he maintained that he didn't know that the information that was provided to him was confidential.

STORY: Mark Cuban Says Live TV Remains the Most Important Platform 

On the witness stand, Cuban testified that he didn't remember details of a conversation nearly a decade ago. Attorneys representing the SEC struggled to demonstrate his mindset at the time of the stock sale. The agency pursued the case for many years -- having the case dismissed by a judge before revived by an appellate court. Through that time, the SEC mocked Cuban's "Hollywood production schedule.” There were also Cuban attacks on the wisdom of the SEC's expenditure of time and resources to hunt him.

Cuban was facing $2 million in penalties if found liable.

Instead, after three and a half hours of deliberation, a jury found in his favor. The defendant reportedly smiled as the verdict was announced.

Twitter: @eriqgardner

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/thr/business/~3/Vv4ouCT0Ags/story01.htm
Tags: cleveland browns   emmy awards   NFL Network   What Is Labor Day   Karen Black  

'Arrow': Stephen Amell on 'Evolving' Oliver/Felicity, 'Errand Boy' Roy and Flash

[Warning: Some spoilers ahead.]

Oliver Queen has a rough road ahead on Arrow.

In honoring Tommy's death through his vow not to kill again as he re-assumes his perch as the hood, Oliver's path to heroic is paved with dead ends and detours. With Queen Consolidated vulnerable, a kid in Roy Harper attempting to be the City's saving grace and Laurel desperate to lock up the vigilante away for good, time isn't on Oliver's side.

In a chat with The Hollywood Reporter, star Stephen Amell talks about playing a character who isn't "chasing a ghost" anymore, getting put in "precarious" situations, his bleak future with Laurel and why he believes Arrow is producing the "most engaging hour of television on TV this year."

First of all, Oliver's hangout received a major makeover at the start of this season. What has been your favorite part of shooting in the Arrow cave so far?

The scene where I walk into the Arrow cave [in the premiere] and it lights up, that was the first scene we shot this season. To me, it still feels like the same place but on screen, it visually looks really cool. We've come a long way since the pilot.

STORY: 'Arrow' EP on Oliver's Rocky Road to Hero, New Antagonists and Season 2

When Oliver returns to Starling City following Tommy's death and post-Undertaking, things are pretty grim. What has the journey been like playing a guy who's trying to do things differently?

It's been a lot of fun to play the character this year because he's not as haunted. He's not chasing a ghost, so to speak. He's doing things for a much more virtuous reason. So when he accomplishes his goals, there's a sense of accomplishment and possibly even good feelings, which is, again, not something we've had a lot of in the first thing. And that's an important step for the show because anger and revenge can only take you so far. It's really only a two-dimensional type of storytelling, whereas when you see a character work up a full range of emotions and be happy and content once in a while, that opens up so many possibilities for us on the show. That has made the first bunch of episodes that we've shot much more dynamic and much more well-rounded. The first five episodes that we have this year are definitely as good, or in some instances, better than what we put out in the first season.

That's a tall statement to make.

The show this year for me -- I read a lot of reviews of the first episode -- I think we're doing the most engaging hour of television on TV this year. I'm really proud of the show and the direction it's taking.

Tommy's death still looms large as Oliver goes on his journey to becoming the Green Arrow. How significant is the loss affecting Oliver's perspective?

He says it in the premiere. If they're going to get back to do this, it has to be about honoring Tommy and trying to become the version of himself that Tommy hopes he would be. For a lot of characters, not just Oliver, there's a tremendous sense of guilt. Oliver tried to save Tommy but he couldn't. To a larger extent, he put Tommy in harm's way to begin with. If Malcolm (John Barrowman) dies in episode 16, then the Undertaking never happens and Tommy survives. [Tommy] remains a pivotal part of the show; we can't just gloss over him dying like that. Otherwise, what was the point of doing that?

STORY: 'Glee' Star Set as CW's Flash

How does that affect Oliver's standing with Laurel (Katie Cassidy)?

I think Laurel has some misplaced anger at the moment toward the vigilante but maybe she shouldn't. We resolve that pretty soon in the show. Oliver and Laurel -- I wouldn't say they're in the best place because the best place for them always and forever (Laughs.) would be in a relationship since they both love each other. But at least it's in a much more honest place, let's just put it that way. Laurel and the vigilante on the other hand, they're not in a good spot whatsoever.

At the end of the second episode, Oliver is put in a precarious position.

He is. At the beginning of episode three, we pick up right where we left off. Precarious. 

What's Roy Harper's (Colton Haynes) journey like as he starts on his road to becoming Arrow's sidekick? In this latest episode, Oliver even throws him a bone.

Colton's killing it this year. We don't have a ton of scenes together so when I see his stuff, I always find myself laughing. I think he brings a lot of humor to the Roy character. I'm just tossing him something -- as the vigilante -- that I consider not a meaningless job -- in a future episode Oliver refers to him as "an errand boy" and I wouldn't say that he just considers him to be an errand boy but it's not that important of a job. But to Roy, it's like he's part of a team now. Oliver's just trying to give him a purpose and hoping to keep him out of trouble. The elephant in the room is his proximity to Thea (Willa Holland), that's what really worries Oliver. It's the same reason he doesn't reveal himself to Laurel and why he was so afraid to reveal himself to Tommy because proximity to the vigilante is dangerous. As Roy gets closer to the vigilante, Thea is in more and more danger. That's eventually going to become a factor this year.

Thea seems to be the one character who has evolved the most out of everyone. Talk a little bit about what we can expect for the Queen siblings.

When I was talking about the season, everyone wasn't in the best place. The hangover from the Undertaking has taken its toll and everybody has been demoted, so to speak, or had to move career positions whereas with Thea, she's in a great spot. She's together and she's managing the club. Her relationship with Oliver is good, but there is still that fence that she has that he's aware of, in that he hasn't opened up about what happened while he was away [on the island]. They've decided to shelve that conversation for the moment but they'll have to have it eventually. Certainly they're in a much better spot compared to the start of last year, when she wasn't happy with him.

What is it like for Oliver having to go up against a powerful businesswoman like Isabel Rochev (Summer Glau) at Queen Consolidated?

He's not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. He's legitimately trying to save the company. It does mean a great deal to him. It's an extension of his family and he's the person who represents his family now. He's trying to make good for his company, his family and Isabel. As it happens, he has another job and it's constantly wreaking havoc for him to be the CEO of the company. He can't say to her, "I'm the vigilante and that's why I'm not here." He just has to appear to be a failure and some of that is irresponsible. He's working to earn her trust but it's not happening as quickly as he'd like.

When I spoke to producer Marc Guggenheim prior to the season, he hinted that the Isabel and Oliver's work dynamic will affect another relationship that he has. What can you say there?

We haven't really seen anything beyond business with Isabel's character. Last year Oliver had flings and we haven't really gone down that road this year. Oliver and Laurel have said they can't really be in a relationship right now. I'm interested to see if and when something romantic happens between Oliver and anybody because there hasn't been any of that so far this year.

Felicity (Emily Bett Rickards) has secured her spot in Oliver's inner circle, alongside Diggle (David Ramsey). What can we expect to see with Felicity and Oliver working more in tandem?

Their relationship is evolving. She is a full-fledged member of Team Arrow now and she's not afraid to give her opinion. She's smart and capable and Oliver's starting to see her that more and more. I don't know where it's going to end up but that relationship is going to continue to strengthen throughout the season.

You mentioned proximity being one of Oliver's biggest worry. Does that continue to affect who he brings in to his inner circle?

One of the things we reference later on in the season that we never talked about is how much Oliver vetted Diggle and Felicity before he revealed his identity. There was always the joke in the first season that he was revealing himself to everybody. It seemed like every week, somebody new was learning [about Oliver being Arrow]. There was more of a thought process because of how dangerous this knowledge is. Since Felicity's been a part of this, we've seen her life in danger several times. So he does consider it.

Will more focus be paid on the supporting players?

We've done an episode -- I think episode six -- that's Diggle-centric. It's his episode. In a lot of ways episode three is Detective Lance's (Paul Blackthorne) episode. Episode five is someone's episode that I can't say. It's very exciting to utilize the rest of the cast a little bit more this year. It'll be interesting to see how people react to that.

Lastly, what's your take on this iteration of Barry Allen/Flash (Grant Gustin).

He's a whippersnapper. He's young, he's enthusiastic, he's not stupid. In fact, he's incredibly smart. He's a little naive and his level of enthusiasm and his penchant for problem-solving is something we've seen on the show with Felicity. Their characters are incredibly similar and as a result, have an instantaneous chemistry with one another and fondness for one another.

Arrow airs Wednesdays at 8 p.m. on The CW.

E-mail: Philiana.Ng@THR.com
Twitter: @insidethetube

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/thr/television/~3/uiJnilzoP_0/story01.htm
Category: homeland   world trade center   roger federer   Nick Jonas   gold cup