Snowflake Finance VP Says Big Companies Migrate at a Glacial Pace (theregister.com)
- Reference: 0177902943
- News link: https://it.slashdot.org/story/25/06/02/1852240/snowflake-finance-vp-says-big-companies-migrate-at-a-glacial-pace
- Source link: https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/02/snowflake_analyst_conference/
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/02/snowflake_analyst_conference/
And this is new why? (Score:2)
Have been in the IT industry for 40 years, and have been involved in tons of major technology overhauls. Every migration starts out with the promise of clean, issue free migration, and every one of them has got bogged down in politics, resistance to change, un-brainwashing folks (convincing legacy system owners to change / convincing the incoming world changers that the world is a little more complicated than think it is). None of this is related to technology - it's just people being people. So ... why is
Re: (Score:2)
> So ... why is this a surprise?
That was kind of my initial response as well. I haven't been around as long as you have, but long enough to wonder if this dude has ever worked in a company before. There's a real good reason that things are done slowly and methodically. Some of it can be helped, some of it can't
Re: (Score:2)
>> So ... why is this a surprise?
> That was kind of my initial response as well. I haven't been around as long as you have, but long enough to wonder if this dude has ever worked in a company before. There's a real good reason that things are done slowly and methodically. Some of it can be helped, some of it can't
it's done methodically and slowly because disruptions in service due to rash actions can lead to loss of revenue. Sometimes to significant loss of revenue.
To act rashly without protection from above is a resume-updating experience.
Back in the day a popular expression was, "Nobody was ever fired for buying IBM." This was because IBM was that slow, methodical process and they tended to maintain strong after-sale support so long as you were paying for it. A place I worked for 20 years when through two lifec
Apt description (Score:3)
I like how Snowflake can be used either as an adjective or a noun in the title and still be valid.
Re: (Score:2)
I have my own naming sense doubts about it too.
A snowflake melts and evaporates, and I don't like that association with my financial matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha yeah, on my first pass at the title I assumed it was a derogatory adjective - until I saw the company name in the summary. But, surprise surprise, for this story it works both ways!
The Jeffries conference? (Score:2)
Do they have seminars on Jeffries Tubes? Or do they instead pick over the bones of Toys 'R' Us?
IT works for business, not the other way around (Score:2)
Sorry buddy, you work for them, and they've got other priorities too.
SaaS or in house (Score:2)
At any serious scale for data warehousing, you'll save a fortune by hiring one or two data warehouse specialists and doing it in house. Cloud is not a good fit.
If your data warehouse is for compliance and you never expect to look at the data again, the cloud can work fine.
But if you're trying to solve the actual real world analytics issues data warehouse are intended to solve, including real time analytics, the cloud is going to be slow and painful and expensive.
Why is this even an article? (Score:2)
This article is basically the VP of a services company complaining that his company has to deal with customers. If the customers would just work differently, then their job would not be as difficult and they could make more profit with less work.
If wishes were horses....
Re: Why is this even an article? (Score:2)
The answer to the question of "What happens when an actual snowflake becomes a CEO?".
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose in his defense, it didn't sound like complaining, just stating the very blatantly obvious to anyone in the industry.
They are cumbersome projects, and he didn't seem to express that they ever had any misconceptions about it, or even that it is very wrong. When speaking to investors it may be very apt to explain that those "sweet deals" should be perceived with some caution, because the investors are very oblivious and otherwise may start complaining when they see the follow-on expenses hit.