Talk:Hewlett Packard Enterprise Services

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:HP Enterprise Services)
Jump to: navigation, search


Rename[edit]

"EDS will be renamed EDS - An HP Company." Is this actually true given there is no citation and is gramatically incorrect? --Bell Ringer (talk) 09:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


Yes it is. See the following quote:

HP intends to establish a new business group, to be branded EDS – an HP company, which will be headquartered at EDS's existing executive offices in Plano, Texas.

from [1]press release on the EDS site 78.146.185.84 (talk) 11:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


The above comment is no longer accurate. It is now referred to as HP Enterprise Services. This brings up an issue throughout this article - there continue to be references to EDS even though the company does not exist after 23 Sep 2009. Here's a recommendation: - Refer to company as EDS for updates and content before 23 Sep 2009 as EDS. - After 23 Sep 2009 refer to company as HP Enterprise Services, formerly EDS.

Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aflagg99 (talkcontribs) 20:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Eagle's nest & nicknames[edit]

Hopefully the EDS article will eventually include information about the firm's reputation for authoritarianism and indentured servitude, without straying too far from NPOV. Also, information on whether EDS today is different from the traditional EDS would be interesting.

This page should contain some account of Eagle's Nest, where the management of EDS hired mercenaries to rescue American employees who had been kidnapped abroad. I believe there was a book published about it, which leads me to suspect that I have the name wrong as I can't find it on Amazon.

Yeah, that was On Wings of Eagles, by Ken Follett. Rhymeless 08:23, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Should also discuss the CAD-CAM company Unigraphics, acquired in 1991, now spun off again as UG Solutions.

Should also discuss Perot's changing role in the company (that is, his departure). Bovlb 20:38, 2004 Apr 16 (UTC)

Article implies that NMCI was given as a result of conflicts in the Middle East. This is not correct, so I am changing it. Vesta 08:06, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Michael Jordan, the great Basketball player, isn't EDS CEO (at least, according to EDS's own website). --Abu Badali 13:50, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

I suppose this has no place in the main articles, but I know that more than a small few employees (some former, some still there) refer to the company as "Every Day Sucks". Obviously, verifiability may be a problem, since none of them are likely to be willing to go on record to verify this. It might be worthy of note that, as well as the disasters, they've actually been booted off government IT contracts at the Inland Revenue and the DVLA, though I'm not sure where it might fit in. Chris 16:22, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thats's simply untrue Chris. They were never booted off IR nor the DVLA. There is a difference between being booted off an account and not having it renewed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.16.80 (talk) 14:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

As a very recent former employee, seeing most of my team sent to cheap Asian companies and our work turning into tasks I could train a monkey to do, I can confirm the Every Day Sucks Statement. The worse example I saw at EDS was it's lack of security dealing with Passwords, with support teams dealing with multiple clients, in my area there was a spreadsheet called password.xls that contained the passwords of over 20 clients, and everyone (including short term contractors had access to this file and could do what they like with it no auditing. (Former Australian employee)

Many different tongue-in-cheek "real meanings" have floated around for years. (I suppose this happens at every company that has initials for a name.) One, for instance, is "Everyone Dresses the Same" (in the days of dress codes). Oh, and the reasons for the end of contracts, like divorces, often lie on both sides. J42 07:04, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Don't forget "Everything Done Slowly".

Bias[edit]

It occurs to me that the section entitled "recent bad press" is rather unbalanced, there are also many stories in the press about notable contract wins which are not represented here, I agree with J42 that there are many sides to these arguments.

And internally the company is called EDS ;)

--John-Nash 21:15, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Deleted: Recent press coverage about EDS IT failures:

In recent years, EDS has been involved in a growing number of high profile government IT failures involving EDS:

-- Zondor 06:28, 19 September 2005 (UTC)


This entry reads more like a slash article <sheesh> Removed unsupported statement. Michigan user 16:29, 25 September 2005 (UTC) Re-worded bad press statement. There is nothing supporting that the amount of bad press is "growing". Reading these articles does not support the "Failure" title either. Switching vendors is not an IT failure - it is business as usual in the USA. Michigan user 16:40, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Removed reference to article that does not exist (Colorado Benefits Management System) Michigan user 16:51, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Note that ALL of the remaining articles are found in ONE "news publication" = news.zdnet.co.uk. This sort of looks like a vendetta of one tabloid for whatever reason. Some of these are as weak as that a server went down for 5 hours and they make it sound like the entire banking systems failed - unbelievble. If no one can support these "IT failure" claims with other sources - I am going to edit this section out in a few days. Michigan user 16:51, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

The deal with the UK government does not mean that the govt. is waiting for it's money. As reported in a recent Private Eye, the exit deal is that EDS will pay back the money when they win new business from the government. So far, no new business has been won therefore, under the terms of the agreement, no money needs to be paid back. 78.146.185.84 (talk) 11:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

APESMA Miscellaneous News - EDS[edit]

Controversial?[edit]

This page states that EDS is controversial but doesn't actually explain why... -anon

I agree with this assessment. EDS failed to deliver on IT services for the British Government, but it's not really a controversy. - Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aflagg99 (talkcontribs) 20:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

POV - Reads like an advertisement[edit]

This entry reads like an advertisement for EDS. The "Controversy" section is about one line long, despite being involved with problems such as the Department of Work and Pensions failing computer system. Instead we are treated to a talk on how "EDS headquarters in Plano features the impressive 'God Pod' suite of offices and presentation rooms," or how they service "very large companies and governments that need services from a company of EDS's scale". Plus, the article features so many links to the EDS website it's amazing there is any actual text between them. I'm going to try and fix this to make it less POV, but it will probably still need some more work from somebody more knowledgeable. --h2g2bob 17:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Many of the constroversial adds were over 2 years old and none of that leadership team remains.

Article doesn't reference the claim "[the] company that defined the outsourcing business when it was established in 1962".

What exactly is this alleged advertisement allegedly trying to sell? ➥the Epopt 00:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

ADs[edit]

How about something about their (weird) advertisements? I mean... at least from the internet/pop. culture perspective, I'm sure that a large number of people are familiar with their commercials. (Herding cats, anyone?) 64.75.241.206 10:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Lead[edit]

While certainly interesting, is the mercenary extraction story important enough for the lead? In that detail? MadMaxDog 11:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

HP Approved to Buyout EDS[edit]

What does it mean? What is HP positoining itself for? How does a company with EDS's reputation help a company like HP, given all the recent scandal associated with HP's Board and their tactics? Mbryson2 (talk) 23:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Market consolidation. HP was more successful in winning contracts than EDS. I'm guessing EDS benefits from HPs market share, HP benefits from EDS reputation. Timeshift (talk) 01:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Controversy section[edit]

In general, such sections tend to be problematic per WP:STRUCTURE. However, the outright removal of multiple sourced subsections should be discussed first. --Ronz (talk) 22:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

This has been talked about many times here, since no other services company has this kind of section even though all services companies have disputes... It shouldn't be here but in the past every time it was removed it was rolled back into production. See the BIAS section above.

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument. The controversies are WP:NOTEworthy and WP:CITEd. Timeshift (talk) 23:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Major Clients[edit]

National Heritage Insurance Company (NHIC) was first licensed in Texas in 1977. It was created by Ross Perot when EDS was bidding on the contract to administer the Texas State Medicaid Program. The contract required that the administrator be licensed as an insurance company in the State of Texas. When originally licensed, NHIC had two employees, Ross Perot and Fred Lucas, MD. National Heritage Insurance Company became licensed in a number of states where EDS did state government business. NHIC lost the contract for the Texas Medicaid Program in 2000, after 24 years. NHIC Corp. is is another EDS subsidiary doing business with CMS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devansaus (talkcontribs) 18:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

HP edits to this page[edit]

FYI. HP has a community of folks from various departments in our company who are trained to edit WP articles. We aim to be good NPOV members of the WP community. Any edits made anonymously from HP's intranet are either:

  1. inadvertent (Wikipedians who edit from HP's intranet are expected to log into their WP accounts before editing but sometimes forget),
  2. made by employees who aren't yet aware of our internal community, or
  3. made by contractors with access to HP's intranet.

It's also possible that unauthorized use is being made of HP's intranet, but that's outside the scope of this comment.

I'm trying to get the word out. If you are an HP employee or contractor who wasn't aware of this policy, please contact me for details. We want to include you in our community! If non-HP Wikipedians have any concerns about anonymous edits that appear to originate from HP's intranet, also feel free to contact me. -- tbc (talk) 20:04, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Name change[edit]

EDS Defence is still running a website under that name http://www.edsdefence.com/overview.html. Vernon White . . . Talk 14:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Company Structure[edit]

This section which talks about how the company was structured in 2006 doesn't seem relevant anymore. Wouldn't it make mores sense to update the company structure to how it is currently organized? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aflagg99 (talkcontribs) 20:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


Proposal: Split Article into EDS and HP Enterprise Services[edit]

HP Enterprise Services followers, this article was first created when EDS was its own company. When HP acquired EDS and created the HP Enterprise Services division, the article was simply renamed and continued under the HP Enterprise Services heading. However, this creates a great deal of confusion because the article attempts to deal with everything from EDS history to HP's corporate news. For example, the "Company Structure" is as of 2006, yet the key people listed include Tom Iannotti. These facts are inconsistent.

In order to keep the articles on one entity at a time, I have the following proposal: Split the HP Enterprise Services article into 1) EDS spanning from the begin to HP acquisition, 2) HP Enterprise Services starting post acquisition. This would simplify the article and make a clear distinction between the stand-alone company and the subsequent division.

Before making this a change, I would create two sandbox areas that everyone would have access to, one for EDS and one for HP Enterprise Services.

Please feel free to weigh in this discussion.

Aflagg99 (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I moved your new section to the bottom of the talkpage, per convention. I hope you don't mind.
Personally, I'd be happy to see the article split.
bobrayner (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd also like to see it split. None of the other sites with HP's services competitors have this kind
of baggage from years long past.
cebess (talk) 20:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

EDS/Enterprise Services Sandbox Now Open[edit]

The EDS article sandbox and the HP Enterprise Services sandbox are now open for your edits. Let's if we can get these revised by October 1, 2010 so that we can begin working in the edits to the live articles. Aflagg99 (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Since your target date has been and gone and nobody else seemed to have much to say, I went ahead and split the article into Electronic Data Systems and HP Enterprise Services :-)
I mostly went with what was in your sandbox, apart from some uncontroversial tweaks - ie. changing things from present tense to past tense in the EDS article - and the retention of some recent minor changes by other editors.
I'd still like to get some recent financials & an orgchart for HPES, and any other sources would be helpful.
Any comments / suggestions?
bobrayner (talk) 02:43, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

We will be starting the migration process shortly. Aflagg99 (talk) 17:26, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Super Bowl ad, maybe for EDS[edit]

The ad showed what at first seemed to be a nineteenth century American cattle drive, until the viewer realizes the animals are house cats. If one is familiar with the assertion "Managing programmers is like herding cats," the ad can be read as "We do the nearly impossible." Was it EDS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.175.225.22 (talk) 21:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. [2]
That could be an interesting addition to the article :-)
bobrayner (talk) 21:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Revisions Need to Be Made[edit]

  • Changes "EDS" mentions to Enterprise Services where appropriate
  • Reference HP Enterprise Services (formerly EDS)
  • Update the employee figure to most current information
  • Update revenue sources
  • Update services
  • Update partners, agility alliance
  • Add Health Care client —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aflagg99 (talkcontribs) 16:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Some concerns about this article[edit]

I have to say that I find this idea of some HP "community" that edits their own corporate articles kind of creepy. The problem that this causes is a conflict of interest, and it has already caused problems here. When I look at the EDS article, I see that it has been completely scrubbed of history, which is a problem for this very historical company. I notice further that even the *article history* is gone.

I suppose you managed that by deleting the EDS article and then restoring it. Let me just register my irritation at your high-handed treatment of the encyclopedia, and my request that you back off making such bold changes to the articles for companies you work for. Now that the EDS article is split, I also request that your HP "community" keep your hands off of it due to your conflict of interest. If you want changes made to it, I will be glad to make them for you after discussion.Jarhed (talk) 12:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

The EDS article wasn't deleted. Originally, there was an EDS article; it got moved when EDS effectively changed name to HPES; then it was split into a "historical" article on EDS and a current-day article on HPES. Feel free to have a look through the article histories. If you think anything in particular is missing or wrong, just say so - that would be much more helpful than vague accusations of bias. If you find a specific fault, I'm sure other wikipedians would like to help fix it. bobrayner (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
See, that is precisely the problem I am talking about. EDS is an historic company that merits a substantial history section. Your scrubbing of the history to fit your corporate needs is a conflict of interest and doing such runs against Wikipedia guidelines. I have no interest in arguing with you or edit warring. However, I do NOT appreciate all of the historica data that has been deleted. I intend to try to restore as much as I can to the EDS article, but you have made that effort much more difficult.Jarhed (talk) 13:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree that EDS merits a substantial history section. That's why I did this, so I cannot fathom why you're angry about history being deleted by some stealthy corporate conspiracy. If you are unhappy with some aspect of the article, feel free to make specific improvements or make specific proposals; but making vague and/or fictional slurs against other wikipedians, including accusing others of high-handedness, is not the best way forward. bobrayner (talk) 14:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Photos[edit]

HP Enterprise Services corporate headquarters in Plano, TX

This edit (2011-05-16) clobbered the image EDS-Plano-TX-5071.jpg (shown at right). I'm mentioning this in case anyone wants to put it back into the article. — Loadmaster (talk) 20:54, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

HP Service First[edit]

Suggest adding a link / reference to the HP Service First software, which is in direct competition to CA Service Catalog for ITIL based incident / problem / configuration / request management. Significant as HP is entering into the corporate enterprise arena for ITIL based software products and support - a growing industry in the private and public domains worth a substantial amount of revenue.

I can't see information anywhere on wikipedia on HP Service First or CA Service Catalog.

My bad. This should be a link to HP OpenView in the Software section of the Hewlett Packard box at the bottom of the page.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hewlett Packard Enterprise Services. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 1 April 2017 (UTC)