IT outsourcing in London users have been told that the UK’s existing internet infrastructure is placing limits on their ability to achieve faster and faster speeds.

Richard Patterson, spokesperson for broadband-expert.co.uk, has highlighted the fact that there is pressure on ISPs to deliver this despite the fact that they are restricted by the physical networks currently in place.

Companies should be able to determine the speeds that they are likely to receive by inquiring with their provider and this should allow them to optimise the speed at which they can access applications through software-as-a-service, as well as the more general speed of internet access.

Mr Patterson explained: “If some of the measures suggested by Ofcom under the voluntary code are adopted, this would go a long way to resolving the issue.”

His comments follow a report by Ofcom that found that many internet users are not achieving the speed that the connection was advertised with.

Source:http://www.ihotdesk.com/article/800009333/Infrastructure-limiting-speeds-for-online-IT-services

In recent weeks, IBM has been in the news the other side of the Atlantic as it tries to respond to two legal cases brought against it.
It is interesting to note how, despite the maturity of the outsourcing sector – particularly in the US – it seems as though the issue of managing relationships and expectations is a skill that has not yet been perfected by the industry.

Although legal action is always considered a ‘last resort’ option, the public sector is under pressure to deliver savings and efficiencies. When multi-million contracts have ‘gone wrong’ or are ‘significantly delayed’ somebody – usually, it seems, the vendor – has to be responsible.

But it’s much more complicated than that. More often than not, vendors and suppliers deliver what they were asked to deliver. Where they seem to fail is to meet the untold or unclarified expectations that buyers and end-users have in mind for the venture.

A recent example is IBM, who has been facing two recent legal disputes in the US.
The first of these relates to the state of Texas and a seven-page letter the Texas Department of Information Resources sent detailing what it calls “chronic failures” of agreed service levels.

In the letter Texas expresses to IBM it remains discontented with services provided, indicating that IBM is in breach of its contract.

This is not a new problem. Indeed, it has been ongoing since 2008, when the state first suspended the $863m, seven-year outsourcing contract.
IBM obviously contests the claims. Meanwhile, Texas IT officials are hoping for the best and preparing for the worst after giving IBM 30 days to fix alleged problems with the state’s $863 million data centre outsourcing contract.

The second incident involves the state of Indiana and sees both parties suing each other since May. The heart of the problem: Indiana’s 10-year, $1.6bn outsourcing contract with IBM to streamline welfare eligibility in the state, which the state governor cancelled in October last year.

According to reports, the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (FSSA) is trying to recover $437.6m it paid IBM until 31 January. The lawsuit also includes costs incurred for any third-party lawsuits, federal penalties and employee overtime, plus triple damages worth more than $1.3bn.
As for IBM, it has counter-sued Indiana for $52.8m reportedly for hardware, software and automated processes Indiana IBM left there and is still using.

In both cases, each side disputes the other’s claims. We’ll just have to stay tuned to see how the saga unfolds; only then will we get sight of what the possible repercussions for the outsourcing industry will be.

Source:http://www.sourcingfocus.com/index.php/site/newsanalysisitem/2471/