????在經(jīng)歷了一系列丑聞，更換了CEO，重建了董事會(huì)之后，科技巨頭惠普公司（HP） 終于以全新的面貌呈現(xiàn)在世人面前。不過新惠普走的似乎卻是另一家公司——IBM的路子。

????上上周惠普首席執(zhí)行官李艾科和其他高管向股東、分析人士和媒體介紹了新惠普的發(fā)展愿景。這些愿景讓人很難不想到IBM。IBM就像一個(gè)“影子巨人”，影響著惠普董事會(huì)的決策走向。

????李艾科為惠普規(guī)劃了一幅十分動(dòng)人，但又模糊不明的前景。

????? 構(gòu)建一個(gè)開放的在線市場，使消費(fèi)者和企業(yè)可以在這里購買各種應(yīng)用程序。

????? 構(gòu)建 “基礎(chǔ)架構(gòu)即服務(wù)”（infrastructure-as-a-service）和“平臺(tái)即服務(wù)”（platforms-as-a-service）等產(chǎn)品功能，以使企業(yè)能夠使用基于云計(jì)算的軟件。

????? 推出1億臺(tái)運(yùn)行webOS操作系統(tǒng)的設(shè)備，其中許多設(shè)備將連接到惠普的基礎(chǔ)架構(gòu)上。

????有些投資者的期望遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不止如此，他們希望惠普采取更多舉措，例如進(jìn)行徹底重組，或甩掉利潤率偏低的個(gè)人電腦部門。不過他們從李艾科那里得到的卻是波瀾不驚的愿景——IT業(yè)將進(jìn)一步演化；云計(jì)算的破壞性力量；惠普的角色被定義為一個(gè)包羅萬象的提供商……李艾科說道：“我們所有人都需要一個(gè)值得信賴的伙伴來一起探索這個(gè)新世界，除了惠普之外，還有誰能實(shí)現(xiàn)這種領(lǐng)導(dǎo)能力呢？”

????惠普首席財(cái)務(wù)官凱瑟琳?賴斯嘉稍后也提到了云計(jì)算，并大膽斷言：“惠普正著眼于業(yè)界未來的發(fā)展方向。然后她問道：“除了惠普之外，還有誰有如此上佳的定位？還有誰像惠普一樣，具有強(qiáng)大的、可持續(xù)的優(yōu)勢？”

????請注意她的修辭：惠普并沒有滿懷自信地表示自己是唯一一家引領(lǐng)新一代“云經(jīng)濟(jì)”的公司，而是在問：除了惠普之外，還有誰能做到這一點(diǎn)?；萜彰看螔伋鲞@個(gè)問題，答案都不言自明——IBM。就連惠普的收益預(yù)測也在模仿IBM。上周IBM預(yù)測道，截止2015年，IBM的收益將增長11.4%。而本周惠普也表示，截止2014年，它的收益率將增長11.2%，這個(gè)數(shù)字幾乎與IBM的一模一樣。

????長期以來，惠普和IBM一直是競爭對手。幾十年來，兩家公司在業(yè)界各領(lǐng)風(fēng)騷。2002年，惠普斥資250億美元收購了個(gè)人電腦制造商康柏電腦公司（Compaq），明確了其未來發(fā)展方向。而IBM卻反其道而行之，向軟件和IT咨詢服務(wù)領(lǐng)域轉(zhuǎn)變，而這兩個(gè)領(lǐng)域的增長潛力和利潤率都要好于個(gè)人電腦業(yè)務(wù)。

????不過惠普也及時(shí)地在這些領(lǐng)域進(jìn)行了擴(kuò)張，它斥資140億美元收購了IT服務(wù)業(yè)巨頭EDS。因此惠普的營收也超過了IBM，其上一財(cái)年的銷售額達(dá)到1260億美元，相比之下，IBM上一財(cái)年的銷售額為1000億美元。不過在其它重要的衡量指標(biāo)上，惠普仍相形見絀。盡管IBM的營收不如惠普，但I(xiàn)BM的凈利潤達(dá)到了148億美元，而惠普的凈利潤只有88億美元。而且惠普的市值僅為890億美元，而IBM的市值高達(dá)1880億美元，是惠普的兩倍。

????這還是李艾科的前任馬克?赫德拼命削減成本后的結(jié)果。馬克?赫德醉心于拉高利潤率，導(dǎo)致了惠普員工士氣不振，公司的創(chuàng)新能力也停滯不前。去年，IBM耗資60億美元用于研發(fā)，是惠普的研發(fā)支出的兩倍。

????當(dāng)然，惠普的某些優(yōu)勢也正是IBM所缺乏的，不過那些領(lǐng)域也正是IBM有意放棄的。例如2005年IBM將其個(gè)人電腦業(yè)務(wù)賣給了聯(lián)想，放棄了它的熱賣產(chǎn)品Thinkpad筆記本電腦。而目前惠普近三分之一的收入都來自于其個(gè)人電腦部門，但該部門的營業(yè)利潤率僅為5%。相比之下，惠普的軟件部門的利潤率為21%，但軟件收入占惠普總收入的比重還不足2.3%。

????因此，軟件將成為惠普未來的增長戰(zhàn)略的重要一環(huán)。也就是說，惠普要在這個(gè)IBM的核心優(yōu)勢領(lǐng)域上奮起直追。而且像IBM一樣，惠普也正在進(jìn)軍云計(jì)算領(lǐng)域。不過正如邁克爾?柯普蘭指出的那樣，在云計(jì)算領(lǐng)域，惠普將主要關(guān)注食物鏈的下端，而把高端留給那些已經(jīng)在該領(lǐng)域站穩(wěn)腳跟的云計(jì)算公司，比如甲骨文（Oracle）和IBM。

????在李艾科的演講中，他似乎深信，惠普與終端客戶的接觸，使惠普擁有了IBM所不具備的競爭優(yōu)勢。仿佛只要有了1億臺(tái)安裝了webOS操作系統(tǒng)的設(shè)備，消費(fèi)者和企業(yè)就會(huì)自動(dòng)涌向惠普的云計(jì)算產(chǎn)品。不過事實(shí)究竟會(huì)怎樣發(fā)展，現(xiàn)在還不明朗。本質(zhì)上，云技術(shù)就不依賴于設(shè)備的操作軟件。例如亞馬遜公司（Amazon）已經(jīng)建立了十分成功的云業(yè)務(wù)——亞馬遜網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)（Amazon Web Services），但并不在乎設(shè)備采用的是哪種操作系統(tǒng)。

????不過IBM已經(jīng)開始大步進(jìn)軍“中層云”領(lǐng)域了。IBM最近宣布了構(gòu)建一個(gè)“公共云”的計(jì)劃，并于本周表示，將投資3800萬美元在新加坡建立一個(gè)云計(jì)算數(shù)據(jù)中心。本月早些時(shí)候，IBM對投資者表示，到2015年為止，公司云服務(wù)的收入預(yù)計(jì)將達(dá)到70億美元。這可能意味著IBM要比惠普更善于把握業(yè)界未來的發(fā)展方向。

????因此，在上周的惠普股東大會(huì)前夜，一位IBM的高管對惠普嗤之以鼻，表示IBM在構(gòu)建集成軟件和服務(wù)方面要比惠普“領(lǐng)先許多年”，也就不足為奇了。

????相比之下，在惠普股東大會(huì)之后的采訪環(huán)節(jié)上，李艾科的話很有辯解的意味?！都~約時(shí)報(bào)》（New York Times）引述了他的話：“我們沒有在追趕任何人，尤其是IBM?！倍?dāng)《信息世界》（Infoworld editor）的一位編輯指出，惠普的資產(chǎn)組合“看起來與IBM幾乎100%的重合”時(shí)，李艾科不耐煩地回應(yīng)道：“我想稍稍糾正你的話：是IBM與我們100%的重合?！?/p>

????不過，打嘴仗沒有任何意義。勝負(fù)是由市場決定的。如果惠普能夠在自己的戰(zhàn)爭中打贏IBM，那么一切批評的聲音都會(huì)煙消云散。不過，現(xiàn)在惠普的當(dāng)務(wù)之急，是要在IBM的陰影之下證明自己。

????譯者：樸成奎

????Behold the new HP. After a series of scandals, a change in CEOs and a rebuilding of its board, the tech giant revealed the new HP to the world: It's still very much a company that wants to be another company -- IBM.

????Watching CEO Léo Apotheker and other HP (HPQ) executives present their vision last week to shareholders, analysts and reporters, it was hard not to think of IBM (IBM), the unnamed elephant sitting in HP's boardroom.

????Apotheker outlined an appealing if vague future for HP:

????? An open, online marketplace where consumers and companies alike could buy apps;

????? Features like infrastructure-as-a-service and platforms-as-a-service that allow companies to tap into cloud-based software;

????? 100 million devices running webOS, many of which will connect to HP's infrastructure.

????Some investors were hoping for much more -- a radical restructuring maybe, or plans to spin off the low-margin PC division. What they got was Apotheker's anodyne vision of an evolving IT industry, the disruptive force of cloud computing, and HP's role as a soup-to-nuts provider. "All of us need a trusted partner to navigate this new world," he said. "Who but HP could deliver this leadership?"

????Later, CFO Catherine Lesjak mentioned the cloud again before boldly declaring that "HP is skating to where the puck is going," (cue eye roll) and then asking, "Who else is as well positioned as HP is? Who else has as powerful and as sustained advantages?"

????Notice the rhetoric here: HP isn't saying with confidence it's the only company to usher in the new cloud economy, it's asking you who else can do it. Each time it did so, there was an implied answer: "IBM." HP is even mimicking IBM in its earnings forecast. Last week, IBM estimated its earnings would grow 11.4% through 2015. This week, HP said its earnings would grow through 2014 at the nearly identical rate of 11.2%.

????HP and IBM have long been rivals. Both were computing giants for decades, but while HP pinned the future on its $25 billion purchase of personal computer maker Compaq in 2002, IBM took the opposite approach, transitioning into software and IT consulting services, both areas that had more growth potential and better profit margins than the PC business.

????In time, HP expanded into these areas as well, helped in good part by its $14 billion acquisition of EDS, an IT services giant. As a result, HP surpassed IBM in revenue, bringing in $126 billion in sales in its last fiscal year, compared with IBM's $100 billion. But by other important metrics, HP still lagged: Despite smaller revenue, IBM's net profit of $14.8 billion dwarfed HP's $8.8 billion figure. And the market values IBM at $188 billion, double HP's market cap of $89 billion.

????And all this was in spite of severe cost cutting by Mark Hurd, Apotheker's predecessor. Hurd's obsession with driving up profits left the company's staff demoralized and its ability to innovate hamstrung. Last year, IBM spent $6 billion on research and development, twice as much as HP did.

????There are, of course, strengths that HP offers that IBM lacks, but these are generally areas where IBM has chosen not to do business. IBM sold its PC business, which made the popular Thinkpad laptop, to Lenovo in 2005. Today, nearly a third of HP's revenue comes from its PC division, which has an operating profit margin of 5%. By contrast, HP's software unit has a profit margin of 21%, but software makes up less than 2.3% of HP's total revenue.

????So software is going to be an important plank in HP's growth strategy going forward -- that is, HP is going to go hard after a core IBM competency. And like IBM, HP is moving into cloud computing, although as Michael Copeland pointed out, HP will focus further down the food chain, leaving the high-end to companies with more established cloud offerings like Oracle (ORCL) and, ahem, IBM.

????In his presentation, Apotheker spoke as if he believed that HP's access to end users would give it an advantage over IBM, as if 100 million webOS-powered devices will somehow draw consumers and companies into HP's cloud offerings. But it's not clear that will happen: The cloud is almost by definition independent of the operating software running devices that connect to it. Amazon (AMZN) has built a successful cloud business, Amazon Web Services, without caring which OS devices are running.

????But IBM is already taking big steps into the "mid-level" cloud, too. It recently announced its own plan to build a public cloud, and this week it said it's investing $38 million in a cloud computing data center in Singapore. Earlier this month, IBM told investors it plans to see $7 billion in revenue from cloud services by 2015. It may be that IBM is closer to the proverbial puck than HP.

????So it's not surprising that, on the eve of HP's shareholder meeting this week, a top IBM executive sniffed that his company was "years ahead" of HP when it came to building an integrated software and services provider.

????By contrast, in interviews following the meeting, Apotheker seemed on the defensive. The New York Times quoted him saying, "We are not playing catch-up to anyone, particularly IBM." And when an Infoworld editor noted that HP's portfolio "seems to overlap almost 100% with what IBM is doing," Apotheker replied testily, "I would qualify it slightly differently: IBM overlaps 100% with us."

????In the end, such verbal sniping means little. Rivalries are settled in the market, and if HP can beat IBM at its own game, it will silence its critics. For now, though, HP will have to prove itself in IBM's shadow.