How Common is it to Tell the Truth on SAP?

Executive Summary

  • SAP and SAP consulting companies more often that not appear to be addicted to lying to customers. It is widely regarded as normal to lie in order to maximize revenues from SAP projects.
  • How to SAP proponents use the argument of popularity to argue from falsehoods.

Most analyst and media entities cannot tell the truth about SAP. Most take money from SAP and have little interest or expertise to be able to fact check SAP. 

Introduction

This article was promoted by a debate on the topic of in-memory computing, which is part of our article How to Understand Why In-Memory Computing is a Myth.

In that article, we stated that the term in-memory has no meaning as all computing is performed in memory.

In this article, we will explain and debate this perspective of focusing on what is popular over what is true.

Comment on Supporting Popularity

A comment that was made in defense of the use of a term which is false was the following:

“In-memory database” has become an industry term whether we like it or not. If you want to start a campaign to change it – it’s a free country but, again IMHO, it’d be a waste of time. SAP or Oracle or any other vendor do not lie to anyone by using this term, in my opinion. Sorry, I feel disinclined to argue a non-existent case here.”

Supporting False Things Because they are Popular

This arguer makes the case that what is true is irrelevant. This is a logical fallacy called argumentum ad numerum. It means that an argument should be considered true if enough people believe it is true.

Many people do think like this. For example, most of the partners I have met at major consulting companies have this view. To them the reality of items is immaterial. It is the perception that counts. And they continuously hammer this point away at their underlings.

For Brightwork Research & Analysis, this way of thinking is a problem. We perform research. Research means caring primarily about what is true. It also means not caring what is popularly accepted. It means not caring if a statement is made by a powerful entity or a powerless entity. The vast majority of IT media entities, ranging from ComputerWeekly to Gartner do not care what is true. They follow concerns about popularity and do minimal fact checking of SAP. This means almost the entirety of the IT media system, as well as the consulting companies, are aligned with popularity over what is true.

Whether You Like it or Not

The sentence “A is the way it is, whether you like it or not” is curious to us.

In fact, I find that comment strange. Let us alter it to see how it works for other topics.

“The fact is people are getting run over by tractor trailers whether you like it or not.”

If one am talking about trucking safety, and the person in opposition makes this statement as a response, it makes little sense. The same sentence could be applied to any negative phenomena. Animal abuse, cancer, etc..

Ine is talking about whether something is prevalent, the other is addresses whether it is either right or true.

Facts About the Use of the Term “In Memory Computing”

  1. Is in memory an accurate term. It isn’t.
  2. Is the term deliberately deceptive? Of course. The entire reason to manipulate a term was to trick people. (The alternative explanation, that SAP has no idea what they are talking about is not a great alternative.)
  3. Does the way SAP, and others that have jumped on the bandwagon, undermine the understanding of databases? Yes.
  4. Is this a problem? According to argumentum ad numerum logic, if enough people believe something which is false, then no. We say it is.

Taking the Side of What is True Over What is Popular

We are not focused on whether the term is popular or not popular, or how popular the term is. That would be a different type of research, which would be tracking the popularity of IT terms. This is what people who don’t have what is true on their side seem more interested in discussing.