Is IBM's Blockchain a game changer?

First off I woule like to apoligize for the potential grammatical fuck-ups on my part. I don't normally partake in the realm of posting on blogs or anything social media. Or hell, anything that isn't outside of work. As well as the length of this post. I have tried to summarize it while providing as much information as I could. I would like to have a nice open conversation.

I would to talk real quick about a potentially massive issue, that many/most of you may not even realize could be a real issue.
Please don’t scream FUD and all that non-sense like a child, let’s have a real talk about what, I am about to talk about,
Means for much of the crypto space (minus crypto’s that are solely used for monetary purposes like BTC, LTC, etc.). Also,
please do not include coins propped up by China like NEO, into the discussion. China is in the process over the next decade
of developing major companies that will lead in particular area’s of technology. So the likeliness that this conversion applies
to them is pretty negligible.

So, if many of you have not heard IBM currently has an Enterprise Blockchain currently in production (Fabric). IBM touts
That this blockchain is currently used by over 400+ clients, Walmart actually being one of them for use with food safety.
There are also multiple parts to IBM’s overall blockchain:

1. IoT support
   1. Which they recently release a pretty sweet “blockchain ready CPU” which is also the worlds smallest computer Link to article
2. Cross-border Transactions (which is actually handled by Stellar’s (XLM) network)
3. Financial Services (were not talking cryptocurrency)
4. Public Sector use (Regular business and companies)

So many of you may scream about the lack of a cryptocurrency/token associated with this network. Well according to IBM in a multi-day conference they had, their lead architects discussed this concern, according to them, most companies in-fact do not what to deal with or need a digital coin. Which makes sense to me.

Also, the concern about centralization is a major concern. I am anti-centralization as well (mostly with $$$$$). I do have a huge soft-spot with open-source software though. I think open source software has help our world advance as well as help educate those who derive from low income enviornments and other areas where money is a constraint. Well what IBM is doing which I find pretty sweet is that they adopted an open source based model which is extremely similar to that of Red-Hat. As of now a large number of small-enterprise level business and individuals are involved with writing the underlying code which all Hyperledger Projects uses. I can only assume though, IBM and The Linux Foundation (who is partnered with IBM in this), and whomever else, do code reviews prior to commits.

Another major concern is centralization of the network’s nodes. I can node speak to the validity of this, because I am not 100% sure. Since there are many different project’s in Hyperledger (once again IBM’s is Fabric), I can only assume some will be centralized because some organizations may want (for good reason) to keep their network closed.

Now that you have a pretty rough and elementary idea of what IBM is doing in the blockchain sector and what their business model is, you may want to know, how does this chain different from something like Ethereum or future projects like EOS, ADA, etc? Well there are a ton of differences.
Like:

1. No need for a utility token or currency
2. Fabric’s users can develop using 2 different types of consensus protocols. Compared to the others with use only 1.
3. Hyperledger is much more modular design. It allows users to pick and choose what they do and do not want to use.
4. Users can decide whether they want their TX’s to be visible or non-visible to others (outside of their organization), which may be useful for companies, who are only dealing within their organization.
5. Fabric is an Enterprise service and they provide 24/7 support to customers.
6. Excellent training resources
7. Tools to help developers and non-developers at a company to develop their application appropriately utilizing blockchain.
   And a lot more.

So, this leads me to my next point. Why do I think this is a threat to a number of crypto’s which I have already described or are similar in nature? There are a number of reasons, and all of these reasons are based out of logic and my experience working at different enterprises and companies as a DEVELOPER.

1. Companies big and small will 99% of the time use Enterprise level software, hardware, services, etc. which are utilized
   in areas that affect a companies operations, finances, data, etc. This is because they need to have 24/7 support especially in areas with mission-critical operations (like banks, industry, transportation, etc.). If something goes wrong, developers need quick access to the experts in area’s that may not directly relate to that organizations applications (Operating Systems, hardware, etc.)
2. Normally enterprise subscriptions include discounted or free education directly from the supplying company (IBM in this case). For example HP (I currently deal with NonStop Application & System Development), provides many courses at a discounted rate which actually translate into credit and certifications.
   1 Potential on-site support where needed
3. With regards to IBM, The sheer number of entities which are involved with Hyperledger. This leads me to believe they will NEVER adopt the start-up technologies for their production environments.
4. IBM’s influence globally, especially in the financial sector.
5. IBM’s collaboration with central banks. (If you did not know, it has been suggested by IBM’s VP of blockchain that many central banks will be issuing fiat tokens utilizing their blockchain as early as Q2 this year.) - yeah non of us are fans of this.

So to sum it up, as a developer who has worked in the financial sector, transportation sector, etc. I find it extremely unlikely that any large companies
Will be adopting any various crypto start-up’s tech for their production-level environments. I AM NOT saying a company will not accept Crypto as payment, I refer only to them putting their current and future applications on the blockchain of an entity such as ETH, ADA, etc. I am also expecting pushback from individuals saying that companies such as Google, Microsoft, maybe even IBM have supported (financially) some crypto’s (Yes IOTA fans we know about Microsoft). Please know that these companies do this for A LOT of startups, many of times It leads to nowhere or the supporting company will implement their own method of this technology in a different fashion (pretty easy to do when the code is open source). I say all of this stuff, first, because I love what IBM is doing. Second, because I don’t think many people understand how a company operates with technology. Many of times a company will choose older or maybe even tech that isn’t as good from a reputable company, over technology from a startup that has no heavy usage.

All this is just my personal opinion and experience, and I may be wrong. But I would like to have a debate, and maybe speak with some individuals who have been in tech for a very long time now or maybe some people who are exces and have experience in making these decisions. Hopefully this will help people invest more intelligently, and maybe find blockchain solutions which IBM and other large entities in the future don’t get involved in, to invest in. Also please review the members list, and see what types of companies they are and how they play into cryptos you may already own. This can help you decide if it really is a good coin to HODL.

This might be the most controversial thing I say here "I think once IBM's chain picks up speed , the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance will be null" 0.0

Lastly, here are some references, because that’s how people don’t spread fake shit (cough, CNN)

HyperLedger Members
IBM Blockchain
HyperLedger Projects