????惠普在硬件上投入重注，認為其最終將獲得成功。IBM則將賭注壓在已被證明比硬件投入要少的軟件上，同時采取廣泛撒網的策略。但這并不意味著IBM不愿進行并購：該公司表示，從現在到2015年，將拿出200億美元進行收購，超過過去10年并購額的總和。

????這意味著，IBM認為它的大多數投資應該放在剛嶄露頭角、具有發展潛力的軟件公司上。惠普當然也會尋找好的軟件公司進行投資，不過，它只是希望平衡一下過去幾年對硬件公司的投資額。這是純軟件和軟硬結合兩大策略的爭議之處。

????惠普的賭注充滿風險，因為科技界越來越由軟件驅動。硬件一直是、而且永遠是技術領域的重要組成部分，不過在個人電腦、服務器、交換機和路由器等諸多領域，軟件提高了生產效率、并不斷推動創新。硬件雖然也在不斷進步，但越來越被視為利潤稀薄的日用品。

????而軟件長期以來一直是利潤豐厚的業務。雖然惠普經過多年并購，在營收增幅上已超越IBM，但IBM的利潤更豐厚。去年，IBM的運營利潤達到27%而惠普只有8%。

????這就是IBM和惠普為何境況不同。兩家公司新任首席執行官面臨的最大難題是，如何確立公司未來的發展方向？管理層應該如何為公司出謀劃策？

????羅曼提表示，將繼續執行前任制定的戰略，但愿意在必要時更大膽一些。惠特曼則坦承惠普正面臨著挑戰，但自己能迎難而上。不久前，惠特曼否決了投資者要求分拆惠普PC業務的請求。上周，她再次重申，惠普將進軍不斷增長的智能手機市場。

????無論全球經濟何時轉暖，兩家公司都有發展空間。IBM告訴企業，在他們向新科技時代進軍的道路上，IBM能提供咨詢、基礎設施和軟件專業技術。惠普也號稱能提供這些服務，但它還有解決方案——從咨詢和應用軟件到個人電腦和智能手機，幾乎包羅萬象，因此，惠普的服務似乎更為全面。兩家公司還要與甲骨文（Oracle）和戴爾（Dell）等公司展開激烈競爭。

????兩家公司前景如何？金融市場已經給出了不同答案。IBM股票今年上漲了13%。惠普下跌了29%。IBM市值為2,360億美元，惠普市值僅為360億美元，不到IBM的1/6。

????不過，在考慮這些數據之前，我們還應該看看被許多人認為能決定科技企業未來的一項數據。過年三年，IBM的研發投入為180億美元，為同期營收額的6.0%。惠普的投入只有90億美元，占營收比重為2.5%。著眼未來意味著可能會減少并購而增加研發費用。現在，兩家公司都在為光明的未來作準備，戰略應該是非常值得關注的因素。

????譯者：項航

????HP paid big for its bets on hardware, wagering it would win out in the end. IBM, meanwhile, made lots of smaller bets on software, which has proven to be a cheaper business to start-up than hardware. That doesn't mean IBM won't pay out for acquisitions: The company has indicated it will spend $20 billion on deals through 2015 -- more than it has spent in the last 10 years.

????What it means is IBM believes its big investments will be in software companies that are only starting to show their stuff. HP, of course, will also be looking for good software investments, but it wants to counterbalance them against some of the hardware companies that it bought over the past several years. It's a debate between pure software versus a mix of software and hardware.

????HP's bet is risky because the world of tech is more and more driven by software. Hardware is and will always be an important component of tech, but in many areas -- personal computers, servers, switches and routers -- software is driving efficiencies and innovation. Hardware, while ever improving, is increasingly seen as more of a commodity business that delivers low margins.

????Software, of course, has long been a high-margin business. Even though HP, through its years of acquisitions, has seen its revenue grow faster than IBM's, it is IBM that has enjoyed the bigger profits. Last year, IBM's operating profit was 27% of its revenue, versus an 8% margin for HP.

????That's where IBM and HP stand today. The bigger question for their new CEO's is, where will these companies go? Where can their leaders take them?

????Rometty has indicated she will build on the strategies set down by her predecessors, although she is willing to put a bold stamp on the company if that's what it needs. Whitman has been frank about the challenges facing HP, yet willing to make tough calls on its future. Whitman resisted demands from investors to spin-off HP's PC business. And this week, she reiterated her desire to make the company a player in the growing market for smartphones.

????There is room for both companies to thrive, whenever the global economy finally improves. IBM will tell companies it's got the consulting, infrastructure and software expertise they need to push into the brave new era of tech. HP will say it offers the same, but it has the soup-to-nuts solution -- from consultants to apps to PCs and smartphones -- that's even more comprehensive. Both will battle other giants in the space, like Oracle (ORCL) and Dell (DELL).

????Will both thrive? The financial markets measure a discrepancy. IBM is up 13% so far this year. HP is down 29%. IBM has a market cap of $236 billion. HP is valued at $36 billion, or less than a sixth of its rival's value.

????But before you consider any of those statistics, consider the single metric that many people believe says more about a tech giant's future than anything. IBM has spent $18 billion in research and development over the last three years, or 6.0% of its revenue in that period. HP has spent $9 billion in the same period, or 2.5% of its revenue. To plan for the future may mean spending less on high-ticket acquisitions and more on research and development. As both companies steer toward a brighter tomorrow, that strategy seems one well worth betting on.