It is not malicious...just common sense business practices in a capitalist society. Although others might think otherwise.
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 5:58 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Fwd: Is There Such a Thing as a Mainframe Monopoly? On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:49:14 -0500, Rick Fochtman wrote: > >---------------------------------------------------<snip>-------------- --- >> >>Would refusing to license your software on machines other than what you >>produce go toward malicious actions? >> >>Would refusing to license your software for running on a competitor's >>machine, when just a few months earlier you were doing that? >> >> >------------------------------------------------<unsnip>--------------- -- >Let's remember that z/OS nowadays requires a 64-bit-capable machine. If >you don't have the capability, then the license is useless. You didn't answer Steve's question, Rick. Fundamental and PSI both had z/Architecture compatible hardware. Hercules is also compatible. IBM will not license its software on any of these. -- Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
