On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 08:40:42 -0400, Craddock, Chris wrote: >Shane sez >> Mate, I have (what was) a multi-site customer that is migrating >> off-platform for reasons of less than half an engine. >> They wouldn't pay for an ICF, and wanted the M-thingies back from the >> CF LPARs. > >M-thingies? You mean those meaningless indications of speed-thingies? > >> Eventually the second site was shut down; WLC and (severe) >> capping pulled the costs down on the remaining site. >> Not enough - on the way to being lost altogether. > >No big surprise, but I hear that a lot. If it is as widespread as it >seems, then the z platform seems doomed to be marginalized into a >smaller and smaller number of ever-larger footprints. Not a healthy >picture!!! > >> The Geico's of the world may not feel the pain, but the smaller end >> of town is.
Shane and Chris, of course, have summed up this problem with customary skill and diplomacy. The issue is that IBM is listening primarily to its zBLC group, made up primarily of its largest, spendy-est customers. Those customers are generally thriving on the z-platform, due in no small part to the tremendous attention paid to their needs. The small fry, on the other hand, are seeing less and less from IBM ... and the smaller ISVs are in the active/passive process of being choked by the Flex-vs.- IBM fiasco. Small customers are still tolerated, but there isn't much being done to help their business use of z/OS (or z/VM for that matter; and does z/VSE even matter anymore?). SHARE doesn't have near the impact that the zBLC has and that may not be able to change - unless the zBLC members wish to make it so. (And why would they?? Does the harem really want another wife?) -- Tom Schmidt Madison, WI ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
