In a recent note, McKown, John said: > Subject: Re: IBM to the PCM market > > > Conspiracy theory: Maybe IBM wants to kill off the > > Mainframe, they just > > want to be able to blame it on the users deserting the platform rather > > than announcing a final end and having IBM desert the users. > > I don't understand why IBM would do that. If the System z is not as > profitable as some other system, such as the System p, then they could > just say so and give their zSeries customers some sort of migration > path. From what I've read, this is what Studebaker did. They stopped > making cars because they determined that it was more profitable to do > something else with their money. I don't know, but surely it would be > more profitable to IBM do so such a thing than to just let companies "go > their own way". Judging by my company (in the past), the most likely > conversion would be to Intel or AMD processors. > Ah, but it was easier to migrate from Studebaker to Rambler or Dodge than from z/OS to Windows. In the most ruthless scenario, the vendor continues to serve an ever-dwindling captive customer base at ever-increasing unit prices, milking every last drop of revenue, until no price-point is profitable.
-- gil -- StorageTek INFORMATION made POWERFUL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
