On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 09:14:59 -0700, Ray Mullins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>However, both you and Marcia continue to ignore the context of the
current
>discussion here on IBM-MAIN in your posts. Many of us are or work
for ISVs
>- especially small ones that can't afford the $100K for a basic
kneecapped
>z9 BC, but could afford the FLEX-ES offering. These ISVs have
supported IBM
>System z and its predecessors for over 40 years. There are many
ISVs
>represented on this list, and the small ISVs have been griping over
the
>perceived lack (and remember, perception is reality here) of a proper
IBM
>response to the FLEX-ES situation for almost a year.
Neither Timothy, nor Marcia, nor any other front-line IBMer you
regularly see or talk to is going to engage in a discussion about ISVs,
PWD, or IBM's future plans for System z. The only people who could
respond are IBM executives responsible for those things, and they
don't hang out here. IBM deals with 3 kinds of customers:
- ISVs
- Business Partners
- Consumers ("end users") [not mass market]
Everyone on the planet recognizes that not every ISV can install a
traditional mainframe. Even IBMers. We who deal with ISVs or who
hang out in places like this appreciate the frustration ISVs are
experiencing, but we cannot, as individuals or as IBMers, address
them. We are, all of us, waiting to see what will happen. As you might
expect, any (non-executive) IBMer who actually has knowledge of the
future cannot speak of it.
But ISVs should be working through the PWD program to ensure that
PWD is representing your needs. The fact that a lot of small ISVs are
represented in IBM-MAIN changes nothing since PWD doesn't hang out
here AFAICT.
Having your livlihood threatened isn't pleasant and your frustration
and anger are understandable, but, honestly, you will not get
speculation from us on what the future will hold. So if your
expectation is that you will get an answer here prior to getting an
answer through an official PWD channel, you will be disappointed.
Something like this affects peoples' lives and livlihoods and speculation
by anyone with an ibm.com e-mail address would be monumentally
inappropriate. If we could tell you anything, we would.
So please don't take our lack of response here to your concerns as an
ISV as a sign of indifference or unconcern. Far from it. All members of
the Mainframe Fan Club want you to succeed, but the needs of ISVs
are very different than those of consumers, and it is unfair to the
consumers to imply that the technology dividends they have received
over the last 10 years don't count for anything just because you're
unhappy with IBM today.
BPs should be working through their channel management to ensure
that IBM knows how *your* business is affected. (They don't hang out
here, either.)
This brings us to consumers. IBM has continued to lower the TCO
*and* TCA for the mainframe. A lot. Timothy and Marcia have been
trying to respond illustrate those advances.
Since IBM is in business to provide value to its shareholders (duh), IBM
does have its own financial objectives, too. Common sense says there
must exist a price below which IBM, at a given point in time, is not
willing to go, and there are sacrifices it is unwilling to make. IBM must,
of course, live with the consequences of those decisions, but "that's
just business."
So, if z/OS & related middleware software pricing finally breaks the
camel's back and a company decides, after a TCO analysis, that the
benefits do not justify the costs and that reengineering onto another
platform is the right thing to do, then you should do it. We have seen,
however, that many companies who take the time to do a careful TCO
come to realize that there are qualities of service and capabilities in
the mainframe that they have taken for granted. All of a sudden, there
are more benefits than originally thought, providing additional weight
in the TCO equation.
Assuming a company won't push the equipment off the end of the
loading dock in a fit of spite, it may decide to preserve its hardware
investment and look at Linux on the mainframe. Or not.
But with all that said, I and many others sadly recognize that some
customers (the "consumer" kind) are leaving the mainframe. Their IT
needs are shrinking, not growing, and it has become painfully evident
to both sides that the time has come for a parting of the ways. The
capacity and qualities of service aren't needed, and there aren't
enough servers to worry about consolidation. If they have benefitted
from their relationship with IBM in prior years, hopefully they will
remain partnered with us. Some won't. That's "just business", too.
But we'll miss them anyway and wish them success.
Respectfully,
Alan Altmark
Sr. Software Engineer
IBM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
