The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Graeme Gibson) writes: > ..but "blind" is completely out of court here and cannot go > unchallenged in this forum. If CKD compatability had been abandoned > then I've no doubt that it would have broken thousands of applications > and would have been regarded by the customer base as a total > show-stopper when considering an upgrade to any version of "MVS" or > "S/390" or "z/OS" without CKD support. the issue (initially) wasn't about CKD being abandoned but starting with MVS supporting FBA ... and transition period from CKD to FBA. i was told that even providing them with fully tested and integrated FBA support in MVS ... it would still cost $26m to ship the support and I had to show (significant, incremental) ROI for that $26m (including opportunity costs vis-a-vis spending it somewhere else). at the time, the claim was that they were shipping as many disk drives as they could build ... and therefor (at best) customers would buy FBA in lieu of CKD ... with no incremental revenue. one business case was life-cycle costs ... there have been enormous costs sunk into incremental enhancements to CKD ... that would have much more cost-effectively done as transition to FBA. lots of past posts mentioning CKD issues (and/or being told I had to show ROI business case for the $26m to ship FBA support in MVS): http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#dasd for other topic drift, misc. past posts about being allowed to play disk engineer in bldgs. 14 & 15 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#disk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
