On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:12:59 -0500, Dave Day wrote: >Roger, If IBM's current mainframe revenue stream was to dwindle to one >twentieth of its current, how long do you think we would continue to see the >improvements we have seen in both harware and software in recent years? >Just to maintain current revenue, they would have to increase market share >twenty fold. Estimates are that there are somewhere between 6 and 10 >thousand z/OS shops, worldwide. Taking the smaller number, do you actually >think z/SO could grow to 120,000 paying installations?
Unfortunately it's too late now. When the CMOS processors arrived in the 1990s there was a golden opportunity to bring mainframe prices down to more reasonable levels, which might well have resulted in the kind of growth you mention. z/OS could have established the same foothold in small and medium sized companies as it has today in large companies. But IBM took the choice to keep mainframe prices high, and they could do this because at that time there was really no alternative. In 1990 the idea of running a production workload on a PC was still laughable. But now that the "toy" computers have caught up and overtaken the mainframe in almost all respects, we are seeing the inevitable dwindling in the number of mainframe sites. In the 1990's it was estimated that there were 22000 CICS installations alone. Now we are talking about figures of 6 thousand sites and falling. IBM reports growth in mainframe hardware revenues. Increased MIPS at the high end and increasing server prices (yes, a z10 does cost more than a similarly powered z9) account for this. But the astonishing pace of system z hardware and software development, funded by premium price tags, does little to improve the employment prospects of the bulk of mainframe professionals. The number of installations diminishes, and the improvements to z/OS reduce the staffing requirements even further. >1/20th of the current revenue? I think we would all be taking in each other's >wash to find work. They could not stay in the business. Most of us reading this forum probably have a common interest: to keep a healthy market alive for our skills. IBM's interest is to maximise its profits by continuing to squeeze as much as possible out of the mainframe market while it still exists. The question is, do IBM's methods coincide or conflict with our interest, given that z/OS will never now achieve mass market penetration? I don't claim to know the answer to that question (although of course I have my opinion). Regards, Roger Bowler ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
