On Thursday, 05/03/2007 at 02:26 AST, Craig Dudley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How about comments on one of the basic premise of this thread - CMS > is "functionally stabilized"? From an external POV, it does appear > that CMS (and adjunct components like SFS) isn't (aren't) being enhanced > for the continuing support role it has in maintaining a z/VM CP > environment.
Wow. Tough question, but a good one. In the last few years, I'd say that CMS application-oriented enhancements generally have indeed been limited and primarily focused on: - security: SSL, new APIs - networking: IPv6, NFS client, LDAP (including CMS clients!) No, no new pipelines stages. No, no new PL/I compiler. They are also nothing to sneeze at considering those investments are being made at a time when z/VM's value to IBM is its ability to compete in the virtual server arena. To quote from IBM's 1Q07 results "prepared remarks": --------------------------------------- System z revenue grew 12 percent, fueled by double-digit growth in Asia Pacific and Europe. MIPS grew 9 percent, marking seven consecutive quarters of year-to-year MIPS growth ? and longer than any product cycle in recent history. This sustained growth is supported by a strong demand for traditional mainframe engines, specialty engines for Linux and Java, and growing recognition of System z as the premiere tool for large scale virtualization. As a result we are seeing new clients and new work coming to the platform and leveraging our latest technology. System z performance also reflects continued good sales execution and we believe we gained market share. ---------------------------------------- As soon as the market signals its willingness to substitute "CMS application development" where it currently says "large scale virtualization", then you will get dizzy as we swing the development engine to focus on CMS. As long as it keeps selling new hardware. When we have to choose between virtualization and CMS, we choose virtualization. What we have gained with that strategy exceeds what we have lost. The CMS changes we have made are those needed to let our customers conform with new best practices, laws and regulations regarding privacy, and to allow the system to integrate into tomorrow's networks. (Still more to do.) Would CMS be a great AD platform? Yes! Our efficiency and good interactive response are wonderful. But how many AD platforms does one company need? on System z? (Stockholder concern peeking through - sorry.) If I were just graduating from college, I think I'd rather use some fancy shmancy AD GUI thingy (e.g. eclipse) and run the resulting program on Linux. Why? Because (a) it's waaay easier than a 3270, and (b) it's what I know. "Virtualization. That's what z/VM is all about, Charlie Brown." Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
