FLEX-ES

[Jay Howard]

We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and management is 
looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery purposes. Is there 
anyone that has or is doing this that would be willing to share their 
experiences? You can reply directly to me if you like. 

Thank You,
Jay Howard 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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
 

FLEX-ES

[Phil Payne]

> Could you solve this problem in the future by upgrading to something past
the z890 (whenever that is) ...

Castor-less mainframe?

25th April, from what I hear.

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

FLEX-ES

[Phil Payne]

> What is the model number on that castor-less mainframe?

Don't know yet.  An analysis is in progress.

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

FLEX-ES

[Phil Payne]

> .. mainframe malarky ..

There's no money in it.  And I'm not the only one pissed at IBM's legal team - 
they seem to
have adopted a policy of making swimming along with them as difficult as 
possible.

As far as I'm concerned, the market is going below critical mass.  I'll do a 
page or two for
the next one, but I suspect that will be it.

There's always Gartner.

http://armadgeddon.blogspot.com/2006/03/does-gartner-podcasting-from-ibm.html

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Jay Howard wrote:
We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and management is 
looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery purposes. Is there 
anyone that has or is doing this that would be willing to share their 
experiences? You can reply directly to me if you like.
  


Does Flex-ES support z/Architecture for production use?

--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Jay Howard]

According to Gartner it does. 

Jay Howard 



"Edward E. Jaffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
03/16/2006 02:55 PM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List 


To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: FLEX-ES






Jay Howard wrote:
> We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and management 
is 
> looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery purposes. Is 
there 
> anyone that has or is doing this that would be willing to share their 
> experiences? You can reply directly to me if you like.
> 

Does Flex-ES support z/Architecture for production use?

-- 
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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


--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[August Carideo]

Yes it does
some prior draw backs was it did not support ESCON which it does now
and even though it supported parallel channels, you could not connect them
to DASD controllers
I have only seen it used at one MVS location , but many VM, VSE shops due
to the fact IBM does not have a low mip solution for them





  "Edward E. Jaffe" 

  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To:   IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU  

  FTWARE.COM>   cc: 

  Sent by: IBM  Subject:  Re: FLEX-ES   

  Mainframe 

  Discussion List   

  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

  EDU>  





  03/16/2006 02:55  

  PM

  Please respond to 

  IBM Mainframe 

  Discussion List   









Jay Howard wrote:
> We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and management
is
> looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery purposes. Is
there
> anyone that has or is doing this that would be willing to share their
> experiences? You can reply directly to me if you like.
>

Does Flex-ES support z/Architecture for production use?

--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Marian Gasparovic]

I may be wrong, but last time I heard, z/OS 64bit was not licensed/supported
(whatever legal words) besides development purposes.


On 3/16/06, Jay Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and management is
> looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery purposes. Is there
> anyone that has or is doing this that would be willing to share their
> experiences? You can reply directly to me if you like.
>
> Thank You,
> Jay Howard
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
> 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
>
>

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Steve Comstock]

Edward E. Jaffe wrote:

Jay Howard wrote:

We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and 
management is looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery 
purposes. Is there anyone that has or is doing this that would be 
willing to share their experiences? You can reply directly to me if 
you like.
  



Does Flex-ES support z/Architecture for production use?



Sure, if you pay the standard license fees for the z/OS
base and any products you use. It's only us developers
who get the software gratis and are thus forbidden to
use it for production. At least that's my understanding.

It's also my understanding that those fees can be pretty high.

Kind regards,

-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Comstock
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:13 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FLEX-ES
> 



> 
> Sure, if you pay the standard license fees for the z/OS
> base and any products you use. It's only us developers
> who get the software gratis and are thus forbidden to
> use it for production. At least that's my understanding.
> 
> It's also my understanding that those fees can be pretty high.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> -Steve Comstock
> The Trainer's Friend, Inc.

Not entirely. PWD people can get z/OS running 64-bit mode. Commercial
users are still limited to running z/OS in 31-bit mode. However, I think
that the newest instructions are available even in 31-bit mode.

I've also heard some rumors on the FLEX forum that there is a true
64-bit host version of FLEX (Athlon64 and EM64T processors in 64 bit
mode) that cannot be rolled out yet because IBM has not (yet) permitted
it.

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
UICI Insurance Center
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited. 
 

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Shane]

On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 14:52 -0500, Jay Howard wrote:
> We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and management is 
> looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery purposes. Is there 
> anyone that has or is doing this that would be willing to share their 
> experiences? You can reply directly to me if you like. 

Sorry, but every time I hear FLEX I think "laptop with dongle".
I have this recurring image of the DR site being folded up and taken
home to finish that Gantt chart or somesuch ...
One day I guess I'll see one that isn't in a bag on the back of a motor
bike.

Shane ...

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Edward E. Jaffe]

McKown, John wrote:

Not entirely. PWD people can get z/OS running 64-bit mode. Commercial
users are still limited to running z/OS in 31-bit mode. However, I think
that the newest instructions are available even in 31-bit mode.
  


In this context, "64-bit mode" is shorthand for z/Architecture i.e., 
ARCHLVL=2. This architectural mode distinguishes itself from ESA/390 in 
many ways, including 64-bit general purpose and control registers, a 
128-bit PSW, a new 8K PSA layout, new DAT structures, and many, many new 
instructions not available in ESA/390 mode. Some instructions (those 
marked "N3" in PoOp) are available in either architectural mode on 
machines implementing z/Architecture.


The generally accepted use of the term "64-bit mode" indicates that a 
program is executing in the 64-bit _addressing_ mode. When the operating 
system is running in the z/Architectural mode (ARCHLVL=2), programs 
running therein may issue instructions implemented by z/Architecture 
(e.g., the so-called "grande" instructions) regardless of the addressing 
mode in which those programs are executing.


It's best not to use the terms "64-bit mode" to describe the 
z/Architectural mode and "31-bit mode" to describe the ESA/390 
architectural mode. I never do it. Too confusing...


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Sebastian Welton]

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:19:34 +1000, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Sorry, but every time I hear FLEX I think "laptop with dongle".
>I have this recurring image of the DR site being folded up and taken
>home to finish that Gantt chart or somesuch ...
>One day I guess I'll see one that isn't in a bag on the back of a motor
>bike.

It takes me and the missus to get my one into the boot of the car, although
I suppose you could just squeeze it into a sidecar! I have actually heard of
people who have, for DR purposes, put their FLEX box into a van and driven a
distance away from the impending disaster, plugged it in, connected it to
the network and continued operations. Can't really do that with a z9 (or an
MS server farm for that matter.)

Seb.

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Wayne Driscoll]

That restriction cracks me up (well actually it makes me want to throw up).
IBM wants (needs) a large pool of ISV's writing products for z/OS, yet, in
order to do this, the ISV must either:
1 - Get a full z/OS license in order to run any "Production" software, ie
customer defect tracking, company web site, billing, etc.
2 - Purchase a non z box (ie Windows or Unix) and run the above functions on
it.  

Seems like the same problem IBM ran into with Universities.
Wayne Driscoll
Product Developer
JME Software LLC
NOTE: All opinions are strictly my own.
 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Steve Comstock
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: FLEX-ES

Edward E. Jaffe wrote:
> Jay Howard wrote:
> 
>> We are a small shop running a zSeries/890 (capacity 130) and 
>> management is looking at using a FLEX-ES system for disaster recovery 
>> purposes. Is there anyone that has or is doing this that would be 
>> willing to share their experiences? You can reply directly to me if 
>> you like.
>>   
> 
> 
> Does Flex-ES support z/Architecture for production use?
> 

Sure, if you pay the standard license fees for the z/OS base and any
products you use. It's only us developers who get the software gratis and
are thus forbidden to use it for production. At least that's my
understanding.

It's also my understanding that those fees can be pretty high.

Kind regards,

-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.

--
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

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Timothy Sipples]

Concerning the original question (using FLEX-ES for DR purposes for a 
production z890 Model 130), I assume that's technically possible.  FLEX-ES 
does support z/Architecture.

The question prompts many other questions, though.  In particular, what is 
your company doing with respect to DR coverage for any other systems you 
might have?  What are those expenses?  Could you solve this problem (and 
save some money) by using a z800 or z890 (with Linux) to cover DR needs 
for a larger part of the company, to pool resources?

Could you solve this problem in the future by upgrading to something past 
the z890 (whenever that is) and then parking your "old" z890 in your DR 
center?  The faster Linux engines and such on any new model (for more 
server consolidation opportunities), plus probably zIIP support, could 
make the transaction worthwhile.

Another way is to form a partnership with another mainframe shop in your 
general vicinity.  It works best if you find another company with roughly 
the same problem -- there probably is at least one -- and you simply agree 
to provide DR coverage for each other on your production systems.  There's 
probably no money that changes hands in either direction (because you're 
mutually helping each other more or less equally).  Check with IBM on any 
implications (and possible suggestions), but it should be quite doable.

- - - - -
Timothy F. Sipples
Consulting Enterprise Software Architect, z9/zSeries
IBM Japan, Ltd.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Knutson, Sam]

Hi Tim,

I would advise anyone very strongly against the partnership approach.
It falls into the paper recovery trap that many shops including one I
worked at allowed to occur in the past.  Documentation such as a letter
indicating a reciprocal agreement could be produced which might satisfy
the auditors but the hardware, carbon based units, and real access to
back it up was never there.  It was the most dangerous of constructs an
illusion of safety without a real safety net.  

Does the partner have enough spare capacity to run your entire business
critical workload on a few hours or even a days notice for weeks till
other arrangements are made?  Do they have an LPAR defined ready and
waiting?  CPU capacity available as 'spare' or more likely inactive but
installed capacity?  Do you pay for the feature to allow them to
dynamically activate capacity? Who pays for tests? Do they have enough
spare DASD capacity?  Have their auditors and security administrators
and senior management all concurred?  That partnership probably won't
get you past the security guards on a Saturday morning do you have
escalation procedures?  Is the sizing reviewed when business process
changes occur or at least annually?

A partnership implies that both partners incur very real costs or have
approximately the same size expendable workload equal in size to the
partner production workload that they are willing to totally sacrifice
and allow the other party to process almost on demand.  

Business Recovery Providers are not free but to get a DR plan that will
keep you employed after it's executed I think you need to get skin in
the game.  You either $build or $buy but I don't see DR instituted as a
reciprocal agreement (free beer) as something suitable for most
businesses.

Best Regards, 

Sam Knutson, GEICO 
Performance and Availability Management 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
(office)  301.986.3574 

All it takes to fly is to hurl yourself at the ground... and miss.
Douglas Adams

-Original Message-
Another way is to form a partnership with another mainframe shop in your
general vicinity.  It works best if you find another company with
roughly the same problem -- there probably is at least one -- and you
simply agree to provide DR coverage for each other on your production
systems.  There's probably no money that changes hands in either
direction (because you're mutually helping each other more or less
equally).  Check with IBM on any implications (and possible
suggestions), but it should be quite doable.

- - - - -
Timothy F. Sipples
Consulting Enterprise Software Architect, z9/zSeries IBM Japan, Ltd.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

][

This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message.

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Ted MacNEIL]

>I would advise anyone very strongly against the partnership approach.
It falls into the paper recovery trap that many shops including one I
worked at allowed to occur in the past.

I could not agree more.
I also find that the COMDISCO approach doesn't work either.

I have one recovery site, and more than one customer.
What happens if more than one customer gets hit by a disaster (9-11? Katrina? 
Other?)?
Who gets the site?
First?
Largest?
Biggest payer?
More than one?
None? You're too close to the storm centre!

The only thing that works is true replication under YOUR control.
Everything else is 'paper recovery' (I like that term, Sam!).

"It's too expensive"!
So is going out of business!

D/R is an insurance policy.
Sites, testing, back-up, recovery, procedures?
They're the premium payments.

As with all, you get what you paid for.

-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 6:00 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FLEX-ES
> 
> 
> >I would advise anyone very strongly against the partnership approach.
> It falls into the paper recovery trap that many shops including one I
> worked at allowed to occur in the past.
> 
> I could not agree more.
> I also find that the COMDISCO approach doesn't work either.

I sort of agree with you. The problem is cost for us small-timers. We
cannot afford to have a duplicate, replicated, remote datacenter. Trying
to do that would cause us to likely "go under" right now instead of in
the case of a disaster. My other problem with any D.R. scenario is
personnel. We are trying to make our z/OS recovery "cook book". And we
are getting there. The Sungard people do 99% of the initial recovery
(getting z/OS running). Unfortunately, application recovery is still
dependant on "local" knowledge. So if a major disaster hits our area
(not just our computer room), then the lack of trained personnel may
well cause the business to fail. And I'm not just talking I.T. people.
What about end-users? You can't just take somebody "off the street" and
have them be able to "take over". So, our disaster recover, is more for
a data center disaster and not a 911 type disaster where we are all
dead. Of course, if I'm dead, I won't really care about the company too
much, will I?


> 
> I have one recovery site, and more than one customer.
> What happens if more than one customer gets hit by a disaster 
> (9-11? Katrina? Other?)?
> Who gets the site?
> First?

>From what I understand it is "first declared, first come".

> Largest?
> Biggest payer?
> More than one?
> None? You're too close to the storm centre!
> 
> The only thing that works is true replication under YOUR control.
> Everything else is 'paper recovery' (I like that term, Sam!).
> 
> "It's too expensive"!
> So is going out of business!

But if the cost of a "proper" scenario drives you to bankruptcy due to
cost, what's the diff?

> 
> D/R is an insurance policy.
> Sites, testing, back-up, recovery, procedures?
> They're the premium payments.

And if the premium payment for insurance is greater than the replacement
cost? Not a good decision then. Theoretically, an Insurance Company
(like mine) cannot really go out of business all at one. The various
state agencies will step in. So, although we may lose our jobs, our
customers should be safe. Theoretically.

> 
> As with all, you get what you paid for.

No - you pay for what you get. There are many times when you don't get
even if you pay.

> 
> -
> -teD
--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
UICI Insurance Center
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited. 
 

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 03/17/2006
   at 10:47 PM, Timothy Sipples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Another way is to form a partnership with another mainframe shop in
>your general vicinity.

Not so close that they're knocked out by the same, e.g., earthquake,
flood, tornado.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Timothy Sipples]

Sam Knutson wrote:
>I would advise anyone very strongly against the partnership approach.

I sort of agree with you, but there are an awful lot of companies that 
currently make no provisions for DR. (The original poster's company might 
be in that category.) So a DR partnership is a step forward for them. It 
still might not be entirely what the business needs, but it's probably 
better than nothing.

Any partnership requires work. (Anybody married? :-)) Companies like 
Sungard are institutionalized DR partnerships. I have an open mind when it 
comes to similar private arrangements between two or more companies -- 
there are working examples.

It is scary how vulnerable most IT infrastructure is, and I think this 
area is one where a lot of businesses will need to reassess what they're 
doing (or not doing). It also happens to be one of the areas in which 
mainframe-oriented architectures excel.

- - - - -
Timothy F. Sipples
Consulting Enterprise Software Architect, z9/zSeries
IBM Japan, Ltd.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Ted MacNEIL]

>So a DR partnership is a step forward for them. It 
still might not be entirely what the business needs, but it's probably 
better than nothing.

I disagree.
If there is no guarantee that you will get in, then you have spent time/money 
for nothing.
You'd have been better off without the expense.

-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Jay Howard]

Timothy Sipples wrote : 

"(The original poster's company might 
be in that category.)"

Being the original poster, we currently do partner with a company for our 
DR needs. We are looking for ways that we can reduce our DR costs and 
FLEX-ES is one of the options that we are investing. 

Jay 

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Diehl, Gary (MVSSupport)]

Phil,

What is the model number on that castor-less mainframe?  Are there any pictures 
of it posted somewhere (isham maybe)?

It sounds interesting, I'd like to learn more about it.

Thanks and best regards,

Gary Diehl

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Phil Payne
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 1:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: FLEX-ES


> Could you solve this problem in the future by upgrading to something past
the z890 (whenever that is) ...

Castor-less mainframe?

25th April, from what I hear.

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES

[Shane Ginnane]

Phil wrote on 29/03/2006 01:13:27 AM:

> > What is the model number on that castor-less mainframe?
>
> Don't know yet.  An analysis is in progress.

Went to your site yesterday Phil, and figured you got sick of fighting IBMs
legal team, and tossed in this mainframe malarky ...

Shane ...

--
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

Flex-ES Help

[Cheryl Walker]

Would anyone be able to help me out in a pinch? I have a flight in the  
morning and need to pull some sysout files and source PDS members off  
of my Flex-ES z/OS ThinkPad to a USB drive in some format that I can  
print them on a PC. I've never used this machine before, and I don't  
have a network connection. So if you can take pity on me, and guide  
me, I'd really appreciate it. I've even lost the name of the P/390 and  
Flex-ES listservers, where I should be posting this plea.


I have some flat sysout files in z/OS 1.4, and some source members in  
a PDS.


I somehow need to move them from z/OS to the Unix system.

From the Unix system, I'd like to to put them on a USB drive that I  
can take to a Windows or Mac system and print. Optionally, I can  
attach an ink-jet printer to the ThinkPad.


I know that the proper path is to read the three Redbooks on these  
systems, download and install a TN3270 emulator on my PC, connect the  
ThinkPad to my network, and learn how to print from the TSO session on  
my PC to my network printer. But I'm running out of time, and don't  
think I can do it in time.


Help!
Cheryl Watson

--
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

FLEX-ES & PWD

[David Day]

Just curious.  Does anyone know of any success stories vis-a-vis this 
platform and program?  Got the Flex machine through PWD, developed the 
software, brought it to market, and am now a successful ISV?

--
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

DR: (was FLEX-ES)

[Shane]

I can see Johns point of view, however I'm with Sam and Ted. Especially
re sharing production sites for backup of each other.
That would have to be a recipe for an unmitigated bloody schmozzle.

I can see the common backup site approach working -  would need
discipline, but that would be one of the plusses a third party would
bring to the table presumably. Never used such a service myself mind
you.
When I was at Amdahl we tried to get one of our customers to use their
hot DR site to act as fallback for another. Would help with costs, and
we'd ensure sufficient kit was on the floor.
Politics got in the way.

Shane ...

--
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

Re: Flex-ES Help

[Lance D. Jackson]

Cheryl,

Once you XDC the SYSOUT files to datasets, then you can FTP them from z/OS to 
your ThinkPad, assuming that you're logged into the mainframe through the 
laptop.

-Original Message-
From: Cheryl Walker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 09:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Flex-ES Help

Would anyone be able to help me out in a pinch? I have a flight in the morning 
and need to pull some sysout files and source PDS members off of my Flex-ES 
z/OS ThinkPad to a USB drive in some format that I can print them on a PC. I've 
never used this machine before, and I don't have a network connection. So if 
you can take pity on me, and guide me, I'd really appreciate it. I've even lost 
the name of the P/390 and Flex-ES listservers, where I should be posting this 
plea.I have some flat sysout files in z/OS 1.4, and some source members in a 
PDS.I somehow need to move them from z/OS to the Unix system. From the Unix 
system, I'd like to to put them on a USB drive that I can take to a Windows or 
Mac system and print. Optionally, I can attach an ink-jet printer to the 
ThinkPad.I know that the proper path is to read the three Redbooks on these 
systems, download and install a TN3270 emulator on my PC, connect the ThinkPad 
to my network, and learn how to print from the TSO session on my PC to my 
network printer. But I'm running out of time, and don't think I can do it in 
time.Help!Cheryl 
Watson--For 
IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,send email to [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFOSearch the archives at 
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
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

Re: Flex-ES Help

[Lance D. Jackson]

Alternately, I believe this is the link to the Flex-ES Listserv: 
http://www.listserv.uga.edu/archives/flex-es.html


-Original Message-
From: Cheryl Walker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 09:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Flex-ES Help

Would anyone be able to help me out in a pinch? I have a flight in the morning 
and need to pull some sysout files and source PDS members off of my Flex-ES 
z/OS ThinkPad to a USB drive in some format that I can print them on a PC. I've 
never used this machine before, and I don't have a network connection. So if 
you can take pity on me, and guide me, I'd really appreciate it. I've even lost 
the name of the P/390 and Flex-ES listservers, where I should be posting this 
plea.I have some flat sysout files in z/OS 1.4, and some source members in a 
PDS.I somehow need to move them from z/OS to the Unix system. From the Unix 
system, I'd like to to put them on a USB drive that I can take to a Windows or 
Mac system and print. Optionally, I can attach an ink-jet printer to the 
ThinkPad.I know that the proper path is to read the three Redbooks on these 
systems, download and install a TN3270 emulator on my PC, connect the ThinkPad 
to my network, and learn how to print from the TSO session on my PC to my 
network printer. But I'm running out of time, and don't think I can do it in 
time.Help!Cheryl 
Watson--For 
IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,send email to [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFOSearch the archives at 
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
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

Re: Flex-ES Help

[Cheryl Walker]

Thank you!

Cheryl

On Sep 3, 2008, at 9:37 PM, Lance D. Jackson wrote:


Alternately, I believe this is the link to the Flex-ES Listserv: 
http://www.listserv.uga.edu/archives/flex-es.html


-Original Message-
From: Cheryl Walker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 09:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Flex-ES Help

Would anyone be able to help me out in a pinch? I have a flight in  
the morning and need to pull some sysout files and source PDS  
members off of my Flex-ES z/OS ThinkPad to a USB drive in some  
format that I can print them on a PC. I've never used this machine  
before, and I don't have a network connection. So if you can take  
pity on me, and guide me, I'd really appreciate it. I've even lost  
the name of the P/390 and Flex-ES listservers, where I should be  
posting this plea.I have some flat sysout files in z/OS 1.4, and  
some source members in a PDS.I somehow need to move them from z/OS  
to the Unix system. From the Unix system, I'd like to to put them on  
a USB drive that I can take to a Windows or Mac system and print.  
Optionally, I can attach an ink-jet printer to the ThinkPad.I know  
that the proper path is to read the three Redbooks on these systems,  
download and install a TN3270 emulator on my PC, connect the  
ThinkPad to my network, and learn how to print from the TSO session  
on my PC to my network printer. But I'm running out of time, and  
don't think I can do it in time.Help!Cheryl  
Watson 
--For 
 IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,send  
email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN  
INFOSearch the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


--
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



--
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

Re: Flex-ES Help

[Sebastian Welton]

Should be pretty simple:

- power up your laptop, FLEX and z/OS
- you should have x3270 on it so start it and log on to TSO then exit to the 
READY prompt
- plug in your USB stick which, hopefully, should be recognised by the 
underlying Linux system. If not, mount it
- use IND$FILE on x3270 to download your data

I do this all the time.

Seb

On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 21:25:46 -0400, Cheryl Walker 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Would anyone be able to help me out in a pinch? I have a flight in the
>morning and need to pull some sysout files and source PDS members off
>of my Flex-ES z/OS ThinkPad to a USB drive in some format that I can
>print them on a PC. I've never used this machine before, and I don't
>have a network connection. So if you can take pity on me, and guide
>me, I'd really appreciate it. I've even lost the name of the P/390 and
>Flex-ES listservers, where I should be posting this plea.
>
>I have some flat sysout files in z/OS 1.4, and some source members in
>a PDS.
>
>I somehow need to move them from z/OS to the Unix system.
>
> From the Unix system, I'd like to to put them on a USB drive that I
>can take to a Windows or Mac system and print. Optionally, I can
>attach an ink-jet printer to the ThinkPad.
>
>I know that the proper path is to read the three Redbooks on these
>systems, download and install a TN3270 emulator on my PC, connect the
>ThinkPad to my network, and learn how to print from the TSO session on
>my PC to my network printer. But I'm running out of time, and don't
>think I can do it in time.
>
>Help!
>Cheryl Watson
>
>--
>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

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES & PWD

[Robert Fake]

InfoSec, Inc. has been tremendously successful via this program.  We
utilized the tServer T30 (Thinkpad laptop) system to develop The Automated
Security Administrator (TASA) for CA-Top Secret, CA-ACF2 and IBM-RACF.  This
technology was acquired by CA in 2005 and is now known as eTrust Cleanup for
CA-Top Secret, CA-ACF2 and IBM-RACF.  There are many hundreds of clients of
this software today.

We have continued in the PWD and have developed another tool to enhance the
capabilities of CA-Top Secret administrators, called TSSadmin Express using
our T30.

Without the FLEX-ES platform and the PWD program, we would never have been
able to afford a mainframe computing platform to develop and market this
software.

I have written to IBM regarding this issue and like everyone else, have not
received much in the way of answers or direction.  Our license doesn't
expire until 12/2008, so we have time to make decisions once everything
plays out, but we are very concerned that if we do not have the FLEX-ES
platform to continue development and support and the cost effective IBM
software, the astronomical costs to a small business like ourselves could
put us out of business.

Bob

Robert B. Fake
President
InfoSec, Inc.
703-825-1202 (o)
571-241-5492 (c)
949-203-0406 (efax)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit us at www.infosecinc.com

-Original Message-
From: David Day [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 3:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: FLEX-ES & PWD

Just curious.  Does anyone know of any success stories vis-a-vis this
platform and program?  Got the Flex machine through PWD, developed the
software, brought it to market, and am now a successful ISV? 

--
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

--
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

Re: FLEX-ES & PWD

[Charles Mills]

My former company (Firesign Computer) was a success story for the
predecessor machines and program. We acquired two P/390s through the PiD
program (mid-1990s). We developed Outbound which became (according to
Gartner) the number three inter-machine file transfer product (after
Connect:Direct and CA-XCOM6.2, and not counting FTP, which was not generally
an enterprise-market solution at the time). My company was acquired by ASG,
who still markets Outbound as ASG-Outbound Express. We had over 300 IBM
mainframe enterprise customers (predominantly OS/390) at the time of the
acquisition, and employed seventeen.

We never could have done it without the P/390s and the PiD and ADCD
programs.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of David Day
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 12:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: FLEX-ES & PWD

Just curious.  Does anyone know of any success stories vis-a-vis this
platform and program?  Got the Flex machine through PWD, developed the
software, brought it to market, and am now a successful ISV? 

--
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

Re: DR: (was FLEX-ES)

[Ted MacNEIL]

Wow!
Your response was in 10 minutes before I saw my post!

-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

-Original Message-
From: Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 07:51:04 
To:IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: DR: (was FLEX-ES)

I can see Johns point of view, however I'm with Sam and Ted. Especially
re sharing production sites for backup of each other.
That would have to be a recipe for an unmitigated bloody schmozzle.

I can see the common backup site approach working -  would need
discipline, but that would be one of the plusses a third party would
bring to the table presumably. Never used such a service myself mind
you.
When I was at Amdahl we tried to get one of our customers to use their
hot DR site to act as fallback for another. Would help with costs, and
we'd ensure sufficient kit was on the floor.
Politics got in the way.

Shane ...

--
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

--
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

IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

[Warner Mach]

I do not have any direct stake in the FLEX-ES vs IBM issue, but
I have been surprised that there does not seem to be much speculation
on why IBM is dropping the FLEX-ES connection; just complaints that
they are doing so ... Is the reason only known to a few IBM 
executives?
  .
To fill the void, I offer the following speculative reasons:
  .
1. Complaint: Fundamental Software is doing something that IBM does
not like ... This is probably not the reason, because if it was IBM
would state it.
  .
2. Economic: The IBM bean-counters have made a cold calculation that
they would make more money if Flex-Es was gone. Maybe having a lot 
of developers out there causes competition for IBM tools software(?).
Maybe IBM would make more revenue by forcing at least some of the 
folks who now use Flex-Es to buy 'real' hardware(?).
  .
3. Legal: The IBM lawyers have decided that the company would do 
better in court if they adopt a simple 'no emulation' stance. In that
way they can better confront any attempts by competitors to sell 
emulated mainframes.
  .
4. Openness: IBM has decided, based on their Linux experience, that
being proprietary is 'old school' and, in order to revitalize the 
mainframe they have to open it up. Of course, in order to do so, 
they have to gently let down any partners who are tied to the 
old school paradigm, such as Fundamental ... However, once this 
transition period is over they will: (a) Make source available and
back off of the OCO policy. (b) Provide some sort of option for
hobbyist/developer licenses that allows running on, for example,
Hercules. (c) Provide other options such as free unsupported 
experimental versions of the operating system (ala Red Hat) ...
(Mr. Palmisano, tear down this wall!). 

--
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

Re: D/R (Was: FLEX-ES)

[Ted MacNEIL]

>I sort of agree with you. The problem is cost for us small-timers. We
>cannot afford to have a duplicate, replicated, remote datacenter. Trying
>to do that would cause us to likely "go under" right now instead of in the 
>case of a disaster.

Then, why bother?
If you can't afford to lose, you can't afford to win.
If it's too expensive to set up to recover the business, go forth and hope sh*t 
doesn't happen.
(TIC)

>the lack of trained personnel may well cause the business to fail. 

See first comment.

>So, our disaster recover, is more for
a data center disaster and not a 911 type disaster where we are all dead.

Not if your recovery site wasn't hit by an airplane.


>From what I understand it is "first declared, first come".

So, you're not guaranteed.
So, again, why bother?

>But if the cost of a "proper" scenario drives you to bankruptcy due to
cost, what's the diff?

Then, why bother?

>And if the premium payment for insurance is greater than the replacement cost? 
>Not a good decision then.

Then don't pay the premium!


>The various state agencies will step in. So, although we may lose our jobs, 
>our customers should be safe

Specious at its best.
Don't do D/R because the government will step in and save our butts.
Truly Canadian in sentiment.

>No - you pay for what you get. There are many times when you don't get even if 
>you pay.

Then don't pay!

The three laws of thermodynamics, in layman's terms:
1. You can't win!
2. You can't break even!
3. You can't even get out of the game!


-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[Greg Shirey]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 6:00 PM 
> 
> >So a DR partnership is a step forward for them. It 
> still might not be entirely what the business needs, but it's 
> probably 
> better than nothing.
> 
> I disagree.
> If there is no guarantee that you will get in, then you have 
> spent time/money for nothing.
> You'd have been better off without the expense.
> 
> -
> -teD
> 

I disagree.
I once worked at a municipality whose DR expenditures were cut from the
budget.  The only disaster recovery scenario available to us was an
agreement with the county offices on the other side of downtown.  This cost
us nothing, and yet was still better than nothing.  No sweeping
generalization to the contrary could convince me otherwise.  

Greg Shirey
Ben E. Keith Company

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 3/21/2006 8:04:41 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

because  it is required. Either by auditing practices or by law. Violate
the  auditing practices and your stock price is in jeopardy (read: stock
holder  lawsuits). Violate the law and the fines could make the D.R. cost
look  small.



>>
NASPA is stepping up the D/R coverage after the events of last
year and 9/11. Unfortunately they've buggered up the Website/membership  
requirements to require joining to read or download entire articles. 
_www.naspa.com_ (http://www.naspa.com)  will give a flavor of
this month's endeavors. 'Advanced Disaster Planning' and 'A Q&A with 3  
Senior Risk Mnagers on how preparedness is changing after
the Hurricanes of 2005'.
 
 Also a historical look at the PC's first decade 1975-85. Watching  Headline 
News this morning and Dell ad has a new XPS PC with a 19" monitor and 1  
Terabyte harddrive for $999. _www.dell.com_ (http://www.dell.com)  

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 6:00 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FLEX-ES
> 
> 
> >So a DR partnership is a step forward for them. It 
> still might not be entirely what the business needs, but it's 
> probably 
> better than nothing.
> 
> I disagree.
> If there is no guarantee that you will get in, then you have 
> spent time/money for nothing.
> You'd have been better off without the expense.
> 
> -
> -teD
> 

Ted,

Just to make sure that I'm really understanding your position: You are
basically saying that the only valid way to do disaster recovery for
I.T. is with a second, remote, duplicate, real-time replicated, company
owned site. Literally anything less is a complete waste of money. If
that is true, then only really large companies need bother. Or am I
misunderstanding you?

Of course, the real reason that most companies use money for D.R. is
because it is required. Either by auditing practices or by law. Violate
the auditing practices and your stock price is in jeopardy (read: stock
holder lawsuits). Violate the law and the fines could make the D.R. cost
look small.

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
UICI Insurance Center
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited. 
 

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[Ted MacNEIL]

>Literally anything less is a complete waste of money. If that is true, then 
>only really large companies need bother. Or am I misunderstanding you?

Maybe what I'm saying sounds extreme.
But, if (for example) you have a COMDISCO-like solutions with multiple 
subscribers, but only the first to declare gets in, what was the money spent by 
the others?
A productive use of funds?



>Of course, the real reason that most companies use money for D.R. is because 
>it is required.

But, spending money for a non-guaranteed D/R spot?

-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[Ted MacNEIL]

>I once worked at a municipality whose DR expenditures were cut from the budget.
>The only disaster recovery scenario available to us was an agreement with the 
>county offices on the other side of downtown. 

I was talking more about multiple partners and only the first to declare gets 
in.
IFF you are guaranteed to get in, then fine.
But, I have yet to see that scenario work.
How about testing? When can you?
Does your partner guarantee the capacity will be available?


-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[Greg Shirey]

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 6:00 PM

>I was talking more about multiple partners and only the first to declare
gets in.

Your comments seemed to be more general, at least to me. 

>IFF you are guaranteed to get in, then fine.

There were no guarantees, only an agreement.

>But, I have yet to see that scenario work.

Nor have I.  We never had a disaster, though a tornado did rip through our
downtown area.  (The IT centers were a few blocks either side of the
tornado's path.) 

>How about testing? When can you?

We tested once.  It went well. 

>Does your partner guarantee the capacity will be available?

Nope.  But it was better than nothing.  That was the panacea we believed in
at the time... 

Greg Shirey

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[Ted MacNEIL]

>>I was talking more about multiple partners and only the first to declare
gets in.

>Your comments seemed to be more general, at least to me.

My original response talked about that, specifically.
It just that some of the context was lost as pieces got snipped out.


-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

--
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

Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)

[Timothy Sipples]

Jay Howard wrote:
>Being the original poster, we currently do partner with a company for our 

>DR needs. We are looking for ways that we can reduce our DR costs and 
>FLEX-ES is one of the options that we are investing.

I think we've got two separate concepts running through this thread, so 
here's an attempt to clarify.

There are DR companies -- Sungard and IBM BRS are good examples -- that 
sell DR contracts of various kinds. I'm going to disagree with the 
implication that these contracts are "worthless" because of "first in" 
policies. There were several disaster declarations during Hurricane 
Katrina, and the DR vendors seemed to do pretty well by all accounts. The 
contracts have various SLAs and prices -- basically "first" doesn't mean 
"forever" -- and the (good) DR vendors build enough infrastructure and 
test regularly with their clients in order to handle even wide area 
disasters.

There's also the separate idea of finding a like minded company in order 
to strike a one-to-one private partnership along similar lines. In the era 
of Capacity On Demand that's quite reasonable for mainframes, so I don't 
really share the concern about lack of production capacity at your 
partner's site with a disaster declaration. (All bets are off for other 
platforms.) If the disaster affects both companies simultaneously then 
that's bad, so you'll probably want to pick a DR partner that's "close but 
not too close."

In many cases striking a private partnership is not a direct cost item. 
(You still have the costs associated with preparation and testing, but 
that's always true unless you plan on not having any DR strategy.) So I'm 
not sure what you mean by "reducing our DR costs," because I'm thinking 
"zero" here. It's a straight up trade: I'll let you use our production 
system (spin up an LPAR/COD) if you have a disaster if you'll agree to the 
same for me. I'm sure there's a reasonably comparable mainframe shop 
elsewhere in Georgia.

Many companies opt for multiple DR arrangements concurrently. Some simply 
need their own GDPS. I know of an insurance company that understands it 
would have to declare bankruptcy if there was a system outage lasting more 
than 60 minutes. There are probably several companies with even less 
tolerance for outage.

Either of these arrangements (DR vendor or private DR partner) is better 
than nothing. Better than nothing may be sufficient. Nothing is what an 
awful lot of companies have right now, and (prediction) some of them will 
effectively go out of business when disaster strikes.

Do note that controlling DR costs is what mainframes do exceptionally 
well, so cost context is important here. Building and testing DR 
infrastructure with other platforms can be brutally expensive, and what 
you end up with isn't as capable anyway. A big part of the reason is 
Capacity On Demand, but it's not the only reason. In fact, I can imagine 
many cases (Linux and J2EE especially) in which mainframes should act as 
the DR systems even if the primary production systems are not mainframes.

- - - - -
Timothy F. Sipples
Consulting Enterprise Software Architect, z9/zSeries
IBM Japan, Ltd.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

[Rob Scott]

>4. Openness: IBM has decided, based on their Linux experience, that
being proprietary is 'old school' and, in order to revitalize the
mainframe they have to open it up. Of course, in order to do so, they
have to gently let down any partners who are tied to the old school
paradigm, such as Fundamental ... However, once this transition period
is over they will: (a) Make source available and back off of the OCO
policy. (b) Provide some sort of option for hobbyist/developer licenses
that allows running on, for example, Hercules. (c) Provide other options
such as free unsupported experimental versions of the operating system
(ala Red Hat) ...

Warner - you are a funny funny guy !! 


Rob Scott
Rocket Software, Inc
275 Grove Street
Newton, MA 02466
617-614-2305
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rs.com/portfolio/mxi_g2

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Warner Mach
Sent: 26 March 2007 09:09
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

I do not have any direct stake in the FLEX-ES vs IBM issue, but I have
been surprised that there does not seem to be much speculation on why
IBM is dropping the FLEX-ES connection; just complaints that they are
doing so ... Is the reason only known to a few IBM executives?
  .
To fill the void, I offer the following speculative reasons:
  .
1. Complaint: Fundamental Software is doing something that IBM does not
like ... This is probably not the reason, because if it was IBM would
state it.
  .
2. Economic: The IBM bean-counters have made a cold calculation that
they would make more money if Flex-Es was gone. Maybe having a lot of
developers out there causes competition for IBM tools software(?).
Maybe IBM would make more revenue by forcing at least some of the folks
who now use Flex-Es to buy 'real' hardware(?).
  .
3. Legal: The IBM lawyers have decided that the company would do better
in court if they adopt a simple 'no emulation' stance. In that way they
can better confront any attempts by competitors to sell emulated
mainframes.
  .
4. Openness: IBM has decided, based on their Linux experience, that
being proprietary is 'old school' and, in order to revitalize the
mainframe they have to open it up. Of course, in order to do so, they
have to gently let down any partners who are tied to the old school
paradigm, such as Fundamental ... However, once this transition period
is over they will: (a) Make source available and back off of the OCO
policy. (b) Provide some sort of option for hobbyist/developer licenses
that allows running on, for example, Hercules. (c) Provide other options
such as free unsupported experimental versions of the operating system
(ala Red Hat) ...
(Mr. Palmisano, tear down this wall!). 

--
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

Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

[Bob Shannon]

> So, if I were to speculate on an IBM motive, it is to put the small
ISV's > out of the z/OS development business.  

Go back to the archives and read the history of this issue before
jumping to conclusions. IBM discussed PSI and FLEX-ES at the last Vendor
Disclosure meeting. If you need information, you should work through
IBM, not through IBM-MAIN.

Bob Shannon
Rocket Software

--
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

Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

[Gary DiPillo]

Warner,

I have a very direct stake in the issue.  We (my company) has been a PWD 
member for many years (1995).  We previously used a P390 and upgraded to 
an IBM Server x235 with the FLEX-ES software.  IBM KNOWS this, since the 
transaction had to be approved by them, and they provide the hardware 
service as well as the z/OS software service.  To date, I have never 
received a single communication from anyone in PartenerWorld or 
elsewhere in IBM regarding this issue.  They did not forget to bill me 
for the ADCD software.  If the FLEX-ES vendors did not make the 
information known in this and the FLEX-ES list, my zOS system (and quite 
possibly my business) would vanish early this summer.  Fortunately the 
vendors (not IBM) has given the FLEX-ES PWD user community a heads-up 
that they may have to make other arrangements.  There is nothing on the 
market that even remotely offers the level of service and reliability of 
my system for the price.  But not a single word from IBM and certainly 
not why.  And why speculate as to IBM's motivations?


Maybe some of the commercial FLEX users can buy "real" hardware, but the 
smaller ISV's will have a problem affording even the smallest z9 BC,  
finding the floor space for the machine where it has adequate support 
(at least 1500 lbs in a 9sq ft area, won't fit into, and will exceed the 
load limit, of the elevator up to our office suite), adequate A/C and 
power, and the machine does not come with DASD, so that cost, space and 
operating expense is also an issue.  So, if I were to speculate on an 
IBM motive, it is to put the small ISV's out of the z/OS development 
business.  But why would they want to do that, and cut off a very 
important source of the innovation that makes the z/OS environment so 
robust?


Gary DiPillo

--
Axios Products, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 631-864-3666 x133

--
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

Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

[Charles Mills]

My wild guess would be something along the lines of 2 (although I would not
be privy to the information if 1 or 3 were the root cause).

The costs of the FLEX program are obvious: the time of all of the people
involved, and the (theoretical, but very measurable) loss of revenue on VERY
deeply discounted hardware and software.

The benefits are harder to measure: the benefit of having a bunch of small
vendors. 

Perhaps the small vendors are just not strategic to IBM. It's easier to deal
with a modest handful of large players than a passel of large, medium,
small, and tiny players.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Warner Mach
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 6:09 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

I do not have any direct stake in the FLEX-ES vs IBM issue, but
I have been surprised that there does not seem to be much speculation
on why IBM is dropping the FLEX-ES connection; just complaints that
they are doing so ... Is the reason only known to a few IBM 
executives?
  .
To fill the void, I offer the following speculative reasons:
  .
1. Complaint: Fundamental Software is doing something that IBM does
not like ... This is probably not the reason, because if it was IBM
would state it.
  .
2. Economic: The IBM bean-counters have made a cold calculation that
they would make more money if Flex-Es was gone. Maybe having a lot 
of developers out there causes competition for IBM tools software(?).
Maybe IBM would make more revenue by forcing at least some of the 
folks who now use Flex-Es to buy 'real' hardware(?).
  .
3. Legal: The IBM lawyers have decided that the company would do 
better in court if they adopt a simple 'no emulation' stance. In that
way they can better confront any attempts by competitors to sell 
emulated mainframes.

--
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

Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 11:51 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?
> 



> 
> Perhaps the small vendors are just not strategic to IBM. It's 
> easier to deal
> with a modest handful of large players than a passel of large, medium,
> small, and tiny players.
> 
> Charles

Reminds me of one of the Capital One(?) bank ads, where the "big banks"
don't want to be bothered with "small business loans". It __appears__
that IBM, at least on the System z side of the house, wants only the
"high volume", "higher profit" market. . It's difficult to argue
with that. Unless there is a way to show that "short term profits" will
likely lead to the long term death of the market (as many here believe).
But, then again, salesmen generally only care about today's sale, next
quarter they may be selling something else. Again, a fact of life in
today's world where everything is deemed ephemeral. 

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential.  It is for intended addressee(s) only.  If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it. 

--
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

Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why?

[Charles Mills]

What a vendor MIGHT do to encourage developers:

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2106952,00.asp 

Charles

--
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

FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[McKown, John]

I got this from the FlexES group. I don't know anything else, but it
sounds a bit ominous to me. But, then again, I don't know.
 
I just thought it might be of interest to some here as well.
 
--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited.
  

-Original Message-
From: FLEX-ES S/390 Emulator [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Steven Friedman
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 2:30 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community



A Letter to the FLEX-ES User Community: 

An unfortunate set of circumstances has recently arisen that,
unless addressed by IBM immediately, will result in the abrupt
termination of the very successful 6 year-old Partnerworld for
Developers FLEX-ES delivery program. 

To provide some history for background purposes, T3
Technologies, Inc. is a long time IBM Premier Business Partner,
specializing in FLEX-ES technology. In 2000, shortly after the IBM P/390
product program ended, members of the IBM PWD community had no
affordable hardware options for development platforms. I personally
approached Jeff Magdahl, then manager of the S/390 PWD program, with an
idea to again offer PWD members a very low cost mainframe development
platform, this time based on FLEX-ES technology. The concept I brought
to Jeff was fully in synch with his mission for PWD-to incent developers
to continue developing mainframe applications, thereby maintaining a
healthy environment for IBM mainframe sales.

The result was a family of products offered by T3, ranging from
a "Mainframe on a Thinkpad" to our more robust 100 MIPS+ x-Series based
servers. To date, T3 has delivered over 600 tServer units in 28
countries, a majority to the approximately 1,400-member worldwide
mainframe PWD community. 

Unfortunately, a S/390 licensing dispute between IBM and
Fundamental Software (FSI) is now underway and the collateral damage
will likely mean the end to this PWD delivery program. It seems FSI has
a patent license with IBM for certain S/390 rights that expire on
October 31, 2006. Without renewal of that licensing program, FSI can no
longer provide FLEX-ES licenses to this PWD program. And, incredibly, it
seems IBM is not currently entertaining a renegotiation of that license
agreement with FSI. It is entirely likely that the IBM'ers responsible
for this (lack of) negotiation are not even aware of the impact this may
have, and the potential ripple effect through the mainframe developer's
community. With no similar low cost options available, many developers
will have no choice but to cease their mainframe development and support
of literally hundreds if not thousands of mainframe software
applications. 

Strategically, this does not make much business sense for IBM,
obviously has an impact to T3's business, and likely has significant
ramifications to ALL PWD businesses. I am therefore asking all of our
customers, indeed all PWD members to join me in a letter/emailing
campaign to the relevant IBM managers in zSeries and in the Partnerworld
for Developers Program. My hope is to shed some light on the situation
to the decision makers and force a restoration of this very important
mainframe developer's incentive program.

Without your collective help, this very beneficial PWD program
will end in just 26 days!!! Please be specific and direct in your
emails. Pull no punches, and let IBM know how you feel about this, and
how it impacts your plans to continue delivering zArchitecture products.

Existing PWD FLEX licenses are valid through the end dates of
your current IBM agreements. No action can be taken to prematurely
cancel those agreements. T3 and FSI will continue to provide the highest
levels of support to all FLEX users through those expiration dates. New
orders can be filled through October 31.

. 
This situation has no effect on current production users of
tServers or other FLEX-based systems. FLEX-ES production licenses are,
essentially, lifetime licenses. T3 and FSI will continue to provide
support to our production customers for as long as you request it.

Let us not sit back and hope that saner minds prevail. Join me
in taking some action to protect our collective business futures.

Sincerely 

Steven Friedman 
President, T3 Technologies Inc. 



-

FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Phil Payne]

> I'm sure Phil would know more, but he's probably too busy fiddling with his 
> Audi to care
much.

I've been booked for a magazine photo-shoot on Monday - "Practical Classics" - 
to illustrate a
how-to article about servicing AUdi fuel injection systems.  When it's 
published, I'll post
the URI so you can admire my manly figure.  Just bought a new T-shirt specially.

I'm not really that up to speed on the current status, largely because a lot of 
the
discussions have been between FSI (who are as tight as a duck's posterior 
sphincter when it
comes to discussing their relationships) and a very few people at IBM who are 
probably more
ashamed about discussing their activities that anything else.

And trying to find out how Google works is as much fun as Assembler I/O 
programming back in
the 1960s - nothing ever works like it's supposed to, and getting ahead of the 
game is fun.

I knew there was a contract expiry due, but I believed it was between FSI and 
T3.  With all
the noise T3 has been making about the PSI "product", you can't blame FSI for 
being a little
cautious about renewing an agreement with the world-exclusive marketing arm of 
a competitor.
There are some very technical issues about intellectual property that I, for 
one, am glad I'm
not involved in.

I'm told that T3 is planning a launch of the PSI "product" and has invited its 
PWD customers -
not a way to improve relations with your other supplier.  Or IBM, for that 
matter.

I do have a fragmentary transciript of the exact words an IBM executive used 
when referring to
PSI's chances of getting software licenses.  I also know that PSI has a 
corporate lawyer with
a LOT of experience in precisely this sector.  I await developments.

I know Steve will be very upset with me (but what's new about that) but my 
first take is that
he's poisoned his FSI relationship with his gung ho attitude to PSI, and now 
he's discovered
that the PSI "product" is no such thing.

I've always thought the FSI/IBM intellectual property agreements were of 
unspecified length
and mutual - FSI has a few patents, too - and I can't see that an expiry would 
be expected.  I
don't think the agreements are as comprehensive as some people would like, but 
that's a horse
with different feathers.

I understand from a couple of sources that PWD AD/CD renewals are currently 
running below 70%.
This saddens me because it's another "critical mass" issue and I fear the 
platform is rapidly
approaching that in a number of ways.

Words fail me when it comes to IBM's refusal to sanction commercial 64-bit 
operation under
FLEX-ES.  This is at one time the STUPIDEST and most predatory action IBM has 
taken since
1956.  It is incredibly, cretinously dumb and will lead to the zSeries market 
collapsing
several years before it would otherwise do so.  Given the huge profit margins 
on zSeries
software, it would IMO be appropriate for stockholders to ask for a review of 
this strategy
before it's too late - if it isn't already.

We now have the situation where ISVs are developing applications that mandate 
DB2 V8 and their
customers are unable to run it because their FLEX-ES system only supports 
ARCHLVL=2 in 31-bit
mode.  So they buy a Superdome.

How ANYONE can maintain that IBM does what its customers want in this situation 
is really way
beyond me.

Can no one do TCO calculations at IBM any more?  ´Has the skill evaporated?  
You can make a
zBox cheap, and its software, but you still need external peripherals - cost, 
power and
service - which you get thrown in with a FLEX-ES solution.  Internally emulated 
DASD are a
damn sight faster, too.  Have any of them compared the cost/GB between old iron 
and a state of
the art PC server?  And things like Faketape and printer emulation have huge 
benefits for
small users.  All things a big, dumb piece of iron can't do.  The world has 
moved on.  But I
understand the HMC got a new GUI recently, so that's all right.

I'm told that one senior zSeries executive "would be happy with an installed 
base loss around
5% a year".  It's actually quite a bit more than that now - but can you even 
IMAGINE what
Thomas Watson would have said to a salesman who thought a declining base - or 
even a static
one - in some way acceptable?

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Phil Payne]

> The IBMers here are technical, not political or bean counters.

What a load of gonads.  Why do they keep posting press releases about obscure 
analysts that no
one has ever heard of?

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Phil Payne]

> And what about always posting about how cheap the hardware is getting?

If the hardware (processor) were free it would make little difference.

"As as predicted last year, the entry point for current hardware is now the 
2066-0A1 at 80
MIPS - the 40 MIPS 2066-0E1 being non-viable because of the maintenance charges 
on the
mandatory IFL.  The 2066-0E1 and 0A1 are too powerful for most of the users 
being orphaned
this year - the moratorium on higher software charges applies only to IBM 
software and is
limited to 48 months; enough time, perhaps, to get off the platform.  These IBM 
customers need
a system of appropriate size - even if given as a gift, a larger system can 
bankrupt a small
company with its software costs."

http://www.isham-reseach.co.uk/low_end_s390_2003.html - 20 January 2003.

Not the first time I said it, either.

I have to say I find such posts insulting.  Does anyone really believe we can 
be fooled so
easily?  Most of IBM's "pricing initiatives" over the last decade or so have 
been disingenuous
at best.  One example is the regular "10% technology benefit" in MSU/MIPS in 
every generation,
because of course it makes damn all difference given the degressive pricing 
model.

The bizarre thing is that some of executives think they're doing a good job.

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

DB2 Version 8 on a Flex-ES box.

[Jim McAlpine]

Does anyone have any experience of the above and if so have you noticed any
performance degradation because of 64 bit instruction emulation on 32 bit
instruction hardware.  Better still, can anyone quantify it.

Jim McAlpine

--
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

DB2 Version 8 on a Flex-ES box.

[Phil Payne]

> AMEN! Seems like they're just killing themselves(and us too)
> by not having a low end package for development and testing.
> Most folks will take the path of best ads and convert to something
> else, whether it's Oracle/Grid or Blade  servers.

There is, of course, a low end package for development and testing - but it's 
Partnerworld
only and not available to "real" users.  I've been arguing with various IBM 
executives for
years that these systems should be available to "real" users and I've suggested 
a couple of
self-financing ways it could be done.  But I'm afraid NIH and the way zSeries 
executives get
paid got in the way.

IBM is supposedly producing its own emulation in 2Q06 - recent rumours suggest 
it will use an
iSeries as a host.  There are quite a few advantages in doing that - an EBCDIC 
base for an
EBCDIC emulation lets you use, e.g., i5/OS's I/O facilities

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

DB2 Version 8 on a Flex-ES box.

[Phil Payne]

As an unsollicited follow-up, there seems to be a little more going on.  Dr 
Frank Soltis made
some comments at COMMON that don't seem to have been reported in the English 
language press:

http://www.netigator.de/netigator/live/fachartikelarchiv/ha_news/powerslave,id,30572783,obj,CZ,np,archiv,ng,,thes,.html

You can wave Babelfish at it if you like.  It won't tell you anything more than 
I posted some
months ago in http://www.isham-research.co.uk/mainframe_2008.html - but it's 
neat to have
confirmation.

For some unfathomable reason, this story seems to have created waves.

-- 
  Phil Payne
  http://www.isham-research.co.uk
  +44 7833 654 800

--
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

FLEX-ES users, would you care to unite?

[Robert Shimizu]

All:

I'm Bob Shimizu, of Cole Software.  I lurk on this list, and I 
thought I'd venture a posting today.


Please excuse my repeating myself here.  I have previously sent this 
message to the FLEX-ES list, and I want to try to broadcast this idea 
to the mainframe list as well.


Cole Software depends heavily on the FLEX-ES platform, and we too are going
to be affected if this useful platform is discontinued.  Further, because
IBM doesn't formally recognize the Hercules project, we are unable to
participate in it.

At a recent IBM meeting, Mr. Jerry Duma of IBM announced that he shared our
concerns and that he was making it a high priority to find a resolution
between FSI and IBM so that T3 Technologies could again offer the platform.

Dave Cole has authorized me to contact this list and ask out loud if each of
you would care to organize into a group that would then lobby IBM to resolve
this issue, and soon.  I would be happy to serve as one point of contact,
and perhaps there are others on this list who are motivated to cooperate
with me.

So, I put it to you:  Would any of you care to band together and work
proactively for a solution?  I will be happy to help if you do.  I'm open to
all avenues of endeavor or approach that you'd be willing to discuss.

If you would like to sign up, please respond to me at 
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED], and include your 
name, whether (or not) your company is a member of the PWD 
organization, your company's name , snail mail address, telephone/fax 
numbers and any advice you'd like to offer.  I will compile the 
responses and will get back to the group soon.


Sincerely,
Bob

Robert W. Shimizu
Cole Software LLC
(800) XDC-5150 or (928) 771-2003
(928) 771-2005 fax
e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Our web site is http://www.colesoft.com

z/XDC Quick References are available online at 
<http://www.zxdcquickreference.com/>www.zxdcquickreference.com!



--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[David Andrews]

You have to wonder whether this is related to T3's introduction of PSI's
"Liberty" servers.  Liberty overlaps the z9BC low end, perhaps through
250 MIPS.

I'm sure Phil would know more, but he's probably too busy fiddling with
his Audi to care much.

-- 
David Andrews
A. Duda and Sons, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Ray Mullins]

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of David Andrews
Sent: Thursday October 05 2006 13:11
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

You have to wonder whether this is related to T3's introduction of PSI's
"Liberty" servers.  Liberty overlaps the z9BC low end, perhaps through 250
MIPS.

I'm sure Phil would know more, but he's probably too busy fiddling with his
Audi to care much.

---


It's not.  Here is a similar notice from Cornerstone employee Mike Hammock
from the FLEX-ES list:




I've been asked to post this announcement:
===
Announcement:  Fundamental Software has notified IBM and it's PWD resellers
that they are unable to accept orders for PWD FLEX-ES after November 1,
2006.

Background:  FSI applied for the renewal of certain IBM patents that expire
on November 1st.   IBM has yet to approve their request.   While this issue
may be resolved any day, it is prudent at this time for Cornerstone to
advise both our partners and customers of the pending situation.   First,
Cornerstone will continue to accept orders for FLEX-ES PWD licenses until
October 20th.  That date allows enough time to manage requests through the
IBM PWD approval process.Note:  There is no guarantee that IBM will
process and approve all the requests that we submit before the end date of
November 1.   If  you were considering a new FLEX-ES PWD license, renewal,
or upgrade, it is critical that you start this process NOW.   Cornerstone's
support of FLEX-ES will continue without interruption for the full term of
your PWD agreements.  For example, a PWD with a 3 year maintenance agreement
executed prior to November 1, 2006, will continue to receive support from
Cornerstone for the duration of that agreement.

We hope this issue is resolved soon, but it may or may not happen by
November 1st.Please act accordingly.



Mike
C. M. (Mike) Hammock
Sr. Technical Support
zFrame & IBM zSeries Solutions
(404) 643-3258
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-

Sadly, I believe the FLEX-ES world is going to be in upheaval, and the PWD
program is the first casualty.  

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Eric N. Bielefeld]

This surely seems like a good way to start killing the mainframe.  Get rid 
of the developers of software products for your system.  Also, get rid of 
all of the really small companies off the mainframe that will never now grow 
into large customers.  There doesn't seem to be a lot of smarts in IBM in 
some areas.


I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I 
haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product legally run z/OS 
in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on IBM-Main, if I 
remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing mode, meaning z/OS 
1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.


Why would IBM want to kill off their smallest customers?  It just doesn't 
make sense.  IBM is sure sending a lot of mixed signals!  Phil Payne - where 
are you?


Eric Bielefeld
Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
Milwaukee Wisconsin
414-475-7434


--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Tom Moulder]

I work with a company that is running a FLEX-ES and z/OS 1.6.  Guess they
got the issues worked out.

Tom Moulder


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Eric N. Bielefeld
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

This surely seems like a good way to start killing the mainframe.  Get rid 
of the developers of software products for your system.  Also, get rid of 
all of the really small companies off the mainframe that will never now grow

into large customers.  There doesn't seem to be a lot of smarts in IBM in 
some areas.

I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I 
haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product legally run z/OS 
in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on IBM-Main, if I 
remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing mode, meaning z/OS 
1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.

Why would IBM want to kill off their smallest customers?  It just doesn't 
make sense.  IBM is sure sending a lot of mixed signals!  Phil Payne - where

are you?

Eric Bielefeld
Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
Milwaukee Wisconsin
414-475-7434
 

--
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



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date: 10/4/2006

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Steve Comstock]

Eric N. Bielefeld wrote:
This surely seems like a good way to start killing the mainframe.  Get 
rid of the developers of software products for your system.  Also, get 
rid of all of the really small companies off the mainframe that will 
never now grow into large customers.  There doesn't seem to be a lot of 
smarts in IBM in some areas.


I keep trying to get their attention, but
to no avail.



I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I 
haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product legally run 
z/OS in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on 
IBM-Main, if I remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing 
mode, meaning z/OS 1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.


We just installed 1.7; there are still some of the
newer hardware instructions that are not supported
- unlike Hercules, where instruction support seems
more robust; but, of course, they're not a legal
platform for running z/OS. [In fairness, I was able
to run in 64-bit amode pretty early on.]



Why would IBM want to kill off their smallest customers?  It just 
doesn't make sense.  IBM is sure sending a lot of mixed signals!  Phil 
Payne - where are you?


Small doesn't return big returns. Future? Ah,
you mean next quarter. After all, "we're a bit
of an elephant so it takes us a little time
to turn around". But I've been told there are
changes a'brewin'. We'll see.

Kind regards,

-Steve Comstock

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Wayne Driscoll]

Eric,
There never really were any "Technical" issues with running 64-bit under
FLEX, it just worked.  The issue, and why Tom gets around it, is a
"legal & licensing" one.  IBM will only allow PWD members to run a FLEX
in 64 bit mode.  If you were a small shop that wanted to run z/OS under
FLEX for "production" work (assuming that production isn't compiling and
testing software products), then you were limited to only 31 bit mode.
Again, limited smarts in IBM on this.
Wayne Driscoll
Product Developer
JME Software LLC
NOTE: All opinions are strictly my own.
  

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom Moulder
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

I work with a company that is running a FLEX-ES and z/OS 1.6.  Guess
they got the issues worked out.

Tom Moulder


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Eric N. Bielefeld
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

This surely seems like a good way to start killing the mainframe.  Get
rid of the developers of software products for your system.  Also, get
rid of all of the really small companies off the mainframe that will
never now grow

into large customers.  There doesn't seem to be a lot of smarts in IBM
in some areas.

I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I
haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product legally run
z/OS in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on
IBM-Main, if I remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing
mode, meaning z/OS
1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.

Why would IBM want to kill off their smallest customers?  It just
doesn't make sense.  IBM is sure sending a lot of mixed signals!  Phil
Payne - where

are you?

Eric Bielefeld
Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
Milwaukee Wisconsin
414-475-7434
 

--
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



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date:
10/4/2006

--
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

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Fred Hoffman]

Hi Eric,

AFAIK, an account that I moonlight at is loading 1.7 onto the box.  

Fred

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Eric N. Bielefeld
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community


This surely seems like a good way to start killing the mainframe.  Get rid 
of the developers of software products for your system.  Also, get rid of 
all of the really small companies off the mainframe that will never now grow 
into large customers.  There doesn't seem to be a lot of smarts in IBM in 
some areas.

I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I 
haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product legally run z/OS 
in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on IBM-Main, if I 
remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing mode, meaning z/OS 
1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.

Why would IBM want to kill off their smallest customers?  It just doesn't 
make sense.  IBM is sure sending a lot of mixed signals!  Phil Payne - where 
are you?

Eric Bielefeld
Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
Milwaukee Wisconsin
414-475-7434
 

--
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

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Charles Mills]

I am looking at a current T3 proposal and it says:

zPad Base System: ... Full S/390 capability, including ESA/390 Features for
VSE/ESA, VM/ESA, z/VM and Z/OS and 64 bit zSeries support, IBM Denier nylon
carry case.

And to think I remember when mainframes did not come with a nylon carrying
case.

Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Eric N. Bielefeld
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 2:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I 
haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product legally run z/OS 
in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on IBM-Main, if I 
remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing mode, meaning z/OS 
1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Tom Moulder]

Wayne

What you say makes sense because the company is a PWD.

Tom Moulder

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Eric N. Bielefeld]

So, if your a PWD member, you can run 64 bit mode, but if your company just 
needs 10 - 30 MIPS or so, you can only run 31 bit mode?  That doesn't make 
any sense.  Is there anyone out there from IBM who can explain this, and 
tell us why IBM wants to kill the FLEX box?  I'm sure that a few of the 
IBMers on this list must at least know who to ask and could find out, but I 
bet we won't hear from any IBMers.


Eric Bielefeld
Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
Milwaukee Wisconsin
414-475-7434


Eric,
There never really were any "Technical" issues with running 64-bit under
FLEX, it just worked.  The issue, and why Tom gets around it, is a
"legal & licensing" one.  IBM will only allow PWD members to run a FLEX
in 64 bit mode.  If you were a small shop that wanted to run z/OS under
FLEX for "production" work (assuming that production isn't compiling and
testing software products), then you were limited to only 31 bit mode.
Again, limited smarts in IBM on this.
Wayne Driscoll
Product Developer
JME Software LLC
NOTE: All opinions are strictly my own. 


--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Alan Altmark]

On Thursday, 10/05/2006 at 04:36 EST, "Eric N. Bielefeld" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I
> haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product legally run 
z/OS
> in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on IBM-Main, if 
I
> remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing mode, meaning 
z/OS
> 1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.

As it has been explained to me, members of IBM PartnerWorld in Development 
(PWD) are entitled to obtain the FLEX-ES dongle that enables the 
z/Architecture support.  Non-members are not.

Non-PWD members are not supposed to be in possession of the dongle and are 
not licensed to use z/Architecture on the box even if they *do* possess 
it.  (An agreement with IBM to the contrary overrides the whole thing, of 
course.)

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Edward Jaffe]

Eric N. Bielefeld wrote:
So, if your a PWD member, you can run 64 bit mode, but if your company 
just needs 10 - 30 MIPS or so, you can only run 31 bit mode?  That 
doesn't make any sense.  Is there anyone out there from IBM who can 
explain this, and tell us why IBM wants to kill the FLEX box?  I'm 
sure that a few of the IBMers on this list must at least know who to 
ask and could find out, but I bet we won't hear from any IBMers.


If you run 10-30 MIPS, chances are you're running z/VSE. That operating 
system runs on the vast majority of "production" FLEX-ES systems. There 
are other z/Architecture emulators coming into the picture and real 
mainframe hardware now starts as small as 28 MIPS, so the landscape has 
changed considerably since FLEX-ES was first introduced. IBM may be 
taking a wait and see approach.


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Timothy Sipples]

>If you run 10-30 MIPS, chances are you're running z/VSE. That operating
>system runs on the vast majority of "production" FLEX-ES systems. There
>are other z/Architecture emulators coming into the picture and real
>mainframe hardware now starts as small as 28 MIPS, so the landscape has
>changed considerably since FLEX-ES was first introduced. IBM may be
>taking a wait and see approach.

I have no particular insider knowledge on this, but a few more points on
small mainframes:

1.  IBM dropped the minimum purchase level for mainframe software products
down to 3 MSUs because smaller customers needed this (and small projects
within larger companies).  This now means the mainframe is the cheapest
place to put, say, WebSphere Message Broker.

2.  IBM dropped the price almost in half on the 26 MIPS System z9 BC A01
from the previous entry model, the z890 Model 110.  I didn't do a totally
scientific study, but I believe today's mainframe is the same dollar price
as any of the previously lowest price entry models, including the "baby
mainframes" of yesteryear that people remember fondly.  In
inflation-adjusted terms it's much lower of course.  The z9 is a much
better machine than any predecessor and every bit a real mainframe, even at
26 MIPS, for true mainframe qualities of service.

3.  The U.S. price of a brand new BC A01 is now about the same as one full
time (fully burdened) employee's annual compensation, for perspective.

4.  The 26 MIPS model is 4 MSUs.  You can set subcapacity limits below that
if your needs are even more modest, and special software pricing is
available.

5.  Genuine z/OS (in the form of z/OS.e) is available for a small fraction
of the price for any new workloads, including DB2.

6.  There's more competition than ever in the tools and utilities business,
driving down costs.  There are even 5 operating systems available to
choose, including one IBM doesn't make (Linux) that's just a little
popular. :-)

7.  IBM announced there will be changes to z/VSE pricing terms with Version
4 related to subcapacity.  (This is good.)

8.  The z800 (minimum 40 MIPS, subcapacity eligible) is a real 64-bit
mainframe and is available on the secondary market for less than the price
of popular automobiles.  A "small" z900 (also subcapacity eligible) is
probably less than that.  (Well, if a one person personal data center now
has a z900)

All that said, small mainframe customers (and developers) should keep
letting IBM know what they need.  IBM generally does respond if it can, as
in the examples above.

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Pinnacle]

- Original Message - 
From: "Timothy Sipples" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 12:56 AM
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community




All that said, small mainframe customers (and developers) should keep
letting IBM know what they need.  IBM generally does respond if it can, as
in the examples above.



Tim,

The bottom line is that IBM keeps erecting barriers for small developers to 
get on the platform.  That's why I'm still developing on a P390 with z/OS 
V1R4 in 31-bit mode.  PWD recently added a $1000/yr license charge for the 
ADCD which was previously free.  The FLEX-ES boxes at >10K for a laptop or 
>30K for a server are priced beyond my means.  So only the big developers 
will continue to develop for z/OS, everyone else will keep developing for 
.NET, Java, and Linux on their commodity PC's for <$1000.  If IBM abandons 
FLEX-ES, you won't have any z/OS development happening in any company under 
$1M market cap.  Good luck when that happens.


Regards,
Tom Conley 


--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Alan Altmark]

On Friday, 10/06/2006 at 01:31 AST, Pinnacle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> The bottom line is that IBM keeps erecting barriers for small developers 
to
> get on the platform.  That's why I'm still developing on a P390 with 
z/OS
> V1R4 in 31-bit mode.  PWD recently added a $1000/yr license charge for 
the
> ADCD which was previously free.  The FLEX-ES boxes at >10K for a laptop 
or
> >30K for a server are priced beyond my means.  So only the big 
developers
> will continue to develop for z/OS, everyone else will keep developing 
for
> .NET, Java, and Linux on their commodity PC's for <$1000.  If IBM 
abandons
> FLEX-ES, you won't have any z/OS development happening in any company 
under
> $1M market cap.  Good luck when that happens.

If PWD is really not affordable, then each and every member of PWD who 
does z/OS development *should* rise up and be heard.

The rock/hard place is if you do s/w development as a hobby, not as a 
business, and just want to have fun, recoup your costs, and have a little 
something left over to supplement other sources of income.  For those 
folks the ante may be too high.  But I just don't know; I've never been a 
self-employed s/w developer.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Stephen Y Odo]

Alan Altmark wrote:
The rock/hard place is if you do s/w development as a hobby, not as a 
business, and just want to have fun, recoup your costs, and have a little 
something left over to supplement other sources of income.  For those 
folks the ante may be too high.  But I just don't know; I've never been a 
self-employed s/w developer.
  
And it strikes me as sad that IBM would exclude "hobbyists" like 
myself.  A lot of good things have come out of people who developed 
stuff just for fun ...


Also, IBM excludes all those students who would want to write programs 
on the mainframe or just learn how.  They can get a Windows or Linux 
laptop for about $1.5K with all the software they need.  The only way 
they can do anything with z/OS is to get an account on somebody's 
mainframe ... which is nearly impossible at our institution.


They can get a Linux box and start experimenting and learning without 
having to write up a project proposal and getting approval to get access 
to a system.


--Stephen


--
-
Stephen Y. Odo
Systems Engineeringe-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Information Technology Services phone:  (808)956-2383
University of Hawai'i FAX:  (808)956-2412
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
U5 Girls/Boys Master Coach
U10 Boys Age Group Coordinator
U16/U19 Girls Age Group Coordinator
Child and Volunteer Protection Advocate
AYSO Honolulu Region 178   e-mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[R.S.]

Stephen Y Odo wrote:
[...]
Also, IBM excludes all those students who would want to write programs 
on the mainframe or just learn how.  They can get a Windows or Linux 
laptop for about $1.5K with all the software they need.  The only way 
they can do anything with z/OS is to get an account on somebody's 
mainframe ... which is nearly impossible at our institution.


They can get a Linux box and start experimenting and learning without 
having to write up a project proposal and getting approval to get access

to a system.


...or this persuades students to use Hercules and illegal copy of z/OS. 
Like some IBMers do.


BTW: wouldn't it be simpler just to give z/OS *for free* to all the 
hobbyists, students, maniacs ? Like few other OS vendors did.
Obviously with limitations for personal, non-commercial use, on 
specified HW, etc.

Small developers would pay $ yearly as today.

OK, I know. I would make z/OS *popular* which seems to be against IBM 
policy.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric N. Bielefeld
> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:37 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
> 
> 
> This surely seems like a good way to start killing the 
> mainframe.  Get rid 
> of the developers of software products for your system.  
> Also, get rid of 
> all of the really small companies off the mainframe that will 
> never now grow 
> into large customers.  There doesn't seem to be a lot of 
> smarts in IBM in 
> some areas.

zSeries no longer seems to be considered a stragetic system as best as I
can tell. It is expensive. And it is too reliable. What I mean is that
people don't seem to care anymore if a server dies once a week, just
reboot it and recover whatever was "in flight". Having hardware that
won't fail in 5 years of continuous operation is "over engineered"
because such reliability is no longer considered important to the
business customers.

> 
> I have a question.  I know this has been discussed in the past, but I 
> haven't heard any updates lately.  Does the FlexEs product 
> legally run z/OS 
> in 64 bit addressing mode yet?  The last we discussed it on 
> IBM-Main, if I 
> remember correctly, you couldn't run 64 bit addressing mode, 
> meaning z/OS 
> 1.6 and above wouldn't run on it.

To the best of my knowledge, no. You cannot run commercial 64 bit on
FlexES. Likely ever.

> 
> Why would IBM want to kill off their smallest customers?  It 
> just doesn't 
> make sense.  IBM is sure sending a lot of mixed signals!  
> Phil Payne - where 
> are you?

Well, pessimist that I am, I figure that current IBM management has a
mind set of "milk as much from the current zSeries customers as we can
and when they all get disgusted with us on zSeries, sell them some other
architecture system like a pSeries or iSeries". IOW, they seem to want
to kill zSeries. One nice way is their Linux on zSeries. Why? Because
they can get current zSeries z/OS, z/VM, and z/VSE customers converted
onto Linux on the zSeries. Then, when the zSeries is killed, they can
say that their Linux investment is OK because Linux will run on xSeries,
iSeries, pSeries.

OK, I'm likely wrong in the above. I'm just not very pleased with IBM
right now on this subject and am venting.

> 
> Eric Bielefeld
> Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
> Milwaukee Wisconsin
> 414-475-7434


--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited. 
 

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Tom Marchant]

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 13:55:43 +0900, Timothy Sipples 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>>If you run 10-30 MIPS, chances are you're running z/VSE. That operating
>>system runs on the vast majority of "production" FLEX-ES systems. There
>>are other z/Architecture emulators coming into the picture and real
>>mainframe hardware now starts as small as 28 MIPS, so the landscape has
>>changed considerably since FLEX-ES was first introduced. IBM may be
>>taking a wait and see approach.
>
>I have no particular insider knowledge on this, but a few more points on
>small mainframes:
>
>1.  IBM dropped the minimum purchase level for mainframe software products
>down to 3 MSUs ...

Big deal

>  This now means the mainframe is the cheapest
>place to put, say, WebSphere Message Broker.

Oh, really?
How useful is Websphere Message Broker on a 3 MSU z/OS system?

>
>2.  IBM dropped the price almost in half on the 26 MIPS System z9 BC A01
>from the previous entry model, the z890 Model 110.

Big deal.  *All* computing hardware has been dropping at that rate for the 
last 40 years.  The original HP 4-function calculator cost $700.  A lot of 
people have almost as much compute power in their wrist watch as a 168.
>
>3.  The U.S. price of a brand new BC A01 is now about the same as one full
>time (fully burdened) employee's annual compensation, for perspective.

And the software costs for real customers continues to rise.  Customers 
have been abandoning the mainframe because of software costs.  The hardware 
costs have not been driving people away.  The point of this thread is 
really about the software costs.
>
>4.  The 26 MIPS model is 4 MSUs.  You can set subcapacity limits below that
>if your needs are even more modest, and special software pricing is
>available.

And IBM continues to cling tightly to the (almost) linear pricing
structure for software.  Double the power of your hardware and pay
almost double the price for your software.  With the power of
computers doubling every couple of years, it doesn't take any genius
to realize that it can't continue, but IBM can't seem to figure it
out.  Pay me a penny today, two cents tomorrow.  Double it every day,
and I'll retire wealthy in a month.
>
>5.  Genuine z/OS (in the form of z/OS.e) is available for a small fraction
>of the price for any new workloads, including DB2.

But still with the same almost linear price curve, and only on small 
processors.

Tom Marchant

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Tom Marchant]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 18:08:32 -0500, Eric N. Bielefeld  wrote:

> ...  Is there anyone out there from IBM who can explain this, and
>tell us why IBM wants to kill the FLEX box? 

The IBMers here are technical, not political or bean counters.

Tom Marchant

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Mark Zelden]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:48:44 -0700, Edward Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>If you run 10-30 MIPS, chances are you're running z/VSE. 

Maybe, maybe not. I know a couple of very small production "MVS" environments
that fit into that category.  We run one very small LPAR on a z900 that 
I was looking at moving onto a flex 4 or 5 years ago.  ESCON connectivity
to a STK tape SILO was a show stopper at that time.

Mark  
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead
Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Tom Marchant]

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 15:11:49 +0100, Phil Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RESEARCH.FREESERVE.CO.UK> wrote:

>> The IBMers here are technical, not political or bean counters.
>
>What a load of gonads.  Why do they keep posting press releases about
>obscure analysts that no one has ever heard of?

I stand corrected.  Thanks.  And what about always posting about how
cheap the hardware is getting?

Tom Marchant

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Peter D. Ward]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:49:30 -0600, Steve Comstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>We just installed 1.7; there are still some of the
>newer hardware instructions that are not supported
 

Your version of FLex-ES is tailored per agreements.   

>
>Small doesn't return big returns. Future? Ah,
>you mean next quarter. After all, "we're a bit
>of an elephant so it takes us a little time
>to turn around". But I've been told there are
>changes a'brewin'. We'll see.
>

Are you under NDA with IBM?  No?.. then perhaps you'll share with the list
what  you are intimating about.  

--
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

Re: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Duane Reaugh]

FYI
Cornerstone just sent out an email to their user stating they have been
notified by FSI that they can not accept licenses after Nov 1st, 2006

"Fundamental Software has notified IBM and its PWD resellers that they
are unable to accept orders for PWD FLEX-ES after November 1, 2006."

The FLEX system, the MP3000 and the P390 (I got at least one of each)
all have internal disk subsystem. The z800, z890-BC has no internal disk
so I have to buy an ESS or something similar. The MP3000 is barely
office equipment (we have it in the parking bay), but z890 and ESS are
hardly rack mountable. If the price does not stop you, the
environmental's will.

Duane Reaugh
DTS Software 

--
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

Re: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Bob Shannon]

>ESS are hardly rack mountable

The DS6800 is rack mountable. However, that won't help with the
processor environmentals.

Bob Shannon

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 9:31 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
> 
> 
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 15:11:49 +0100, Phil Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> RESEARCH.FREESERVE.CO.UK> wrote:
> 
> >> The IBMers here are technical, not political or bean counters.
> >
> >What a load of gonads.  Why do they keep posting press releases about
> >obscure analysts that no one has ever heard of?
> 
> I stand corrected.  Thanks.  And what about always posting about how
> cheap the hardware is getting?
> 
> Tom Marchant

Well, it depends on how you look at it, right? The price / performance
ratio is decreasing (or price per MIP in the old days). However, since
IBM is "killing" the lower performance systems, there are no inexpensive
machines (well that $100,000 z9BC is relatively inexpensive for a z9
system, but compared to an xSeries? and it doesn't include any
peripherials). For example, suppose that it cost $100,000 for a 200 MIP
box. That is 100,000/200 or $500/MIP. The next box out says that it only
costs $250/MIP. So it costs 1/2 as much. But now the minimum MIP value
is 500. So the box itself costs $125,000. So it costs more in actual
price. 

Oh, and this doesn't address the software cost, which for many OEM
vendors is "linear" and based on the "total MIP" size of the box. So
your "cheaper per MIP" box has an astronomical software cost. This has
been cussed and discussed here many times. I have my opinion, but I
don't want to start that thread again.

Yes, I understand that MIP is a bad word. I just used it because I can
type it easily. Replace it with whatever you wish, such as MSU or
group-model or capacity model or ...

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited. 
 

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Pommier, Rex R.]

Tim,

All valid points, but as I see it, rather moot to the discussion.

You talk about the new z9 boxes being able to drop down to 26 MIPS.  The
thing is still over 6 feet tall and weighs over half a ton!  If I were a
software vendor, it would be rather difficult to take that on a plane to
a customer site to demo some software.  And that doesn't include the
required external disk/tape/hardware console.  Also kind of hard for a
small vendor to maintain a "real" mainframe if they are doing
development out of their home!

You mention the hardware costs of the used boxes as being cheap.  I
agree, they are.  However In our case, the software incentives for going
to the z9-BC made the new box cheaper over 3 years than a $10K Z800.  

I think item 5 is the one that most troubles IBM's customer base.  "New
workloads" can get the cheap z/OS.e.  My management is concerned about
the high cost of the current workloads.  As long as they are paying this
and seeing the seemingly cheaper cost structure of switching to another
platform, they are surely not going to look at putting new workloads on
"z".  


We're running a "real mainframe".  We just swapped out a 7060 for a
z9-BC, again for the software savings and being able to remain on a
supported level of z/OS.  However, at least one of our software vendors
is a small (2 man) shop who does their development on a FLEX-ES machine.
If they lose their capability to do development on this small (cost and
size) platform will they go out of business and leave us in the lurch?  


I think IBM either needs to come clean with their customer base and tell
us if they're going to abandon the z/OS market or make some real effort
to let the little guy remain (or return to being) competitive.  If that
means IBM doesn't want to mess with the little guys, for heaven's sake,
get out of the way and let the partners like FLEX do it.  In the long
run, IBM is killing their "z" market by eliminating their "coopetition".



Just my $.02.

Rex


I have no particular insider knowledge on this, but a few more points on
small mainframes:

1.  IBM dropped the minimum purchase level for mainframe software
products down to 3 MSUs because smaller customers needed this (and small
projects within larger companies).  This now means the mainframe is the
cheapest place to put, say, WebSphere Message Broker.

2.  IBM dropped the price almost in half on the 26 MIPS System z9 BC A01
from the previous entry model, the z890 Model 110.  I didn't do a
totally scientific study, but I believe today's mainframe is the same
dollar price as any of the previously lowest price entry models,
including the "baby mainframes" of yesteryear that people remember
fondly.  In inflation-adjusted terms it's much lower of course.  The z9
is a much better machine than any predecessor and every bit a real
mainframe, even at
26 MIPS, for true mainframe qualities of service.

3.  The U.S. price of a brand new BC A01 is now about the same as one
full time (fully burdened) employee's annual compensation, for
perspective.

4.  The 26 MIPS model is 4 MSUs.  You can set subcapacity limits below
that if your needs are even more modest, and special software pricing is
available.

5.  Genuine z/OS (in the form of z/OS.e) is available for a small
fraction of the price for any new workloads, including DB2.

6.  There's more competition than ever in the tools and utilities
business, driving down costs.  There are even 5 operating systems
available to choose, including one IBM doesn't make (Linux) that's just
a little popular. :-)

7.  IBM announced there will be changes to z/VSE pricing terms with
Version
4 related to subcapacity.  (This is good.)

8.  The z800 (minimum 40 MIPS, subcapacity eligible) is a real 64-bit
mainframe and is available on the secondary market for less than the
price of popular automobiles.  A "small" z900 (also subcapacity
eligible) is probably less than that.  (Well, if a one person personal
data center now has a z900)

All that said, small mainframe customers (and developers) should keep
letting IBM know what they need.  IBM generally does respond if it can,
as in the examples above.

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Steve Comstock]

Peter D. Ward wrote:

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:49:30 -0600, Steve Comstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:



We just installed 1.7; there are still some of the
newer hardware instructions that are not supported


Your version of FLex-ES is tailored per agreements.   


Yes, but it was _implied_ that this product would
be kept current. Of course, it was always at the
discretion of the supplier.





Small doesn't return big returns. Future? Ah,
you mean next quarter. After all, "we're a bit
of an elephant so it takes us a little time
to turn around". But I've been told there are
changes a'brewin'. We'll see.




Are you under NDA with IBM?  No?.. then perhaps you'll share with the list
what  you are intimating about.  


Whoops! Did I say that out loud?

Well, I don't have anything I would take to the bank.

I had a conversation last week with Florence Hudson,
who is in charge of zSeries, and Don Resnick, who
is in charge of the Academaic Initiative. It was a
good talk, and Florence alluded to a new advertising
campaign for zSeries coming out "soon".

Of course, all their recent ad campaigns have been
worse than stupid, so we have to wait and see if it's
really anything that will win over hearts and minds.

I continue to push the contacts I have, and get some
recognition of the problem(s), but no big actions
that really address what I see as the root issues.

So it all depends on if they are really listening and
"getting it". Like I say, they talk big (so I hear
them) but past history is such I want to wait and
see what really happens.

Kind regards,

-Steve

--
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

Re: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Edward Jaffe]

Duane Reaugh wrote:

The FLEX system, the MP3000 and the P390 (I got at least one of each)
all have internal disk subsystem. The z800, z890-BC has no internal disk
so I have to buy an ESS or something similar. The MP3000 is barely
office equipment (we have it in the parking bay), but z890 and ESS are
hardly rack mountable. If the price does not stop you, the
environmental's will.
  


I suggest you consider the DS6000 over ESS.

--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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

Re: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Pommier, Rex R.]

 I've seen a couple people mention the DS6800 so I thought I'd throw my
experience in with it.  When we replaced out MP3000 (2 drawer file
cabinet) with the z9-BC (comparatively huge), we also replaced an
ancient RVA (30 square feet of floor space) with a DS6800 solution (7U
in an existing rack).  Not only did we gain the floor space back, but
when I hit the "power-off" on the RVA, I gained 5% of my UPS capacity
back!

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Edward Jaffe
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:23 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

Duane Reaugh wrote:
> The FLEX system, the MP3000 and the P390 (I got at least one of each) 
> all have internal disk subsystem. The z800, z890-BC has no internal 
> disk so I have to buy an ESS or something similar. The MP3000 is 
> barely office equipment (we have it in the parking bay), but z890 and 
> ESS are hardly rack mountable. If the price does not stop you, the 
> environmental's will.
>   

I suggest you consider the DS6000 over ESS.

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Eric N. Bielefeld]

John,

If your going to use bad words, at least spell them correctly.  Its MIPS, 
not MIP.  Million Intructions Per SECOND!  (LOL)


Eric Bielefeld
Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer
Milwaukee Wisconsin
414-475-7434

  > Yes, I understand that MIP is a bad word. I just used it because I can

type it easily. Replace it with whatever you wish, such as MSU or
group-model or capacity model or ...

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology 


--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Gerhard Postpischil]

Eric N. Bielefeld wrote:
If your going to use bad words, at least spell them correctly.  Its 
MIPS, not MIP.  Million Intructions Per SECOND!  (LOL)


When you correct someone else's spelling, mistakes make you look really 
foolish. I surmise you meant "you're going" ?


Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Jon Brock]

Gaudere's Law (aka Merphy's Law) strikes again.  Or maybe agin.

Jon



When you correct someone else's spelling, mistakes make you look really 
foolish. I surmise you meant "you're going" ?


--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Daniel A. McLaughlin]

Million Intructions Per SECOND! 

   OR

  Meaningless Indicator of Processor Speed




Daniel McLaughlin
ZOS Systems Programmer
Crawford & Company
PH: 770 621 3256
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

If you aim at nothing you will hit it every time.
 - Zig Ziglar









--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Ted MacNEIL]

>And what about always posting about how
cheap the hardware is getting?

Another load of carp!

Hardware may be getting cheaper on a unit basis, but we're buying more units.
When in doubt.
PANIC!!  

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Pommier, Rex R.]

 Not only that, but it is "instructions", not "intructions".  ;-)

(Man, it must be Friday...)

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gerhard Postpischil
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 1:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

Eric N. Bielefeld wrote:
> If your going to use bad words, at least spell them correctly.  Its 
> MIPS, not MIP.  Million Intructions Per SECOND!  (LOL)

When you correct someone else's spelling, mistakes make you look really
foolish. I surmise you meant "you're going" ?

Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Alan Altmark]

On Friday, 10/06/2006 at 06:27 GMT, Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> >And what about always posting about how
> cheap the hardware is getting?
> 
> Another load of carp!
> 
> Hardware may be getting cheaper on a unit basis, but we're buying more 
units.

Well you can't blame IBM for your increased usage!  :-)  As the unit cost 
declines, previously unaffordable projects suddenly become affordable.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Jeffrey D. Smith]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Jon Brock
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 12:10 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
> 
> Gaudere's Law (aka Merphy's Law) strikes again.  Or maybe agin.
> 
> Jon
> 
> 
> 
> When you correct someone else's spelling, mistakes make you look really
> foolish. I surmise you meant "you're going" ?
> 

And MURPHY'S LAW strikes YET again.

It's a weak mind that can think of only one way to spell a werd.

/J

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Ted MacNEIL]

>Yes, I understand that MIP is a bad word.

Also, you're mis-using it.

The "S" is not for pluralisation.
It stands for "Second".

As in:
Millions of Instructions Per Second.

It is 1 MIPS, 2 MIPS, red fish, blue fish.

NOT 1 MIP.

And, MSU's are just as bad, these days.

First, IBM isn't as rigourous with LSPR, any more.

Second, IBM Marketting skims a little off the top.

MIPS: Marketting's Indicator of Processor Speed.
 
When in doubt.
PANIC!!  

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 3:02 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
> 
> 
> >Yes, I understand that MIP is a bad word.
> 
> Also, you're mis-using it.
> 
> The "S" is not for pluralisation.
> It stands for "Second".
> 
> As in:
> Millions of Instructions Per Second.
> 
> It is 1 MIPS, 2 MIPS, red fish, blue fish.
> 
> NOT 1 MIP.
> 
> And, MSU's are just as bad, these days.
> 
> First, IBM isn't as rigourous with LSPR, any more.
> 
> Second, IBM Marketting skims a little off the top.
> 
> MIPS: Marketting's Indicator of Processor Speed.
>  
> When in doubt.
> PANIC!!  

Well, didn't I say it was bad?!? I didn't say why it was bad . 

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited. 
 

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Ted MacNEIL]

> Not only that, but it is "instructions", not "intructions"

"Don't be Misled by MIPS"

When in doubt.
PANIC!!  

--
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

Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community

[Alan Altmark]

On Friday, 10/06/2006 at 08:02 GMT, Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> The "S" is not for pluralisation.
> It stands for "Second".
> 
> As in:
> Millions of Instructions Per Second.
> 
> It is 1 MIPS, 2 MIPS, red fish, blue fish.
> 
> NOT 1 MIP.

Since it's an acronym, not a word, we get to make up whatever rules we 
want for pluralization.  Repeat after me:  The box has 200 MIPS.  It is a 
200-MIP box.  I think I should pay IBM more for each MIP, regardless of 
how many MIPS the box has.  "Has"?  "...how many millions of instructions 
per second the box *has*?"

OBVIOUSLY, MIPS is singluar, even it it isn't a noun.  It is an adjective. 
 The correct plural form is "MIPSes".

I think Humpty Dumpty would agree.

> And, MSU's are just as bad, these days.

You mean MSUs (no apostrophe), of course.  Or is "MSU" already plural 
since it is "Units"? :-)

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott

--
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