Re: Continued Corporate bias against Telecommuting?
Federal/State Government incentives Telecommuting trying to solve theirs (also ours, of course) problems, such as traffic, transports, pollution, gas shortage(future), massive people movements, security threats, etc... Corporations, in the other hand, foresee lower office costs. Lower footprint offices However , I think may the companies are considering the sinergy of workers group. The interaction of people may be very creative and fast responsive to problems IT are dealing with. What are they losing with less present teams ? Have they felt something like less dedication ? Nowadays even with fast connections/resources providing group teleconferences, nothing is good as daily contact, eye contact, body language perceptions, and all that king of PSI stuff. I have worked with fine tech groups and I have worked with not-so-good not-so-easy-to-deal ones.. I think that some tasks depends more on individual efforts and may be telecommuted, but look: I said TASK not JOB. PS; I am talking about people not about mvs internals,;-) I know some corporations that are trying to mix, balancing home-working and presence-group-working. Something like 2-day home, and 3-day-in-site for reunions, meetings, contacts, project update, instructions etc... Maybe someday in the future, with holographic teleconference ( when home computers will be really helping domestic affairs), there will be virtual corporations, and we will part of a virtual workgroup, a virtual taskforce. I only hope that I will have a real job and real salary (with a real house and real wife too ! ) :-P - JC - Rio de Janeiro Brazil *** Imbriale, Don escreveu: With increasing costs of gasoline and the ever-present cries to reduce dependence on oil and the possibility of epidemics such as bird flu, now would seem to be the best time to encourage telecommuting. If the US Federal and state governments provided tax incentives to corporations who implement telecommuting programs, I bet there would be a rush to get employees to stay home. -- 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: Another off-shoring question
Corporate costs = Infrastructure + Peopleware + Software + Hardware + Taxes It is kinda of complex economics equation followed by strategic and management poit-of-view Conclusion: nobody knows who is right and whats the correct solution, and the CIO have to feel to where the wind is blowing. |;)). PS: Do not forget the CSO opinions to get things messy. -JC- Rio de Janeiro Ed Gould escreveu: On Jun 15, 2006, at 5:18 PM, Phil Payne wrote: What if the target country were the USA? I haven't checked current data, and it's too much of an effort - in this instance - to get my facts right. But the last time I looked, IBM software (especially middleware like DB2) was substantially cheaper in the USA than it was in the UK. Around CICS and DB2, we're talking a third or so. Given that we now have the sort of bandwidth that's giving me subsecond response in Sheffield from Redmond, I'd think any British bank that didn't seriously evaluate putting its data centre in Arizona would be nuts. -- Phil, Interesting. I didn't know the prices were different in the US (as opposed to other countries). Have you found that companies know this (about say India software cost being higher? Just curious as to why it would be more expensive (as well). I have a close friend who is in the consulting biz and they do outsourcing as well. I have the impression from him that its not that big of deal. Like I said I am rather surprised. Ed -- 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: Another BIG Mainframe Bites the Dust
Gentlemen, I have been reading this thread, as z-worker I am, too interested and worried about my job/future. Obviously I have been thinking: What the hell 7,000 mips the good man was talking about ? How were configurated his fabric ? It was one datacentre ? Have they 2 for DR purposes ? How many enviroments did they have ? How many Plexes ? There were any over sized ones ? Which DB/DC were been used ? You can say that a Corporation like that would have checked all those wasting aspects long ago before thinking any alternatives and starting finance analysis, but I would like to know some macro aspects a little deeper than "7000 mips were at 100% and were costing more 10 million bucks on 5-year period". All right, add x million contracts simulations by month (someone have said before). Anyhow, it is still somewhat 'vague', like my car was good enough, it did not fit to my usage. So I have bought a new one, a new brand X. I wish I have made myself clear, and I simply would like some data to understand what did happen. OK... their corporationthey do what they want, but, please, we are techs, we like data, graphs, vectors, trends, machine model/type, and, :) ...dumps. (sorry, couldn't resist) [Sorry to interrupt you guys] Best regards, Joao Carlos Rio de Janeiro - Brazil. PS: Soon I will be posting from my Blackberry too. Of course, by the seashore, in the sunset, over a cold beer. Then I will be able to understand these corporation subjects ITIS. ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Thank you. * -- 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: Just another example of mainframe costs + aspects
Gentleman, I must say I basically agree with C.Mills 's approaches . I would also like to add some aspects: a) Once wintel/linux (and even unix/risc) are plataforms aimed by crackers/intruders, its security adds extra costs (hw, sw & HR) and disasters/incidents to manage. b) A computer-grid seems to me a little bit (not so little) far complex to manage and extract real profit ( on response time x costs). It's complicated to adjust, to fine-tune, and I bet it will not be so easy to re-arrange DB's or to increase the grid without doing it. Mainly if you are using no-charge SW. I can't believe good tools would be available this way. At last, I can say (after my 50's, more than 30 on the MF road) corporations are living beeings, they have memories, habits, colors, they have birthdays/parties, and so their systems/applications . some have bad habits ... they keep them (perhaps because their users and/or their analysts/IT developers). Sometimes, it is necessary a revolution, like that we are focusing , so that new blood come in and brake corporation's paradigms .. resulting in a really new system/application. My point have already been stated earlier in this list by someone: Couldn't the solution, the new application, be developed in MF with new technics/tools/facilities with some new blood ? Was the grid solution more a strategic solution to solve internal problems ? I bet it so. In their future will araise new problems, without answers, without tips, without ROT's, without any white-head pro to talk to. Well, in case of virus, they always can boot in safe mode and run NAV or AVG or SCAN/CLEAN on each of their 1/n host/server component (they will certainly have a script to ease operators life). Sorry for joking, I couldn't resist. PS: When my car air-cond fails, I stop the car, turn engine off, turn it back on, and so the air-cond is back online. If my car electronics were MF , the error would not occur twice ( I would have apllied a PTF ). Wish you all a nice weekend, for I am on vacations, leaving to a distant nice beach, with my wife and no kids (and no PC and no MF). Hasta a la vista. João Carlos R. Baptista Rio de Janeiro - Brazil Charles Mills escreveu: Without knowing what your day-to-day role is, it's hard to say. First, simply by not being in denial. Mainframes are not better because the people who use them are older, the boxes are bigger, they were around in 1979, and all of your professional peers work on them. Mainframes are not better because we all know they're better, and that's that, and anyone who disagrees with me is obviously one of "them." Second, many of the participants on this list, myself included, work for (directly or indirectly) IBM or a software vendor. We have a direct or potential influence on speed, cost, ease-of-use, reliability, and security. If you work for an end-user company, then you have some influence on, for example, the ease-of-use of your systems. I often hear on this list a defense of obscurity: "why would you want to change how JCL works -- it was good enough in 1968, it's good enough now." That is not a productive attitude. Face it, the mainframe is in many ways user-hostile. We are the people who invented the cult of the unapproachable IT guru: "authorized personnel only." Changing those attitudes would be a good step. And some things cannot be changed. Better to work to advocate intelligently for the use of mainframes for the tasks they are good at, than to operate in denial of the fact that it's not the best choice for every computing task, or every company. 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
