Re: Flex-ES Help
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
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 INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Flex-ES Help
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
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
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
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
-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? snip 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. shrug. 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?
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
Re: IBM vs Flex-Es - Why? + ibm-main anamoly
Charles Mills wrote: 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. This seems to be the case with IBM education; they used to hire out a variety of instructors as sub-contractors (including yours truly from time to time). Now they have narrowed the contractors they deal with to a dozen; if you're a small guy you have to have an affiliation with one of the dozen; and these guys pay peanuts and keep the markup. --- BTW, has anyone else noticed IBM-main posts coming across with lots of trailing newlines? At first I thought it might be the trial version of CA Security Center I'm working with, but it seems to only be IBM-Main (e.g.: see the end of this post) [well, i tried to show it but got rejected for too much quoted material - most of which was all the newlines] --- Kind regards, 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. -- -Steve Comstock The Trainer's Friend, Inc. 303-393-8716 http://www.trainersfriend.com -- to be included in our opt-in list of announcements of -- new courses and other products and services from The -- Trainer's Friend, send an email to [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? + ibm-main anamoly
At 08:53 PM 3/26/2007, Steve Comstock wrote: This seems to be the case with IBM education; they used to hire out a variety of instructors as sub-contractors (including yours truly from time to time). Now they have narrowed the contractors they deal with to a dozen; if you're a small guy you have to have an affiliation with one of the dozen; and these guys pay peanuts and keep the markup. This happened a few years ago with a contract programming deal I was considering in Poughkeepsie. With the middleman in there, the best I would wind up with was about 2/3rds my usual rate. Although it would have been a neat project to work on, I had to say, Thanks, but no thanks. --- BTW, has anyone else noticed IBM-main posts coming across with lots of trailing newlines? At first I thought it might be the trial version of CA Security Center I'm working with, but it seems to only be IBM-Main (e.g.: see the end of this post) Nothing here. Maybe it's the input side on your end. == Art Celestini Celestini Development Services Phone: 201-670-1674Wyckoff, NJ = http://celestini.com = Mail sent to the From address used in this post will be rejected by our server. Please send off- list email to: ibmmainat-signcelestinidotcom. == -- 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?
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
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: FLEX-ES PWD
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
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: Software Pricing (Was: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community)
In a message dated 10/17/2006 10:09:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I understand it, if A is 37% cheaper than B, then it costs 63% (100-37) what B costs. I quite clearly stated that I meant a factor of 37 and _NOT_ 37%. I made the distinction so as to avoid this kind of inanity, but it seems someone will always be dumb enough to step forward. Your original post, on 12 OCT 2006, said I've seen an IBM internal analysis of a Websphere Application Server implementation that was 37x cheaper on Intel than on zSeries. That's 37 _TIMES_ - not 37%! You made it abundantly clear that you meant a factor of 37 and not 37%. But you sowed confusion by adding the word cheaper. Your post was followed on 13 OCT 2006 by Matt Simpson's post in which he said Statements like this always confuse me. How can something be 37 times (or 3700%) smaller or cheaper than something else? I posted an explanation, shortly after Simpson's describing his confusion over your choice of words, on the basic mathematics and the wording one must use to communicate a percent change in order not to confuse readers who are well versed in basic mathematics, as are Simpson and I. Simpson was not confusing 37 times with 37%, as you apparently thought. He was questioning how a price can be reduced by more than 100%. Basic math states that the percent change in moving from X to Y is 100*(Y-X)/X, unless X=0. E.g., moving from 10 to 20 is a 100% increase of the beginning value of 10, from 10 to 0 is a 100% decrease, and moving from 10 to -40 is a 500% decrease of the original value. This works fine in abstract math but not always in the real world. I'm quite stunned at the apparent ignorance of basic mathematics shown in the responses. Simpson and I are both stunned whenever anyone unthinkingly throws in words like cheaper or less with a % value greater than 100, indicating the writer has succumbed to the inane, endemic mind-rot sown by advertisers, media hypers, and politicians who, in trying to gain the attention of the reader, claim that something has been reduced in price by more than 100%. These hype-mongers are the ones who are dumb enough not to understand basic mathematics. Simpson's use of 37% was a hypothetical attempt to understand your confusing use of the word cheaper, not an attempt to claim that 37 times is the same as 37%. In your latest post you have cleared up the confusion by saying I HAVE IN MY POSSESSION AN IBM INTERNAL STUDY SHOWING THAT THE COST OF PROCESSING ONE CUSTOMER-SPECIFIC SAMPLE WEBSPHERE APPLICATION SERVER TRANSACTION ON XSERIES IS 1/37TH THE COST OF PROCESSING THE SAME TRANSACTION ON ZSERIES. Thank you for rewording your original statement into a non-confusing and mathematically precise wording to express the basic math involved, which neither Simpson nor I misunderstand. 1/37th the cost is not the same as being 37x cheaper. Engineers, architects, and even corporate accountants are careful to resist dumb and inane wordings when describing percent changes. Bill Fairchild, B.S. Applied Mathematics, 1967 -- 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
Software Pricing (Was: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community)
Bollocks. I've seen an IBM internal analysis of a Websphere Application Server implementation that was 37x cheaper on Intel than on zSeries. That's 37 _TIMES_ - not 37%! -- 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
Software Pricing (Was: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community)
Sorry, I disagree. Mainframe software pricing has been falling, quite precipitously in many cases, over several years. There are a variety of ways that's been true, and a variety of reasons, but it's fact. And the market trends show no sign of abating (personal view), so I expect further decreases. In contrast, non-mainframe software pricing has been soaring. Mainframe software pricing is *not* linear (at least in IBM's case -- can't speak for other vendors). Don't know how that rumor got started. If you look at the Value Unit Exhibits in IBM software announcements it's quite obvious pricing is not linear. Pricing is quite substantially sublinear: each incremental unit has a progressively lower price. The fact much IBM mainframe software is available in smaller quantities (at smaller prices) than non-mainframe software -- WebSphere Message Broker cited as an example -- is indeed a very big deal. Why wouldn't it be? Yes, 3 MSUs of WebSphere Message Broker is productively useful in real customer situations. I try to avoid unreal hypotheticals -- I'm citing an example from recent experience. There are other examples, like WebSphere Process Server and WebSphere Commerce Server to pick two more. (WCS is available on Linux on z.) Re: the situation of smaller z/OS developers: To convince somebody at IBM (way above me) there's a problem (and how to fix it), here's how I'd go about making the argument: 1. Explain why smaller z/OS developers are important. That ought to be fairly easy. 2. Explain what changed for the worse and how much worse (or what didn't change but needs to change, and how). I'm a little puzzled because, over a decent time span anyway, I don't recall z/OS development resources ever being cheap. (When was this mythical those were the days! everyone is talking about? Wasn't it a lot more expensive to write and support code for MVS in, say, 1986?) Is today's price a record low, or is it getting worse? That's an important question, and I honestly don't know the answer. 3. Explain the business impact. A $1,000/month expense for a software company making $1,000,000 per year in profit isn't a bad situation, for example. But reverse those numbers and it's a huge problem. What is the real world impact to individuals, partners, and customers? What would happen (good and bad) if IBM were to make the change? Apologies if all that is obvious, but hopefully it's still useful. - - - - - 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
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 16:42:40 +0100, Phil Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED] RESEARCH.FREESERVE.CO.UK wrote: And what about always posting about how cheap the hardware is getting? If the hardware (processor) were free it would make little difference. Snip! 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. I agree completely. IMHO the only thing that IBM can do to stop the flight from the mainframe is to make drastic price cuts for the software. An immediate reduction of 50% coupled with an announcement that there would be annual reductions of 25% might help stop the hemmorrhage, but it's not enough to attract new customers. AFAIK, they don't even publish the software prices any more. IIRC, a previous employer was paying around $20,000 per month for IBM software on a 15 MSU 9672-R24. So what would the software cost on a 1500 MSU box? A million dollars a month? They have completely abandoned the mainframe, and software costs were a big part of the reason. The inflation in software costs caused by cheaper and faster hardware has led all kinds of companies to find every possible alternative to running on the mainframe. 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
On 5 Oct 2006 22:31:19 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: - 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 snip 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. I think the problem is that the IBM mainframe division has never really liked dealing with small, maybe because a lot of the support costs are the same regardless of size of shop. I suspect they really don't know how to handle small in many cases and there are IBM sales organizations that would much rather deal with i or p series. 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: Software Pricing (Was: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community)
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 17:40:05 +0900, Timothy Sipples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, I disagree. You disagree with what? You didn't quote anything. Mainframe software pricing has been falling, quite precipitously in many cases, over several years. That's a powerful assertion. Back it up with data. Specifically about MVS and related software. The 10% or so adjustment in MSU ratings for the new generations is a tiny drop. There are a variety of ways that's been true, and a variety of reasons, but it's fact. And the market trends show no sign of abating (personal view), so I expect further decreases. Not enough to make a significant difference, IMHO. In contrast, non-mainframe software pricing has been soaring. Really? How about some data? The mainframe is the only place that I know where the software pricing is tied to the compute power of the processor Mainframe software pricing is *not* linear (at least in IBM's case -- can't speak for other vendors). Don't know how that rumor got started. The phrase I used was nearly linear and I stand by it, but I admit that it is from memory. I have no data available to me. It would seem you do, but you do us no service to make these claims without presenting data to support them. If you look at the Value Unit Exhibits in IBM software announcements it's quite obvious pricing is not linear. Pricing is quite substantially sublinear: each incremental unit has a progressively lower price. There is no such section in the z/OS 1.8 announcement. IBM stopped publishing the price for software in announcements many years ago. Is there a web site where MVS (and related) software pricing is documented? I searched and couldn't find it. I used to use it frequently. The fact much IBM mainframe software is available in smaller quantities (at smaller prices) than non-mainframe software -- WebSphere Message Broker cited as an example -- is indeed a very big deal. Is it a fact? Can you give any numbers to support that assertion? 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, Not even close to a million dollars a month. Of course, your mileage and product mix may vary, but it is less than half of that. Across the last two machine-type upgrades (z900s to z990s to z9s), a doubling of installed MSUs, and version upgrades to all major software, etc., there has been very little increase in my software bill (less than 8%). Granted, I pay less, as a percentage of installed MSUs, for software than a much smaller shop. So shoot me. But IBM could have done nothing over the last four years and my bill would be closer to your original estimate. I, for one, appreciated the two technology benefit price discounts. I do agree, however, that there needs to be something done at the low end to keep and attract new customers. Just don't throw the baby out with the bath water. As for TCO on other platforms, gimme a break. I've seen enough not to be fooled again. Bob Richards -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 8:16 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 16:42:40 +0100, Phil Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED] RESEARCH.FREESERVE.CO.UK wrote: And what about always posting about how cheap the hardware is getting? If the hardware (processor) were free it would make little difference. Snip! 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. I agree completely. IMHO the only thing that IBM can do to stop the flight from the mainframe is to make drastic price cuts for the software. An immediate reduction of 50% coupled with an announcement that there would be annual reductions of 25% might help stop the hemmorrhage, but it's not enough to attract new customers. AFAIK, they don't even publish the software prices any more. IIRC, a previous employer was paying around $20,000 per month for IBM software on a 15 MSU 9672-R24. So what would the software cost on a 1500 MSU box? A million dollars a month? They have completely abandoned the mainframe, and software costs were a big part of the reason. The inflation in software costs caused by cheaper and faster hardware has led all kinds of companies to find every possible alternative to running on the mainframe. LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Seeing Beyond Money is a service mark of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- 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
In a message dated 10/9/2006 7:48:20 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think the problem is that the IBM mainframe division has never really liked dealing with small, maybe because a lot of the support costs are the same regardless of size of shop. I suspect they really don't know how to handle small in many cases and there are IBM sales organizations that would much rather deal with i or p series. Anecdotal evidence: In 1996 I ordered a P/390 from IBM. I was told that since my one-man business did not have an established track record with IBM's accounts receivable department, I would have to pay the full amount before they would ship the system to me. I called the salesman and left a msg on his tape recorder - where do I mail the check and what is the exact amount? After about a week with no reply from him I called his tape recorder and left another message, screaming things like Your company is still way too large. A lot more of you need to be downsized, perhaps starting with you. Where in the hell do I send this check? I finally talked with someone on the bottom of the food chain in the shipping department who told me Send the check to the return address on the shipping label inside the box we ship it in. We're shipping it now. No worries. Too large. Wrong focus. Small customers be damned. I never received a call back from the sales jerk. When it arrived I had the JES2 WAITING FOR WORK message in 30 minutes after I started unpacking it. And I was following the instructions very slowly and deliberately. An excellent product. A ***[expletive deleted]*** sales force. Bill Fairchild -- 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
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 09:05:33 -0400, Richards.Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom, Not even close to a million dollars a month. Of course, your mileage and product mix may vary, but it is less than half of that. Across the last two machine-type upgrades (z900s to z990s to z9s), a doubling of installed MSUs, and version upgrades to all major software, etc., there has been very little increase in my software bill (less than 8%). Thanks, Bob. I'll guess that Less than half of that means more than a third of a million dollars a month. Still a big nut. As I mentioned, I couldn't find current pricing information. Maybe I ahould have kept my big mouth shut. Still, I wonder: Is the growth in the mainframe at your shop on par with the growth in other platforms? If not, I would consider that to be a net loss for the mainframe. It's not something that I like to see. As for TCO on other platforms, gimme a break. I've seen enough not to be fooled again. I agree. I don't think I said that other platforms have lower TCO. I did find it interesting though, when I read the last TCO report that IBM had posted on their web site a couple of years ago thet the total cost of the PC network that everyone uses to connect to the mainframe was not included. 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: Software Pricing (Was: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community)
Tim, let me give this a shot. 1. 1. Explain why smaller z/OS developers are important. That ought to be fairly easy. Fairly easy for me to explain to a friendly audience. Very difficult to explain to an endless chain of executives who don't see how small software developers affect their bonus and or objectives. 2. Explain what changed for the worse and how much worse (or what didn't change but needs to change, and how). I'm a little puzzled because, over a decent time span anyway, I don't recall z/OS development resources ever being cheap. (When was this mythical those were the days! everyone is talking about? Wasn't it a lot more expensive to write and support code for MVS in, say, 1986?) Is today's price a record low, or is it getting worse? That's an important question, and I honestly don't know the answer. No longer really being on the business side of MVS software development, I'm not sure -- but yes, the P/390 announcement was the golden day of small-company MVS development. Where this thread started is that it looks like its more complex, more expensive successor is going away. That is a turn for the worse, for the way worse. 3. Explain the business impact. A $1,000/month expense for a software company making $1,000,000 per year in profit isn't a bad situation, for ... Woo-hoo! It must be nice having that perspective on what a small software company is! My company had the #3 product in its mainframe category and the most profit we EVER made in a year was about $250K. Not real useful to talk about company size in terms of profit because profit is affected by so many factors. Better to talk about company size in terms of revenue. A $1MM profit would probably be a company with around $10MM in sales. $10MM in revenue would make you about the 400th largest SW company in the world. (Source: Software Magazine 2005 The Software 500) I'll bet the Dave Salt's of mainframe development would kill for that kind of revenue. No, we're talking about the one-to-three man shops, where the real creative stuff comes from. A prosperous three-man shop might have revenues of $400K-600K; a struggling startup might have revenues that were much, much less, and so yes, $1000/month is a BIG deal. And the point of the thread is, I believe, that if FLEX goes away, the cost will be much, much more than $1000/month. Does this help? Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 1:40 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Software Pricing (Was: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community) Sorry, I disagree. -- 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, Growth on other platforms? Suffice it to say, the mainframe is the model citizen on this discussion. IBM's print ads have made fun of servers taking over the datacenter and they suggest their blade centers. In my case, THE BLADE racks have taken over. The power company must love us! no grin here You did not mention TCO on other platforms. You mentioned migration to them. I took the liberty of pointing out the fallacy that most companies fall into when they do that...that their TCO will be lower. That is a bunch of bull. As for network costs, I am not qualified to really comment. But being a bank with lots of branches, I presume those costs would be there regardless. Bob Richards -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 9:24 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 09:05:33 -0400, Richards.Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom, Not even close to a million dollars a month. Of course, your mileage and product mix may vary, but it is less than half of that. Across the last two machine-type upgrades (z900s to z990s to z9s), a doubling of installed MSUs, and version upgrades to all major software, etc., there has been very little increase in my software bill (less than 8%). Thanks, Bob. I'll guess that Less than half of that means more than a third of a million dollars a month. Still a big nut. As I mentioned, I couldn't find current pricing information. Maybe I ahould have kept my big mouth shut. Still, I wonder: Is the growth in the mainframe at your shop on par with the growth in other platforms? If not, I would consider that to be a net loss for the mainframe. It's not something that I like to see. As for TCO on other platforms, gimme a break. I've seen enough not to be fooled again. I agree. I don't think I said that other platforms have lower TCO. I did find it interesting though, when I read the last TCO report that IBM had posted on their web site a couple of years ago thet the total cost of the PC network that everyone uses to connect to the mainframe was not included. LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Seeing Beyond Money is a service mark of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- 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: Software Pricing (Was: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community)
On Mon, 2006-10-09 at 06:24 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: Tim, let me give this a shot. Touché Charles - good post. 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: A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
As as predicted last year, the entry point for current hardware is now the 2066-0A1 at 80 MIPS Your own charts show a z9-BC R07 A01 is rated at approximately 26 MIPS. 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: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 10/05/2006 at 07:29 PM, Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: 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.) I'm confident that any non-NDA licensee for 64 bit z/OS on FLEX-ES is under an NDA and therefor can't tell us about it. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html 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: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 10/06/2006 at 04:22 PM, Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Since it's an acronym, not a word, we get to make up whatever rules we want for pluralization. Pluralization isn't the issue; obfuscation is. If you want to refer to, e.g., MIPSs, MIPSes, MIPSen, that might look silly but at least it would be clear. Droping the S that stands for seconds just confuses people. OBVIOUSLY, MIPS is singluar, But MIP is just peculiar. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html 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: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
I ignored almost all of these posts about a letter to the FLEX-ES Community since I had never heard of FLEX-ES before. But after seeing 50 new ones added yesterday, I decided to read one. Sure enough - more pedantic off-topic nonsense. Where is the thread killer when we need it most? Bill Fairchild -- 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
Bill, There were several posts that strayed off of the topic, but if you read at least the first post on this topic, I think you'll find this very on topic. Flex-ES is a PC that is fitted with special software so it can run the MVS operating system. It is also fully licensed by IBM, which unfortuneatly Hercules is not. It allows developers to run z/OS at a cost that they can afford. There are also many smaller companies who can get a whole system for a price they can afford, since I believe from previous discussion that the smallest z box starts around $100K. This topic gripes me in that I am currently unemployed. If IBM is going to kill off a platform that small developers use, eventually the only companies besides IBM to get software for the mainframe will be a few like CA and Compuware, who can afford big boxes. It just seems very short sited of IBM to not renew licensing for the Flex-ES box. Eric Bielefeld Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer Milwaukee Wisconsin 414-475-7434 I ignored almost all of these posts about a letter to the FLEX-ES Community since I had never heard of FLEX-ES before. But after seeing 50 new ones added yesterday, I decided to read one. Sure enough - more pedantic off-topic nonsense. Where is the thread killer when we need it most? Bill Fairchild -- 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
Abuse of A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
Hi, In support of Bill Fairchild's indictment of the thread entitled A Letter to the FLEX-ES Community all I can say, as somebody with a vested interest in both FLEXES and the ADCD program, is that the pedantic diatribe of spelling and abbreviation corrections somewhat diluted the worthiness of the thread for me. The continued use of the subject initial line implied that the posting might conceivably relate to the topic in question, a belief that was in retrospect somewhat naive on my part. Perhaps this is the worst kind of SPAM as it purports or imples usefulness, but generally adds little value. Kind regards - Terry Terry Sambrooks Director KMS-IT Limited 228 Abbeydale Road South Dore Sheffield S17 3LA UK Tel: +44 (0)114 262 0933 WEB: www.legac-e.co.uk Reg: England Wales 3767263 at the above address All outgoing E-mails are scanned but it remains the recipients responsibility to ensure that their system is protected from viruses, trojans, worms, and spy-ware. -- 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: Abuse of A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
I agree with you 100% Crispin Hugo Systems Programmer, Macro 4 http://www.macro4.com/ Macro 4 plc, The Orangery, Turners Hill Road, Worth, Crawley, RH10 4SS This email has been scanned for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security Service and the Macro 4 plc internal virus protection system. -- 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: Abuse of A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
I rarely delete entire threads as there's generally something of interest amongst all the inevitable chaff. This one is of interest to a lot of us - even though I personally don't have one, and don't have any customers with Flex. Only time I see them is the IBM techos I bump into. People have commented in the past that changing the subject messes with the threading readers. If the tangent(s) had been hived off it would have made deleting the whole lot easier. Whatever, I find the Del key works o.k. 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: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
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
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
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
FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
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
Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
-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
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
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 18:08:32 -0500, Eric N. Bielefeld eric- [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
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
FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
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
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 -- 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
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
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
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
-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
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
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
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
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 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
Gaudere's Law (aka Merphy's Law) strikes again. Or maybe agin. Jon snip When you correct someone else's spelling, mistakes make you look really foolish. I surmise you meant you're going ? /snip -- 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
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
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
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
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
-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 snip When you correct someone else's spelling, mistakes make you look really foolish. I surmise you meant you're going ? /snip 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
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
-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 GRIN. -- 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
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
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
Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community
Well you can't blame IBM for your increased usage! Some times I can: 1. DB2 V1.2. 2. Any release of TCP/IP for MVS prior to OS/390 V2.5 3. Event Publisher As the unit cost declines, previously unaffordable projects suddenly become affordable. In your dreams! I have always believed IBM should stay away from TCO arguments. They usually stick foot A into mouth B. 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
Not just z/OS, but z/VSE and z/VM as well! (z/TPF? Sure.) And I'd love to get a copy of BS2000/OSD and VM2000 to try to run under Hercules. I have wondered in the past if Fujitsu and/or Hitachi would be willing to allow their versions of the operating systems out on a hobbyist license. I know there are beaucoup legal restrictions resulting out of the 1980's lawsuits, but now that those 31-bit operating systems are obsolete (note judicious use of quotes) in the true IBM iron world I wonder if things could be relaxed. I've still got my Great Software Idea T, but right now because of time and other reasons I'm working on prototyping using M$ Visual C++ Express (still free until November, folks!), even though I can see it running on all platforms, not just Intel/AMD and z/Architecture. (Anyone got a Bull with GCOS 8 lying around :-) ? ) Later, Ray -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R.S. Sent: Friday October 06 2006 02:21 To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community 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. -- 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
OBVIOUSLY, MIPS is singluar, even it it isn't a noun. It is an adjective. Is it an adjective in the sentence: The processor is/has 200 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, please keep Chuckie away from the keyboard! g -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Friday October 06 2006 13:51 To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community On Friday, 10/06/2006 at 08:37 GMT, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OBVIOUSLY, MIPS is singluar, even it it isn't a noun. It is an adjective. Is it an adjective in the sentence: The processor is/has 200 MIPS? [Sorry - I'm having too much fun to stop.] The processor has 200 million instructions per second. Hmmmvery existential While I can make that sentence mean something, it isn't what you intended. The processor *has* MIPS, but it *executes* 200 million instructions per second. But it would never execute 200 MIPS - that's just wrong on SO many levels. Not to mention violent. :-) I'll be glad when Saturday gets here. -- 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, please keep Chuckie away from the keyboard! g Put your hands on your head! And, STEP AWAY from this discussion! 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
I think *has* reflects the singular subject box. It shouldn't reflect the plural object 200 MIPS. From: Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW:A Letter To The FLEX-ES Community Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 16:22:02 -0400 regardless of how many MIPS the box has. Has? ...how many millions of instructions per second the box *has*? OBVIOUSLY, MIPS is singluar Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott _ Get today's hot entertainment gossip http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip -- 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
Friday or not... can 'ya all just get over it. This is an informal list, not a college english class. My point about MIPS/MSU (while I did digress, and for that I appologise), is that they are NOT good metrics! There aren't any good ones, anymore. LSPR is haphazard. Gartner is a joke! Phil admits that his MIPS charts are worth what you pay for. And, our management is paying software charges based on faulty figures. No other industry would accept that. 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
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 20:37:44 +, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OBVIOUSLY, MIPS is singluar, even it it isn't a noun. It is an adjective. Is it an adjective in the sentence: The processor is/has 200 MIPS? ... Sorry, but he (or somebody) invoked the Humpty Dumpty rule, and once a word has been dumptied standard rules no longer apply. He probably has some adjective use for MIPS (or MIP) in mind and even have a definition for it. Hmm. It's more Fridayish than usual today. Pat O'Keefe -- 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
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. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe
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. -- 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
- 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 snip 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: Problem with Ethernet adapter running large ftp or jdbc application on FLEX-ES box
case anyone has any bright ideas. Not a bright idea, but may be something you may want to check... Are _all_ NICs on your physical box connected to a network? We have had issues (I don't remember the messages...) when we left some NIC unconnected. Cheers, Jantje. -- 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: Problem with Ethernet adapter running large ftp or jdbc application on FLEX-ES box
Thanks all for the replies. I'm going to upgrade the version of FLEX-ES. Jim McAlpine On 5/18/06, Jan MOEYERSONS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: case anyone has any bright ideas. Not a bright idea, but may be something you may want to check... Are _all_ NICs on your physical box connected to a network? We have had issues (I don't remember the messages...) when we left some NIC unconnected. Cheers, Jantje. -- 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
Problem with Ethernet adapter running large ftp or jdbc application on FLEX-ES box
I sent the post below to the FLEX-ES list but I have copied it here just in case anyone has any bright ideas. When we run large ftp or jdbc app we get the following sequence on errors on our z/OS 1.4 system and the adapter invariable shuts down after recovering a few times - EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4314I INITIALIZATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1, LINK ETH1LINK IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4314I INITIALIZATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1, LINK ETH1LINK EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4314I INITIALIZATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1, LINK ETH1LINK IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4305I UNABLE TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4307I REASON: ERROR ENCOUNTERED AFTER REACTIVATION EZZ4315I DEACTIVATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1 We also have a z/OS 1.2 instance which displays similar symptoms but which invariably manages to go throuigh recovery enough times and not shut down the interface. I say this because the messages might indicate a hardware error but both instances have a different interface. This leads me to think that it is either a Flex-es problem or a configuration problem that I have got wrong with both instances of tcpip. I have checked all apars that describe problems with the error code 80100044 and none of them are applicable to our system except those where I have applied the ptfs. Anyone seen this before. I'm nearly at the hair pulling stage. 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
Re: Problem with Ethernet adapter running large ftp or jdbc application on FLEX-ES box
Don't know how close, but we had such an issue when we installed a new zbox and the gigabit cables did not match the NIC's. Something about the diameter of the fiber and types of light bulbs used. Some types (sizes?) of packets would flow just fine, some took many retries, some failed. Another issue I have read about is a mismatch in transmission unit sizes. Gigabit, for example, uses a 'burst' that greatly exceeds 1500 bytes (about 9k on z/osa's, about 4k on as/400). Since some network types cannot conceive of a network of anything but Windows PC's, they think 1500 is the maximum possible. Yet another issue is where a negotiated MTU fails due to a 'black hole' router. This is traceable to the 1500 maximum myth. HTH. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim McAlpine Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 11:39 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Problem with Ethernet adapter running large ftp or jdbc application on FLEX-ES box I sent the post below to the FLEX-ES list but I have copied it here just in case anyone has any bright ideas. When we run large ftp or jdbc app we get the following sequence on errors on our z/OS 1.4 system and the adapter invariable shuts down after recovering a few times - EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message, together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies. -- 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: Problem with Ethernet adapter running large ftp or jdbc application on FLEX-ES box
The CODE 102 on the IST1578I message indicates that it is a possible hardware problem and that the hardware vendor should be contacted. This is what is causing the EZZ4310I message. Jim McAlpine wrote: I sent the post below to the FLEX-ES list but I have copied it here just in case anyone has any bright ideas. When we run large ftp or jdbc app we get the following sequence on errors on our z/OS 1.4 system and the adapter invariable shuts down after recovering a few times - EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4314I INITIALIZATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1, LINK ETH1LINK IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4314I INITIALIZATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1, LINK ETH1LINK EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4314I INITIALIZATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1, LINK ETH1LINK IST1578I SOFT INOP DETECTED FOR IUTL0E20 BY ISTTCCTE CODE = 102 EZZ4310I ERROR: CODE=80100044 REPORTED ON DEVICE ETH1. DIAGNOSTIC CODE: 00 EZZ4309I ATTEMPTING TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4305I UNABLE TO RECOVER DEVICE ETH1 EZZ4307I REASON: ERROR ENCOUNTERED AFTER REACTIVATION EZZ4315I DEACTIVATION COMPLETE FOR DEVICE ETH1 We also have a z/OS 1.2 instance which displays similar symptoms but which invariably manages to go throuigh recovery enough times and not shut down the interface. I say this because the messages might indicate a hardware error but both instances have a different interface. This leads me to think that it is either a Flex-es problem or a configuration problem that I have got wrong with both instances of tcpip. I have checked all apars that describe problems with the error code 80100044 and none of them are applicable to our system except those where I have applied the ptfs. Anyone seen this before. I'm nearly at the hair pulling stage. 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
FLEX-ES
.. 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
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
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
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
Re: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)
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: 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 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
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: Disaster Recovery (was: FLEX-ES)
-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
