Rex's point that PHB's would do an ROI first is absolutely the correct thing to do before jumping into a major conversion ... the fact is they don't always ... and it doesn't matter what platform.
Keep in mind this was another large software/hardware migration ... just not Universe. A few years ago I worked as a senior programmer/analyst for a large manufacturing company where we needed to do a major upgrade OR migrate to something different. We did do a software search & had 3 different vendors in the running, including just upgrading to a later version of the current vendor's product. The decision was made to migrate to another vendor ... almost solely based on the visual 'desktop/applicaton appearance' ... being a newer Windows gui type look. Those of us in IT tried to give them an ROI, but no one listened. Upgrading the current software with both green screen and gui applications that would have given them virtualy the same look & Windows feel and would have cost $250k, and the conversion time would have been a couple months at the most. Instead they opted for a different product. The conversion took 9mos involving or whole IT staff, every other project put on hold, and vendor consultants working hand in hand with us ... a huge effort, but we made it work successfully. The bottom line was a price tag of 2.5mil, which prompted an independent outside audit of the project. The audit revealed that IT managers, programmers, & consultants were viewed as doing exactly what we were supposed to & we hit the deadline timeframe. The criticism from the audit pointed directly at the most top level management CEO, CFO, & COO, making a bad decision by NOT listening to their IT people at all during the review and decision process ... and by the way, they still got their bonuses !! Bob Utech, Senior I.T. Coordinator Information Technology Department (218) 879-3321 ext. 2254 Visit RAM on the Web at www.rammutual.com This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager and delete this email from your system. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this email. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Warning: Although the company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments -----Original Message----- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rex Gozar Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 9:21 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UV to SAP migration disaster I guess the basic premise of your argument is that the PHB's are listening to 90-day-wonder windows programmers, and they encouraged said PHB's that they needed to replace the UV database. I don't buy it. Even PHB's don't go spending millions of dollars on SAP just because their 25 year old windows programmers don't think UV is productive. In the case of Shane Co. the PHB's decided to spend millions of dollars -- and no one bothered to do an ROI study? Or it was fabricated by a bunch of idiots without any concept of reality? At some point, Shane Co. must have been doing good. They were expanding. It seems a short time ago I heard they opened a new store here in Orlando, FL. (Or maybe they weren't doing that good after all and the expansion was a feeble attempt at opening new markets to generate revenue.) During this expansion, one of the PHB's must have said "we AREN'T getting what we need from IT; let's look into other solutions". Or maybe they said, "we CAN'T get what we need". (The former speaking to an unwillingness to address needs; the latter, lacking capability to do so.) And this brings me back to my original question: what was Shane Co.'s REAL reason for deciding to migrate away from UV? If Universe is supposed to be a superior environment for building and deploying business solutions, why couldn't their existing IT staff deliver? Why? It's too easy to characterize management decisions like this as "frivolous" or "political". But it's irresponsible to ignore the true business reasons behind these decisions, dooming ourselves to repeat history's mistakes. rex JPB-U2UG wrote: > I can't speak for everyone but if it's anything like at our place, > it's due to lack of education. UniVerse is contains all of our > business logic and Microsoft is used for our presentation layer, > desktop and web. We have 3 programmers working on UniVerse with an > average age of 55. In our windows area we have 10 programmers with an > average age of 25. Most of the people coming out of the colleges and > universities only know one platform Microsoft. They are taught nothing... ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/