RE: ROCHESTER PUSHES BACK 2000 ANNOUNCE DATE

First, I agree with everything below except the bit about cultural
relativism (even though I know it was probably a rhetorical flourish.)  
*************  Rant On
************************************************************************
**
The difference between computers and cultures is that you can really
quantify computer performance.  People can argue about details of
computer benchmarks, but they always measure something that can be
counted and compared in a meaningful way.  They may be rigged to favor
one type of hardware or software over another, but that's a different
story.  I don't think there are any culture benchmarks  that have
reached that degree of sophistication.  Barbarism _is_ in the eye of the
beholder.
*********************  End of Rant--I feel much
better*******************************************

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Mangham [mailto:randym69@pacbell.net]
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 1999 10:36 AM
> To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: ROCHESTER PUSHES BACK 2000 ANNOUNCE DATE
> 
> 
> Well, here's another spin:
> 
> Since Microsoft is doing the grand Win 2000 rollout bash in 
> Feburary, do you
> suppose ANYTHING Rochester announced near the same date would 
> get any attention
> anyway given the LOW key approach by IBM to AS/400 
> announcements in the past?
> I.e. NO big push in the media when 64-bit hardware/OS came 
> out. NO big push when
> Gartner Group said AS/400 had the highest single system 
> availability in the
> industry. NO big push when it now appears AS/400 is the 
> fastest, most stable Java
> server on the planet (if you believe IBM's benchmarks anyway).
> 
> What we seem to have at IBM is the IT equivalent of cultural 
> relativism. In other
> words, every machine/OS combination is equal in capability 
> when we know quite
> clearly they are not. Of course, our Global Services 
> subsidiary will be happy to
> hook you into a contract to keep your Unix or Win NT 
> "solution" stable and
> running into perpetuity while your AS/400 will most likely 
> not generate much
> follow on revenue for us. (This is NOT to say that Unix or 
> Win NT is the wrong
> answer in many cases, only to say that AS/400 rarely seems to 
> be the winning
> solution when IBM wants to lock in years of predictable 
> services revenue even if
> the profit margin is lower than hardware/software sales. I 
> guess that's the way
> Lou will keep his stock options worth something in the future.)
> 
> Pardon the bitterness, please. I just get very peeved when a 
> company with some of
> the best technology in the world isn't trumpeting it to 
> anyone who'll even
> pretend to listen. (Unlike a certain company that will 
> ceaselessly promote
> generally inferior technology as if it's the latest thing in 
> computer science
> even if the "solution" was one IBM already invented twenty years ago.)
> 
> Randy Mangham
> Pacific Crest Consulting
> 
> 
> 
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to 
> MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: 
> david@midrange.com
> +---
> 
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---