RE: V5R2 Quality - Notes from the field needed

Walden,

I think that reputations are earned and that they do matter.  The type of
information your client is requesting could be considered a preamble to
considering a platform change.

Certainly, telling someone that their direct experiences were a fluke on
an otherwise very reliable platform puts one in the bad company of sleazy
marketers.  This list can serve as a fairly reliable barometer of the
relative stability of various releases of OS/400.  I don't think I've
noticed an increase in the amount of quality-related complaints on V5R2
relative to other releases.

That's the question isn't it?  Have IBM's change control and testing
procedures deteriorated in some way so that a release upgrade is no
longer as reliable as it once was?

Windows really has nothing to do with the question, although it is hard
to begrudge folks their favorite recreational activity of bashing the
product.

We've had reports of many many upgrades since the V5R2 and your client's
results are not typical.  They aren't unique, but they're not typical.
While you may need to follow up with some statements by IBM, I'm
comfortable observing that quality has not gone down.

What is your opinion?  Do you see an agenda beyond the request for
information?

Regards,
Andy Nolen-Parkhouse

> On Behalf Of Walden H. Leverich III
> Subject: V5R2 Quality - Notes from the field needed
> 
> We've had a client request information about IRB's QA/QC process for
> OS/400.
> After a move to V5R2 they have experienced several problems ranging
> from
> decreased performance to a casters-up crash (SQL engine bug w/PTF, but
> not
> on CUME pack). We have a call into their advocate for some info, and we
> of
> course know some too, but any info from the field would be of great
> help.
> 
> -Walden
> 
> PS. We could always start with, hey, at least it's not V3! <G>
> 
> ------------
> Walden H Leverich III