RE: IBM Marketing (was How does ....)

Leif,

> Joe and Jon, there is a problem here. If EVERYONE went with Joe's
> solution, CFINT would not be the cashcow that provides the profit IBM
> needs, so:
>*once green screens are gone, IBM's profit is gone*.
>
> Can this really be what IBM wants? I don't think so.
> Therefore I surmise that the CFINT rip-off is NOT vital to IBM
> although it is nice to have.

I tend to agree with this argument. IBM are trying to burn the candle at
both ends, endorsing the moves to the fabled client/server,
'revitalisation', or whatever fancy name helps sell products for customer
software, and not taking the lead themselves with OS/400; while at the same
time knowing full well that because they (IBM) haven't got any plans
whatsoever to drop/replace 5250 access, charge customers through the nose
for using 5250.

Can you imagine the uproar if, say Microsoft, started saying: You have a
Pentium III, that's faster than a II, so we're only going to let you run 4
concurrent applications, but if you pay an extra premium for them, we'll let
you run a few more, and if you empty your pockets even more you can run as
many as you want...

--phil

[ Deleted uuencoded file 'winmail.dat' ]