RE: Offload from the AS/400 -- MIDRANGE-L



> ----------
> From:         Art Tostaine, Jr.[SMTP:atostain@crecomp.com]
> Sent:         Wednesday, November 05, 1997 7:24 AM
> To:   MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject:      Offload from the AS/400
> 
        <snip>
> During the next 5 years,  they have run their business with zero
> downtime due to
> hardware or software, and everything is going swell.
> 
> Recently, their computer transactions doubled due to a new customer.
> The revenue
> from this new customer did not double, but the amount of "data entry"
> did.
> 
> They leased new trucks, hired new drivers, new billing clerks, etc.
> 
> Guess what, the 400 is slow!
> 
> They also just hired an MIS exec (the only MIS staff they've had in 5
> years).  He
> has no AS/400 experience.
> 
> The problem is that the 400 is slow, and they need a solution.  The
> MIS exec has
> all but convinced my previously happy client that they need to
> "offload" some
> applications from the AS/400.  Get some things down to the PC's.
> 
> I said that if they wanted GUI, we could do that easier than writing
> our own
> front end, using seagull, BOS, etc.
> 
> MIS exec says, "I'm not real hot on GUI, I just want to save the
> AS/400 some CPU
> cycles"
> 
> Why?  Why take an application that works, but is slow, and rewrite it,
> re-test,
> etc., on a PC?
> 
> They do not want to spend money to upgrade the AS/400, but will
> rewrite
> applications on a PC!
> 
        <another snip>
> Cracking my nuckles preparing for a fight!
> --
> Art Tostaine, Jr.
> Creative Computer Associates, Inc.
> Parlin, NJ
> atostaine_at_crecomp_dot_com
> 
> 
        Art,
        It looks like you already have some data to back
        up staying with the 400.
        I'd suggest trying to find out all the areas they say
        it is slow, ie. Interactive too slow or daytime batch
        or overnight batch.
        If it is batch, then PC front-ends won't help near as
        much as a bigger 400.

        Your user community might be some help too.
        You don't want to alienate the exec, but maybe
        someone besides you remembers why the got
        a 400. If the exec is being honest about not being
        hot for GUIs, what does he think he'll get with
        PCs and C/S ? I'd bet a fair number of the users
        entering all those transaction would hate to leave
        their green screens.

        From a purely financial side, don't forget these
        potential costs of C/S (not all will apply but
        some may):
        New PCs for those users who don't have them,
        Upgrade to users PCs to handle heavy transaction app.,
        Upgrade to network to support heavier C/S traffic,
        Training for users to learn new app.,
        Additional staff to support new app.

        Another way to justify new 400 costs is to divide
        by the number of users. Compare how much your
        client spends now per year, per person on PCs
        versus the AS/400. Unless all the users are on
        terminals the PC cost much more. Going to C/S
        tends to make the per person PC costs go even
        higher.

        HTH & Good Luck
         -Steve Cotes
         -cotess@data-io.com
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com
|    and specify 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---