× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



On Thursday 08 November 2001 06:49 pm, jt wrote:
> I disagree with absolutely none of what Don wrote.  I don't really see any
> contradiction.  Don wrote a lot more than the quote below, but he
summarized
> his post well: "Justifying to people that they're paying PREMIUM pricing
for
> a machine that they'll not be able to use all that they're paying for is
> getting to be alot harder in the real world..."

Well, I do have a small issue with what Don said here. "Not be able to use
all that they're paying for..." isn't quite true. If the company buys a 100
CPW machine, that is what they get to use. If they pay for 1000CPW, that's
what they get.

If IBM shipped the hardware with a setting on a big switch on the outside
that said, "CPW" and IBM said, "Okay, we are going to ship you this box
under the agreement that you leave that switch at whatever setting you have
paid for." would there still be the question? You know when you buy a
machine how much CPW you've bought. It is not a case of IBM selling you a
box by saying, "here's a 500 CPW box" and shipping that box with a governor
that only lets it run at 100 CPW. The customer gets what he pays for.

If I hired a rail company to haul my goods from one side of the country to
the other, would it matter if my stuff sat alone on a train capable of
shipping 1000 times as much? Would I complain that I had paid to "ship my
goods" and they had the capability to ship 1000 times more but they weren't
letting me use it? No, I would get to use the capacity I paid for.

> The way to organize is through the iNation.  That way IBM can have input
> into HOW the market organizes.  IBM can, and should, have input about WHAT
> this organized market can do to help IBM.  IBM can, and should, help the
> iSeries Community through the vehicle of the iNation.  This can, and
would,
> change the situation described above.
>

I'm not sure what you want to organize iSeries customers to do. I've seen
some valid concerns here, like price negotiations or pressuring IBM about
what kinds of tools are needed. Do the users need a new organization to
present these issues to IBM?

iSeries Nation is a good vehicle for IBM to promote loyalty to iSeries
users. iSeries Nation membership needs to keep in mind that they can use
that vehicle to express their needs to IBM.

I'm not saying anything against it, these are just things I don't know. I
don't know if iSeries Nation is any better a vehicle for dealing with IBM
than any other user's group.

--
Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net

And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart...
...Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other
commandment greater than these. Mark 12:30-31


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.