Re: MIDRANGE-L Digest, Vol 2, Issue 479

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Whether or not using new technologies is more cost effective to you is 
often based on what you wanted, (or your comfort zone) in the first place.

If you want to use the new features, then it is more cost effective, 
stable, etc.
If you don't want to use the new features, then the old methods are more 
cost effective, stable, etc.

Much as IBM is touting this new white paper out about how great the TCO of 
Linux is.  Pretty amazing that they based against some of their 
competitors but left out 400's and 390's.

Rob Berendt
-- 
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary 
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." 
Benjamin Franklin 




Jan Megannon <jmegannon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
04/02/2003 06:09 PM
Please respond to Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
 
        To:     Midrange Systems Technical Discussion 
<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
        cc: 
        Fax to: 
        Subject:        Re: MIDRANGE-L Digest, Vol 2, Issue 479


E Doc wrote:

>You are the exception, Buck.  I would say 90-95% of the people I meet in
>various AS/400 shops are scared of:
>
>C
>C++
>Java
>UNIX
>Linux
>Perl
>Python
>ILE
>Monsters under the bed
>
>-Doc
>
>__________________________________________________
> 
>
Doc,

In some ways I agree with you and in others not. Many of those who are 
in favour of the various combinations of 
languages/platforms/environments may be  developers/tech-heads. Not to 
say that all of them are that way inclined!

Many of the customers I interact with are concerned about things such as:
Once these technologies are implemented, how easy is it to 
employ/contract a skill to support it?
Considering the speed of change in technology, will I in 12 to 24 months 
be able to get a skill that can support the mutation of languages in 
which the solution was developed?

 From a developer's perspective it is great to be able to provide 
solutions as the customers want it, with the employer providing us the 
opportunity to  employ or prove our skills within the various languages. 
These employers are getting tired of paying for our toys. They want 
solutions that provide:
functionality,
simplicity
ease of use
maintainability
allow them to provide all of the above by employing a maximum of two 
people during the life-cycle of the app (in the case of small shops with 
in-house developers!)

It can be said these companies often stay behind in terms of the 
advancement of technology, but that is a relative statement.To use an 
example (albeit a lousy one!), how many users that you know use the 
enhanced functionality within EXCEL in Office 2000 over that in Office 
95? Does this equate to 10% Probably not. The only thing that faster 
systems has provided some customers is that they can now mess up at 
70CPW instead of at 25 CPW!!!! Until such a time as we start providing 
them with what they want, when they want it at the cost they want it 
(which is always for free :-)  ), they will be more and more loathe to 
throw funds our way. The perception within many companies (locally, as I 
cannot vouch for you guys) is that I.T. is a Cost Centre and not a 
Profit Centre.  Once we can start providing them with solutions and not 
just solutions with constant upgrades in terms of techonology (h/w and 
s/w), they may start adopting a more positive attitude towards us!

Hey, I may be wrong> What are the opinions out there?

Jan.

_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing 
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.