Re: Why NOT the 400?

I've got a client who decided to go the Oracle route 3.5 years ago. This 
is a construction company, mind you, that lives & dies by its job cost 
data. Nobody from Oracle really told them that Oracle Corporation does not 
offer a construction software package. They've spent all this time and 
money trying to jerry-rig the package to do what they need. After 3.5 
years, they've got payroll & human resources running well enough to print 
checks, W2's and some associated reports. They've also got part of G/L 
running. 

Every night, the Oracle folks FTP a file containing the employee file 
updates needed to run payroll over to the 400. That data is picked up by 
my program and places the info into the appropriate files. The timecards 
are still being entered on the 400, and once a week, that data is sent 
back to the Oracle box in order to process checks. Payroll is still run on 
the 400, with the exception of printing the checks. They're held on the 
output queue until the Oracle box manages to produce them (I'm no fool - 
twice they've had to send out the checks from the 400 in order to meet 
their union deadlines). The reason that the payroll is still being run in 
parallel on the 400 is that all the job cost info is there, and will be 
for the foreseeable future, until somebody from Oracle figures out how to 
produce a viable job cost system. 

I also know about a homebuilder who went with SAP and spent over $35 
million (last time I heard) getting it implemented.....But that's another 
story.

I think that David should suggest a thread for "dumb CFO/CEO/CIO" stories, 
compile them into some sort of book, and send it free of charge to all the 
MBA schools in the world. Maybe then we'd see some improvement in the 
situation. Malcolm Haines, are you listening?


Paul Nelson
Arbor Solutions, Inc.
708-670-6978  Cell
pnelson@xxxxxxxxxx




"Rick Rayburn" <the400man@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
07/27/2003 08:48 AM
Please respond to Midrange Systems Technical Discussion

 
        To:     midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: Why NOT the 400?


Thanks Scott.

I think many of us who have been trained in this industry (myself from the 

early days of the system38) are frustrated with how the 400's been 
addressed 
during the past few seasons.

And I know there are way too many characters out there, both 400 
professionals and CEO's of corporations involved with the 400, who are 
stone 
blind on why this wonderful box is the best solution to keep your data 
safe 
and accessible. You want a sexy front end? Go ahead. You want a sexy back 
end? You're gonna pay for your stupidity of selection.

Just heard from someone about a large corporation based in NY scrapping 
their 400 environment for an Oracle setup. Oracle. Loaded from head to 
foot 
with bugs. A friend of mine who works for IBM - NYC as a PM has told me 
often of his pleas with companies to retain the 400 as their warehouse 
management solution instead of the more sexy but unstable and cumbersome 
choices now being offered. He loses most arguments...and when they finally 

go into prodution, there are a myriad of bugs and bad performance issues 
that add another notch to his "I told you so" roster. Programs bombing, 
programs freezing during transactions, slow response times, long hours 
between application turnover, etc. Obviously, IBM makes matters worse with 

their promotional strategy.

Perhaps you are right on the money with your request to take this argument 

outside the 400 community. Somehow, someway, someone needs to educate the 
business population on the value of the 400 as either a back or front 
office 
system and that "sexy" solutions are almost always the worst solutions 
especially when you're trying to produce a stable data environment for 
your 
operation.



>From: Scott Klement <klemscot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Why NOT the 400?
>Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 01:12:50 -0500 (CDT)
>
>
>Rick,
>
>Asking these questions here on the Midrange-L list is pointless.  You'll
>get a lot of agreement with your position, and you'll get a few people 
who
>don't really understand why the community is shrinking who will,
>nonetheless, give their conjectures.
>
>However, you'll never find out the real truth here.   Ask your questions
>in other areas, on Windows-related groups, on Unix-related groups, etc.
>
>Asking here is like asking Tipper Gore why G.W. Bush won the election.
>She may be able to conjecture, but she didn't vote for Bush, and it
>wouldn't have been her decision to put him there.
>
>
>On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Rick Rayburn wrote:
>
> > Why NOT?
> >
> > I don't understand. Everybody in - and out of - our industry know the 
>400 is
> > the very best-of-breed choice for management of your back office. 
Don't
> > heavy-transactional environments flourish better in shallow water? The 

>400
> > does that very well.
> >
> > So, who cares how fast you're speeding down the super highway? You 
gotta
> > have a vault to protect your crucial data, don't you?
> >
> > So,why is that so hard to market? Doesn't our box provide 
>sufficient-enough
> > access to the big road? Sure it does. Certainly enough for a sizable 
>market
> > share. And that's fine. No sweat.
> >
> > We should be getting all the back office action, right?
> >
> > Shouldn't the 400, "promote itself". It's not as if we are trying to 
>sell a
> > lemon disguised as a peach.
> >
> > We have a solid resource and community. Why does our industry grow 
>smaller?
> >
>_______________________________________________
>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.
>

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

_______________________________________________
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.