Re: Why NOT the 400?

Oh, the horrors of IBM consulting and "strategic products".

Like the year we went over a quarter million over budget on some software 
to roll out PC products from our iSeries.  IBM no longer sells the 
product.  I cringe when my boss goes with a product because it's IBM, if 
for no other reason.  Then I think of multiple products that IBM has 
pulled.

I wonder if bundling software is a good idea?  If no new purchases are 
made of the product then is the product dead?  But, what if several large 
customers are still using the product?  The problem with that second 
statement is "Are there any revenue dollars being generated by continuing 
to support that product?".  OV/400 for example.  Did you pay extra for 
software subscription for continuing to support OV/400?  If so, was the 
money there to compensate for the expense of keeping it working on newer 
versions of OS?  Will RPG be the next victim?  No one buys RPG anymore. 
You buy Websphere Development Studio.  Even if you do pay extra for 
software subscription for WDS, will IBM assume it is for some other Web 
reason than RPG?

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





"Steve Landess" <steve_landess@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
07/26/2003 02:08 PM
Please respond to Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
 
        To:     "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" 
<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
        cc: 
        Fax to: 
        Subject:        Re: Why NOT the 400?


>Don wrote:
> One simple work:  SERVICES
> The 400 is too good of a box.  The 400 is so good you can install and
> basically forget it.
> You CAN NOT do that with: unix, linux, windows(Endorsed by IBM for
> Business)....

You're exactly right, Don...

For several years now, IBM has made more revenue from services than any
other sector of their business.

When I was working as a consultant at a major office-supply chain (based 
in
southern Florida) in 1995, IBM had come in and told them that instead of 
the
several AS/400's they were using to run their divisions they needed an IBM
mainframe and new application software to replace ALL of their current
systems.

A huge effort ensued, and I don't know how it turned out.  I think they
spent a LOT of money on the project.  I'm not sure if the IS director
survived the project.  You can be assured that IBM made huge revenues both
on hardware and services from that account.

For much of the 90's, IBM consultants were somewhat of a permanent fixture
at one of my former clients in Austin, having developed the "imaging 
system
project that never ends" using IBM's imaging software on the AS/400 with
OS/2-based PC clients.  It worked, I think, but it was obsolete (at least
the technology was) before it was rolled out to the end users.

Steve Landess
Austin, Texas
(512) 423-0935

_______________________________________________
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.