RE: Some fodder for marketing, perhaps

Actually,

We have PCs all over the place out on the floor.

Many are network attached PCs at supervisor desks next to line.  Then
there are a few stand-alone PCs, mostly PC related to the line robotic
equipment.

That includes our die-cast and milling areas.

Then again, when I compare the cleanliness of this plant vs. the US
owned mfg. plant my Dad worked at for 30yrs, we win hands down.

Lastly, if you want to talk hard on PCs...try a restaurant.  The fryer
grease gets everywhere!

HTH,

Charles Wilt
--
iSeries Systems Administrator / Developer
Mitsubishi Electric Automotive America
ph: 513-573-4343
fax: 513-398-1121
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> fbocch2595@xxxxxxx
> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 4:04 PM
> To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Some fodder for marketing, perhaps
> 
> Tell me what manufacturing floor has pc's and not dumb 
> terminals?  Not many, unless their pockets are deep.   
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:40:33 -0600
> Subject: Re: Some fodder for marketing, perhaps
> 
> 
> Two factors I have seen that prohibit PCs on the production floor are:
> 
> 1) A hostile environment.  This includes air quality, temperature 
> controls, near-by moving objects from fork lifts to thrown 
> packages, and 
> workers with no love for the company or its property.
> 
> 2) Lost production while people use the PCs to play games, do 
> personal 
> stuff, and spend company time to make a case for an Internet 
> connection 
> so they can download porn, music, and surf to e Bay.
> 
> Until that changes, I can not see durable and cheap terminals 
> disappearing. In fact, I would expect the direction to be toward more 
> text-based stuff with bar code readers, RF ID, and all sorts of hand 
> held devices.
> 
> Chuck Lewis wrote:
> > Joe,
> > 
> > No offense to you but my last job was at a very large 
> manufacturing company
> > and I am now at a distribution company. In both places 
> there are terminals
> > in heavy use and that is NOT going to be changing anytime 
> soon. There are
> > areas that simply do not need PC's and what it would take 
> to keep one
> > running in those areas if they were needed would be basically cost
> > prohibitive.
> > 
> > Chuck
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joe Pluta
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 7:50 PM
> > To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
> > Subject: RE: Some fodder for marketing, perhaps
> > 
> > 
> >>From: Jones, John (US)
> >>
> >>Except that IBM never marketed it as $300K off the price if 
> you don't
> >>want 5250.  Instead they said 5250 will cost you $300K.  So 
> it is not a
> >>discount for not having 5250; it is a fee for having it.
> > 
> > 
> > IBM never marketed it in any way.  But the fact is that every year
> > processors with the same or greater power were cheaper, sometimes
> > significantly cheaper.  It's just that the enterprise 
> machines were cheaper
> > by a lesser amount.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>The problem is that IBM took something that was built-in and thus
> >>considered by the customer base to be 'free' and made it an option.
> > 
> > 
> > I personally find this practice reprehensible, but it's 
> become standard in
> > corporate America.  Give it away free until they need it 
> and then charge for
> > it.  At least in this instance IBM has been clearly stating 
> for YEARS that
> > you need to get off the 5250.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >>An
> >>expensive option.  Yes, they lowered the purchase price of the base
> >>server so that it was initially something of a wash, but 
> over time the
> >>cost of 5250 has become an increasingly higher percentage 
> of the overall
> >>cost of a system.
> > 
> > 
> > Actually, that's not quite true.  In the initial days when 
> there were many
> > tiers of interactive CPW, the 100% interactive machines 
> were sometimes four
> > times the cost of the zero CPW version.  Nowadays, there 
> are only two
> > versions: with and without.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>Believe me, I like the platform as much as anyone on this 
> list, but it
> >>becomes increasingly difficult to sell management on the cost of
> >>upgrades.  Things like the charge for Enterprise Edition 
> will kill the
> >>iSeries at my shop.  It is only a matter of time.
> > 
> > 
> > You could move to the browser.  Do you have source?  My 
> product would pay
> > for itself many times over by giving you a nearly identical 
> look and feel on
> > a much smaller machine.
> > 
> > 
> > Joe
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> -----------------------------------
> Booth Martin
> http://martinvt.com
> -----------------------------------
> -- 
> 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.
> -- 
> 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.
> 
>