OK...didn't mean to write a book, but I tried to respond to your points,
Neil.
Neil, regarding IBM budgeting for i. Which IBM executive would I
believe? There are several! But you are not going to get me to say on
this forum who I believe and don't believe.
First thing about budgets with any very large company: Budgets are
fluid. They move with the market, they move with the economy, they move
with what customers are, or are not buying. I saw that over and over
when I worked with IBM. So to state a specific budget number for one
year "ain't gonna" be true for IBM, because it does change based on a
lot of factors. What I did confirm, was the R&D budget is relatively the
same as it has been. IBM is investing in products for businesses in the
mid-market. I believe every word I heard.
Reminder: the "i" of this system has stayed the same since 1996 when IBM
branded all servers in the eServer family. It was at that time I knew
certain systems were going to merge. Say what you might about name
change...the 'i' has been around 12 years. You're missing the point.
Functionality...what can the i do for my business. That's what you need
to focus on.
Articles like the one in IT Jungle concern me, because people outside
this "i family" who might have taken a shot at what the i could do for
them, now question it's validity. That's a shame!! Bashing IBM and its
products within the "family" is one thing, but taking it outside the
family does a lot more harm than good. I don't mean cover up something
that should be open...it's the "bashing" I don't believe is
professional, especially when the information provided is not been
officially validated.
Neil, you asked "All 'they' have to do is issue a public statement
saying that "i" is a better business environment than Windows, Linux and
AIX..." Didn't Ross Mauri say that at the Town Hall! The logo is "i
for Business"!! "i is mainstream". It's in the video...
As to "...outline IBM's plans (and budget) to make as many people aware
of "i" as they are of the othere operating systems." I don't mind
asking about the plans and I'll ask about the budget.
"Our" now includes AIX, Linux, Windows, storage....all this alongside
this awesome operating system we love "i". A CIO at COMMON said, after
hearing the announcements: "Wow! With IBM i, IBM has finally given me
the options I've needed."
IBM decided 12-14 years ago services IS where the cash is...same with
software. Hardware is a commodity...it is the OS that's important.
"Ours" just expanded to give us options...give small to the largest
customers options. There's a lot of great "stuff" available through IBM
products.
BTW, I'm very interested in hearing from whoever directly heard Tom
Jarosh say his job was to manage the decline of this system.
.....Anne
************************
Have a blessed day!
Anne Lucas, Genisys Group Inc.
Customer Account Executive
205-823-4831 Office, 205-746-6850 Mobile Fax: 205-690-4193
email: alucas@xxxxxxxxxxx
AOL Instant Message: So Anne Lucas
www.teamggi.com
------------------------------
message: 7
date: Tue, 6 May 2008 17:21:31 -0400 (EDT)
from: Neil Palmer <neilpalmer400mr@xxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: IBM investment in i
Anne,
I appreciate your comments, and respect your opinion.
I know your heart is in "our" system too. I know "our" system will
still be around in one form or another in 10 to 15 years, as is OS/2,
VSE, etc. But the chart at the foot of the bed has D.N.R. written on
it. I could be wrong. I HOPE I'm wrong. I want IBM to PROVE me wrong.
But....
When you say you won't believe anything unless you hear it from an IBM
Executive, which executive would that be?
Would that be the IBM executive who stood in front of us at COMMON two
years ago in Minneapolis and "guaranteed" the new System i name would
endure for ten years?
Would that be the IBM executive who in an interview a little over 5
years ago said there was no plan to merge i + p - when obviously
something like that has been in IBM's plans for well over 5 years?
(You say yourself "We've known this merger was coming for a long time.")
Would you expect IBM executives to publicly speak the truth about this?
You've surely spoken to some of the developers (and
ex-developers) from Rochester and know what the situation and morale is
like there. I myself was approached at one of the iSocial evenings at
COMMON in Nashville by some of the developers in Rochester and thanked
for my comments at the Town Hall meeting.
As Mark Shearer said just recently in Nashville, OS/400 (he just
referred to it as the "operating
system") is the "secret sauce". It's what defines "our" system and
always has. The OS budget stands alone regardless of whether the
hardware platforms are merged. You still need to spend on the OS if the
hardware platforms become one.
I agree with you entirely when you say we should be asking "OK,
IBM....what does that mean for your faithful IBM i customers? What does
that mean for
"net new" IBM i customers?"
Anne, I know you're a fighter and aren't afraid to take things to IBM.
Take it to the "IBM executives".
All "they" have to do is issue a public statement saying that "i" is a
better business environment than Windows, Linux and AIX, and outline
IBM's plans (and
budget) to make as many people aware of "i" as they are of the other
operating systems.
Removing the organization, the budget and the name is a strange way of
enhancing a vibrant product. "Our"
system's development has been "functionally stabilized". You can see
what that means here:
http://searchdatamanagement.techtarget.com/news/column/0,294698,sid91_gc
i1310086,00.html
IBM has decided that it wants to be a services company. If you are a
services company, it is not in your interests to sell something that
just works.
...Neil
midrange.com
