Re: IBM investment in i

Anne,


I really appreciate you taking the time to reply.

A few comments - it seems I'm equally addicted to
writing books.
(Sorry for the length of this, but unfortunately for
everyone out there I've had insomnia the last few
nights). ;-)


You initially said you only believed what IBM
executives said - you didn't say which ones. I
wouldn't expect you to say on this list which IBM
executive(s) you believe and don't believe, but your
statement seems to confirm what I said - there are
some IBM executives you can not believe. We both know
that at COMMON the execs are often pandering to the
audience. I don't particularly blame them for that -
after all we expect that from alll politicians.

I'm not alone in taking what IBM's "here today, gone
tomorrow" executives say with a grain of salt. And
yes, although Mark Shearer is still around, he is no
longer General Manager, his division no longer exists,
he no longer has sole responsibility for "i", and no
longer has any budgets.

You say you checked and were told the R&D budget was
relatively the same and you believe every word you
heard. I checked with several sources before I made
my comments at COMMON, I was given specific budget
numbers (not a general statement), and I believe every
word I heard. What's more the evidence I have seen
over the past few years confirms what I've heard.

Yes IBM are investing dollars in products for
businesses in the mid-market. I'm sure there are
plenty of companies whose are investing in "products
for businesses in the mid-market". But are they
investing in (OS/400 i5/OS "i") ?

You're a little off in your dates. The letter "i"
became part of the product name in 2000, not in 1996
as you stated. eServer was introduced as the brand
(note - the brand was NOT iSeries) in 2000. In fact
IBM'ers were specifically ordered NOT to refer to it
as simple iSeries, it was always to be referred to as
eServer iSeries. An "i" somewhere in the product name
has only been around for 8 years. Implying that the
product name hasn't changed in those 8 years is
stretching things a little.

The eServer rebranding has to rank up there with New
Coke as one of the biggest marketing blunders ever.
Mark Shearer admitted that at the COMMON Innovation
Awards dinner in Chicago, and to his credit has stated
the same thing on several occasions since then. He
has said that if he had been General Manager for
iSeries before he had his previous job (Marketing for
all of "STG") he never would have introduced eServer
(IBM eServer iSeries - that lovely name that just
rolled off the tongue). Then his successor in STG
Marketing (Anil Menon - he who stated a year ago in
the UK "It is wrong to say that the System i is dying.
It's already dead.") came along and did to Mark what
Mark had done to Tom Jarosh - changed the name again
(to System i).

Trying to hide dissent about the way things are going
within the family isn't going to change anything.
Sometimes the emperor needs to be told publicly that
he has no clothes. Keeping things quiet reminds me of
the "security by obscurity" approach. Would you
expect IBM to ever "officially validate" the
information I quoted? Several IBM'ers whom I trust
implicitly have told me the same thing, and that's as
good as I'm going to get. Anyone wanting to find out
what customers think about the future of "i" could
simply use Google to find these comments in the
Midrange-L archive anyway. Despite that however, I
DO consider IT Jungle and System i Network to be part
of our family. I presume you don't.

Don't get me wrong - I fully expect there to be a
hardware platform around that will run "i" (and its
valuable partner products like RPG) for the next 10 to
15 years to keep the present customer base going. IBM
did that for OS/2 & VSE users and I have no reason to
expect they won't do the same for "i". I just don't
see there being any investment being made in enhancing
"i" (beyond mandatory things like IPv6, encryption, or
whatever governments may mandate to allow you to still
sell your product to them), in attracting new business
to "i", and advertising "i". And I know even you
aren't going to disagree with that last point ! ;-)

The point is that no one (apart from those in the
"family") know what "i" is because it's never been
promoted, yet everyone knows what Unix & Linux is.
IBM explicitly forbade any major advertising for "i"
on it's own (back to the "we're a services company"
argument there, and "i" just doesn't generate enough
money for them on that front - and we're all eternally
grateful for that!). If IBM is so anxious to promote
"i" will there be money to advertise why it's superior
to UNIX, Linux & Windows as an operating system for
business? Sure - as soon as the Toronto Maple Leafs
win the Stanley Cup again. (OK - may have lost you
there - how about "as soon as Hillary Clinton is sworn
in as President"). ;-)

Yes, Ross Mauri did say some nice things about 'i' at
COMMON. IBM executives always do. See my comment
above about pandering to the audience. Will he repeat
those same comments to large audiences outside of the
"family"? Somehow I doubt it, and I have a feeling
that deep down you do too. Somehow I can't picture
UNIX and Windows as part of "our" family. Unless you
mean in the sense of the "funny uncle" that no one
wants to talk about. :-)

Yes I agree, "Hardware is a commodity...it is the OS
that's important." Our operating system did not just
expand to give us more options - our hardware platform
did. Yes the hardware platform has a nice budget.
What about "i" ?

"Manage the decline" were the words Don R mentioned he
heard from one of his sources. The words I heard from
one of my sources, from a conversation they had with
Tom, were "keep this thing alive for as long as
possible". I suppose that person will decide to whom
they will speak.


As I said before, I have no doubt whatsoever about
your commitment and dedication to "i". Have I grown
more cynical over the years? I wouldn't argue with
that. I guess one thing we can do is agree to
disagree on what IBM's future has in store for you,
and "i".


...Neil


--- Anne Lucas <alucas@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

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

Neil Palmer, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada

(This account not monitored for personal mail,
remove the last two letters before @ for that)


__________________________________________________________________
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com