hi Eric,
I think Trevor's thrust is more aimed at the comments of folks like Neil
Palmer, Don Rima, Steve Richter, Bob Tipton. Folks who are supposedly
advocates of the IBM i platform, but yet keep telling us that we should
be fleeing this platform.
They keep saying things like "IBM is firing Frank Soltis", "IBM is not
investing in i", "IBM only cares about services" despite that IBM says
the opposite. Their arguments sound solid, and make people give serious
thought to leaving. But they're not the only possible explanation.
Frank Soltis is older than the normal age of retirement in the USA. All
companies in the USA (and even the world) are fighting a terrible
economy, and need to take steps. Doesn't it make more sense to ask
someone to retire rather than lay off someone who depends on the income?
And who says Dr. Soltis is not leaving willingly? IBM sure didn't say
that. Dr. Soltis didn't say that.
IBM is not investing in i? Because IBM laid off some people and cut
some funding, they're not investing, right? Yet, I talk to IBM
engineers who are making great and important new improvements for the
next release. i 6.1 had great improvements, including those that help
give this system a future. The integration of i and p means IBM can do
more with less staff and less money, so it seems natural to cut spending
and lay off people. Who isn't facing staff cuts and spending cuts in
today's economy? That doesn't mean IBM is not investing in the
platform! But, if we all listen to folks like Mr. Palmer and move to a
different platform, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
"IBM only cares about services." Yes, the services part of their
business has grown, and there are advocates in IBM who believe their
focus should be services. But not everyone. And because services is
55% of their profits does not mean that they don't care about the other
45% does it? If IBM is offered a growth in profits from the Power
Systems group, I'm pretty sure they won't reject it.
The point is: Stop the "doom+gloom" as Trevor puts it, or the FUD as I
put it. Be a System i advocate. That doesn't mean that you need to be
a salesman.
But, when experts come into forums and/or publish articles that keep
talking about the impending death of the system, it's bad for everyone.
In my opinion, it's not IBM, but ISV's that need to do better marketing.
New customers don't care about the hardware architecture or operating
system architecture. They care about the applications. It's up to the
ISVs to sell their apps, and explain why their apps bring extra value
because they're running on the i.
Since that ultimately benefits IBM as well, I think it's a good idea for
IBM to assist the ISVs, providing funding and expertise.
But, right now, the ISVs are the weak link, IMHO. They are the ones
that aren't marketing, except to the faithful. They often don't seem to
believe in the platform. Many of them are cross-platform, and actually
push the other platforms instead of extolling the virtues of i. This is
where marketing is missing.
DeLong, Eric wrote:
I'm a technical guy, well versed in development, operations, and
administration. I understand the technology behind this system, and am
capable of designing and implementing a variety of solutions for my
employer. I AM NOT A SALESMAN!
midrange.com
