On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 19:44, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don't know if it is as simple as that.
It is, if your business did it's homework. Meaning, they bought good
products and followed proper procedure for inhouse development.
Observability on applications is the big problem.
By now i migrated roughly 40 customers to V6R1, and i can tell that
this is a non-issue for properly managed environments.
Applications compiled on V5R1 and up will convert on V6R1, no matter
the options. V5R1 was GA'd on May 25., 2001. That's 8 years ago.
Our old 5250-based software was discontinued in 2002, which means the
last compile was on V5R1 - and even customers still stuck on this
release (which are getting fewer every year) can run their machines on
V6R1, and thus enjoy proper support from IBM.
Our current application release doesn't even run on systems below V5R4
(a good thing - it means we can use new features that are only found
in V5R4). After all, we want to give our customers a modern
application.
Yeah, we had third party applications that took some time till they
supported V6R1. We just moved those to a second LPAR running downlevel
V5R4 till they adjusted.
We have at least one application that we do not have source, no
vendor anymore and still be used plus we have to a bunch of others that need
to be upgraded to get the observability before they can consider upgrading.
So you're running an application which may stop working at any moment,
there's no vendor, no support, no source code?
I don't know about US laws, but here this would be considered gross
negligence - whoever approved this acted in a manner which clearly
presents a danger for the future operation of the company.
Lukas, posting from Windows 7 RC x64 :)
midrange.com
