<geezer> Back in the day </geezer>, before the AS/400 was connected to the world and security concerns were limited to users whose profiles were enabled, it was difficult to justify spending on new iron when the current, very solid iron and the unsupported OS were still going strong, and you didn't need any of the new features of the new hardware / software. I remember supporting CISC V3R2 long after V4R4 came out; as much as I tried, I could never justify to management upgrading the hardware. "It just worked" and it had more than enough capacity for company growth.
- Dan Bale
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of John Yeung
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2025 10:56 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: "Pretty" announcement for End Of Support for Power 9.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 2:19 PM Rob Berendt <robertowenberendt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Patrik,
This is one of those cases in which you fervently believe in what you
believe in. I've explained what I can and to try to do any more is a
waste of my time and a waste of yours.
It's true, we're going to believe what we believe.
Based on my experience, I believe Patrik is correct on the fundamental point that IBM's way of doing scheduled (and forced!) obsolescence is purely a strategy for generating revenue.
I am not versed enough in the finer points to argue specifics. What I can say is that the pace of technological advancement is usually much faster than the pace of increased business needs. Of course there are some large and fast-growing businesses that are going to gobble up whatever IBM's latest and greatest is, just to keep pace with demand.
And if their business is growing that fast, keeping current is not likely to be a financial burden for them.
But the vast, vast, VAST majority of businesses don't grow anywhere near that fast; and at some point, they arrive at a PowerX machine that is WAAAAY overpowered for what their business needs. Yet they are strong-armed into buying PowerX+1 (or hanging on until PowerX+2) anyway.
This doesn't sit well with me. As Patrik suggests, it's hard to imagine any _technical_ reason why iNext couldn't run on Power9. For sure, there are going to be occasional architecture changes, whether hardware or software, that are significant enough to justify breaking compatibility. But not with the regularity and pace at which IBM is steamrolling along.
John Y.
*** CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this communication may be confidential, and is intended only for the use of the recipients named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please return it to the sender immediately and delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. If you have any questions concerning this message, please contact the sender. ***
midrange.com
