I don't know.
I suppose one could think that if you have open source, people will come
knocking and then you can "sell them services".
"Sell them services" the myth of the early 2000's. 

If I'm looking for free software, am I then going to say, "Oh sure, IBM,
I'll sign a contract for $300+ an hour to services."  
I don't know, but last I checked, it was 2005, not 1985 or 1996.

-Bob Cozzi
www.RPGxTools.com
If everything is under control, you are going too slow.
- Mario Andretti


-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Pete Helgren
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:25 AM
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: [WEB400] RE: CGIDEV2

"IBM doesn't care about things costing nothing. They only care about things
that bring in revenue, directly, not indirectly."

And I am still trying to figure out what revenue, exactly, they DO care
about.  I thought it was anything that drove hardware sales for them but
that appears not to be enough.  We "sell" open source applications and
recently applied to be an iSeries reseller.  We were denied because our VAE
was open source (presumably because we don't charge for the software).  Now
why IBM cares what we charge for our application is beyond us. A potential
customer could decide that they want to run our application on Websphere
rather than Tomcat and thus even drive a few more $$ to IBM.  We want to
drive *more* iSeries sales and we are looking for recurring service revenue
to grow the business but IBM said "No way". 

IBM "embraces" open source as a marketing ploy but when it comes to building
a business around an open source model, they appear not to be interested.
They will apparently give more than lip service to open source projects, but
it appears that the lip service will only extend so far.  They have yet to
learn that doing what is right for the customer is always right for the
business.

Sigh....another example that the elephant can't dance.....

Pete Helgren




Bob Cozzi wrote:

>>>It will cost IBM nothing...
>>>      
>>>
>IBM doesn't care about things costing nothing. They only care about things
>that bring in revenue, directly, not indirectly. 
>
>-Bob Cozzi
>www.RPGxTools.com
>If everything is under control, you are going too slow.
>- Mario Andretti
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of Jim Franz
>Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:53 PM
>To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
>Subject: [WEB400] RE: CGIDEV2
>
>  
>
>>Jeeze... what's the big deal.
>>    
>>
>
>Jeeze Bob .....
>With thousands of sites running CGIDEV2, and business partners having
>written packages to sell (and further promote the iSeries), I would take
>this as a very illogical move by IBM. An offer has been made to keep the
>software going on, at no cost to IBM, and keeping current customers
>and partners who invested in this technology happy. And happy customers
>buy upgrades and new servers, and happy partners bring in more business
>to IBM. Rochester has fairly clearly stated that it is not just a Websphere
>platform,
>with tools like Websmart (a tool that gens rpgle cgi) in the Tools Network
>and the Roadmap. There's also your tool, Joe's tools, Brad's tools, and
many
>other vendor offerings. What sense is there in pulling the rug on even a
>small
>segment of your current (declining) customer base. It will cost IBM
>"nothing" to keep
>this going.
>If I were the non-technical CEO of a company, and my IT manager tells me
IBM
>just did this, with no warning (we had like 5 years of warning for
>Officevision...),
>I would always remember this when presented with any IBM proposal...
>jim franz
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Bob Cozzi" <cozzi@xxxxxxxxx>
>To: "'Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries'" <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 5:43 PM
>Subject: RE: [WEB400] RE: CGIDEV2
>
>
>  
>
>>Jeeze... what's the big deal.
>>They do this kind of thing every few years or so.
>>Previously there were no alternatives, but today there is at least one
>>    
>>
>good
>  
>
>>one and probably other options as well.
>>And at the risk of sounding like so many people who have justified CGIDEV2
>>by saying "You have the source code", dare I say "you have the source
>>    
>>
>code".
>  
>
>>I guess I don't see the issue. We, who knew of it, got to use it for a
>>while. Many of us have now moved on to other tools. Those who have not, I
>>would render a guess that their code still works today as it did
>>    
>>
>yesterday.
>  
>
>>There is really no compelling reason to continue to use a no-charge
>>    
>>
>product
>  
>
>>that is not supported. Its purpose is primarily for examples and to show
>>    
>>
>how
>  
>
>>things can be accomplished with, in this case, RPG IV. Okay, so learn from
>>it and move on.
>>These worries sound like someone who lives by a drive-in theater and is
>>    
>>
>now
>  
>
>>complaining that the theater owner is planting trees to block your view of
>>the movies. It was free for a while, but sooner or later it won't be. That
>>is how IBM stays in business.
>>
>>-Bob Cozzi
>>www.RPGxTools.com
>>If everything is under control, you are going too slow.
>>- Mario Andretti
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2020 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].