What's yer big iron type? Regards, Orin
-----Original Message----- From: danangdoc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:38 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [EDI-L] EDI not dead here.. A-freakin-men! The big issues I see here, and also hear from various trading partners, is that resources to administer complex technologies is the issue. I believe this issue will grow, as global competition becomes more and more fierce. Remember KISS from the 80's? (No, not them!) Keep It Simple, Stupid! We also continue to add trading partners, and add new transaction types with existing partners, so EDI may be getting older, but unless you can give me an overwhelming reason to add complexity (comm's, XML (which one..?), etc.) we will remain firmly, and securely entrenched for now. Web front-end and Big Iron, baby! Bob Marshall Ingersoll Rand Co. Infrastructure Group Annanadale, NJ 908-238-5830 --- In [email protected], "rah1420" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "William J. Kammerer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Is EDI dead? Has all that could be said about e-business been said > > already? I dunno - I'm just asking. 'Cause first we had interminable > > discussion about suing somebody because they had the audacity to > archive > > messages from EDI-L. > > (sigh) > > Bill, Bill... > > The issue wasn't with the archiving of messages, though I think you > really knew that. The issue was with the plaintext display of the > email addresses of the readership, which some people had a problem > with. > > Ah well. > > > What about VAN consolidation? Does anyone use EDINT with more than > > two trading partners? What about HIPAA? What about RFID? What's > > going on with UBL? Anyone? Anyone? Class? Anyone? > > Well, we're actually doing AS2 with (drumroll) 6 trading partners. > > #include STD_DISCLAIMER > > I sort of agree with Chris Burns' observations. My fear is that EDI > is going to become a lot more fragmented before it finally shakes > out. > > Here's a classic example. > > Don't call me a Luddite, because I'm not; but for Pete's sake, what's > the big damn difference between AS2 connections between multiple > trading partners and multiple dialup connections to multiple trading > partners' modems? Why are all the "EDI experts" making the welkin > ring and thumping the tub telling everyone how great it'll be when > we're all on AS2? Hint: It's not any easier to administer. It must > be simply that with the Internet (said in a breathy sort of expulsion) > we now can do it so much more quickly. And cheaply. Except for my > time and the staff's time. But that's okay, because we can just send > that work offshore. > > Over the holiday break, I remind people, we had to suppress our > inbound 820s because we didn't want the 2005 cash being applied to the > 2004 batch that ran over the holiday weekend. (No catcalls, please; > we still run the Big Iron here.) Guess what? It took one call to > Sterling Commerce; "Please hold our 820s until Monday morning." "No > problem, Rich, it'll be done." Took care of -oh- 65 or so trading > partners with one phone call. > > If I had 65 AS2 connections I'd still be dialing. (Well, not really > but you get the idea.) So tell me again what's so great about AS2? > Please? Is it the fact that I get to manage my own certs? The fact > that I get to farkle with my own servers? Or is it simply the fact > that I can now have multiple failure points instead of just one > contracted service provider that takes care of all my requirements? > > And don't even get me started again on how wonderful (snort) XML is. > When Chris said "cluttering up the supply chain" he was right. I > still remain unconvinced; and I believe the vast majority of our > trading partners who still use EDI will back me up. And some of them > probably spend some not inconsequential sums of money on their EDI > infrastructure, and definitely use EDI to spend some not > inconsequential sums of money on our products. > > RFID? Well, as long as I'm on a roll, I could talk about RFID. Don't > know much about it. Yes, it'll be a Big Thing. My guess? Wal*Mart > is desperate to get their arms around their burgeoning inventory > management costs, and they're big to boot. They used their bigness to > wield a club. > > Unfortunately for them, the technology isn't mature enough. As I read > on Slashdot recently, (observing that the accuracy is at about 60%,) > "It's hard to make the case that RFID will help track inventory when > you can't reliably find 40% of it." > > Oh, it'll get there, just like some form of Really Good Markup > Language will be distilled that will make all our EDI dreams come > true. But in times like these, it's a lot cheaper -- and more > entertaining -- to be a "fast follower" than it is to be an early > adopter. . Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L Yahoo! Groups Links . Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
