...and hands up all those who have converted a large, many faceted application off the mainframe only to see your TCO go up. I know of a company (not naming names) who just put their mainframe-to-server conversion on hold when it was revealed that the next stage of their conversion would be many millions of bucks.
Some things make sense for the mainframe, some things make sense for the servers. Creating an MXG PDB is perfect for a server - it's a pretty straight forward, self contained process. Robin Murray Tel: (902) 453-7300 x4177 Cell: (902) 430-0637 Ron and Jenny Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> 07/13/2005 05:13 PM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List To: [email protected] cc: Subject: Re: Another - Another One Bites the Dust Hands up all of you that have successfully migrated your SAS/MXG applications from MVS to Windows and saved money. Hands up those of you that believe it is now costing more? The MXG PDB is a classic example of an application that can be successfully moved from mainframe to a windows or Unix and provide a better TCO along with improved performance, function and productivity. In fact, if I was asked to develop an MXG PDB from scratch for a site I wouldn't even consider using MVS. A reasonable server class desktop, with XP Professional and some FC connections to SAN storage would be a better and cheaper way to go in almost all cases. Ron > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Welch, Mp P [ITS] > Sent: Thursday, 14 July 2005 3:48 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Another - Another One Bites the Dust > > We've seen that many of our midrange projects end up costing much more > than the mainframe solution they replaced. > > The problem we've seen is that its usually too late to bring the > application back after it migrates regardless of how much more expensive > it becomes. > > If you look at your numbers, you may find the "much more expensive" > mainframe wasn't so expensive after all. > > Even if the perception that the mainframe is too expensive turns out to > be true after reviewing all of the cost factors, there are ways to > reduce many of the cost factors and keep the mainframe infrastructure > cost effective. > > We've seen IBM give us ridiculously high MIP estimates for new mainframe > projects as Norris had mentioned, and CEC based software contracts have > caused unnecessarily high cpu upgrade costs, but we still feel that our > mainframe environment (with proper financial care and feeding) continues > to provide significant contribution to IT value at our company. > > Maybe someday alternative non-mainframe computing will be best for all > our work but if we can wait a little longer those solutions will only be > better (cheaper?) next year... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
