ADDRESS OPINION X = RANTMODE(ACTIVATE) Nope. You are in good company. IBM continues to offer ways to cut software costs. ISV's are under a lot of pressure from both IBM and us. More and more shops are finding serious business cases to fire uncooperative vendors. And those shops are reporting no regrets after doing so.
Hardware costs have been plummeting for a while now. So much so that it makes a serious difference in how we manage resources. We now consider tape to be far more expensive than DASD. YMMV. I suppose it might be true that some old, large shops continue to see escalating costs. But I think that is more a cultural and management issue. Which brings me back to my point: there was nothing of interest to me in the article so far. I can only assume the punch line will be a discussion of 'alternatives'. I'll bet a virtual beverage that Sun will be mentioned. X = RANTMODE(DEACTIVATE) EXIT RC=0.02 -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kreiter, Chuck Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 2:43 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: State of the Mainframe - News Article I can't say I understand these articles that talk about escalating mainframe costs. At my company, we consistently make deals where we end up with better storage, faster processors, etc and our costs actually go down. Whereas, our counterparts in open systems consistently see their hardware, software and support personnel costs go significantly. I don't know if my boss is just a good negotiator or if everyone sees this trend. Vendors who have their hand out at every CPU upgrade are generally shown the door. Anyone else notice this or are we just unique? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
