> Undoubtedly to the choir. But they can buy small/medium servers and >software from "petty cash". After some dozen(s), it's noticed that the >support admins are overworked and stressed, and they pull a position >from mainframe and hire another PC jockey. > By the time the TCO arguments really make a difference, the >commitment to Micro$oft is as entrenched as the mainframe was 15 years >ago.
Maybe. But then, if you continue the narrative, one of two things happens: 1. The too-high costs result in the company's lack of market competitiveness, and the company goes out of business (figuratively or literally). How fast that happens depends on the degree of market competition, but the marketplace seems to be getting more brutal with each passing year. (That's great for consumers, I guess.) 2. The company outsources their IT so they can get their costs back under control. It's the single biggest reason for outsourcing: the business-side managers throw up their hands and say, "Enough. We have a business to run. We're tired of paying for your IT toys, and we just want to give our salesforce better information, run the production line more efficiently, etc., etc." By the way, I don't think anybody is arguing that every computer should be a mainframe or that every computer should be a PC. There's going to be a mix. But if you get the mix wrong then it's door #1 or door #2. :-) - - - - - Timothy F. Sipples Consulting Enterprise Software Architect, z9/zSeries IBM Japan Ltd. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
