> IBM is not killing off the mainframe. Quite the contrary. What makes you > think that? IBM is investing deeply in technology improvements and > advancements. There is a continuing role for a server that handles mixed > workload and share everything. Just as there are roles for Intel- and > UNIX-based servers. > Marcia Harelik
Well we can agree that IBM is not intentionally killing off the mainframe. However, their psychotic mix of heavy investment in some places and criminal neglect in others will surely have the same result in the end. When they are firing shared low-level admin staff in core technology development (as they did just a few days ago) you can't seriously expect anyone to believe IBM sees z/OS as an investment priority. And the folks who are left behind just get to carry the incremental burden. I could talk about straws and camels but you probably get the idea. IBM's assertions in the PSI case basically amount to what Ray Mullins said. "It's our game and our ball and we're going to do whatever we want." In earlier times that would have got them a stern lecture from the DOJ and it may yet do so. But even if it doesn't, the market will render a verdict. There are quite a few factors behind IBM's convulsions over PSI and FLEX. An unpublicized factor is that right now there is an internal edict to monetize intellectual property. The morons (and I emphasize MORONS) behind this policy don't realize that IBM isn't the big man on campus any more. There are just too many alternatives in the market place. Far from increasing revenue, all this will do is drive customers and vendors away from the market and into the arms of other competitors. It takes a peculiar kind of genius to make golden goose soup. Cretins. CC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
