[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Zelden) writes: > Then you switch back. ;-) There are actually a lot of companies that > seem to work that way. That's what happens when bean counters make > the decisions and don't consider the human aspects (time, training etc.)
this is related to the original justification for 360 product line with common architecture across the product line ... recent post mentioning supposed testimony in the gov. anti-trust case by one of the bunch http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007p.html#8 what does xp do when system is copying i.e. compatible product line minimized having to redo applications every time customer upgraded/changed processor ... people resources and elapsed time for conversion was starting to dominate considerations this was also touched on by a talk amdahl gave at mit in the early 70s when asked about what justification was used getting funding for his clone processor company ... even if ibm were to completely walk away from 360, customers already had something like $200B invested in software applications, which would support clone processor business through at least the end of the century. and the "walk away from 360" could possibly considered a veiled reference to future system project http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#futuresys which would have been as different from 360 as 360 had been different from earlier machines ... recent posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007p.html#1 what does xp do when system is copying http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007p.html#3 PL/S programming language http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007p.html#5 PL/S programming language ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
