On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:09:10 -0700, Edward Jaffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>... >> When the new system proved it couldn't handle the real world, >> IBM should have immediately come up with a different plan while >> letting customers continue using the 3270 interface. >> > >Huh?? This is the 21st-century software development business, Dude! (I'd >like to think I know a little something about that.) Bugs are >inevitable. But, you're not supposed to be stress testing your >critical-path software *live* on your customer base! > >I suspect many sysprogs, that are just trying to get their jobs done, >resent being unwilling, unpaid members of IBM's web Q/A test team. Your >attitude surprises me. >... Either you misunderstood me or I misunderstod you. I agree that you're not supposed to stress test live. But this wasn't a "supposed to" event. Whatever IBM did for testing it apparently didn't match the real world very well. They may have thought they were going live, but it looked (looks!) to me like a stress test using live data, live customers, but a moribund system. But the kept (keep!) trying. Yes, they have brought back the 3270 interface (and I'm using it) but a lot of people are still (unintentionally) helping IBM test the web interface. I still say IBM should have backed off, given up on the web interface as it exists now, and come up with a different plan. Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
