On 1/29/2013 10:40 AM, Don Williams wrote:
Hi Steve,
Thanks for great reply. More below...
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 11:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: mainframe "selling" points
On 1/28/2013 7:22 PM, Don Williams wrote:
<snip>
I work for a large hospital that has recently selected a new Electronic
Medical Records (EMR) vendor. While their decision process considered
the
infrastructure, the weight of all the other factors effectively ignored
any
platform advantages/disadvantages. They were far more concerned about
whether the application best meets the needs of the doctors, nurses,
clinics, etc. than whether the hardware be the best available.
Are you saying it's wrong to meet the needs of the customers first?
If I ran a hospital of course I would choose applications that helped
my staff most, and I would not care about the platform - just as long
as the applications worked correctly and were available when needed.
I agree, the staff needs far out weight the choice of platform.
What I omitted, was there was no viable EMR software based on z/OS.
A former colleague brought it to my attention that many hospitals have
started
switching to the same EMR vendor away from mainframe based applications,
and
that I should have my resume at the ready. After talking to other former
colleagues, I discovered that the hospital industry is not the only
industry
trying to move to slicker, nicer applications even if they have to switch
to
another platform. This implies that the software vendor is indirectly
selecting the platform.
Yes, and that's the way it should be.
My real questions are -- Why no EMR vendor chose the z/OS platform?
And are vendors in other industries starting to avoid z/OS? If so, why?
While my analysis is based on antidotal evidence, I believe that the
young
ITYM "anecdotal"; "antidotal" might keep
you from dying due to poisoning
Thanks for catching my wrong word. It did not look quite right, but I was
too lazy to double check it.
(or was I subconsciously looking for an antidote for the current state of
affairs? :-)
new developers of these slicker, newer applications want to develop on a
familiar platform (i.e., their school did not use a mainframe).
IBM blew it 20-30 years ago when they stopped being generous
to colleges and universities. Looking at the short term.
Boy do I agree. IIRC, the university I attended got a 60% to 70% (maybe
more) discount for their s/360 Mod 50.
I expect the various antitrust suits against IBM, esp. one in 1969 forced
IBM to reduce/eliminate their generosity.
They want to choose a platform that minimizes their development cost
(again not
a >> mainframe), yet is sufficient for a production environment.
Historically,
PC, blade servers, etc. simply were not robust enough to handle medium to
large companies. PC/blades/etc. have become larger and clustered, etc.,
so
that now days they can handle a large company (this does not apply to the
Fortune 1000 variety, because they are beyond large). Therefore vendors
seem far more willing to develop for a non-mainframe environment. IBM
seems
to have extended the mainframe with specialty processors like the IFL
processors for zLinux support, and Ensembles for blade support as a hedge
against the other platforms.
I'm not saying that IBM's mainframe market is about to dry up and >
disappear.
The Fortune 1000 size companies alone will keep the mainframe market
healthy
for many years to come, but I do think the other platforms are beginning
to
make a serious dent in the lower side of the traditional mainframe
market.
Where have you been? Of course that's what's been happening for
10 years or so. And IBM, generally speaking, is indifferent to
the trend as long as they get their share of the non-mainframe
market. Pay me for mainframes or pay for AIX, same results.
I'm not sure I agree with "Pay me for mainframes or pay for AIX, same
results."
Which platform provides IBM the best profit margin?
Hardware-wise, I would guess the System z.
Operating System-wise, I would guess z/OS.
Yes. But perhaps they are thinking "better to get a
little margin than no margin". Hmmm. That may be a
little weak.
Therefore I would expect IBM to promote vendor and education activities that
would enhance those lines of business.
I'm not sure high level management in IBM really "gets it" wrt z/OS.
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
On
Behalf Of Ron Wells
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: mainframe "selling" points
someone--needs to tell BBC about false statements.....
From: Mike Schwab <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: 01/25/2013 05:47 PM
Subject: Re: mainframe "selling" points
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-
[email protected]>
Card reader / punch, lineprinter, reel tapes, unmounted 3330 disk
pack.
Things have sure progressed since then.
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Don Williams <[email protected]>
wrote:
The article below does not paint a good future for the mainframe...I
hope
the analysts are wrong.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19399368
<deleted>
--
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.
303-355-2752
http://www.trainersfriend.com
* To get a good Return on your Investment, first make an investment!
+ Training your people is an excellent investment
* Try our tool for calculating your Return On Investment
for training dollars at
http://www.trainersfriend.com/ROI/roi.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
