Most shops I have worked at do not want to bring in any product that has only a small support group. For example, if a product is developed that has a real benefit - but it is from Sally's Software firm. But Sally is the only person for support and sales, then they will not look at it because they believed it would not last past the time that Sally could no longer support it.
I think the question comes down to: Is it cost effective to invest in a function that may have a limited life span. What happens if it becomes imbedded in production and then when it breaks, our production goes down and there is no one on the staff to support it? So some of the larger organizations would not be willing to invest unless they could see the lifecycle of the product and creator (be it business or individual) I have several downloads I use from the CBT Tape. But I do not incorporate them into a production - if this dies the system dies - process. If the tool I have from the CBT TAPE dies, it does not impact anything but my statistics or analysis functions. Then I try to go and find another process. I am always looking for products supported by companies that have a good track record so I can replace anything I use from the CBT TAPE; however, that usage is isolated to me and no one else. One caveat. No business is protected from failure. So even when buying tools from various vendors, there is no guarantee that the vendor will be around tomorrow. Or that support will be able to fix the problem if they cannot replicate it in-house. Lizette -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 5:24 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Interested in up to date open source software or low cost utilities? The only "problem" with the CBTTAPE is that it is really only for _free_ ($0.00 cost), "open source" type software. I am not really aware of any of the contributions which are "binary executables and support files" only. I don't know of a way to have something like the Apple, Google, or Amazon "app" store where you actually pay real money and receive an executable. I am not sure, but it appears that David is looking at something where some of us "in the field" could write something very useful. And then publish it via the "z/OS app store" in order to make some money. It would be an interesting way to encourage the individual practitioner to transition into being a small ISV. Of course, one problem with this is "where the individual is doing the development?" question. If they are doing it on their employer's machine, then the employer likely has some rights to the software. Most of the Apple/Android apps are developed on a person's own PC, and so there is not really any question about who "owns" it. Since IBM does _not_ supply a free/low cost way to have your own z machine with software, this is not likely to catch on. As much as I like it. Might be interesting if IBM had a z/OS system that they maintained on which an individual could afford to have their own account, like in the old days of "time sharing". Of course, IBM (on the z at least) has little or no interest in any "product" which does not have a high "markup". So I doubt this is going to happen. > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of David Griffiths > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 2:39 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Interested in up to date open source software or low cost > utilities? > > Hi, I'd like to find out how much interest there would be in a wider > range and more up to date ports of common open source software > utilities and also more low cost utilities. Kind of like a z/OS "app > store" where customers could go to easily purchase or download for free such > small programs. > (Leaving to one side for now the question of how we get there!) > > Would a mainframe client consider using software (applications, tools, > utilities, etc) in an app store like model, where the product > roadmaps, support, or updates are less well established, too risky? > Does your company have policies today that would preclude you from > using software in this model? > > (Disclaimer: I work for IBM but am canvassing opinion in a completely > unofficial capacity.) > > Cheers, > > Dave > > PS: apologies if you've seen this message before - I thought the > google group was a gateway to this list! -- I have _not_ lost my mind! It is backed up on a flash drive somewhere. Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
