Shane Ginnane wrote:
>What a bloody schmozzle.

Wait a minute. Let me make it simple then, because it is. Get Country
Multiple Pricing (CMP) and:

(a) There are no Single Version Charge periods;
(b) There are no Sysplex aggregation rules.

There's a whole IBM redbook devoted just to part (b) -- an excellent one,
as it happens -- so I'd say a fair amount of complexity is gone with CMP.

With respect to Linux, everybody in the Linux support business has rules,
even complex ones, concerning how you pay for your support, what that
support entails (its limits and processes -- for example, what components
are supported at level X, which ones at level Y, and so on), hours and
escalation processes, how you renew (or don't), dispute resolution, and
various other permutations. The trend over time has been for progressively
greater complexity in those Linux support arrangements. Red Hat, for
example, used to have one "vanilla" option many years ago. Now they have
chocolate, chocolate with chocolate sauce, vanilla with chocolate chunks,
tutti frutti, tutti frutti with whippped cream and a cherry on top....

In addition, you've typically got separate licensing and support agreements
with the various software vendors (including with IBM, I hope) on top of
your Linux agreement(s). And each component even within your Linux
distribution has a different license: GPL2, GPL3, LGPL, Apache, MIT, etc.,
etc., and those individual component licenses can change even with the next
patch. They should all be OSI compliant, but they are still different, and
somebody probably has to review them and periodically re-review them.

I'm not necessarily criticizing any of that. No, I'm not criticizing it at
all. It is what it is. The complexity is real and is probably increasing.

If CMP for z/OS (and the IBM software products on z/OS) is/are a "bloody
schmozzle," then so are other operating systems and their products that I
also like -- and they might even be medium sized war bloody. As it happens,
with CMP IBM mopped up some blood. [What a metaphor you picked, Shane.
Lovely. :-)]

Let's applaud IBM for a few seconds here when the company does something
good, for it has done so, I would argue. I think IBM absolutely did the
right thing in simplifying the rules amidst a software industry (including
Linux) that's getting more complex over time. You just have to switch to
the new, slimmer, simpler CMP rule set, that's all. I merely provided a
fuller answer to be helpful to those who haven't yet adopted CMP and
perhaps to drive home the point that CMP is good.

I recommend CMP.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy Sipples
IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA
E-Mail: [email protected]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to