Thoughts - Charles is right on. And: > How can IBM know that your hardware is working correctly and they aren't > having to diagnose your hardware system rather than just diagnosing their > software, if you get what I mean?
The license would be 'as is' - no support. And it'd be easier to just let people have the hypervisor (pdt) vs trying to port z/OS to x86. So no hw issues, just license for free a hobbyist no support z/OS + pdt, limited to X # CPs & memory (and no useless USB keys). > If IBM blesses your system, how can IBM know that you aren't running > production workloads without paying them the requisite license fees? They can't. However, take Microsoft or VMware, I can get full featured versions of all MSFT products (server, exchange, etc) for a few hundred bucks. VMware too. Sometimes eval versions for free. What keeps people honest? Lawyers. Woe to the company using unlicensed enterprise software for real workloads. Also, with regards to "hackers" or other nation state or <insert badguy here> taking the software apart - I've yet to hear a compelling argument that not licensing the software to hobbyists or students has any relevance to this. - nation states can just buy or steal Z/OS and the hardware directly or second hand. Not stopping them. - hackers or other motivated individuals have only to collectively buy, beg or steal a copy of the OS. Or get a job somewhere that uses it, or go to a school that does etc. it's hardly hard to find. Furthermore, if any of the above found a vulnerability or 10, and used it - that'd get back to IBM pretty quick, who could then fix said vuln and make the platform safer .... what's the issue again? That's the model used by more or less every single software company today. If that's not crazy enough, many now *pay* people to take their software apart and find bugs. Wow! It would seem IBM - Z is behind the times here. Interestingly IBM supports and promoted big bounties in other non-Z areas. Apparently differences of opinion. Ok end rant. Chad > >> On 10/04/2016 03:09 PM, Charles Mills wrote: >> IMO, FWIW <g> IBM is *very* supportive of those of us who make money >> developing software. The pricing at the Dallas Innovation Center cannot be a >> huge profit center for IBM. IBM is about to host a software vendor meeting >> (how much can I say without violating the NDA?) that has to cost IBM a heck >> a lot more than the nominal attendance fee. IBM gives my employer a >> "software vendor advocate." I can go to him with any problem (well, any >> problem that might be in IBM's court) and while he probably does not know >> the answer (unless it is a GRS or RSM question) he probably knows someone >> who knows who knows the answer. We pay nothing for his time. >> >> That said, why is IBM so antagonistic to z/OS running on non-Z hardware? I >> of course don't know (and doubt our advocate would get us an answer!) but >> perhaps they fear opening the floodgates? If z/OS on Hercules, then legally >> why not z/OS on a Brand X mainframe? Still makes no sense to me, but IBM >> employs people who know more and spend more time on this subject than I. >> >> Charles >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
