On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 21:25:45 -0500, Jeffrey C Barnard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dean, > >Interesting thoughts ... > >Basically IBM is a corporation with stockholders. A 'for profit' corporation. >They will do things that they believe will earn them money. IBM is very >interested in earning money (as are most if not all corporations). The key to >this discussion is to come up with a way for IBM to earn money on a 'hobbyist' >license. Something has to fund (pay for) the license and the IBM personal >handling distribution/maintance/support of said license. License security (legal >usage) is another issue (I will ignore that for now). > >Find a way for IBM to make a profit on a hobbyist license and they will do it. >Remember IBM is a very large company. Their cost structure is much higher than >you think. Suggesting a way for IBM to make $100,000 is not going to make it. >$100K (or $1 million) is not even on any IBM managers radar screen. > >Does PWD make money? Probably not but the $13K/$20K everyone complains about >probably does not even cover the cost of IBM running the project. Remember, NO >AD/CDs any more and PWD costs have largely been moved to T3/Cornerstone as >distributors. Most PWD personal are now doing something else. IBM has lowered >their costs by moving the PWD program outside IBM but T3/Cornerstone have to >make money too. > >Complain if you want but the reality is if you want a hobbyist license you have >to find a way for IBM to make money on it. Heck, you might get them to at least >listen to you if you could find a way for them to break-even on the license (but >I doubt it). What a hobbiest license would do is make it possible for z/OS and z/VM to survive the coming retirement of 80% of all the experienced programmers. By creating a very inexpensive training/development environment, IBM would make it possible for that market to continue. That isn't return on investment - it is pure survival. Unless... IBM has given up and is willing for that market to dissipate. Milking an older market - minimizng investment and maximizing profits - is a reasonable business strategy. I remember reading that RCA was the last USA manufacturer of a large class of vacuum tubes. The last few years they made a ton of money. I've got a friend who works for a small chip company spun off from Intel... a roster of 8 of them are generating revenues of 40-50 million a year on costs of 8-10 million. No R&D costs for the hardware, some cost in developing new Windows drivers, some support costs and paying foundaries to make the chips. It would take a wild leap of imagination for IBM to make that move... and I doubt they have it. They see a valid business strategy and are investing in it. john alvord
