Re: Ancient software (Re: Product name by module)

[Edward Gould]

We had a CICS “application” that we were paying big bucks for . We did a 
similar thing but inserted code into the “application” that did a WTO . we 
scanned the syslogs daily and not once in 6 months was this “application” used. 
We took the empty logs to the user and said see you aren’t using it. They said 
otherwise. So we essentially did a br r14 into the code and waited another six 
months and went back to the user and asked if they were still using the 
application. They again said yes so we deleted the cics application and never 
brought it up again. The user never had a clue and we saved $60K (US) after 2 
years. We made sure management was aware of this and got their blessing. I 
don’t think they believed the user anymore after that. I wish I could have 
gotten 10 percent of the savings.

Ed
 
> On May 18, 2016, at 7:17 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht 
>  wrote:
> 
> Radowslaw Skorupka wrote:
> 
>> Of course I can imagine an answer like "we've been running this job for 15 
>> years, Frankie said it's important, but he retired 10 years ago, we don't 
>> know who's currently using it, nor what is the name of the application". ;-)
> 
> It was my unpleasant task to get rid of an expensive software suite, because 
> *all* are using it for many years and it is that *important*. The same as 
> Radoslaw said.
> 
> Really? The original person who maintained that software went away for a 
> better pay job overseas.
> 
> It was troublesome to even think of that removal story, because one of our 
> clients swore high and low they are *really* using it and ALL of its 
> connectors to the various database subsystems.
> 
> And they said *many* persons are using it.
> 
> I laid out a nasty trap to satisfy my bosses: 
> I used RACF WARNING and turned off those connectors. Nothing happened. I told 
> my boss what happened, we met up next month with the client. I showed my 
> proof, only ONE person is using it and NOT those connectors.
> 
> They relented. We then moved that software to a LPAR with 1 CPU allocated. 
> They complained about bad response time, etc. and eventually they used those 
> database own software to collect all the data they needed.
> 
> Next month my stats showed that NO ONE actually used that expensive software 
> suite.
> 
> Good. We notified the vendor that we drop them due to costs and no-one is 
> using it. They missed the boat in the sense they tried to persuade us to buy 
> a more EXPENSIVE suite. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
> 
> I believe many IBM-MAIN persons are sitting in the same boat. Getting rid of 
> ancient legacy (I hate that fancy word!) stuff because of costs and because 
> as one often said 'they're going off the mainframe'.
> 
> Groete / Greetings
> Elardus Engelbrecht
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Ancient software (Re: Product name by module)

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Radowslaw Skorupka wrote:

>Of course I can imagine an answer like "we've been running this job for 15 
>years, Frankie said it's important, but he retired 10 years ago, we don't know 
>who's currently using it, nor what is the name of the application". ;-)

It was my unpleasant task to get rid of an expensive software suite, because 
*all* are using it for many years and it is that *important*. The same as 
Radoslaw said.

Really? The original person who maintained that software went away for a better 
pay job overseas.

It was troublesome to even think of that removal story, because one of our 
clients swore high and low they are *really* using it and ALL of its connectors 
to the various database subsystems.

And they said *many* persons are using it.

I laid out a nasty trap to satisfy my bosses: 
I used RACF WARNING and turned off those connectors. Nothing happened. I told 
my boss what happened, we met up next month with the client. I showed my proof, 
only ONE person is using it and NOT those connectors.

They relented. We then moved that software to a LPAR with 1 CPU allocated. They 
complained about bad response time, etc. and eventually they used those 
database own software to collect all the data they needed.

Next month my stats showed that NO ONE actually used that expensive software 
suite.

Good. We notified the vendor that we drop them due to costs and no-one is using 
it. They missed the boat in the sense they tried to persuade us to buy a more 
EXPENSIVE suite. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

I believe many IBM-MAIN persons are sitting in the same boat. Getting rid of 
ancient legacy (I hate that fancy word!) stuff because of costs and because as 
one often said 'they're going off the mainframe'.

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN