Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[R.S.]

Just to complement: RACF, TSS and ACF2 were not the only choice.
Here, in Poland many installation had been using polish security product 
called PIES (eng. DOG).


Now, AFAIK there is (still) one small TSS shop, all the rest use RACF.

Few years ago I saw some announcement of DEADBOLT, product of 
JMenterprises company (US). AFAIK neither product, nor the company is on 
the market now.


I've also heard of some system modification allowing to used z/OS 
without any security product. Of course in such case everyone has access 
to everything.



--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland






W dniu 2015-09-10 o 07:11, Timothy Sipples pisze:

Tony Harminc wrote:

Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there.

Not truly, not exactly. IBM's omnipotence is routinely overestimated. ;)

IBM presumably knows how many z/OS licensees(*) are licensing the z/OS
Security Server elements. Presumably most(**) z/OS customers that do not
license z/OS Security Server are licensing some other security provider
product(s), though IBM would not know those details. Also, IBM would not
know which z/OS Security Server licensees also license other security
provider products.(***)

Anyway, I assume IBM could make some "reasonable" estimates, as other
parties could, but I'd say IBM doesn't truly know these market shares.

For what it's worth, Barry Schrager's estimates seem plausible to me, too,
but I have no special insight.

Writing my own views for myself, as always, even if I do not always insert
a disclaimer.

(*) z/OS licensees is not quite the same thing as z/OS systems (or
enterprises with z/OS). Every discrepancy I can think of is illegal,
though.

(**) I suppose it's also possible (though I'm sure rare) to run z/OS
without one of the three most popular security provider products. That's an
interesting side question. I have not yet encountered even one z/OS LPAR
(or z/VM guest) running without one of the three most popular security
provider products. Has anyone else? If so, how was that z/OS instance
configured?

(***) As one simple example, customers that license the IBM Rational
Development and Test Environment for z (RDTz) have z/OS Security Server
licenses (within those particular license terms and conditions) at no
additional charge. Do those RDTz licensees actually use the z/OS Security
Server, or do they use another security provider product? IBM would have no
reliable way of knowing.






--
Tre tej wiadomoci moe zawiera informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wycznie do uytku subowego adresata. Odbiorc moe by jedynie 
jej adresat z wyczeniem dostpu osób trzecich. Jeeli nie jeste adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomoci lub pracownikiem upowanionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, e jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne dziaanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i moe by 
karalne. Jeeli otrzymae t wiadomo omykowo, prosimy niezwocznie 
zawiadomi nadawc wysyajc odpowied oraz trwale usun t wiadomo 
wczajc w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive.

mBank S.A. z siedzib w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl
Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru 
Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2015 r. kapita zakadowy mBanku S.A. (w caoci 
wpacony) wynosi 168.840.228 zotych.


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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Ted MacNEIL]

There are a couple of shops in Toronto that use it.
It was developed by a couple of. CROWN TECH/DATACROWN ex-employees.

-
-teD
-
  Original Message  
From: Shane Ginnane
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 14:52
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM 
products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF 
>and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% 
>market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never seen it 
in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF was a 
slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

Shane ...

--
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

Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Steve Harner]

I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share 
breakdown is for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top 
Secret. In his 5/24/12 interview with Jeffrey R. Yost, Ph.D. 
(conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/132470/oh404bs.pdf), Barry Schrager 
noted that:
(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF and 
CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% market 
share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Thanks in advance for any further information which you can provide regarding 
what the current market share breakdown is for EACH of the three noted z/OS ESM 
products. 

Steve Harner
IT Audit Technical Consultant

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Thomas Conley]

On 9/9/2015 9:57 AM, Steve Harner wrote:

I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share 
breakdown is for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top 
Secret. In his 5/24/12 interview with Jeffrey R. Yost, Ph.D. 
(conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/132470/oh404bs.pdf), Barry Schrager 
noted that:
(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF and 
CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% market 
share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Thanks in advance for any further information which you can provide regarding 
what the current market share breakdown is for EACH of the three noted z/OS ESM 
products.

Steve Harner
IT Audit Technical Consultant

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



I would take Barry's word as gospel.  Just based on what I've seen at my 
clients, I would tend to agree with his numbers.


Regards,
Tom Conley

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Shane Ginnane]

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF 
>and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% 
>market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never seen it 
in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF was a 
slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

Shane ...

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Steve Conway]

Hi, Shane.

I've seen and used Top Secret at government, military, and very large 
financial service organizations.

No idea of the numbers, of course.


Cheers,,,Steve

Steven F. Conway
AO-DTS- CTHO-HSD INFRASTRUCTURE (INFR)
z/OS Systems Support
Phone:  703-295-1926
Mobile: 304-995-7360
steve_con...@ao.uscourts.gov



From:   Shane Ginnane 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   09/09/2015 11:27 AM
Subject:Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three 
z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  
wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM?s 
RACF and CA?s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 
75% market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 
percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never 
seen it in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF 
was a slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

Shane ...

--
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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Charles Mills]

Yes, we have customers running TSS. I could (but won't LOL) name a very large 
bank.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Shane Ginnane
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM 
products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF 
>and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% 
>market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never seen it 
in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF was a 
slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Scott Ford]

Yeah I think our numbers are larger on RACF and yes we have some large TSS
shops as well as RACF

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Rob Schramm  wrote:

> I think the numbers would need one more delineation.  My understanding is
> that TS is also in a lot of z/VSE.  Which changes the results for the
> question "how many mainframe installations of TS are there?" Of course if
> you add in z/VM, it might change things again.
>
> I was under the impression that the numbers for z/OS were
> 1) RACF
> 2) ACF/2
> 3) TSS
>
> But for the numbers of mainframes it was
> 1) RACF
> 2) TSS
> 3) ACF/2
> Of course the results of the numbers of mainframes are going to have some
> companies double or triple dipping even within a single mainframe
> footprint.
>
> Maybe a more interesting number would have rated MIPS, number of LPARs and
> number of users by operating system.  And it wouldn't be complete without
> the developers numbers as well.
>
> But as for real numbers.. can't really help.
>
> Rob Schramm
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:22 PM Tony Harminc  > wrote:
>
> > On 9 September 2015 at 09:47, Steve Harner  > wrote:
> > > I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share
> > breakdown is for EACH of the three
> > > z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret.
> >
> > Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
> > they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there. CA of course
> > knows how many ACF2 and TSS shops there are, but IBM also knows that
> > with almost perfect accuracy both because they know who is paying for
> > z/OS but not RACF, and because they see dumps and logs and such from
> > essentially every customer, which will also tell them. I doubt either
> > IBM or CA is talking on these numbers, though. In the absense of their
> > comments, I'd trust Barry's remarks.
> >
> > Based on the much smaller number of z/OS customers that I (as an ISV
> > employee) see problem tickets from, I would guess the ratio to be
> > roughly 80/10/10. Certainly neither ACF2 nor TSS is going away any
> > time soon; both are good products that are kept current, and all three
> > products offer unique features not available in the others. Because of
> > the nature of our software, we have to explicitly support all three in
> > code and doc, but I doubt that any would-be ISV or vendor of
> > consulting services in the z/OS market can afford to not support any
> > of them at least in install and use doc, even if the product uses only
> > standard SAF services.
> >
> > As for conversions, clearly the trend is to RACF, but we've seen
> > oddities like a large ACF2 customer that converted to RACF and was
> > then almost immediately acquired by another company using ACF2, and
> > converted back. I have yet to encounter a customer with all three
> > products in the same datacentre, though I don't doubt that they exist
> > as the result of M activity.
> >
> > Tony H.
> >
> > --
> > 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
>

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Shane Ginnane]

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 20:40:49 +0300, Itschak Mugzach  wrote:

>The market is is split between TSS & RACF. I know of only one ACF2 site,
>but they droped the mainframe...

Interesting - as I said I have never seen TSS in any shop in Aus. Just never 
got a foothold here. That includes major banks and government departments.
When CA acquired ACF2 there was a concerted push for ACF2 over TSS - almost to 
the point of discouraging (maybe not encouraging) adoption of TSS.

Shane ...

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Timothy Sipples]

Tony Harminc wrote:
>Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
>they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there.

Not truly, not exactly. IBM's omnipotence is routinely overestimated. ;)

IBM presumably knows how many z/OS licensees(*) are licensing the z/OS
Security Server elements. Presumably most(**) z/OS customers that do not
license z/OS Security Server are licensing some other security provider
product(s), though IBM would not know those details. Also, IBM would not
know which z/OS Security Server licensees also license other security
provider products.(***)

Anyway, I assume IBM could make some "reasonable" estimates, as other
parties could, but I'd say IBM doesn't truly know these market shares.

For what it's worth, Barry Schrager's estimates seem plausible to me, too,
but I have no special insight.

Writing my own views for myself, as always, even if I do not always insert
a disclaimer.

(*) z/OS licensees is not quite the same thing as z/OS systems (or
enterprises with z/OS). Every discrepancy I can think of is illegal,
though.

(**) I suppose it's also possible (though I'm sure rare) to run z/OS
without one of the three most popular security provider products. That's an
interesting side question. I have not yet encountered even one z/OS LPAR
(or z/VM guest) running without one of the three most popular security
provider products. Has anyone else? If so, how was that z/OS instance
configured?

(***) As one simple example, customers that license the IBM Rational
Development and Test Environment for z (RDTz) have z/OS Security Server
licenses (within those particular license terms and conditions) at no
additional charge. Do those RDTz licensees actually use the z/OS Security
Server, or do they use another security provider product? IBM would have no
reliable way of knowing.


Timothy Sipples
IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA
E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Itschak Mugzach]

No surprise. I've done such RACF to TSS conversion myself due to a bank
merge with our own tools. TSS is much more detailed in control and more
protective, but RACF is much more simpler to use and configure and use SAF
in a more standard way.
The market is is split between TSS & RACF. I know of only one ACF2 site,
but they droped the mainframe...


ITschak

ITschak Mugzach
Z/OS, ISV Products and Application Security & Risk Assessments Professional

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Gross, Randall [PRI-1PP] <
randy.gr...@primerica.com> wrote:

> I know of two extremely large US banks that use it.
>
> Both have RACF & T/S; at least one is (or was) in the throes of converting
> RACF to T/S.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 11:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM
> products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret
>
> Yes, we have customers running TSS. I could (but won't LOL) name a very
> large bank.
>
> Charles
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Shane Ginnane
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:27 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM
> products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner 
> wrote:
>
> >(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s
> RACF and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has
> 75% market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25
> percent.
>
> Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never
> seen it in a customer site.
> When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF
> was a slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.
>
> --
> 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
>

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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Rob Schramm]

I think the numbers would need one more delineation.  My understanding is
that TS is also in a lot of z/VSE.  Which changes the results for the
question "how many mainframe installations of TS are there?" Of course if
you add in z/VM, it might change things again.

I was under the impression that the numbers for z/OS were
1) RACF
2) ACF/2
3) TSS

But for the numbers of mainframes it was
1) RACF
2) TSS
3) ACF/2
Of course the results of the numbers of mainframes are going to have some
companies double or triple dipping even within a single mainframe footprint.

Maybe a more interesting number would have rated MIPS, number of LPARs and
number of users by operating system.  And it wouldn't be complete without
the developers numbers as well.

But as for real numbers.. can't really help.

Rob Schramm

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:22 PM Tony Harminc  wrote:

> On 9 September 2015 at 09:47, Steve Harner  wrote:
> > I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share
> breakdown is for EACH of the three
> > z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret.
>
> Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
> they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there. CA of course
> knows how many ACF2 and TSS shops there are, but IBM also knows that
> with almost perfect accuracy both because they know who is paying for
> z/OS but not RACF, and because they see dumps and logs and such from
> essentially every customer, which will also tell them. I doubt either
> IBM or CA is talking on these numbers, though. In the absense of their
> comments, I'd trust Barry's remarks.
>
> Based on the much smaller number of z/OS customers that I (as an ISV
> employee) see problem tickets from, I would guess the ratio to be
> roughly 80/10/10. Certainly neither ACF2 nor TSS is going away any
> time soon; both are good products that are kept current, and all three
> products offer unique features not available in the others. Because of
> the nature of our software, we have to explicitly support all three in
> code and doc, but I doubt that any would-be ISV or vendor of
> consulting services in the z/OS market can afford to not support any
> of them at least in install and use doc, even if the product uses only
> standard SAF services.
>
> As for conversions, clearly the trend is to RACF, but we've seen
> oddities like a large ACF2 customer that converted to RACF and was
> then almost immediately acquired by another company using ACF2, and
> converted back. I have yet to encounter a customer with all three
> products in the same datacentre, though I don't doubt that they exist
> as the result of M activity.
>
> Tony H.
>
> --
> 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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Gross, Randall [PRI-1PP]]

I know of two extremely large US banks that use it.

Both have RACF & T/S; at least one is (or was) in the throes of converting RACF 
to T/S.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 11:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM 
products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

Yes, we have customers running TSS. I could (but won't LOL) name a very large 
bank.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Shane Ginnane
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM 
products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF 
>and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% 
>market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never seen it 
in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF was a 
slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

--
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

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Tony Harminc]

On 9 September 2015 at 09:47, Steve Harner  wrote:
> I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share 
> breakdown is for EACH of the three
> z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret.

Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there. CA of course
knows how many ACF2 and TSS shops there are, but IBM also knows that
with almost perfect accuracy both because they know who is paying for
z/OS but not RACF, and because they see dumps and logs and such from
essentially every customer, which will also tell them. I doubt either
IBM or CA is talking on these numbers, though. In the absense of their
comments, I'd trust Barry's remarks.

Based on the much smaller number of z/OS customers that I (as an ISV
employee) see problem tickets from, I would guess the ratio to be
roughly 80/10/10. Certainly neither ACF2 nor TSS is going away any
time soon; both are good products that are kept current, and all three
products offer unique features not available in the others. Because of
the nature of our software, we have to explicitly support all three in
code and doc, but I doubt that any would-be ISV or vendor of
consulting services in the z/OS market can afford to not support any
of them at least in install and use doc, even if the product uses only
standard SAF services.

As for conversions, clearly the trend is to RACF, but we've seen
oddities like a large ACF2 customer that converted to RACF and was
then almost immediately acquired by another company using ACF2, and
converted back. I have yet to encounter a customer with all three
products in the same datacentre, though I don't doubt that they exist
as the result of M activity.

Tony H.

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