On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 10:41:05 -0800, Fargusson.Alan wrote:
I don't really want to defend IBM pricing, but gross margin is
not the same as profit. It is much more expensive per customer
to maintain software that has a small installed base than software
that has a large installed base. The number
They should follow what Gate's did in the beginning---give it away and nail
ya later on Maint./upgrades.
But then again how about IBM doing something really strange ... listen to
customers getting nailed on all the pricing by third part vendors as well
as IBM because it is a MAINFRAME ...guess it
(or maybe even lower).
You have a good point though.
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Y. Odo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 1:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IBM pricing (was URGENT! really low performance. A related
question...)
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 10:41
To a degree, IBM has listened to us. Look at the product mix that has
appeared recently, generally at lesser cost: File Manager, Fault
Analyzer, CICS/PM, RMF/PM (for Linux, too), DB2 Utilities Suite, etc.
If you get weary of the constant contract negotiations, you can
usually find something
Unfortunatly still alot to go ... still being hammered to justify any
upgrades and yes third party products not making it easy nor are the
smaller server groups . Yes I gree it is getting better and IBM offering
more -- but not enough and becoming too short on delivery .. cost of owner
ship still
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 10:41:05 -0800, Fargusson.Alan wrote:
I don't really want to defend IBM pricing, but gross margin is
not the same as profit. It is much more expensive per customer
to maintain software that has a small installed base than software
that has a large installed base. The
