***@ibm-main.lst (Clem Clarke) writes:
> It's a shame, but unless IBM does do a big rethink on this, and allows
> small developers some sort of inexpensive or free access to the
> mainframes, they will die. Allowing a "hobbyist" license for Z/OS,
> VM and VSE on Hercules would be one way, and what does IBM really have
> to lose? And the gain would be that they could have many people
> working at no cost on these systems developing tools and applications
> to make them better and better.
some related thread drift from another n.g.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007m.html#3 nouns and adjectives
that in the 60s and much of the 70s ... lots of the innovation came out
of customer installations & datacenters ... since it was the customers
that understood the need and requirement ... things like cics, ims, etc.
later they were transferred to "development" organizations for product
support. in many cases, this is misnomer ... since those "development"
organizations are responsible for product maintenance ... not the
products "development" (maybe doing plus/minus five percent changes per
annum). I've periodically made facetious comments referencing the "term"
inflation in using the word "development" applied to organizations that
are primarily product "maintenance".
something similar happened with the introduction of the ibm/pc ... large
proportion of the "products" originated from end-users (that were faced
with the actual problems and understood what kind of solution was
needed). vendor product operations tend to have people like software
engineers that understand issues about software maintenance ... but
rarely have people with the necessary experience that they could see
what solution was originally needed.
even before ibm/pc came out ... there were some that had jump shipped
from vm/cms (that had been providing mainframe-based personal computing
environment) and were implementing some number of CMS applications on
other early personal computers. These weren't ports of CMS applications
(because the implementation details tended to be totally different), but
frequently the look&feel and the solution they provided were the same.
the "OCO-wars" were especially hard on the vm/cms community ... because
not only was full source available ... but even maintenance, fixes, etc
for customers were shipped as source updates ... based on CMS
multi-level source maintenance facilities. Some studies from their
period even claimed the number of system (source) updates done at
customer datacenters (aka aggregate lines-of-code) was actually larger
than the source lines-of-code in the base system.
the high-end of the market is where the (quarterly) revenue/profit
... but all the innovation tends to originate at the low-end & mid-range
... in part innovation requires quite a bit of experimentation,
trial&error, etc ... and the high-end is rarely made available for such
As a result, some of the other vendors found a need that could filled in
the entry/low-end market segment (and long term ... it is frequently the
entry/low-end that tends to feed the high-end with the applications that
keep the high-end quarterly revenue sustained).
the pre-occupation with quarterly results has been a sporadic topic for
at least the last 40 yrs. during periods when there was significant
general economic growth ... the generational issues appeared to almost
take care of themselves ... allowing the perception that executives
could solely concentrate on the quarterly issues. however, this approach
somewhat came to roost. i've mentioned before about being at a talk at
MIT in the early 70s where Amdahl was asked how he was able to convince
the money people to support his new clone computer company. His reply
was that there was already something like $200b that customers had
invested in 360 applications ... that even if IBM were to totally walk
away from 360/370 ... which might be considered a vieled reference to
the future system project
... (just) that (existing) software application base could keep him in
business thru the end of the century.
starting in the early 70s, i had been heavily involved with HONE
deployment ... first its original objective to provied "hands-on"
experience to branch office SEs with operating systems running in
virtual machines ... and then the transition to being primarily an
online, interactive environment deploying applications (mostly
implemented in cms\apl) supporting sales & marketing worldwide.
in the mid-70s, I got con'ed into helping with the virgil/tully
microcode assists ... including spending time off & on over a period of
a year running around the world with the product managers, meeting with
business planning & forcasting groups positioning the processors in the
market. One of the things that I saw was that the business positioning
environment in world trade was somewhat the early stages of what was
going to be happing in the domestic market a decade or so later (the
HONE tools somewhat gave me perspective of what sales & marketing was
doing world-wide ... from the mechanics bottom-up ... where-as all the
virgil/tully forcasting was perspective of sales & marketing somewhat
from top-down). lots of past posts talking about (both) 360 & 370