Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support
From: Dave Froble (davef_at_tsoft-inc.com)
Date: 07/23/05
- Next message: terry golden: "Re: HP layoffs: 14,500"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "Re: simple image processing on VMS"
- In reply to: Main, Kerry: "Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Next in thread: Doc.: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Reply: Doc.: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Reply: Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Reply: JF Mezei: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:08:44 -0400
Main, Kerry wrote:
> All,
>
> Something to kick around ..
>
> The following is an interesting article which, imho, seems to bear out
> why some projects that want to change their platforms after 10-15 years
> of running just fine fail miserably and crash and burn. Of course, when
> they do crash-n-burn, a great deal of money has already been spent and
> there is no shortage of finger pointing as to why it failed.
The issue that still escapes me is, why will people WANT to spend money
for at best (in my opinion) a lateral move, and many times, a downward
move. I've asked, and the answers just don't make any sense to me.
The last answer I got was, "Our company needs to be on just one OS, and
that is windows."
Ok, whatever happened to 'multi-vendor inter-operatorability'?
> [I know of two major OpenVMS to Windows/UNIX projects that fall into
> this category - very large, high profile multi-million $ projects. A
> third one I know of is just waiting for someone to slam the lid on the
> coffin as the main players are already transferring to other projects..
> I could make reference to rodents leaving the ship, but I won't]
Well, the rats have to eat.
> http://news.com.com/The+great+legacy+skills+debate/2010-1007_3-5798584.h
> tml?tag=nefd.ac
> "The great legacy skills debate"
>
> Side rant - I hate the term "legacy" as every platform has "legacy"
> versions, but that does not mean their current version should be called
> "legacy". As an example, even though Microsoft refers to Windows 2000
> and Windows NT4 as "legacy", that does not mean Windows 2003 should be
> classified as "legacy".
My experience with this word and usage is that it is meant to imply that
something is 'lesser', 'old', and not just old, but old, no good, and
needing replacement. I'd mention to some that they are living on a
'legacy' planet, but they'd probably just look for ways to get rid of it.
> However, the article does bring out some good points about focusing to
> much on techie stuff and not enough on business knowledge.
The business solution IS the system. What else should matter?
> Perhaps the article quoted first in the above is a sign that some of the
> OS religion is starting (ok, crack in the door) to give way to a more
> practical realization that better integrating what you have is likely
> going to cost you about 10% of what a platform re-write / re-host will
> cost, at a fraction of the time to do it in and with exponentially lower
> risks involved.
I can see people who want to use, at the technical level, a particular
platform. What I still cannot understand is the business people being
willing to finance this wish. What I also cannot understand is the
active dislike of a particular platform at levels higher than the
technical people.
So fine, let the world continue on it's mad quest for stupidity.
There's money in helping them. I'm all for being stupid. I can prove
it. There's 2 jet engines on my back porch, and I'm putting them on a
50 MPH Ultralight aircraft this afternoon. Not only have I joined
'them', but now I'm leading them. But at least I'll have some fun.
-- David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. Fax: 724-529-0596 DFE Ultralights, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road Vanderbilt, PA 15486
- Next message: terry golden: "Re: HP layoffs: 14,500"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "Re: simple image processing on VMS"
- In reply to: Main, Kerry: "Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Next in thread: Doc.: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Reply: Doc.: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Reply: Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Reply: JF Mezei: "Re: Platform Support vs. Business Support"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|