Post #88,573
3/15/03 5:16:24 PM
|
But it is not what you said
You said we can do SAP-DB now.
I agree with what Glen said. It is a matter of timing, of new installs, of isolated projects. It is years into the future. 5 - 10 years.
It is not now.
And it is not something you attempt to force into a situation that it is not RIPE for.
|
Post #88,581
3/15/03 6:37:47 PM
|
No *YOU* can't because you won;t risk that neck of yours...
...And in 5-10 years you won;t either... except when something comes along and WHOPS you across the side of the head...
AS I say, this can be done now with SAPDB... Maybe I was shy...on the COST... by a factor three... so I save 25% on the project... 1/4 saved of ANYTHING is EXTREMEMLY significant...
Get off your... "It's not well known, therefore shitty" routine... LINUX was that way and now it is everyones Twinkle of the eye...
Get over *HAVING* to prove this again and again... SAPDB *CAN* do as much as you need it to do... it is multi-threaded it has SUPPORT up the Wazoo... It has a significant support structure... argueably less than Oracle... but then again look at Oracle's Universal installer... it won't with out severe tweaking... Oracle fails to link or install properly on many(most) platforms out of the shrink wrap... Oracle has sooo many "Known Issues"
What would SAPDB be any different if it did the same things?
SAPDB, is supported by MAJOR ERP/CRM/HRMs... Issues you have aren't really the problem... they are YOUR problem... You can Management Speak... oh that is right... Barry doesn't do anything, unless it's done by "everyone"... Oh boy that bridge is getting closer and closer...
b4k4^2
| [link|mailto:curley95@attbi.com|greg] - Grand-Master Artist in IT | | [link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry/|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] [link|http://pascal.rockford.com:8888/SSK@kQMsmc74S0Tw3KHQiRQmDem0gAIPAgM/edcurry/1//|ED'S GHOST SPEAKS!] | | [link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,857673,00.asp|Writing on wall, Microsoft to develop apps for Linux by 2004] | Heimatland Geheime Staatspolizei reminds:
These [link|http://www.whitehouse.gov/pcipb/cyberspace_strategy.pdf|Civilian General Orders], please memorize them.
"Questions" will be asked at safety checkpoints. |
|
Post #88,591
3/15/03 7:55:45 PM
|
Sigh
But I like my neck, thank you.
Your "my way or tough shit" attitude just doesn't cut it when dealing with multiple groups of people.
Oh my, it has multi-threading. yay!!!
So what? Technobabble for the people spending the $$.
So the "major" (according to you) apps support it?
So what. I'm not running them.
Most of the world run a huge variety of vertical apps.
Do THEY support it?
Does the vendor of MY critical app, the one I use work with it?
No.
Can I arm twist the vendor?
No.
Does this vendor of this particular app have reasonably priced competition?
No.
Does this app serve me (and my customers) very well?
Yes.
Do I want to rewrite it merely to use a different database?
Hell no.
Does it give me any choice of database?
Yup. It currently works with Oracle, DB2, and SQL Server
Can the vendor support it?
Only if I'm willing to pay at LEAST 25% more, and then unknown since it is a fork off their current tree.
Would I want them to increase their price by 25% to support another database?
No.
Have you given me anything other than insults that can help me move toward the alternative?
No.
Am I not manly enough? Not enough of a risk taker? I have not pushed forward the revolution fast enough for you?
I don't answer to you. I answer to my boss and my children.
Done.
Dead.
Thank you for playing.
|
Post #88,603
3/15/03 10:10:11 PM
|
Translation
Your toolset creates the dependency.
But if your tool vendor is convinced of the value of offering that port, then you would use it. In fact before you found out about that dependency you tried it.
Furthermore you have run pilot projects with both postgres and MySQL. And if your use of Linux is any sign, when the tool is ready for your needs (which I understand to be high-end) then you will have successful deployments.
But if your company is as you have described elsewhere, legacy projects will limp along for decades. Just like the mainframe folks have been doing...
Cheers,
Ben
PS Do you ever spare a moment of pity for people 20 years from now who will realize that the genius Barry Roomberg's untouchable code has a key routine with a mistake in it? And there are now unknown dependencies on this error in the maestro's code, so you can't fix it! :-)
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
|
Post #88,620
3/15/03 10:52:12 PM
|
Huh?
PS Do you ever spare a moment of pity for people 20 years from now who will realize that the genius Barry Roomberg's untouchable code has a key routine with a mistake in it? And there are now unknown dependencies on this error in the maestro's code, so you can't fix it! :-)
Most of the time people use the term genius it is sarcastic. Should I be worried?
Anyway, if I have code that outlives me, doubt I'll care that people can't change it. It should be ripped out and rewritten every 3 years anyway.
|
Post #88,626
3/15/03 11:21:02 PM
|
Explanation...
It was a reference back to [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=81278|http://z.iwethey.org...w?contentid=81278] - and while we are referring back to that thread there is a point that I had which I never stated back then due to being too busy to get involved at the moment.
My opinion is that you have mistaken the limitations of people who can survive the politics of your specific mainframe environment for the limitations of people who like to deal with mainframes. And if we can get her interested enough (and idle enough) to respond, my example of a mainframe person who demonstrates general competence by anyone's standards is Slugbug. That said, I suspect that there are many companies with established mainframe environments which resemble yours politically...
I also note that Ovid started on mainframes, but he is not evidence against your thesis since he left that environment quite cheerfully when given the chance.
Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
|
Post #88,647
3/16/03 12:10:37 AM
|
I started on mainframes, too...
I don't know if I'm up to the standard of SlugBug, but I did do 6 years of IBM 370 Assembler in a TPF and VM/CMS environment.
After 6 years, I had enough and was given a chance to work with C language on IBM PC's, so I did. In the 80286/80386 era. Two years after learning C, I started learning C++. I did that for about 5 years, then wanted to learn Unix and databases, but my employer was happy to make me into a permanent Windows NT networking person.
So I changed jobs, in about 3 months, I was proficient in Unix, and pretty decent in Sybase. Then I went to work for BEA, and realized that I knew nothing compared to the freakkin geniuses they had there.
I learned completely new coding techniques, to get portable code in C between AIX, Solaris, HP-UX, and even Windows NT. Something that still can't really be done in C++. But I did C++, too, and continued in the career.
Then I got a chance to do a big Unix/NT integration with C and Tuxedo and MQSeries, and mainframe interfaces in COBOL and XML. That was very cool, took a year.
Now, I've spent the last 1 1/2 years learning Java and DB2. I'm pretty decent at that, too.
But, for all that experience, I do think that fear stops most organizations from progressing and there are examples today of companies who won't be around in 5 years, because they cling to technology that time clearly has passed by. The airline/travel industry is particularly at risk, because they are still dependent on TPF (Transaction Processing Facility), when the last known updates for it from IBM were probably sometime in the early 1990's, and only after American, United, Delta, etc. BEGGED them to continue the O/S support.
Now, someone needs to rewrite the major travel reservations systems like Apollo, SABRE, and Worldspan into Unix technology, but now there's no money to support such an effort.
So, I fear the entire airline/travel technology industry will die off, until some brave soul enters the market with new technology. First small beans, then in about 5 years, they will dominate the marketplace.
The bottom line is that as long as the business model works, people will keep things the way they are. As soon as the model shifts fundamentally, then it's a WHOLE NEW BALL GAME.
Recessions are wonderful tools for creating a whole new ball game, because the economics make the old model flat out impossible.
|
Post #88,700
3/16/03 5:13:56 PM
|
Um....
....who ya' callin' a mainframe person? :-)
Sure, it's in my bag of tricks, but one has to grow and keep skill
levels consistent with what is in demand in the marketplace.
Not sure if I understand all of the parameters in Barry's shop, but
I'll venture a guess that there is a culture of fear element present
which likely permeates from above. In cases where fear is part of
the culture, it is often necessary to build and demonstrate a working
prototype that involves differing technologies so as to open eyes.
Has this been attempted?
Also, most mainframe shops that I'm aware of are adopting the plethora
of new technologies now available for big iron systems. Has this been
explored? Some examples:
[link|http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/os/linux/|http://www-1.ibm.com...zseries/os/linux/]
[link|http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/software/java/|http://www-1.ibm.com...es/software/java/]
My $.02
-Slugbug
If you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right.
-Henry Ford
|
Post #88,704
3/16/03 5:42:07 PM
|
You know, use and like mainframes
That is what I meant by a mainframe person.
You also know, use, and like a ton of other technologies. :-)
Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
|
Post #88,709
3/16/03 6:00:14 PM
|
Categorization is a dangerous thing
IME, people who categorize themselves as mainframe people usually only have knowledge and skill in that area with little or no desire to learn other things. On the other hand, "technologists" can and often do have mainframe skill along with knowledge and experience in a variety of other areas.
-Slugbug
If you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right.
-Henry Ford
|
Post #88,713
3/16/03 6:08:58 PM
|
*Exclusive* categorization is dangerous IMO
Since it is possible to know many different topics, it is possible for a person to be categorized as knowing multiple topics. ;-)
Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
|
Post #88,606
3/15/03 10:18:49 PM
|
Dont know your vendor but
When I was with Siemens and a GOOD customer asked CS if they could use X then Customer Service would start submarine support immediately on a test basis. Of course I dont know the vendor in question or their vision of what cust support is.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]</br>
To a lot of people in California hunting anything but the wild tofualope was equivelent to sacarificing babies to satan. S.M. Sterling
|
Post #88,614
3/15/03 10:40:12 PM
|
Small vendor
With a very limited support / development staff. They are far more interested in adding new features and fixing bugs than widening the number of databases they support.
When we started using them 6 years we were one of their 1st customers. They were a SQL Server ONLY shop. We practically forced them to move to support Oracle because SQL Server was too small / flaky to handle our requirements. So they already did this type of move, just for us. Since we resell their software into large companies, our argument was the large company already had Oracle and would not install / support SQL Server just to run their product.
It was incredibly painful dealing with this app. It generated SQL Server specific SQL. It used asyncronous ODBC connections, which never worked with the Oracle ODBC drivers, at least not for the 1st 2 years. I went though 6 seperate 3rd party ODBC driver test installs and QC. Sometime they would work for weeks until breaking in a strange way. The whole time the vendor said: Sure, send me everything you have and we will try to recreate. 2TB of data!!!! Of course we couldn't, so they would PCAnywhere into the PC running their software and try to fix it that way.
I'm speaking from EXPERIENCE here, not some BS "oh, it is well supported and has threads, ooooo". Try blowing MONTHS getting multiple systems playing nicely together.
We can't do the reverse, since we can't hold the carrot of SAB-DB already in the large corporations being used as a general database. Unless you want to point be to the companies using it already. Not vendors who support it, companies that use it.
|
Post #88,619
3/15/03 10:50:52 PM
|
understood and sympathise
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]</br>
To a lot of people in California hunting anything but the wild tofualope was equivelent to sacarificing babies to satan. S.M. Sterling
|
