Author: Anne & Lynn WheelerAnne & Lynn Wheeler
Date: Jul 3, 2008 05:13
> ..but "blind" is completely out of court here and cannot go
> unchallenged in this forum. If CKD compatability had been abandoned
> then I've no doubt that it would have broken thousands of applications
> and would have been regarded by the customer base as a total
> show-stopper when considering an upgrade to any version of "MVS" or
> "S/390" or "z/OS" without CKD support.
the issue (initially) wasn't about CKD being abandoned but starting with
MVS supporting FBA ... and transition period from CKD to FBA.
i was told that even providing them with fully tested and integrated FBA
support in MVS ... it would still cost $26m to ship the support and I
had to show (significant, incremental) ROI for that $26m (including
opportunity costs vis-a-vis spending it somewhere else). at the time,
the claim was that they were shipping as many disk drives as they could
build ... and therefor (at best) customers would buy FBA in lieu of CKD
... with no incremental revenue.
one business case was life-cycle costs ... there have been enormous
costs sunk into incremental enhancements to CKD ... that would have much
more cost-effectively done as transition to FBA.
|