Re: Re: slanted article "Inside System Storage -- by Tony Pearson"

We are definitely going to be disagreeing on this one Paul. 

While I do agree that companies need to be far more accountable,  that argument has nothing much to do with Hercules vs. IBM. 

Believe it or not, IBM *does* have a point about protecting IP that they spent *billions* of dollars to develop. MVS alone cost about a *billion* dollars to develop. I have no idea how much more money has been put out iby IBM for development and support of  OS390, z/OS, VM, z/VM, CICS/Transaction Server, DB2, and all the other products around.

But I flat out will bet any amount of money you want that it is more than the GDP of most *countries* on the planet. 

Ignoring that won't be productive. 

Now yes, IBM should, in my opinion, bend a bit on this subject. But if they choose not to, well, there is not much anyone can do about it. 

And it does not make them evil.  

<grin> Well, most of IBM. The billing department in Brazil - *that's* evil!  </grin>

-Paul


On Sep 21, 2010, at 8:38 PM, kerravon86 wrote:

> --- In [email protected], Paul Raulerson <paul.raulerson@...> wrote:
> >
> > Facts - there have to be more facts that this. 
> > Whatever else IBM may be, it is not stupid. And 
> > no matter how far IBM has turned away from we 
> > developers, it will always be aware of where 
> > the money is. 
> 
> Of course it is. Maintaining a monopoly and
> strangling competition is exactly what companies
> are meant to do, both morally and financially.
> 
> It's someone else's job to break that, IBM
> shouldn't have to do it themselves. Nor should
> Microsoft have to be the ones to cut off their
> own arm.
> 
> > It is quite possible IBM did offer someone a 
> > license for z/OS on Hercules
> 
> Actually, it's quite unlikely. Otherwise it would
> have come out as part of the dispute.
> 
> > For example, if they priced z/OS at say, 
> > $1,000,000 per engine or more.
> 
> If IBM had come back with such a thing, you'd be
> hearing the TurboHercules complaint starting off
> with that figure and saying it is predatory
> behaviour. It isn't. It's "no sale".
> 
> > Or there could be a dozen more possibilities, 
> > all of which are valid from IBM's viewpoint.
> 
> Occam's Razor will tell you that the (undisputed
> by IBM) TurboHercules complaint has all the main
> facts in it. You can see copies of IBM's letters
> too.
> 
> > Remember, IBM is pretty generous in the open 
> > source department
> 
> Try putting that statement to them, and suggest
> that they open source z/OS, and report back on how
> successful you were.
> 
> Hell, I'll settle for just getting them to put in
> writing that MVS 3.8j, which is already open-sourced,
> and has no copyright notice, can be legally
> redistributed.
> 
> Good luck with that one too.
> 
> Generous? Devious!
> 
> > Which is why I repeat that there have to be more facts than this. 
> 
> Um, no, there doesn't need to be. It's all quite
> well explained already. If you were IBM, wouldn't
> you do exactly what they are being accused of? I
> probably would. Or else I would resign, as I would
> hope that I would not implement policies that are
> against the best interest of IBM, after having been
> paid to do so.
> 
> > Really best to be careful what we say. 
> > Unproven or unprovable things about IBM will 
> > come back to haunt us.
> 
> More unfounded speculation. We already are being
> haunted anyway. The whole world is haunted by
> IBM and Microsoft's respective monopolies. It's
> unbelievable that in a world with more
> (unreasonable) anti-capitalist protestors than
> you can shake a stick at, that there isn't a
> permanent hippy farm parked outside of IBM and
> Microsoft.
> 
> > Eventually, IBM will be coming to an agreement 
> > about Hercules. 
> 
> Eventually IBM will HOPEFULLY be forced by government
> legislation to end its predatory anti-capitalist
> practices. The biggest danger I see is numbskulls
> in the government falling for the "oh, it's just
> another server" lie (which they have a history of
> falling for already).
> 
> > We all want that agreement to be the most 
> > beneficial for the Hercules community. 
> 
> I'm after an agreement that is most beneficial
> for the business community, personally. and that
> should allow PSI as a competitor to both
> TurboHercules and IBM.
> 
> BFN. Paul.
> 
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hercules-advocacy/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hercules-advocacy/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    hercules-advocacy-fullfeatured-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    hercules-advocacy-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/