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

> Some time ago Fran sent the below link…
	That article is a must read.


> 		From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] On
> Behalf Of Fran
> 		Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2010 08:59 
> 		To: [email protected]
> 		Subject: [H390-VM] TurboHercules Takes on IBM
> 
> 		"TurboHercules Takes on IBM" article by Phil Smith III in
> the October/November 2010 issue of z/Journal magazine is very interesting.
> See page 52 in http://zjournal.tcipubs.com/issues/z-JOCT-NOV10.pdf
> <http://zjournal.tcipubs.com/issues/z-JOCT-NOV10.pdf>  
> 
>  
> 
> Quote from the article -
> 
> 
> " IBM has mostly taken a “don’t-ask,don’t-tell” approach toward Hercules
> use by vendors and hobbyists, but has
> never officially allowed licensing of current IBM software on the
> platform. So while there are surely dozens—maybe
> even hundreds—of copies of z/OS,z/VM, z/VSE, and perhaps even z/TPF
> running on Hercules boxes, they’re
> technically doing so illegally and certainly aren’t supported by IBM.
> Subscribers to the Hercules mailing  list ([email protected])
> frequently bemoan their inability to run
> current IBM software legitimately. Their thesis is that “tall oaks from
> little acorns grow.” They assert that by explicitly
> enabling Hercules use by hobbyists and small ISVs, IBM would be
> encouraging development of both skills and products
> for System z, helping ensure its future"
> 
> END QUOTE
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The important words here are ' Don’t ask don't tell... That is really all
> I care about.
> 
> As a "hobbyist" why am I interested in a commercial enterprise like
> 'TURBO-HERCULES'?
> As far as I can see that is really out-of-scope for the "HERCULES" forum.
> 
> I suggest we stop playing with the tigers tail on this.
> More power and great thanks to everybody who ever had any part in building
> this wonderful open-system.
> But if they want to take it to the next level and make it a business then
> the line of distinction should be very clearly drawn.
> 
> I feel that this community should stick to the non-commercial application
> and enhancement of Hercules.
> And I pretty much think that IBM has the right to do anything and
> everything to protect their investment in hardware and software.
> Historically they could not separate them or develop one without the other
> and thus they are intertwined -
> Everything from the archetecture of the hardware to the OS was developed
> by IBM and all meshed together.
> Not very fair to let someone else pick and choose which parts of that he
> wants to copy. Because we now have newere technoligies.
> Because all the development has already been done. 
> 
> I like BFN-Paul - at least he is 90% developing his own OS - Pretty sure
> nobody is going to object to that running on Hercules.
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> 	From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of kerravon86
> 	Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2010 09:34 
> 	To: [email protected]
> 	Subject: [hercules-advocacy] Re: slanted article "Inside System
> Storage -- by Tony Pearson"
> 	
> 	
> 	  
> 
> 	--- In [email protected]
> <mailto:hercules-advocacy%40yahoogroups.com> , Paul Raulerson
> <paul.raulerson@...> wrote:
> 	>
> 	> Well, like I said, we just have to agree to disagree. 
> 	> I have a much more
> 	> libertarian take on the issue than you do. 
> 	
> 	That isn't libertarian. That is just evil.
> 	
> 	> I do not think profits or making
> 	> money, or even becoming a billionaire is an 
> 	> "evil" thing. 
> 	
> 	Misrepresenting my view is evil too.
> 	
> 	I never said that it was evil to make money in a
> 	capitalist society. I said the exact reverse.
> 	
> 	What I object to is the suggestion that any
> 	company making money in a capitalist society is
> 	some sort of charitable saint that we should be
> 	thankful, rather than just another guy out for a 
> 	buck. And the claim that IBM's board of directors
> 	are full of integrity and we should put our faith
> 	in them, as they engage in predatory practices.
> 	
> 	> And I not ashamed to say I am quite happy 
> 	> holding on to my very modest IBM shareholdings.
> 	
> 	What a surprising revelation there. At least that
> 	explains why for the first time in my life I have
> 	seen someone in the middle of a debate drop a link
> 	to a board of directors of a multinational and
> 	say "take a look - these are people of integrity".
> 	
> 	> Nor do I think IBM is an "evil" company, though 
> 	> the closest to that I know
> 	
> 	I didn't say IBM was evil either. I have explicitly
> 	said that if I was on the board of directors, the
> 	decisions I would make would be to maintain IBM's
> 	unfair monopoly too. In a company setting, my loyalty
> 	must be to the company, with only the law above that.
> 	That's the conditions of taking on the job.
> 	
> 	I explicitly said that it was not IBM's job to
> 	put constraints on their own market share. It is
> 	the government's job to do that. To break up
> 	natural (not evil) monopolies.
> 	
> 	> of is when an acquaintance of mine, Edwin Black, 
> 	> uncovered some pretty
> 	> interesting evidence that IBM sold equipment to 
> 	> Genrmany before WWII that
> 	> was used in some pretty unpleasant ways.
> 	
> 	No evil there, either. It is up to governments to
> 	decide the rules of who you can trade with, not IBM.
> 	
> 	> I do think rants about IBM like this will not lead 
> 	> to getting Hercules accepted and supported by IBM
> 	
> 	If I were IBM, nothing in the world other than
> 	explicit legislation would get me to accept Hercules
> 	or support it in any way.
> 	
> 	IBM is doing the exact sensible thing, at least
> 	for its short-term profits are concerned. I think
> 	that in the long term they are forcing people to
> 	move off MVS. If I was any other company using
> 	MVS, I'd be looking at opportunities to move off
> 	that platform so that I am not beholden to a
> 	monopoly.
> 	
> 	But short-term, and maybe medium-term, fleecing
> 	customers is precisely what IBM should be doing
> 	for their shareholders, so their behaviour is 
> 	perfectly understandable, natural, rational, 
> 	amoral, and exactly what I would do myself, were
> 	I in that position.
> 	
> 	But from a government/world point of view, I
> 	would have ended IBM's predatory practices long
> 	ago. And I would have taken a portion of the 
> 	government funds that go into various research 
> 	programs to create Hercules in the first place,
> 	rather than wait for individuals to do so. I
> 	would also have created a public domain clone
> 	of Windows and z/OS to help break up these
> 	monopolies (rather than just splitting the
> 	company which I don't think achieves anything).
> 	
> 	That is precisely why I spend my own free time
> 	doing what the hopeless governments have failed
> 	to do for decades. At least I can say that I tried.
> 	As opposed to trying to keep a monopoly in place
> 	and attempting to pass it off as some sort of
> 	saintly charity with a straight face.
> 	
> 	BFN. Paul.
> 	
> 	P.S. I forgot to add a disclaimer to a previous
> 	message - yes, I know Mother Theresa is the
> 	scam of the century, but it is part of our
> 	language for now.
> 	
> 	
> 
> 	
> 


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