Unfortunately, the ignoring of low-end processor client needs is just a reflection of the Armonk attitude and position that only high-margin business is worth IBM's attention. No concern for growing smaller clients into larger ones at all. I have never understood that attitude, as it seems to me to be guaranteed to drive you into oblivion.
Decades ago I ran a VM/SP + VSE/SP shop (just me and one other half-systems, half-applications programmer plus one just-applications programmer) for a company running their accounting and word-processing storage processes on a 1M-byte 4361 processor and multiple 8100 processors running DPPX and it satisfied all their needs. After I left they abandoned IBM and went to an all DEC mini-computer solution using packaged accounting software because IBM totally ignored their growing needs. Peter -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Brian Westerman Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2023 12:46 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: z/OSMF After a couple years of use, I feel I'm pretty safe saying that, to me, z/OSMF appears to be a poorly designed and very badly programmed product. Most vendors would have ditched the product and stopped promoting it by now, but IBM probably has grand "plans" that won't really come into fruition until sometime around 2030 for z/OSMF. As you all know, the z/OSMF product is the ONLY way to install z/OS, (without using COS), and the product doesn't even run in a usable way on their smallest, (but still supported and sold) processors. So some poor site that buys into a z/15 T02 or z/16 A01 with a single CPU can barely even get the product up let alone have more than one user, and even that user (the systems programmer doing the install) has abysmal response time. I have pointed the problem out to IBM (multiple times), and have gone through the entire process of "proving" the issue(s) several times showing the issues in detail, only to be pointed to a manual that states that you "should" have a minimum of a 400MIP processor complex to use z/OSMF, (because that's what they use(d) for testing). The next problem I already see happening is that they are throwing a bunch of new "features" and add-ons into it, and some of them would be great products on their own, but are being hobbled by the (IMO) poorly designed product. I still can't believe that the same company that proudly states that we can still run code developed in the 1960's on the z/16 seems to care less about the fact that their installation vehicle doesn't support their own small end processors that you need the z/OSMF installation vehicle to install the OS with. Any other vendor would be laughed out of town. One of the sites we support (a z13s, no zIIP, single CPU) can't even install the updates from Broadcom via the "normal" method because using the Java interface times out before authentication. The solution from Broadcom (until IBM can fix their issue) is that they build a special delivery package for the site to use. That's just sad, and what was IBM's response after 7 months of "looking into" the problem? "The site could use a faster processor or the vendor should increase the authentication time limit." Neither of those is a possible solution in this case. Very sad and poorly played on IBM's part. -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
