6 Sep
2007
6 Sep
'07
7:29 p.m.
On 06/09/07, Sridhar Ayengar <ploopster at gmail.com> wrote:
Liam Proven wrote:
The problem is that "users" is a somewhat nebulous concept when it comes
to mainframes, and "seats" is a completely meaningless measure when it
comes to mainframes. The average non-computer-using American probably
accesses a mainframe at least a dozen times a week. More if you use a
computer.
It's not that there's a lot of mainframes out there, it's that they're
quite pervasive.
All right, conceded.
But I suspect that there is a user count involved somewhere for
licensing purposes!
Re your point about accessing a mainframe - that would generally be
very indirectly, though, no? They access a web server or an ATM or
something, that probably talks to another server, that talks to a
mainframe.
Most of the tedious IT management press that I read seems to consider
the client/server model obsolete now and talks of at least 3-layer
models instead.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat: liamproven at aol.com ? MSN/Messenger: lproven at hotmail.com
Yahoo: liamproven at yahoo.co.uk ? Skype: liamproven ? ICQ: 73187508
It
depends on how you define the market for a mainframe. It's not the
same market as for a Windows PC, and it never was.
Well, we could compare installs, or we could compare users. It's up to
you. Either way, I'll warrant that its market share now is
infinitisemal compared to what it once what.