Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- From: "Ray Porter" <ray_porter@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:39:39 -0400
"Kevin Powick" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:xn0fpjozs35y6u001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ray Porter wrote:
I'm not familiar with the mainframe you mention, but has it been
considered to purchase a new "box" that can support the current
mainframe OS, applications, and programming tools/languages? Or have
you determined that these applications really do need to be redone from
the ground up?
The mainframe is owned and managed by the campus central IT division and
they've decided that the mainframe will be decommissioned and all
applications hosted in that environment must be retired or replaced.
Fortunately, a couple of us have worked with this application area for 20+
years and are very familiar with the functional needs and business
requirements (most of which are contained within the mainframe
implementation). We've got a few years since their timeline for unplugging
the mainframe keeps slipping but in the long run, everything on that box has
to be reimplemented in another environment if it's still needed.
Ray Porter
.
- References:
- in-house development versus packaged solutions
- From: Ray Porter
- Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- From: TJC Support
- Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- From: Kevin Powick
- in-house development versus packaged solutions
- Prev by Date: Re: Private variables question
- Next by Date: Re: Private variables question
- Previous by thread: Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- Next by thread: Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|