Tmax lowers IBM z/OS computing cost

Even as IBM battles NEON in court in an effort to squelch zPrime, another upstart is emerging on the mainframe scene, TmaxSoft, which is about to introduce a System z version of OpenFrame, promises to duplicate key z/OS functionality, such as CICS, VSAM, RACF, JES and more on a low cost IFL.

Tmax, in effect, offers another way to reduce the cost of System z computing by avoiding mainframe software licensing costs. Instead you run these traditional mainframe applications on an IFL. And as with zPrime, big, big savings here. eWeek reported it here, but it didn’t seem to get picked up much.

As the Register, a UK publication, noted in January, IBM can’t let this get out of hand: With mainframe revenues off sharply and likely to be so until the System z11 mainframes ship much later this year, IBM can ill afford to look the other way as Neon Software peddles its zPrime tool for offloading mainframe workloads to much cheaper specialty engines. So it sued Neon, which had already launched its own pre-emptive legal strike at the end of 2009.

Tmax hopes to avoid a similar confrontation with IBM. “We’re a different things. NEON encouraged users to violate their license [according to IBM]. They couldn’t come after us with the same claim. Our customers take their own intellectual property and run it on OpenFrame. There is no IBM software involved,” says John Plato, the Tmax marketing person in the US.

Still, Tmax offers the opportunity for what Plato describes as workload shifting. OpenFrame duplicates the functionality of core z/OS systems. replacing the legacy CICS, IMS, JES, VSAM mainframe engines with OpenFrame to run the customer’s applications originally written in legacy code like COBOL and PL1 on Linux, but do so without having to make changes to the source code or business logic. It also handles batch applications.

This allows companies to move those applications to the IFL, which reduces the licensing costs without having to give up the benefits of the mainframe, just the expense of running software under z/OS. The result is the same as with zPrime; the customer runs what had been a z/OS application on an IFL, at the substantially lower IFL licensing costs.

Tmax, in effect, emulates those core z/OS functions in OpenFrame although it doesn’t call it emulation. And the performance is as good as the real thing based on a test of a 7500 MIPS workload, according to Plato. The product is ready for production use, he reports; the company is just looking to sign up some pilot projects.

Whether Tmax avoids IBM’s legal wrath remains to be seen. As the Register reported, IBM’s charge is that NEON is hijacking IBM intellectual property. Tmax is hoping to avoid that by inserting its own intellectual property instead. The lawyers will have to figure this one out.

The real point, however, is that mainframe computing is perceived as simply too expensive, especially with the availability of powerful, less costly platforms that promise to handle mainframe-class workloads without the mainframe overhead. Whether they actually deliver on that promise is another question. But one thing is certain: upstarts like NEON and Tmax will keep coming as long as there is a demand for lower cost mainframe computing.

US House kills mainframe for $750K

The US is facing multi-trillion-dollar deficits for years to come. A dysfunctional Congress can’t pass even the simplest of legislation without tacking on millions of dollars in earmarks. Yet, the House shut down its last mainframe computer, supposedly saving the taxpayers a whopping $750,000 a year in maintenance, fees, and energy costs. Watch the video of them pulling the plug here.

They have moved the applications to a variety of other servers and platforms, specifically x86 and UNIX servers running virtualization, according to Computerworld UK.  Of course the mainframe has the most robust, industrial strength virtualization of them all, whatever.

The final mainframe was 13 years old. Computerworld UK quotes the House director of facilities as saying “It wasn’t the fastest box in the world. Some of our blades and some of our standard servers have more capability than that entire 8-cubic-foot box has. Technology-wise, it’s obviously been surpassed.”

No kidding. The mainframe has gotten considerably smaller, fastest, cheaper, more flexible, and far more energy efficient in the past 13 years. Heck, they could have picked up one of IBM’s latest System z Solution Editions that would give them a BC-class z10, software, middleware, three years of maintenance, and more for a bit over $200,000. Hmm, wonder what all those distributed x86 and UNIX systems and their upkeep are costing us taxpayers.

Driving this change appears to be the House’s intense desire for green computing. Remember, these are the people who seem to be having trouble passing legislation that would cut our dependence on foreign oil. With the new platforms and virtualization the House has virtualized a couple of hundred servers, which indeed saves energy. A System z would have done as well or better.

The real issue, however, was not energy but the decline of IT skills in the House. As Computerworld UK reported, quoting the House facilities director: “We really don’t have those [mainframe] skill sets in-house anymore. We try not to maintain architecture that we can’t support ourselves.”

I see messages daily from experienced mainframe people unemployed and looking for work, some of whom probably live in the DC area. All these years and the House couldn’t find any skilled mainframe people, who are they kidding?

The House is just the latest and possibly the most visible recent manifestation of a problem that has the potential to seriously undermine the future of the mainframe no matter how much IBM enhances its capabilities, dumbs down its operations, and cuts prices—the unwillingness of management to invest in cultivating people with mainframe interests.

This issue, which came up in the discussions around the Union Pacific Railroad’s decision to try to migrate off the mainframe—at which it apparently has not yet succeeded—appeared  first in Network World and was taken up in this blog and elsewhere. It also was discussed at some length in this Mainframe Zone discussion.

If current IT managers perceive the mainframe as a costly, obsolete dinosaur heading to extinction they will not invest in cultivating mainframe skills no matter how wrong that perception is. This more than anything else will undermine the mainframe’s future and become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Did layoffs kill the EDS-RBS z10?

A major System z crash in December shocked a lot a mainframe folks. As the Register put it so elegantly this past December, “EDS mainframe goes titsup, crashes RBS cheque system.”

RBS is the Royal Bank of Scotland. EDS, as a result of a nearly $14 million acquisition in 2008, operates now as HP Enterprise Services. As one of those services, it runs mainframe data centers for outsourcing purposes.

The crash apparently resulted from the failure of a System z10 staff stretched too thin to correctly implement a microcode fix. Mainframes are legendary for their resistance to crashes, but they do need to be maintained. Incorrectly applying a microcode fix is a monumental mistake.

The failure reportedly brought down the bank’s check clearing system for about 12 hours.  Finextra.com passed along an unconfirmed UK Techwire report that just added to the speculation: HP’s “disaster recovery plan saw processes switched to a z10 in Mitcheldean, Gloucestershire, but this machine also failed to work.”

An HP response to Finextra confirms the failure and adds only that operations were restored quickly.

So, what went wrong? The mainframe community probably won’t ever know for sure. The Register attributes the problem to cost-cutting measures that led to the layoffs of the skilled mainframe staff needed to recognize the importance of the microcode update and implement it correctly.

That makes sense given the general history of big acquisitions, which often rely on deep layoffs to cut costs and boost the bottom line. The mainframe community on LinkedIn didn’t hesitate to voice outrage. A few felt the published accounts didn’t provide sufficient data to determine what went wrong, and I wholeheartedly agree.

Others were quick to finger layoffs as the primary culprit: “Ever since HP took over at EDS, a lot of good mainframe talent [has] hit the streets. Some because HP saw no value in them as they were primarily mainframe-oriented personnel. Others got smart and found other opportunities, or retired, before the economy tanked.”

An online search weeks later failed to turn up any more data except this from a Register article months earlier that lends credence to the suspicion of layoffs or work cutbacks as the problem: “HP has emailed EDS staff offering unpaid leave and temporary cuts in hours and wages in an attempt to cut costs. Before the end of October staff can take either unpaid leave or a reduction in working hours.”

The LinkedIn thread morphed into a discussion of layoffs and training. That is probably the real message from the HP-RBS z10 crash. Although the z10 is very efficient to operate and manage in terms of manpower compared to distributed platforms, it still requires at least a few skilled individuals. The best way to save money in a mainframe data center is by taking advantage of mainframe efficiency and System z specialty processors to consolidate more workloads on the z, not by laying off people.

A mainframe virgin comes to System z

IBM is celebrating over its latest mainframe win, BC Card, a large Korean credit card processor that dumped its distributed Compaq (HP) servers when it needed to upgrade its IT infrastructure. Instead it opted for three System z machines. IBM announced the deal in mid December.

The Register followed with a longer article in January.  I’m working on a more detailed case study to appear later this quarter.

For IBM, this win is an especially sweet victory in a number of ways:

1. It is a new user to the System z, a mainframe virgin so to speak.
2. BC Card is replacing its incumbent provider, Compaq/HP, which countered the IBM z offering by proposing its SuperDome as an alternative. HP along with Sun/Oracle are shaping up as IBM’s primary competition for the z.
3. This win validates the IBM System z Solution Editions program. BC Card jumped at the Solution Editions program, which delivers a bundle of System z hardware, middleware, and software plus maintenance at a steeply discounted price.

In truth, BC Card isn’t exactly a mainframe virgin. Over a decade ago, the company had a Japanese mainframe, a plug-compatible. This was before the z/OS era so we’ll let IBM claim they are new to the System z if not exactly to mainframe computing. Along with the new hardware, BC Card is replacing Oracle with DB2 and adding WebSphere and CICS. Initially it will use the z to handle its mission-critical card authorization system and core processing. It also will embark on new development using WebSphere and CICS.

The end of 2009 turned out to be pretty good for System z wins actually. IBM announced a new mainframe deal with First National Bank of Namibia along with more successes in China. Also earlier in the year IBM announced other Korea successes.

Overall the System z appears to be doing surprisingly well in rapidly developing countries. For example, IBM reports an Indian commercial bank, Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited Bank committed to a $10m deal to create a credit card processing system based on the System z platform.  Businesses over there seem to be skipping the phase of building the infrastructure small at first with a handful on x86 servers and scaling out as necessary. Instead, they are jumping right to mainframes, spurred no doubt by IBM’s cost cutting.

Opting for your first System z is not an easy leap no matter how much IBM cuts the price. There remains a serious learning hurdle. Skilled mainframe people are not readily available in these parts of the world and demand for the few who are there is great. Intensive training for the existing staff was part of the BC Card plan from the start. Even staff that may remember the previous mainframe a decade earlier will have to be brought up to speed on today’s modern z.  Given that the company is not expecting to put the z in production for months they have time for thorough training.

The future of IBM System z and mainframes

What is the future of the IBM System z? That turned out to be the inadvertent topic of a long LinkedIn Mainframe Experts discussion thread—50 comments and still growing—that began by talking about the fight shaping up between IBM and NEON over zPrime and moved back and forth between the initial topic interwoven with discussions of old IBM platforms and of the future of the System z.

It is coming on 10 years since IBM renamed the System/390 as the zSeries. There has been buzz on the Internet for the past year about what the next mainframe will look like. Software Strategies references an upcoming z11 several times in a CPU-focused comparison of HP servers with the System z.  IT Knowledge Exchange posted a blog item in Nov. about IBM ending z9 marketing in June and referenced a z11 coming a few months later. Others talk about the z11 offering a water cooled option. There is, however, nothing official to be found on IBM’s website even remotely confirming any of this, except the end of marketing the z9.

Still, IBM does need something to boost the System z offering in the face of the increased performance and low price of the newest x86-based systems. Short of rolling out a new mainframe architecture powered by a hot new chip IBM appears to be starting 2010 pursuing two mainframe strategies: 1) slash the cost of mainframe acquisition through System z Solution Editions and 2) adopt a more accommodating product marketing approach called Fit for Purpose.

The IBM System z Solution Editions certainly are welcome. They lower the cost of acquiring a System z by bundling the necessary hardware, software, and middleware to do real business work into a reduced price package with several years of maintenance included. IBM offers a handful of Solution Editions for BI, CRM, cloud, data warehousing, and more. Additional Solution Editions will likely be forthcoming. If you can qualify, this gets you another System z cheap.

The Fit for Purpose strategy addresses situations where the mainframe may not be right for a given situation. Rather it guides organizations to choose the (IBM) platform—mainframe, Unix, blade, x86—best suited to the workload, situation, skills, and budget.

Linux on z greatly expands the workloads that can be run on the z, including Web apps, BI, and even, in theory anyway, Microsoft .NET apps (via SUSE Linux on z with Mono). OpenSolaris on z can expand the z’s workload universe even more. Mantissa’s v/OS promises to put Windows apps on the z eventually.

In a Fit for Purpose briefing early in the summer, however, IBM emphasized the mainframe for large scale transaction processing and databases. Other workload categories, such as business applications, analytics, and Web it steered to UNIX/AIX, and Windows. Huh?

Granted IBM sells x86 and POWER-based platforms too, however, this seems unnecessarily limiting the z. I’ve already profiled organizations that are using their System z to support social networking, BI, Web applications, and mobile computing. Each has built a strong business case around it. Not every workload is suitable for the z, but surely when IBMers talk about Fit for Purpose they can look beyond large scale transaction processing. The mainframe in the future will do a lot more than that. It already does.

Top IBM System z events in 2009

Everybody has what they think are the biggest System z events for the past year, usually things that touched what they specifically do with the z. Since I don’t actually get to play with a System z at work, here’s my more detached view.

The emergence of IBM System z Solution Editions was a big thing in 2009 that largely went unnoticed, mainly because Solution Editions, which are deeply discounted  bundles of System z hardware, software, middleware, and support, generally aren’t available to long-established z shops. They are intended to drive new workloads to the System z.

To date there are Solution Editions for ACI, App Dev, Chordiant, Cloud Computing, Data Warehousing, Enterprise Linux, GDPS, PeopleSoft, SAP, Security, and WebSphere. Expect to see IBM flogging System z Solution Editions in 2010. If some business unit in your organization can qualify, it is a way to get another z cheap and with a bunch of goodies thrown in too.

Another thing of interest in 2009 was the introduction of NEON’s zPrime, which enables System z shops running zIIP or zAAP specialty processors to run a wide range of workloads. The benefit is greatly lower software licensing costs. NEON reports that it can be used with all the core mainframe workhorse applications; IMS, DB2, CICS, even batch workloads. The savings on software licensing can run into millions or even tens of millions of dollars a year.

With such big money at stake IBM has been firing off threatening letters to System z shops considering zPrime. NEON responded with a lawsuit of its own. To date, the only result has been a lot of FUD. However, this is shaping up as the major System z spectator event of 2010 with seemingly everyone rooting for one side or the other and generating some heated discussions on the LinkedIn Mainframe Experts Network.

If NEON prevails or, at the least, comes to some accommodation with IBM, zPrime has the potential to greatly expand the System z market by making a System z considerably more cost-competitive with x86-based platforms.

The cloud became red hot in 2009 for IT but generally has been considered an x86/Linux phenomenon. IBM brought the z into cloud computing in a big way in 2009  and will continue to push z into the cloud in 2010. It mainly has been an IBM show so far with the company putting its own BI in the cloud. Let’s watch to see if the z Solution Edition for cloud attracts many takers.

On the other hand,  efforts to expand the workloads on z in 2009 have been slow at best outside of IBM itself. Linux on z has been the bright spot. Otherwise, there are only a handful of BI users for Cognos 8 for Linux on z. Novell hasn’t reported the names of any SUSE Linux/Mono on z users running .NET applications so, apparently, not much is happening there yet either.

Similarly, Mantissa’s Windows on z initiative, z/VOS, promises to eventually allow companies to run hundreds of virtualized Windows applications on the System z under z/VM. A demo scheduled at SHARE early in the year failed to materialize. From comments in various discussion groups it sounds like a cumbersome kludge. The company’s own z/VOS blog has been quiet on the subject for months but apparently the company continues to plug away at it.

Finally, OpenSolaris on z, after getting thrown off track by Oracle’s acquisition of Sun and IBM’s punting on the whole effort (which was covered here in July) hopefully will get going in 2010. A couple of System z shops expressed interest to me in it. It may have to wait until Solaris 11, when the SPARC and OpenSolaris code bases are expected to merge.

Best wishes for 2010. This blog will be quiet until after the New Year holiday.

IBM Enterprise Linux Server on z as mainframe savior

Will the newest deeply discounted IBM System z enterprise Linux machines, dubbed Enterprise Linux Server, save the mainframe, especially during slow economic times? IBM reports Linux System z capacity doubled from third quarter 2007 to third quarter 2009. That beats z/OS MIPS growth in that period.

On the other hand, the UK-based magazine The Register reported that revenue overall declined 26% in 3Q 09, and the aggregate MIPS capacity shipped fell by 20%.  As author Timothy Prickett Morgan pointed out about Enterprise Linux Server: “It takes a lot of cheap Linux MIPS to make up for expensive z/OS MIPS.”

IBM’s new discounted System z Enterprise Linux Server package is unlikely to make up that difference very fast. According to the IBM announcement, “With potential savings of up to 80%, the new IBM Enterprise Linux Server provides attractive, off-the-shelf pricing.” And a save-as-you-grow pricing model further discounts incremental capacity.

Clearly, IBM has identified Linux on System z as the most immediate growth opportunity for the mainframe. To that end, it is willing to slash prices to capture market share against the likes of HP and Sun in the enterprise Linux segment.

Linux on z is looking more and more like the future of the mainframe. Reed Mullen, IBM’s System z consolidation and virtualization initiative leader, only partly agrees. “Linux is one element of the future of the z.”

Right now it appears companies are turning to Linux on z mainly to consolidate distributed Oracle servers and save a bundle on software licensing fees. Linux server consolidation certainly is a great use case for Linux on the System z, a no-brainer from a payback standpoint, especially with IBM discounting prices.

But there needs to be more than just Oracle server consolidation on Linux. Mullen reports growing interest in running WebSphere applications on z Linux. Cognos 8 on Linux on z also shows promise although there are not many System z shops that have adopted it. Some, however, are kicking the tires.

SUSE’s Enterprise Consolidation Suite for z with Mono, a .NET application server that runs on SUSE Linux on z, opens some interesting opportunities. However, Novell has not publicly identified any .NET-Mono-Linux on z users. Reed suggests there actually are System z shops trying it, but he isn’t naming names either. Until independent analysts like me can actually talk to users, it’s just vaporware. Germany-based EFiS Financial Solutions AG is a recent SUSE Linux on z user, but there is no indication they are using .NET with Mono.

The Enterprise Linux Server entry price, for a BC-class z including 2 IFLs, z/VM, three years of maintenance, and some other goodies runs $212,000. A serious enterprise player, however, will want to run 10 IFLs, notes Reed. IBM is offering steep discounts for those extra IFLs too.

The new deal certainly will appeal to existing System z shops that want to expand their Linux on z workloads with an additional machine. It may even attract the business units of these organizations that previously relied only on distributed Linux platforms. What it is unlikely to attract will be virgin customers, those that have never had a mainframe. They still face a huge learning curve. Given I’ve previously argued that the z is overpriced, however,  Enterprise Linux Server is a welcomed start.

Mainframe application modernization on IBM System z

When people mention mainframe application modernization often it is a code word for moving applications off the System z and landing them on another platform, usually a set of distributed Linux blade or rack servers.  They conveniently ignore Linux on z because their goal for modernization is not getting to Linux but getting off the System z.

There is no doubt that many mainframe applications need modernization. IBM Rational lays out many of the complaints here along with IBM’s recommended corrections, which typically entail buying one or another IBM product.

The modernization problem usually is not about the core functionality. Where modernization is needed is in how users and other applications get to mainframe functionality and data and what they can do with it when they get it. That means integration and adding capabilities that extend the mainframe, like SOA or Web 2.0 or BI or cross-platform management.

IBM reports that it is 5x cheaper to reuse and revitalize a mainframe application than to move it to another platform and rewrite it. The obvious conclusion: it is better to modernize mainframe applications than try to take them someplace else. That’s essentially what IDC found in a recent study titled Mainframe Directions in the Multiplatform Datacenter, 2009–2013: Today’s Workloads and Future Outlook. In short: companies are planning to invest in modernizing and extending their mainframe environments, not abandon them.

To jumpstart this kind application modernization IBM introduced a System z solutions edition package for application development. It bundles together a System z10 BC machine with the various software, middleware, and compiler technology needed to get going at a deeply discounted price.  One critical omission: Rational Developer for z (RDz), although IBM hints that may be thrown in later too.

To capitalize on the mainframe modernization interest, Rational introduced a slew of new products around mainframe application development and lifecycle management. The goal, as Rational sees it, is to lower the cost of owning and operating a mainframe by:

• Reducing the cost of developing and maintaining existing legacy applications
• Reducing the use of manual maintenance processes
• Reducing the complexity of the application portfolio
• Leveraging of less expensive programming skills while lessening dependency on difficult-to-train-and-retain skills
• Making applications more flexible and reusable to better support changing business requirements

To do this, IBM is offering updated tools like RDz, Rational Team Concert for z, a slew of portfolio management tools, HOST and the HOST client access package, and a variety of SOA tools. The last two in particular, HOST, which lets you turn green screen apps into something resembling a GUI, and SOA tools like RDz are critical to any application modernization effort.  As much as SOA has fallen out of favor in some circles, System z shops are effectively using it to extend their z applications to broader audiences and integrate z applications and data with other systems and environments, including Facebook and mobile phones–how much more modernized can the mainframe get.

Others have jumped on the mainframe modernization bandwagon as well. CA, for example, announced the integration of CA Endevor SCM, its change management tool, with RDz v7.6.  According to CA, the integration is intended to simplify the development and management of mainframe software by streamlining application updates, reducing change-related programming errors, and facilitating compliance audits.

CA also is slapping a GUI on its mainframe testing tools, CA InterTest for CICS r8.5 and CA InterTest Batch r8.5. Both tools are based on the Eclipse Platform and have attained Ready for IBM Rational software validation and Best Practice Compliance status.

When it comes to modernizing mainframe applications, the GUI has emerged as the litmus test for the modernized z application. Sure, experienced users swear that command line interfaces are faster but the GUI makes it easier for less skilled people to re-use and re-purpose existing mainframe application code, especially in support of SOA implementations. Turns out that the lowly GUI is where you start mainframe modernization.

IBM System z Solution Editions cut mainframe costs

The mainframe is way too expensive and IBM knows it, especially as a new generation of x86-based systems with robust virtualization emerges. IBM’s response is to roll out a series of hardware/software discount packages, referred to as System z Solution Editions. They promise to deliver the System z at apparently bargain basement prices. Here is a recent Solution Edition announcement from Aug.

In November, IBM briefed industry analysts on three more z Solution Edition offerings: for Chordiant CRM, Enterprise Linux, and Enterprise Linux Server. They join System z Solution Editions for Cloud Computing, Data Warehousing, SAP, ACI, WebSphere, Security, GDPS, and Application Development.

According to IBM, the z Solution Editions represent a “strategy to make System z attractive to new workloads so customers can run a much wider range of their business activities.” But the key to the strategy is slashing the price. System z Solution Editions are “designed to make the cost of deploying new workloads on System z price-competitive with alternative distributed systems,” says IBM.

For eligible buyers, which are those considering new workloads or are new to the z altogether, the Solution Edition bundles System z10 hardware, software, prepaid maintenance, and the necessary middleware at a substantially reduced price.

How much lower? IBM doesn’t reveal actual dollar-prices, preferring to talk in percentages. In one example IBM compared a customer running an SAP Solution Edition on a System z10 EC (6 GP engines, and 4 zIIP) to SAP running on HP (HP rx8640, 4×20 core 1.6 GHz Itanium servers). The result: 30% lower TCO over three years, 270% improved SAP throughput with the z SAP Solution Edition.

The Chordiant Solution Edition includes either a System z10 BC or EC, maintenance, and a software stack consisting of DB2 for z/OS and WAS for z/OS. It does require the company buy the Chordiant software too, naturally.

The Enterprise Linux Server Solution Edition, essentially, is a System z10 BC or EC machine with 2 IFLs packaged as an appliance for large Linux workloads. The entry configuration includes two zCores, 16 GB memory per core for the BC appliance or six zCores for the EC, 3-5 years of hardware maintenance, z/VM with 3-5 years of subscription and support, three 4-port FICON cards, and two 4-port OSA cards. IBM insists the acquisition cost is competitive with x86 or UNIX alternatives configured for large scale Linux consolidation.  Without seeing the actual costs or speaking directly with customers, however, it is not possible to determine how good a deal this is.

Along with the z Solution Edition pricing, IBM also cut the price of IFLs, as low as $50K per IFL in volume configurations. In the same spirit of price slashing Red Hat and Novell (SUSE Linux) reportedly are discounting their zLinux prices.

To add to the price incentives, IBM also launched a zRewards program last spring. zRewards  provides discounts on various migration services to help companies move workloads from other platforms to the z.  (An upcoming piece  will look at System z workload migration.)

So, is this going to be enough to persuade companies to move more workloads to the System z? IBM reports a 62% increase, 3Q07 to 3Q09, in the number of IFL engines shipped. The number of IFL MIPS shipped increased 100% over that time. This, however, doesn’t really prove anything about actually winning new customers.

The z Solution Editions certainly are a step in the right direction as far as lowering the cost of mainframe computing. The System z often makes a good TCO case for core enterprise applications, and its reliability and security are generally unquestioned. The problem, rather, lies in the cost of acquisition. To attract new customers, the System z needs a competitive cost of acquisition too.

Are System z jobs really available?

“Some large firms have reopened their college hiring” reports Alexei Miller, EVP at DataArt, a software outsourcing firm. “They’re actually talking about shortages of human capital.”

That apparently is the view from Canada too: “Demand for mainframe specialists is at an all-time high,” according to IBM Canada in a report published by The Industry Standard in Sept.

And openings for System z people are appearing almost daily on various listservs and forums aimed at mainframe professionals, particularly the mainframe and System z groups on LinkedIn

It is ironic that the big financial firms, for example, slashed IT staffing and, now that the markets appear to be rebounding somewhat, suddenly have projects they need to complete fast. And when they try to call those people back, Miller reports, many already have been picked up by others and aren’t available.

These projects, he notes, typically involve complex, non-standard work and massive data sets. The routine mainframe project work has long been shipped to India and elsewhere offsite. (DataArt also ships work offshore.) Rather, these are the kinds of projects that deal with pricing, risk, and compliance.

Yet unemployment has hit records highs and is predicted to go higher still.  In October, the unemployment rate rose to 10.2 percent, the highest since April 1983, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. There seems to be an information mismatch here.

One underemployed System z professional searching for a full time position while frantically scrambling to complete System z contract work sent me the following lament:

Periodically, I am reminded that at this frantic time in my life there are four ways to catch up with one’s tasks at work.

I: Make a to-do list of tasks for the day, and during the day other tasks arise. At the end of the day, I find I have done most of the tasks for the day but some remain.

II: At the end of some days I have completed only some of the tasks and, naturally, some of my to-do list remains.

III: Other days as other tasks demand attention I find that I will do some tasks that day but none of the tasks on my to-do list.

IV: Then there are the days I end up NOT completing any of the tasks on my to-do list and NOT completing any of the tasks that came up during the day either.

An interesting aspect of this is that when I describe these stages to others, some find them hard to understand – especially how I could get to IV. Others will immediately recognize this from their own experience. The dividing line seems to be around just how much open-ended multi-tasking the job calls for. Knowledge workers who set their own goals understand; administrators who go from clearly-defined task to clearly-defined task don’t. Sales people understand; line workers don’t. First-level managers understand; plumbers don’t.

The problem is that many IT jobs are set up so that we all must fail at something. So, I try to pick what I will succeed at and hope.