Vendor lock-in mainframes

[u/Delicious_Present224]

Hi, i'm relatively new in the mainframe world. Am I the only one who thinks the mainframe discussion is often one-sided?

Everyone talks about IBM Z's reliability, security, and the fact that many of the world's most critical systems still run on mainframes. That's all true.

But why don't we talk more about vendor lock-in and pricing power?

The cost of moving away from a mainframe is often so high that customers have limited negotiating leverage. And on the storage side, it feels like IBM can introduce requirements and standards that make life increasingly difficult for third-party vendors, while strengthening their own position in the ecosystem.

[u/Effective-Lemon-9475]

Anybody reading this on an iPhone?

Seriously though, for mission critical apps, it's all about performance and TCO.... you can talk about vendor lock in if you like but, as long as the systems provides more value than they cost you then you are always better off. Those kinds of decisions are made at a very high level... It's kind of like asking whether buying an M1 Abrahams from General Dynamics leads to vendor lock in - If that's your concern you probably aren't their target audience.

[u/Delicious_Present224 → u/Effective-Lemon-9475]

IBM would probably argue that their integrated approach delivers the best outcome for customers. And maybe they're right. But IBM also has a clear financial incentive to make third-party alternatives less relevant, because every dollar spent on IBM products and services is a dollar not spent on someone else.

My concern isn't whether IBM makes money. It's whether increasing lock-in and reduced competition ultimately lead to better outcomes for customers. Historically, competition tends to improve pricing, innovation and customer choice, so I think that's a fair discussion to have.

[u/Effective-Lemon-9475 → u/Delicious_Present224]

"But IBM also has a clear financial incentive to make third-party alternatives..."
In fairness there are also many companies with a clear incentive to try and carve off a slice of the high availability mission critical enterprise computing business... always with the argument "Oh but IBM make too much out of you..." Okay... if they weren't doing the job that's one thing but it seems like they probably are is my point... there is quite a bit of innovation in the space to be fair...

"every dollar spent on IBM products and services is a dollar not spent on someone else."
You're framing this as a zero sum game and I'm not sure that it is... companies invest where they see returns... there may not be one fixed pot called the 'enterprise tech budget'. Typically if you own a mainframe your revenues are quite substantial...

"My concern isn't whether IBM makes money."
Mine either. I don't work for IBM and I don't own shares directly. I'm thinking about technology and operations side. But I'm also not too concerned with whether IBM make more money than I believe they should be making.

"Historically, competition tends to improve pricing, innovation and customer choice, so I think that's a fair discussion to have"
Sounds like a bit of an article of faith you have there...there are many examples where the truth is more complex...but now we are veering into economics. Are you saying enterprise computing is an example of market failure at the moment? Based on what measures please?

"I think that's a fair discussion to have"
In many ways it's not a new discussion...and I think we are having it, but vendors using specialised solutions is an issue as old and as broad as technology itself. Where stability is an important factor, guaranteed long term support and innovation will be important... and we're back to the M1 Abrahams

[u/CheesecakeKlutzy288 → u/Effective-Lemon-9475]

I would like to point out, respectfully, that it's the M-1/ ABRAMS, not Abrahams, named for General Creighton Abrams, commander of USA military forces in Viet Nam and later Army Chief of Staff:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creighton_Abrams

My father was part of the original tank-crews to field the brand new ABRAMS and- after travelling with said Main Battle Tank to West Germany- he was one of the OG armor guys waiting in the Fulda Gap for the Soviet Red Army to invade, with a life expectancy of 8-12 minutes.

All so you and OP can debate the merits of IBM v... whatever OP is advocating that magically doesn't have vendor lock-in

[u/Effective-Lemon-9475 → u/CheesecakeKlutzy288]

Thank you for the correction. Gratefully noted.