[Info-vax] VMS Cobol - GnuCOBOL

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 2/27/2023 4:26 PM, bill wrote:
> On 2/27/2023 4:14 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 2/27/2023 1:43 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> On 2/27/2023 10:37 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>> You could argue that the need for customized environments is reduced 
>>>> today,
>>>> now that standardized environments are more sophisticated.  I don't 
>>>> agree
>>>> with that at all but it is a thing which could be debated.
>>>
>>> I'm with you on this.  What I'm seeing is that some "standardized 
>>> environments" is actually "this is what you're going to get, don't 
>>> ask for more".
>>
>> "this is what you're going to get, don't ask for more" is practically
>> the definition of standardized.
>>
>> But the point being is that what you get is a lot more than what
>> it was 40 years ago.
> 
>  From who's viewpoint?

There is more functionality. That is a fact.

Some may consider it unnecessary bloat, but there is "more".

>>> Perhaps "standardized environments" aren't so good for everyone?
>>
>> Custom is more expensive than standard.
> 
> Didn't used to be.  That happened when they started paying someone
> outside of their own organization to do the work.

Internal customization also cost.

>> So it depends on whether custom can generate enough extra revenue than
>> standard to cover the extra cost.
> 
> Back in the day :-)  making changes to satisfy your user's requirements
> wasn't a separate budget line item.
> 
>>
>> If it is not related to the company's core business then the answer
>> is likely no.
> 
> In many cases today, even if it is related to the company's core
> business the answer is no.
> 
>>
>> If it is related to the company's core business then it may be a yes.
> 
> But probably not.
> 
> And then we now have the issue of which company's core business?  Yours
> or the software package provider's?

The ISV's try to sell their stuff as the best invention since
the round wheel.

It is up to the company to decide whether the product being
pushed provide value.

Arne