Mico Focus ReUZE misses the point

Micro Focus announced its latest mainframe migration tool, ReUZE yesterday – and once again it has completely missed the point.

The background is that for companies looking to move off the IBM mainframe, Micro Focus has been offering solutions for a number of different target platforms, but in each case the solutions have been based around the old emulation concept. Once again, it seems the company has fallen into the same trap. As the press release states

Unlike other solutions which insist on rewriting mainframe application data sources for SQL Server, or removing mainframe syntax from programs, the Micro Focus solution typically leaves the source code unchanged, thereby reducing costs, risk, and delivering the highest levels of performance and reliability.

The highlighted end to this statement is where I have a problem. Micro Focus seems to think that by offering an emulated environment for mainframe applications, it is reducing risk and delivering the best possible performance and reliability. But this is a load of rubbish. Think about it from the point of view of the mainframe user that has decided to move away from the mainframe – in this case to a Microsoft environment. This is a big step, and the company concerned must be pretty damn sure this is what it wants to do. It has obviously decided that the Microsoft environment is where it wants to be, and as such surely this will include moving to a Microsoft skills set, Microsoft products and tools – database, security, and all the rest. So why settle for an emulation option?

The point Micro Focus has missed is that emulation is a way of propagating the old. After all, it originally stemmed from terminal emulation, where the object was to make sure that end users still saw the same environment even when their workstation technology changed. This was very sensible, becuase it focused on the right priority – don’t force the end users to have to retrain. But let’s be clear – emulation costs. It provides an extra layer of software, affecting performance and scalability, and puts future development in a straightjacket because it propogates the old way of doing things. However, in this case the cost of retraining end users would far outweight these implications.

But in the situation where a user is moving off the mainframe to a Microsoft world, why would the user want to propogate the old? Yes, the user wants to reuse the investments in application logic and data structure and content, but surely the user wants to get to the destination – not be stuck in purgatory, neither in one place nor the other. Why restrict the power of .NET by forcing the user to operate through an insulating emulation environment? Why hold the user back from moving into the native .NET database system of SQL Server and thereby leveraging  the combined power of the operating system, database and hardware to maximum effect? Why force the user to have to maintain a skills set in the mainframe applications when one of the reasons for moving may well have been to get to a single, available and cheaper one?

Yes, the Micro Focus approach may end up reducing the risk of the porting process itself, since it tries to leave mainframe code unchanged, but that is a long way from reducing the risk of moving from one world to the other. And as for the comments on leaving everything unchanged to ’deliver the highest levels of performance and reliability, that is just laughable. What makes Micro Focus think that the way an application is designed for the mainframe will deliver optimal performance and reliability in a .NET environment? The two environments are completely different with totally unlike characteristics. And when has an emulation layer EVER improved performance/reliability?

I see this ReUZE play as like offering someone drugs. If you’ve decided you want to move off the mainframe to .NET, I have a drug here that will reduce the pain. You will feel better …. honest. But the result is you will be left hooked on the drug, and wont actually get where you want to be. If you have decided this migration is for you, don;t try to cut corners and fall for the drug – do the job properly and focus on the end goal rather than the false appeal of an easy journey. Just Say No.

Steve

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn

Comments are closed.


Twitter Goodies

Recent Comments

  • Gravatar icon of AJ Brown AJ Brown
    November 1, 2010 (8:36)
    CICS and PHP - DON'T PANIC It's great to see transactional support of any kind for a cloud language... be it PHP or not (whi...
  • Gravatar icon of Vivekanand Kurdikeri Vivekanand Kurdikeri
    July 16, 2010 (12:41)
    Does Micro Focus Server for SOA miss the point? I think Micro Focus has done a tremodeous introduction of Web Service from a COBOL. May not be a ...
  • Gravatar icon of Ian J Mitchell Ian J Mitchell
    June 15, 2010 (6:14)
    CICS and PHP - DON'T PANIC Hi Steve, Well, we don't actually *demand* that you host the PHP in regions separate to those ru...
  • Gravatar icon of Rick Warren Rick Warren
    April 3, 2010 (12:27)
    AMQP - Great idea, but it will never work As someone who has worked on DDS from an implementation perspective as well as an OMG standards p...
  • Gravatar icon of Steve Craggs Steve Craggs
    December 12, 2009 (9:15)
    Did Teilhard's JuxtaComm patent wipe out IBM, Microsoft and SAP? Subsequent to my post, the Calgary Herald ran an article (http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/P...
  • Gravatar icon of John O'Hara John O'Hara
    December 10, 2009 (9:01)
    AMQP - Great idea, but it will never work Now, this is a late reply! @Thorlin. I looked at DDS before embarking on AMQP (I also looked a...
  • Gravatar icon of Jeff Darcy Jeff Darcy
    December 7, 2009 (2:40)
    Come in Texas East District Court, your time is up The important thing to remember about patents is that they're all about the claims. While the bu...
  • Gravatar icon of Emil Emil
    October 27, 2009 (9:08)
    BAM vs BI Good article. Thanks, Emil
  • Gravatar icon of Business Opportunities Business Opportunities
    October 23, 2009 (11:04)
    So Oracle got Sun - but why? Oracle has stepped up the rhetoric when it comes to its plans for Sun. In a message to Sun custom...
  • Gravatar icon of Gaurav Agarwal Gaurav Agarwal
    September 16, 2009 (1:15)
    IBM gets Cognos to fill the gaps IBM has two BAM solutions now Cognos Now! and Websphere Business Monitor. Why two BAM solutions f...