Le 27/01/2022 à 16:48, Gérard Calliet a écrit :

A major cultural difference between french people and american people is
the order of exposition: american people begin with the positive, and at
the end explain how to overcome the negatice; french people explain
first the negative to overcome, and conclude with the positive.
The more you like something, the more you'll be begining with the
critics to evacuate any naïveté about the positive you admire.

I admit I have been a little too severe perhaps. However it denotes how
founded I'm on the succees of VMS with VSI and all of us.

So, for the non-french readers, my introduction:
""Once again, /to conclude/ to *introduce*, it is in any case a long and
fruitful time with VMS that lies ahead. Whether it's a relaunch or a
classic "legacy" operation, VMS will remain an invaluable tool for its
users for a long time to come.""

> I hope that the year 2022 will be a decisive step in the recovery of VMS.
>
> I would like to clarify a few points about my personal involvement in
> France and the French situation.
>
> I am proud to have contributed to the transformation of the DECUS heir
> users club (hp-interex France) into the VMSgenerations association
> focused on VMS. It is a contribution to a collaborative work that goes
> far beyond my own contribution, and I am filled with gratitude and honor
> towards all the members that this club allows me to meet.
>
> This club is a success because it responds to a need and relies on
> resources that have only been allowed to emerge.  All of us in this club
> share the idea that other clubs of this type should emerge everywhere,
> specialized in VMS and contemporary to its recovery.
>
> Since the creation of the club, I have made a point of restricting my
> personal communications, and I would like to make it clear that
> everything that has been published so far under the name of
> VMSgenerations has always been the result of collaborative work in the
> association.
>
> The current situation in France and the behavior of VSI lead me to
> seriously doubt my work. VSI rigorously ignores the work of our
> association - except for courteous answers without real content. The
> vast majority of French customers are very uncomfortable with VSI's
> commercial policy, I don't know any customer who is seriously
> considering a port to x86 and the general opinion of customers and
> consultants is that VMS will disappear in the short or medium term.
>
> Having worked on the durability of VMS can therefore appear as very bad
> advice, and, for those who have committed themselves to it, at the very
> least as an investment with no return on investment.
>
> Unless there is a drastic reorientation of VSI's strategy, I am
> convinced, like many others, that it will fail in the short or medium
> term. It becomes ethically very difficult for an independent consultant
> to advise to stay under VMS.
>
> I would like to be wrong. But it is the same analysis that made me
> anticipate the recovery of 2014, the contribution to the transformation
> of DECUS France into VMS generations, both validated by experience, and
> the prediction of a failure for VSI when I became aware of its strategy.
> My professional relations can testify to my anticipation of the current
> crisis as early as 2014.
>
> The idea of a VMS takeover was great. Its implementation was completely
> disappointing.
>
> The investors' intuition was right: the intrinsic value of VMS had the
> potential to become productive again in the new context of 2014. But
> that intuition was not pursued, and VMS's value and contextual
> consideration were forgotten.
>
> What is the new context? The appearance of sustainability in the
> economic landscape is the beginning of a development that can only get
> bigger and bigger. For the IT world, this appearance radically
> transforms the consideration of what has been called "legacy systems"
> until now.
>
> VMS was not conceived at a time when the concept of sustainability
> existed. But its founding concepts of systemicity, backward
> compatibility, local control and reasoned scalability meet the new
> concepts of locality, sobriety and reusability.
>
> The VMS revival is therefore an ideal laboratory for experimenting with
> the new deal as regards (misnamed) legacy systems. Nothing trivial here,
> because everything has to be reinvented in both purely technical and
> economic terms.
>
> It is worth noting in passing that the main investor had already
> invested in legacy systems and is interested in green development. His
> intuition did not come from nowhere.
>
> But the implementation fell into all the (predictable) mistakes of a
> relaunch that does not respect the specifics of what to relaunch and
> when and where it is relaunched. VMS was relaunched as one would have
> done for a sub-brand of Apple: a flagship product (x86), maximization of
> immediate profits (the "clearing house" concept exposed by Terry
> Holmes), no attention to the temporalities of the existing base,
> unshakeable confidence in the brand (no marketing, no criticism of past
> business practices).
>
> Whereas a relaunch requires intelligent recovery from the previous long
> time, transmission of positive achievements and criticism of previous
> mistakes, and adaptation to what allows recovery in the new context. And
> what VSI has systematically left out is the crucial question of the
> transfer of skills and has completely ignored the essential need for
> stability of the majority of clients, which explains their loyalty to VMS.
>
> The disastrous results are there.
>
> The centralization of profits discourages intermediaries, at least in
> France, who were the best advocates of VMS. Only the big international
> consulting companies resist, for which VSI has favors that border on
> abusive competition. The exclusive supplier discourages non-VSI open
> source development companies.
>
> The focus on a single target (x86) that would be the sign of renewal
> diverts attention from the long-cycle needs of the customer base. It
> dries up the general investment, drains the cash flow and is one of the
> causes of the product price increase. We find ourselves in the
> extraordinary circumstance of customers paying for a solution that is
> only on the horizon, a solution that they will probably not adopt,
> because the current conditions of use of the product will discourage the
> general management from using VMS.
>
> But the most serious thing, which was structurally foreseeable, is the
> impoverishment of the Boston center, a founding engineering in the
> imbalance with the new effective center of decision and profit in
> Europe. The Boston offices have disappeared, the data center has been
> outsourced, and most of the key managers are non-VMSians. The Boston
> center is a victim of the same trend that took place before 2013: very
> high quality poses immediate profitability problems, and the trend is to
> go offshore to reduce costs. It is easier to invest in integration,
> service, which will be reconvertible in case of failure into external
> porting services (alliance with Sector7).
>
> There is the problem that Digital had encountered: complex balancing
> between decision centers in the world. What we are seeing is a gradual
> underground takeover from the European center, closer to the investor,
> both by reducing resources and by appointing people close to the
> investor to take charge. Seen from Europe, the billing goes through the
> Teracloud entity for an officially American company, whose choice of
> managers seems to come from Europe. Thus the so-called "VSI" entity is
> really difficult to define, let alone its real strategies.
>
> But the root of all the problems is that of the deep meaning of a
> relaunch, which is lost from sight. If the essential importance of
> fundamental engineering is underestimated, we move from the register of
> transmission to that of inheritance. There is a difference between
> allowing transmission between generations and pilfering from
> grandparents' property, or violently succeeding them during their
> lifetime. This calls into question the very core of the possibility of
> VMS revival.
>
> VMS is not (for the moment) a legacy system. The possibility of its
> revival is part of the new economic trend of sustainable development in
> the IT world. The excellence of VMS is passed on FROM THE LIVING of VMS,
> which has nothing to do with a legacy. It is true that making this
> possible is much more complex than simply doing legacy management.
>
> For the moment VSI is only organizing itself within the classic
> framework of operating a legacy system, which allows it to wait serenely
> for the end of VMS. One of the consequences of this situation is the
> inevitable reproduction of a conflict between old and new - nothing less
> innovative than the conflict between old and new -. This explains the
> chaotic competition between the Boston pole and the Melmo pole.
>
> This analysis is anything but recent. This failure of a strong intuition
> because of the application of classic but inadequate solutions has been
> mine since 2014. In the current situation, I only have concrete
> confirmation of this.
>
> What are the concrete consequences for the VMS ecosystem? Either VSI
> will empower the ecosystem to gain confidence in a "revival of the
> revival," and a whole complex and very promising future is in store. It
> is not difficult to predict that all players other than VSI will respond
> with great enthusiasm to any proposal to collaborate with VSI, and the
> wealth of inventiveness and excellence is widely available throughout
> the VMS ecosystem. Or VSI can continue on its current path that will
> make VMS a classic legacy system.
>
> In both cases, the role of intermediaries and user clubs is
> professionally important: each customer will be able to make the best
> possible choices thanks to these expertise circuits: porting, freezing
> in the existing system, modernization under VMS...
>
> This confirms us all in our efforts... and in our expectations.
>
> It remains to give a few points that seem vital to me in the first
> instance for a better business climate with VSI:
>
> VSI must have the humility to organize a thorough market analysis, which
> has never been done
>
> VSI must listen to its customers, work in concert with user organizations
>
> VSI must be transparent about its organization (national and
> international), its financial flows, the cost/productivity/profit ratio
> of its various business units, its investment ratio per business unit
>
> I would like to remind of what I said in my introduction. Here I am
> speaking only in my own name, or rather according to the service
> objectives of my company. According to my analysis, this is a worrying
> period for VMS, and I have experienced the complete deafness of VSI,
> including in the presence of larger entities other than my company
> alone. Having contributed to engaging other entities or clients in my
> assessment of the future of VMS, it seems natural to me to develop as
> objectively as possible the position of my company.
>
> Once again, to conclude, it is in any case a long and fruitful time with
> VMS that lies ahead. Whether it's a relaunch or a classic "legacy"
> operation, VMS will remain an invaluable tool for its users for a long
> time to come.
>
> Perhaps the bet is only for the investor: will he be smarter than the
> trends and able to understand and develop his first intuition? In this
> case VMS will be an impressive innovative revival. Otherwise it will be
> an instructive experience for the emergent domain of sustainability in IT.
>

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus