In Search of more economic IT solutions

IN SEARCH OF A MORE
ECONOMIC IT
SOLUTION
Jurg van Eeden
info@jurg.co.za
In Search of a more economic IT solutions
Contents
In Search of a more economic IT solution.................................................................................................. 2
1.
1.1.
What went wrong: .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.2.
Are we on the right track? .................................................................................................................. 2
1.3.
Is there a solution? ............................................................................................................................. 3
a.
Stop – Wake Up! ..................................................................................................................................... 3
b.
A philosophical point of view ................................................................................................................. 3
c.
Postulated Solution. ............................................................................................................................... 4
d.
Solution. .................................................................................................................................................. 4
e.
Future Actions (the way forward). ......................................................................................................... 4
Mei 2015
-1-
In Search of a more economic IT solutions
1.
In Search of a more economic IT solution.
I am starting to get very frustrated with the IT industry and feel trapped by the “wheelspin” we are
stuck with. Our client, “The Business”, rightfully experiences the same feeling, experiencing the IT
industry as a “black hole” sucking up capital with no obvious progress and I am very sympathetic
towards them.
Around 50 years ago IBM introduced the System/360. The 360 depicted a full circle and the idea was
that this was the ultimate solution. Over the past 50 years computer technology has developed in
quantum leaps, yet the only thing that has changed in the standard programming lab is the
disappearance of the punch cards and 3278 terminals which were replaced by a Windows workstation
to emulate it – not much progress my my mind.
1.1. What went wrong:
Stating that something went wrong will, in itself, be wrong. However, there are certainly some points
to consider.
In the beginning we didn’t have a clue of the way forward and it was literally a matter of “if you don’t
know where you are going, any road will take you there”. Many businesses had chosen the “wrong”
technology1, other had chosen the wrong products. However, with 20/20 hindsight, we have a clear
view of the past and things have started to mature. Today we know that Windows/Linux will be
around for a while and z/OS is the only alternative for industrial computing – thus we just have to deal
with it.
The IT industry was standing at the dawn of the information revolution and desparately needed
methodology and processes to manage it. Its only source was the recent industrial revolution and it
had borrowed heavily from it – unfortunately all the non-applicable stuff in my mind.
1.2. Are we on the right track?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
With Information technology there is a definate shift from manul labour to intellectual labour.
The methods of managing manual labour are unfortunately not applicable to intellectual labour,
however we totally fail to recognise it and stubbonly carry on applying manual labour principles
on intellectual labour.
Henry Ford is well known as the father of mass production by developing the assembly line and
drove down production costs to an acceptable level, not only for vehicles but for virtually all the
commodities we are consuming today - yet IT fail to recognise this jewel from the past.
Apple and the IBM PC had thrown a curve ball to the already struggling IT industry and the
technology has exploded in our face. All of a sudden everybody was an IT expert and the few
computer scientists that were already struggling to find their feet, were rocked in their
foundations. We are still recovering from that “earthquake”.
The tempo of development is speeding ahead but we are stuck with a “legacy” that is just too
costly to revamp and cannot cope any more.
The experience that existed around the classical manual business processes is declining and
business are oblivious towards these legacy computerised systems. Today staff only know that
“things happen” but don’t know why any more. Even the original programmer isn’t around any
more and systems are becomming the proverbial “black box”.
1
Not choosing IBM which is currently the only survivour
-2-
In Search of a more economic IT solutions
1.3. Is there a solution?
By taking crucial facts in mind I am of the firm belief that solutions do exist, but the window in which
we have to recognise and address it, is getting smaller at the same rapid speed that progress occurs.
a. Stop – Wake Up!
At this point in time we have a perfect 20/20 hindsight and should utilise it. We can look back and
realise that Object Orientated Programming has some value and Database technology is
unavoidable. Realtime processing is a reality and batch windows are under huge pressure – even
today it is too small, to merely take a backup of the system at an exact point in time.
We must realise that certain technologies are still developing while others have reached maturity.
Just to illustrate: Nobody in his/her right mind will today attempt to craft a more efficient SORT
than DFSORT. Nor will anybody search for a better file access methodology but merely use VSAM
or DB2 without even considering an alternative (z/OS in focus). When I started programming we
had to read DASD directly with CCHHRR adresses. It was super fast, but sharing and locking was not
on the radar at that point in time. Today it won’t even be considered.
Object Orientated Programming (OOP) technology is, in my mind, still in an evolutionary phase.
However that does not stop us from borrowing some techniques from it.
GUI2 screens are common practice and using TUI3 is merely making a fool of yourself.
b. A philosophical point of view
1. In creating a mindset for the search of future IT, we must realise the philosophies of our major
suppliers (IBM & Microsoft). IBM started with the philosophy of IT is exclusive for a small group
of computer scientists while Microsoft adopted the philosophy of IT is for everybody. Currently
we are lost somewhere in between.
2. The mainframe (z/OS) is the kernel of IT whether we want to accept it or not. The nature of a
Bank’s business is simply too much for an Intel Server. It might be that iSeries clusters will be
able to cope but a central database remains the challenge. Inteligent workstations give us a
depth of functionality above dumb terminals, however “fat” client technology has been a
proven failure and yielded a maintenance nightmare.
3. Take the analogy of an atom with zSeries as the kernel surrounded by a cloud4of iSeries and
xSeries technology. This provides us with a wealth of computing power but do we utilise it
properly?
4. Let us consider motor cars for a moment. How many people would have been able to afford a
car if we build cars like we build applications today? Custom made cars will be unaffordable and
even unthinkable in the modern era – but we keep on building custom made applications. Yes,
the idea of re-use is floating around but it is not realising its potential.
5. The SOA initiative was a big step in the right direction but only addressed a small portion in the
cloud area and is ignorant about the kernel. The problem lies in the origin of IT i.e. in the very
kernel and it is growing like a cancer cell to the point where it will implode on itself and bring
everything to a grinding halt – scary thought.
2
GUI = Graphical User Interface (Windows)
TUI = Text User Interface (NTE)
4
Note: When I am talking about a cloud I am not refering to Cloud Computing
3
-3-
In Search of a more economic IT solutions
c. Postulated Solution.
With the above in mind I honestly believe that we can build a system that can generate the
required applications for the Bank. I cannot give an elaborated design for this in this short writing
but am willing to spend my life in the search for such a solution.
I am making a couple of points to ponder:
1. Every business document whether it is a deposit slip, an invoice or an account application can
be seen as an Object with properties and behaviour.
2. Every item of data in the Bank can be described in a data dictionary as the absolute source for
these objects.
3. Business rules can be described5 in a repository as a source for these objects’ behaviour.
4. Meta functionality or so called “Non-Functional requirements” are known and can be catered
for like “Security”, “event Logging”, etc. As well as things like change-control and deployment.
Standards will become a natural spin-off.
5. Once we have the supporting repositories in place, applications can be generated on demand
and bring down development time from Months to Minutes.
6. Currently there are often scenarios were human intervention is required. However in recent
years the human utilises objective data to justify his/her decision and doesn’t take
responsibility any more. My theory is that if this is the case, the human is obsolete.
7. Realtime processing should be implemented in most cases, however, it is not always possible;
like in cases of cross system updates e.g. our Waste file feeds. But we know this and can keep it
in mind and cater for it. Batch windows should be phased out and cyclic batch updates should
rather be introduced in order to achieve a full 24x7 availability.
8. It will be way too costly! I can hear the outcry. Save this expence and keep on spending millions
on new development – is that the solution? I don’t think so. Sometimes one has to spent
millions to save billions and I will rather spent millions of “funny money” than real money
(even worse – offshore).
9. I am playing now in the typical SAP arena but that is what happens – companies stubbonly
carry on with inhouse software until they reach breakpoint and are then forced to dance to
SAP’s tune (or some other alternative).
d. Solution.
As mentioned above, we can define all pieces of business documents as objects, source the
properties from a data dictionary and source their behaviour from a business rule repository and
generate lower level programs in a language of choice (COBOL) and deploy the built as a package.
This might sound far fetched but I am convinced that we have enough expertise in the company to
design and build such a solution. This is not a sales paper and there is no product available that I
know of. Many attempts were made in the past and all have failed for some or other reason. We
can learn from it.
e. Future Actions (the way forward).
The first hurdle to get over is “buy in”. Once this concept is adopted it will be business as usual. We
need to define the principles – in fact now things start to make sense6. Define the Vision, Mission
and Principles/Values that the solution will be subjected to. Utilise front-end technology and build
5
At the time of writing I don’t have a solution for describing Business Rules in a technical way however I firmly believe
that a solution can be defined.
6
The matter of Vision, Mision and Values haven’t made sense to my logical mind previously.
-4-
In Search of a more economic IT solutions
the engine first. Sometimes one runs into solutions that can be used to create more functionality.
Take the analogy of 3D printing. All one needs is the basic solution. From there the printer prints its
own spare parts. Another example is SAP. SAP uses ABAP and most of the SAP solutions are written
in ABAP.
Define the pros & cons. Draft a business case. This is a huge project but it is a step towards Green
IT (proverbial). Taking this approach gives us sustainable Business applications and we can move
away from the current milling around like headless chickens with no direction in mind. One can
argue that this will be suicidal because it will make programming obsolete but we are making
ourself obsolete anyway. Businesses come to a point where they get rid of their IT departments
and outsource it in an attemt to lower IT costs. That is a suicidal move for the Business but they
don’t want to realise it. We should be mature enough to realise that a kid reasoning that he/she
doesn’t need to go to school is not very wise.
The above scenario will make programming obsolete but will probably create a complete new IT
society with many new roles and responsibilities.
Things are changing rapidly and even our very foundation of the zSystem might become obsolete in
the near future. Just imagine IBM annoucing Quantum computers; machines a thousand fold faster
and a thousand fold cheaper but it is not running COBOL. Are we ready for something like, that or
will we just throw in the towel?
Lets leave the technology on the outskirts of the cloud like mobile and tablets to play with itself for
a while – they are insignificant at the kernel. We just have to prepare the kernel for the future in
order to keep the Bank operational. In my humble opinion we have that responsibility towards the
Bank.
I definately do not claim this to be the “silver bullet” however if I can just ignite the way of thought
I have done my life’s achievement.
Jurg van Eeden
www.jurg.co.za
-5-