This is the real answer. Main frame batch processing.
And till you haven’t experienced it, it seems like an excuse. Why can’t you simply do it all the time. Why can’t you get rid of the mainframe, etc.
But if only it were that easy. There is a reason IBM can still acquire multi billion dollar companies and then run them into the ground.
My company has maybe a couple million customers and can’t get rid of its mainframe and in areas that it’s gotten the process away from the mainframe, batch patronizing is still a thing. Because that is the only way to guarantee integrity.
So yea. I wish your comment gets more up votes. Because it is not a conspiracy, it is a technical limitation.
I had to do some legacy app modernization for one of the largest telecoms companies in the US, and their mainframe system and the UI, while ugly, performed so much faster than the modern approach.
Given, we weren’t the most talented team out there, but rendering the UI on the server side was unmatched in performance versus what we could get out of a web browser. I was the UI guy so I didn’t really touch mainframe side, but it was wild to me that they made this system like 30 years ago and it worked so much better than our modern implementation
lol i was more or less just remarking on the fact that yes mainframe and other legacy apps are pretty old, however that does not mean that they’re necessarily worse than a modern implementation
It can be, but it’s also an issue of “move fast and break things” doesn’t work in all environments.
You don’t want your bank to have an oops with your checking account, or your medical records to get messed up because someone didn’t code it well enough. If it works and is stable, there needs to be a demonstrable benefit and a guarantee that it will keep working when moving to a newer system. Usually on a budget of “what do you mean you need a budget, just do it”.
This is the real answer. Main frame batch processing.
And till you haven’t experienced it, it seems like an excuse. Why can’t you simply do it all the time. Why can’t you get rid of the mainframe, etc.
But if only it were that easy. There is a reason IBM can still acquire multi billion dollar companies and then run them into the ground.
My company has maybe a couple million customers and can’t get rid of its mainframe and in areas that it’s gotten the process away from the mainframe, batch patronizing is still a thing. Because that is the only way to guarantee integrity.
So yea. I wish your comment gets more up votes. Because it is not a conspiracy, it is a technical limitation.
I like working with legacy systems. Post something, go fart around on your phone for fifteen minutes while you wait for it to post.
I had to do some legacy app modernization for one of the largest telecoms companies in the US, and their mainframe system and the UI, while ugly, performed so much faster than the modern approach.
Given, we weren’t the most talented team out there, but rendering the UI on the server side was unmatched in performance versus what we could get out of a web browser. I was the UI guy so I didn’t really touch mainframe side, but it was wild to me that they made this system like 30 years ago and it worked so much better than our modern implementation
I’m not sure whether I want to work with your team or not, considering all fifteen of those minutes farting I get to bill to the client
lol i was more or less just remarking on the fact that yes mainframe and other legacy apps are pretty old, however that does not mean that they’re necessarily worse than a modern implementation
Removed by mod
It can be, but it’s also an issue of “move fast and break things” doesn’t work in all environments.
You don’t want your bank to have an oops with your checking account, or your medical records to get messed up because someone didn’t code it well enough. If it works and is stable, there needs to be a demonstrable benefit and a guarantee that it will keep working when moving to a newer system. Usually on a budget of “what do you mean you need a budget, just do it”.