IBM i Software Providers Accelerate IBM i Decline

I often read how many IBM i devotees lament that IBM does a poor job of marketing as the primary reason IBM i loses out to Windows, UNIX and Linux.

While that may be true, from talking to many users I now have a sense that other, BIGGER trends hurt the IBM i – bad practices from Independent Software Vendors (ISVs).

Let me first state that in my experience, the vast majority of IBM i ISV’s are run by thoughtful providers who sincerely care about their clients.

On the other hand, there are number of ISV’s with the following practices that HURT the IBM i market:

i) Expensive software transfer fees when users upgrade to a new server with a new serial number

ii) 2-tiered software pricing for software transfer – 1) reasonable price when buy the server from the preferred ISV server provider, and 2) REAL PRICEY software transfer fee if you buy your server from someone else

iii) ISV “qualified” server or hosting solution restrictions – so the ultimate users loses freedom of choice

iv) ISV source code restriction.

v) Inflexible software tier pricing. I hear about this when IBM P05 users want to host their applications and the hosting server is P10 or P20.even though the LPAR is comparable to P05.

vi) Poor service. Poor software support reveals itself in many ways

1. Sneaky pricing or increases. Some ISVs have increased their software support fees even as they cut back on their support staff. Others restrict who can provide software changes, in essence so you pay the ISV for any software changes and often at higher prices than you can find.
2. Slow response to questions – some companies can take days to get an answer. This is not just about getting an answer to a technical issue. It can be a long delay because a client wants to get a clear answer what is involved with a temporary or backup software copy for disaster recovery – and the ISV does not sure what to do to make themselves the most money.
3. Software development and focus on its biggest clients – poor response for the smaller clients
4. Decline in function enhancements and innovation

vii) Sneaky pricing or increases. Some ISVs have increased their software support fees even as they cut back on their support staff. Others restrict who can provide software changes, in essence so you pay the ISV for any software changes and often at higher prices than you can find.

IBM i users fall anywhere between upset to highly resentful by these practices. As much as they may love the IBM POWER server rock-solid reliability and ease of use, more users at looking at other options they sense are more cost-effective from suppliers they believe are EASIER to work with.

Consequently, may IBM I users have their POWER server in an interim status as they make plans to evaluate and move to other solutions…a loss for IBM i.

Clearly I understand ISV must make profit to continue operation.

Nevertheless, I hear from many users that they are leaving the platform in essence because the feel their ISV is NOT on their side. Instead, they sense the ISV’s are in the business of optimizing the ISV bottom line instead of helping their customers with their business.

ISV may believe my points are out of line or unfair. I am merely sharing what users tell me why they are moving away – their ISVs charge too much for software that may not be keeping pace with their needs. And, they can find other providers with comparable capabilities, more innovation, better service and a lower cost. Who can argue with that?

What to do?

If these ISV’s plan changes to their pricing or service, they should ask themselves, “how might our intended changes negatively affect our clients. If there will be negative consequences, what other options or variations can we consider limiting the negative affects?”

Better still, imagine if ISV’s were to ask their customers “how can we do a better job even if we have to raise our prices?”

Best of all, if you are disappointed with your ISV, tell them that you would like them to behave differently or you will make plans to seek other options.

I just hope the ISV get this message and change to help our IBM i user base stay strong.