14 ms·

>Nevertheless, many older applications need to be modernized, for example, to create a modern web or GUI interface instead of the ubiquitous green screen interf

>Nevertheless, many older applications need to be modernized, for example, to create a modern web or GUI interface instead of the ubiquitous green screen interface common for older mainframe applications. Why do they "need" this? What's wrong with a TUI? Must every single piece of software have a "modern web" interface? If the option is between a TUI that's instant, and a React/Vue/whatever app that takes 15 seconds to load and breaks the back button... maybe the TUI ain't so bad?

save_ferris 6y ago
Yeah, I found that argument to be strange as well. Not everything needs to have a super dynamic UI. That said, I do think that companies are running into serious issues trying to maintain and integrate legacy mainframe systems without fully or properly considering the maintenance costs. Take the US airlines. My understanding is that these airlines are largely running on legacy booking and inventory systems that have been duct-taped together over the course of decades due to mergers and acquisitions, etc. Several large airlines have suffered major outages that were blamed on internal IT failures, sometimes resulting in grounded planes. I’d love to hear more detail around this problem for those who have the context, but my understanding is that these companies have have many old systems that are costing a fortune to maintain and becoming less and less stable. I’d bet that you could find some pretty serious architecture flaws without digging too deeply into those systems, and I’d argue that those would be issues worth addressing above a UI. Problem is that management can see and grasp a new UI far easier than architecture changes.
- p_l 6y ago
  Major airlines have huge chunks of the IT system outsourced to cloud services for longer than the term grid computing existed. Which isn't that surprising when you consider that Cloud is literally the old mainframe model. The issues you've heard are often related to intersection points between different systems handling different areas, for example the main passenger-handling system is usually outsourced to Amadeus (especially in EU it seems) or Sabre, then you might have onboarding software that can sometimes introduce you to mainframes most people never heard of (I know that at least one airline used Unisys). Some have in-house components that integrate with the rest. There's integration with airport baggage handling. There's plane monitoring and maintenance (which might include "cloud" services from vendors of the plane and separately of the engine), etc. etc. Some of those systems are very new - KLM/AF have recently made a large enough development on z/TPF that they call it actually a new system. I know that I was VERY impressed with how fast a trained clerk worked using it, getting me a new flight after volcano grounded everyone, adding frequent flyer program etc. along the way. You know all those stories about expert ViM users? A typical trained user of one of those systems is at least as fast as them. Quite often, the finger for failures is pointed (often for good reason) at outsourcing companies. Interestingly, it tends to not be Amadeus or Sabre that are pointed at, but well known companies like TCS, Wipro, Infosys...
ulisesrmzroche 6y ago
First things the vast majority of users (virtually all) when they see an old ugly GUI is to hit the back button. Decent SPAs don’t take 15 seconds to load and they don’t break the back button. Stop spreading FUD. It’s like the HN myth of how there’s supposedly all these old devs writing COBOL for the government and in reality the government can’t find any developers to maintain their ancient apps
- SamuelAdams 6y ago
  > It’s like the HN myth of how there’s supposedly all these old devs writing COBOL for the government and in reality the government can’t find any developers to maintain their ancient apps Exactly. I worked at a private, multi-billion dollar organization a few years ago. There were plenty of "old devs" working on their COBOL software, but they also got paid more than 6 figures to do so. And they hired recent grads to work on those same systems. New grads typically started around 60k, more if you negotiated better. Whereas these gov't jobs only pay around 35k - 75k for the same work. For someone with years of experience.
- p_l 6y ago
  The kind of users that are going to use the mainframe are not going to hit the back button. Also, in mainframe-using orgs, there's often this weird idea of giving people training. Sometimes it's over a month of training where you have to sign a loyalty contract that you're going to work at least X months or repay them before you're allowed to take job with competition.
- flukus 6y ago
  > First things the vast majority of users (virtually all) when they see an old ugly GUI is to hit the back button. These aren't public facing apps you have to entice people to use, it's part of their job, if someone hits the back button and refuses to use it they're fired. Modern user friendly versions typically have half the functionality and take longer to do anything, they're universally reviled by people that took the time to learn the old green screen versions. > Decent SPAs don’t take 15 seconds to load and they don’t break the back button. Stop spreading FUD. Decent SPA's are few and far between, they take extra work to get this functionality that was free before SPA's.
wmf 6y ago
UI changes may be driven by organizations that want to replace call centers with self-service.

save_ferris 6y ago

Yeah, I found that argument to be strange as well. Not everything needs to have a super dynamic UI. That said, I do think that companies are running into serious issues trying to maintain and integrate legacy mainframe systems without fully or properly considering the maintenance costs. Take the US airlines. My understanding is that these airlines are largely running on legacy booking and inventory systems that have been duct-taped together over the course of decades due to mergers and acquisitions, etc. Several large airlines have suffered major outages that were blamed on internal IT failures, sometimes resulting in grounded planes. I’d love to hear more detail around this problem for those who have the context, but my understanding is that these companies have have many old systems that are costing a fortune to maintain and becoming less and less stable. I’d bet that you could find some pretty serious architecture flaws without digging too deeply into those systems, and I’d argue that those would be issues worth addressing above a UI. Problem is that management can see and grasp a new UI far easier than architecture changes.

p_l 6y ago
Major airlines have huge chunks of the IT system outsourced to cloud services for longer than the term grid computing existed. Which isn't that surprising when you consider that Cloud is literally the old mainframe model. The issues you've heard are often related to intersection points between different systems handling different areas, for example the main passenger-handling system is usually outsourced to Amadeus (especially in EU it seems) or Sabre, then you might have onboarding software that can sometimes introduce you to mainframes most people never heard of (I know that at least one airline used Unisys). Some have in-house components that integrate with the rest. There's integration with airport baggage handling. There's plane monitoring and maintenance (which might include "cloud" services from vendors of the plane and separately of the engine), etc. etc. Some of those systems are very new - KLM/AF have recently made a large enough development on z/TPF that they call it actually a new system. I know that I was VERY impressed with how fast a trained clerk worked using it, getting me a new flight after volcano grounded everyone, adding frequent flyer program etc. along the way. You know all those stories about expert ViM users? A typical trained user of one of those systems is at least as fast as them. Quite often, the finger for failures is pointed (often for good reason) at outsourcing companies. Interestingly, it tends to not be Amadeus or Sabre that are pointed at, but well known companies like TCS, Wipro, Infosys...

ulisesrmzroche 6y ago

First things the vast majority of users (virtually all) when they see an old ugly GUI is to hit the back button. Decent SPAs don’t take 15 seconds to load and they don’t break the back button. Stop spreading FUD. It’s like the HN myth of how there’s supposedly all these old devs writing COBOL for the government and in reality the government can’t find any developers to maintain their ancient apps

SamuelAdams 6y ago
> It’s like the HN myth of how there’s supposedly all these old devs writing COBOL for the government and in reality the government can’t find any developers to maintain their ancient apps Exactly. I worked at a private, multi-billion dollar organization a few years ago. There were plenty of "old devs" working on their COBOL software, but they also got paid more than 6 figures to do so. And they hired recent grads to work on those same systems. New grads typically started around 60k, more if you negotiated better. Whereas these gov't jobs only pay around 35k - 75k for the same work. For someone with years of experience.
p_l 6y ago
The kind of users that are going to use the mainframe are not going to hit the back button. Also, in mainframe-using orgs, there's often this weird idea of giving people training. Sometimes it's over a month of training where you have to sign a loyalty contract that you're going to work at least X months or repay them before you're allowed to take job with competition.
flukus 6y ago
> First things the vast majority of users (virtually all) when they see an old ugly GUI is to hit the back button. These aren't public facing apps you have to entice people to use, it's part of their job, if someone hits the back button and refuses to use it they're fired. Modern user friendly versions typically have half the functionality and take longer to do anything, they're universally reviled by people that took the time to learn the old green screen versions. > Decent SPAs don’t take 15 seconds to load and they don’t break the back button. Stop spreading FUD. Decent SPA's are few and far between, they take extra work to get this functionality that was free before SPA's.

wmf 6y ago

UI changes may be driven by organizations that want to replace call centers with self-service.