Fantastic information. Thank you Chicken, Jammy and JMC. Appreciate the distilling of your experiences. I suppose what we’re really talking about is the rough banking equivalent of a 1990’s style SAP/Oracle ERP implementation. And I was likely wrong about the accomplishment of my acquaintance (well I had misread the comment so as to understand the development as practically fait accompli.).
Related to ChickenParmentier’s post on core banking systems (possibly better in the banking thread).
That thing about core banking platforms, Oscar D Torson
medium.com/@odtorson/that-thing … .g3b8qasut
Great read thanks.
Maybe there’s a few nuggets of intelligence in there but it’s outweighed by horse shite:
It’s true that in the COBOL-OO/Java transition era there was a lot of unrealistic crap being peddled about the latest fad of “intergalactic distributed objects” but that was only the latest in a never-ending line of IT industry hype. I never came across a system that failed because of a lack of “compute and communications resources”. (I met and discussed this personally with Orfali and Edwards about their book at the time). Intergalactic objects didn’t fail because the internet wasn’t robust enough to support super-generic distributed ‘Customer’ and ‘Order’ objects. No, projects failed for the same reason they always had, always do, and always will – the (mis)management of organisational complexity and requirements specificity and the inability to bridge the gap between the business and techies. Whether it was knowledge-based systems in the 80s, client/server and objects in the 90s, service-oriented architecture in the noughties or microservices today, the IT industry has always dealt in silver bullets and snake oil at the expense of hapless customers with real business needs. Indeed, not only IT, but the consulting industry in general is populated by sharks ready to separate gullible people from their money.
Part of the mess of existing systems is the failure to fully offload and a chunk of that is down to capacity/throughput failures - project x takes 10% of load off; project x uses way more resources than planned. Project x costs more to run than the mainframe it is supposed to replace. Project x is quietly shelved at just 10%. 5 years later, there are two legacy system… repeat and rinse for 35 years…
Plenty about HP buying Autonomy in this thread.
Extradition formally requested.