Re:Banks should let COBOL die
by dragonwriter on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @12:53PM
(#14204735)
> Running mainframes isn't cheap.
Price for performance for certain workloads, as I understand, it can be.
> Not being able to improve these systems / innovate with them can cost the business a lot of time/money.
The banks use other technology for peripheral systems that interact with the core functions all the time (look at the drivers behind AMQP, sometime.) The core functions, OTOH, are about impelmenting requirements that haven't changed in centuries; until there is a desire to implement a fundamental new way of doing things (like blockchain, which financial institutions are exploring and probably aren't using COBOL on mainframes for their experiments) theres nothing to innovate on.
Price for performance for certain workloads, as I understand, it can be.
> Not being able to improve these systems / innovate with them can cost the business a lot of time/money.
The banks use other technology for peripheral systems that interact with the core functions all the time (look at the drivers behind AMQP, sometime.) The core functions, OTOH, are about impelmenting requirements that haven't changed in centuries; until there is a desire to implement a fundamental new way of doing things (like blockchain, which financial institutions are exploring and probably aren't using COBOL on mainframes for their experiments) theres nothing to innovate on.