|
Yes, I can see that, and that has almost always been our concern. I can see the benefit of having an end to end solution but I don't think it always applies in all business cases. However, in the smaller end - how many times would any of us customers have preferred to put a small iSeries out in the field but we couldn't afford it.......and perhaps if it was available we would use OS/400 on a wrist watch. The question was valid, it seems however, that our definition of scalable is about as consistent as to what's wrong with iSeries marketing...... :-) Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxx om> To Midrange Systems Technical 02/08/2005 02:32 Discussion PM <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> cc Please respond to Subject Midrange Systems RE: Scalability Technical Discussion <midrange-l@midra nge.com> I agree. Scalability only ever means "up" in planner's minds. The dread is that the company suddenly outgrow it's back office and not be able to send product, invoices, or payables. That is the real issue in my experience. --------------------------------- Booth Martin http://www.martinvt.com --------------------------------- -------Original Message------- From: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Date: 02/08/05 13:25:49 To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Subject: RE: Scalability The issue here as most posts have pointed out is that no one can agree to scalability or to it's actual relevance. No offense to the put it on a watch people but I'm not sure how relevant that might be to my perspective of what is scalable and how it is good for my business. While scaling down to a diminutive form is of some business sense to some people, the benefits of what I get out of the iSeries and OS/400 don't necessarily themselves scale down to a smaller side. And based on the integrated nature of the product (both hardware and software) I would fully expect it to be harder to justify the cost and technical effort to get it there. Of course, that is my perspective on scalable.........I fully understand that others won't agree. But as mentioned before, that is my personal, professional, and business take on scalable. It's not the only way but it definitely works...... Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxx om> To Midrange Systems Technical 02/08/2005 01:29 Discussion PM <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> cc Please respond to Subject Midrange Systems RE: Scalability Technical Discussion <midrange-l@midra nge.com> May I ask a tangential question here? I have long wondered about something pertaining to this discussion of unix & iSeries. Do unix shops deploy Windows PCs or do they deploy Linux or some variant? Is the iSeries pretty well committed to needing Windows workstations? When one is discussing scalability doesn't unix's ability to fill the need from keyboard to server give unix the edge? In general what is the discussion one would make about unix and the user workstations? --------------------------------- Booth Martin http://www.martinvt.com --------------------------------- -------Original Message------- From: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Date: 02/08/05 12:08:49 To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Subject: RE: Scalability On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Jones, John (US) wrote: > To see how valid these claims about how much more expensive iSeries pros > are than Unix pros, I ran the following. The numbers are approximate > for a large metropolitan area but should be fairly close based on what > I've observed. Please feel free to adjust and comment. Interesting numbers, but they all assume more unix pros are needed than iSeries pros. Why would you make such an assumption? All the numbers in the world showing how much more expensive unix guys are over iSeries guys are pointless if your initial assumption is wrong. Indeed, in my shop and my customers' iSeries pros outnumber unix 2 to 1, yet in my shop unix machines outnumber iSeries 4 to 1. My customers all have the same number of unix machines as iSeries. James Rich It's not the software that's free; it's you. - billyskank on Groklaw -- -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. . -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.