Re: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch

On 12/11/06, Lukas Beeler <l.beeler@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm not replying to a specific mail, but being relatively new to the
System i (right now about 2 years of experience), I have my own opinion
about a lot of topics.

The company I'm working for sells an ERP Software
(http://www.dias-is.com, German only), with it's own GUI Client, which
uses an In-House protocol to display stuff on clients (we have a Windows
Native client, plus a Java client). All Business Logic runs on the
System i, in ILE RPG. This software is a successor to a previous
software running on plain 5250.

We mostly have small business customers located in Switzerland, small
business here means "50 or less" users. Most of our customers are in the
sub 10 users range.

In my opinion, the system i is a great platform, it offers very good
documentation and integration. There's not much which isn't integrated
nicely into the system. I also work a lot with windows and linux, and
i5/OS always seems to be more b"designed" and fully integrated.

There, however, many many things wrong with the System I right now.

(All prices in swiss francs)

* Price

20k for a 600CPW machine with 1 GB RAM, 36GB Disk. For the same amount
of money, I get a dual quad core machine, with half a tera of 15kRPM
disk space, 8GB memory, and all appropriate windows/sql server licenses.
Not that even one of our customers needs that much power.

Disk space is completely overpriced. 3k for two 36GB disks? That's just
ridiculous.

* Speed
The 600CPW model is already vastly overpriced. And it also SLOOOOW.
Accessing the admin webserver on port 2001 literally takes MINUTES.
Restoring backups, installing PTFs, doing saves are all a total PITA, it
takes AGES. It reminds me of PC performance back in 1998.

* Hardware platform
For 20k, what IBM deliver is just, well, pathetic. Installing RAM in the
system requires you to take it completely apart (service processor,
power supplies, tapedrive/cd unit, Fans). IBM can do this a lot better,
just look at the x3550 and x3650. They're both very maintenance friendly
machines. For a quarter the price. The dual power supply is NOT standard
in the 20k model, the rack mount kit available for it is one of the most
awful cases of "engineering gone bad" I've seen.

Why doesn't the Service processor allow me to get a console? HP's iLO
(no charge with linux, charge with windows), or IBM's RSAII (always
charge) allow me to do that.

* Consoles
Consoles are available in three flavors.
Twinax - Too old, but reliable. Works fine. But you can't sell this
anymore.
HMC - Far too expensive. I get a nice System x for that price. No
customer will every buy this.
Thin Console - I've written about it earlier. Buggy, buggy, buggy. Works
mostly. There are no alternatives, though.
Operations Console (LAN, Serial)- I'm not going to touch it with a ten
foot pole. A separate PC for a software which "mostly works".

* iSeries Access
Why is it still called iSeries Access? I thought it's a System i?
Anyway, iSeries (not System i) Navigator is just a huge piece of junk.
It's slow over WAN links, and it's slow in general. That's not because
of java, it's because of incompetent application developers. Many things
can only be done with OpsNav, as there's no native 5250 commands. Like
creating NetServer shares.

* LPARs
LPARs are pathetic when compared to Vmware ESX server, or the free
offerings from Microsoft (Virtual Server 2005), and Vmware. They require
a disk controller per i5/OS Partition, and separate disks. Also, saving
without a tape changer is not really funny, and there is no way to
control a save from a single partition (like for example Backup Exec for
multiple windows servers).

* Integrated xSeries
You can now use the 3k per 36GB disks on my System x. Yes. I've always
wanted to do that. It's great! Also, you can buy PCI cards of slow, old
PCs, which can also use the expensive storage. Cool thing. I have no
idea who would EVER buy this.

These are the things which I find to be the most crucial points wrong
about the System i. If I were a CIO (which iam not), I wouldn't see one
compelling reason to buy a system i. Except if there is some great
software running on it, which I absolutely want. The system i itself
will never compel users to buy one. Not with the current pricing, and
the current deficiencies.

Judging the pricing, and the slow performance of the entry level
machines, I would guess that IBM is just milking the System i community
till it is done, and there's no more money left. Storage prices for
memory (30k for 16GB in 2GB for a 520? I can get the same amount of
memory for a PC in less than 10k. And yes, it is technically the same
memory) and disks (3k for 2x36GB 15kRPM, vs. 1.5k for 2x147GB 15kRPM
(3.5" PC), or .8k 2x72GB, 10kRPM in 2.5" PC).

There are many technical reasons not to buy a System i. And not many
technical reasons for a New System i (if you're a mac or windows shop
right now). There are lots of reasons for legacy customers not to switch
systems, but that's just milking the cow.

excellent post Lukas. a lot of real world info.

I would add that on the programming side of the system the i5 could be
a star in the Linux application space if it only had the unlimited CPU
that other systems have. ILE might actually be better than what Linux
has to offer.   It would be very interesting to see if ports of GNU C
code to ILE C are doable.

-Steve