Re: Is the midrange really the right tool for the job here? WAS (Re: Hardware question)

And I understand that aspect. But sometimes its good to take a step back,
especially in a small shop that obviously has very small computing needs
and evaluate if the applications plus hardware solution is currently the
best fit. Maybe it is, maybe their applications and usage fits their
business well enough to justify a midrange machine. I was just making the
point that it seems that even a new 710 is grossly more that what they
seem to need. Sometimes the short term pain of making a switch is worth
the long term gains to better align the technology and the business.

Just making some observations.


Thanks
Bryce Martin
Programmer/Analyst I
570-546-4777



Scott Klement <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
01/13/2011 05:25 PM
Please respond to
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
cc

Subject
Re: Is the midrange really the right tool for the job here? WAS (Re:
Hardware question)






Systems are sold by the applications that run on them.
Not how much disk space they use!

If I want a good ERP system, some of the choices might be designed for
IBM i, so I run it there. Even if I don't have 10+ GB worth of data!

On 1/13/2011 10:09 AM, Bryce Martin wrote:

*OFF TOPIC* so I made it a new topic....
But I have to ask... what could you possibly be doing on a midrange
machine in today's world that only needs 9GB of storage? And does that
workload REALLY constitute the money spent on the system? I mean, 9GB

of

data today is nothing. So why a whole midrange system when it seems it
will be highly underutilized? Could you/your customer switch to a

cheaper

solution for such a light work load? I LOVE the platform, but its not
really ideal cost/value for tiny word loads.