I would be really surprised if this was true but I have no solid figures whatsoever to back it up. If I'm ever pricing it all out I would keep an open mind. If this is true then that makes a lot more sense. But I can't imagine how IBM I pricing/performance could beat a blade center or especially a rack of say 10 1u servers.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 1, 2012, at 2:03 AM, Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Mark D
I understand that you can do literally almost anything on an i.
The question is why you would want to spend those cpu cycles
and memory on something you can do for much cheaper on a
linux box.

Regarding cost, that depends on whether you're talking about application development vs. running production workloads. If you're pursuing a hobby or developing an application, you're right; a PC is going to cost less. However, under a production scenarios, the choice is more often whether to manage server farms including high-cost database servers, or consolidate workloads under a single IBM i server. Server farms are almost always more expensive than consolidating workloads under IBM i.

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 thread ...


Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page