Re: NT vs AS/400

John - we are not that far apart...
In the pricing model, like any other manufacturer, you look at investment to
design & build, versus expected sales and calc a price. I expect to pay more
for a niche product like the iSeries versus the pSeries. Not looking at the
drive alone but the controllers and microcode to make it work. I am SOOOO
happy to see the high quality iSeries hardware becoming the standard for the
future Universal box (hate the idea but recognize reality.) Besides, IBM has
always gouged the big customers, look at the big iSeries prices! If they
didn't, there never would be a low end product. Kind of like our US tax
system. There is still good value to the customer. I absolutely do not
beleive hardware is a commodity, and do not beleive IBM is headed there. The
only way IBM will keep iSeries customers is to make it a player in this
e-biz world, hence all the new features (some very late).
Your absolutely right about the interactive "feature". Many of us screamed
at them about this and the twinax restrictions (multiple port controllers
only supporting total 7 devices (V4R1 S10).
Bob Tipton's been a great voice, but not the only one.
jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Taylor" <john.taylor@telusplanet.net>
To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: NT vs AS/400


> Jim,
>
> Are you comparing IBM SCSI drives in the AS/400 to equivalent IBM drives
in
> the PC servers? Doubtful, if you're talking about Compaq servers. I'm not
> comparing an IBM drive to a Maxtor; I'm comparing the same (IBM Ultrastar)
> drive being marketed through different channels at radically different
price
> levels.
>
> If you truly believe that IBM manufactures different hard drives
> specifically for the AS/400, then how do you explain the move to a PCI bus
> from SPD? Why would they have bothered? Or the fact that iSeries and
pSeries
> essentially come off of the same assembly line? Or the fact that their
> stated objective is to have a common hardware platform across the entire
> server line? Of course it's the same hardware! You just get the priviledge
> of paying 10 times more than anyone else does for it.
>
> In case you're still doubtful, the evidence that you're looking for is
> available, but you have to do your own homework. Consult the System
Handbook
> for your drive type, then compare it to the IBM Ultrastars. For example,
> take a look at how similar the Ultrastar 9LZX is to the AS/400 6717. Seek
> times, data-transfer rate, latency, cache size... all either identical or
> extremely close. Overall capacity is slightly different due to the
different
> logical formats.
>
> With respect to reliability comparisons, I'll share a little of my own
> anectdotal evidence; I've had a total of five IBM drives fail on me during
> the last 12 years. Four of those were on the AS/400, and suffered from the
> "stiction" problem. The other one was an old 540MB unit in a PC. During
the
> same period of time, I've tossed about a dozen or so Maxtors, Seagates,
and
> Western Digitals.
>
> I've also witnessed NT running rock solid on our IBM servers, yet
constantly
> blue screen on various PC clones. You don't have to convince me that IBM
> produces quality hardware. Big Blue is the only company I buy my hardware
> from when it's going into an high availability environment.
>
> My beef is with the price gouging taking place in the iSeries marketplace.
> This is arguably the most loyal customer base that any vendor has, yet the
> reward for this loyalty is to be consistently raped by IBM marketing. They
> encouraged us to develop for this platform and assured us of investment
> protection if we remained faithful. We built our 5250
> applications --hundreds of them-- and deployed hundreds of thousands of
> terminals across the world.
>
> Life was good for a few years with a low TCO and a reliable
infrastructure.
> Sure, you paid a lot for the hardware, but the value was there; software
> upgrades were included, support was all inclusive. It was an easy system
to
> learn and operate etc. Then they started with software subscription,
> separate chargeable support for various LPP's, buggy client software,
> inconsistent interfaces (QShell/PASE), and then came the biggest slap in
the
> face of all - the interactive feature charges. Now they penalize our
> loyalty.
>
> And they get away with it time and again because we never take them to
task
> over it. The AS/400 community praises this platform and it's creators as
> though they were holy. The lone voice of reason that I remember hearing
was
> that of an former News/400 columnist named Bob Tipton. There was not doubt
> that he was a fan of the AS/400, but he also realized the importance of
> raking IBM over the coals when they deserved it.
>
>
> John Taylor
> Canada
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Franz" <franz400@triad.rr.com>
> To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 03:46
> Subject: Re: NT vs AS/400
>
>
> > With all the claims & counter claims flying back & forth, I have not
seen
> > any real presentation of real statistics to back up either claim.
> Somewhere
> > deep with IBM I know they exist, and IBM does make many announcements
> about
> > the reliability of the AS400 hardware & microcode. I DO beleive the
> iSeries
> > is far more reliable than NT (an operating system, not hardware)servers,
> > even the IBM servers. I have worked in several large shops, with over a
> > hundred as400s, and many NT's (Compaq and IBM, and over a thousand pc's.
> It
> > was like nite & day. The 400 disk drive problems (very few in many
years)
> > were usually if the ups was not connected right. Even when properly
power
> > protected, the NT's suffered many disk problems. If there were 2-3 disk
> > problems with over a hundred as400's, we had 5 times that in the NT
> servers
> > and 10 times that in desktop disk problems. In all cases the 400 drives
> were
> > "pumped".
> > Not truly statistical, but I have seen the same pattern in every shop
I've
> > worked in. I don't need no stinkin' study to tell me the iSeries400
> hardware
> > is far more reliable. I would gladly pay a premium for that.
> > jim
> >
>
>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
david@midrange.com
> +---

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---