RE: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than zero

[Scott Mildenberger <Smildenber@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Don,

If the Intel servers were used instead of the 400 for this application I
assume that they are just being used as servers, i.e. they had a client part
that did a lot of the processing.  If the 400 app. is written the same way
then it is also being used as a server and you can use all of it's CPW.  And
if the Intel servers only cost a couple of grand then you must not be using
a database because that can drive up your cost dramatically, unfortunately
with the 400 you pay for the database even if you don't use it.  My point
being that these comparisons aren't really valid.  In one scenario (the 400)
most of the processing takes place on that computer and you don't need to
buy a bunch of extra software because it all comes included.  With the Intel
scenario, the processing is shared amongst all the clients and you do have
to buy a bunch of additional costly software.  Although I tend to agree that
the 400 should be less expensive I do think the comparisons need to be more
realistic.  There was an article in Midrange Computing about a year ago
(sorry can't remember which issue) that compared a 400 against an Intel
server, they were both equipped with a database (Oracle on the Intel side)
and all the software needed for the application.  Guess what, the costs of
the two servers were comparable and the 400 may have even been cheaper
although I can't remember that detail for sure.  Of course, if you want a
machine for just web serving and no database on it then the 400 has no
chance of competing price wise.  Maybe IBM will start selling a 400 with
limited DB capability for a lower price (maybe that's what that % DB
capability item in DSPSYSSTS is for!).

Just some thoughts,

Scott Mildenberger





> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don [mailto:dr2@cssas400.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:55 AM
> To: midrange-l@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than zero
>
>
> Nathan, would you pay $110,000 for a system you were only
> allowed to use
> 7.5% of!?  These numbers are approximate, but close enough to
> what I was
> faced with this week in trying to talk a Fortune 100 client
> to upgrade...
>
> OH, BTW, the Intel servers would only could a couple
> grand....FAR from teh
> $110,000 +/- so we're faced with the same kinda scenerio
> Borts was down at
> JC Penney....
>
> It's also a easy way to be thought an idiot and laughed out
> of someone's
> office!
>
> Don in DC
>