Re: Lower End AS/400s

["mlazarus@xxxxxxxx" <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>]

Syd,

 We can preach this all day, but today the directive seems to be to cut
costs *immediately* and we'll worry about the additional future costs in
the future.  IBM must realize that and come up w/ a plan to make money, yet
keep entry costs low.

 -mark

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Dr Syd Nicholson sydnic@ccs400.com
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:05:18 +0000
To: midrange-l@midrange.com
Subject: Re: Lower End AS/400s


I have experienced this many times. The up front cost of the iSeries
seems to be expensive.

On the other hand the iSeries does not need an army of technicians to
keep it happy, to change its diaper every time it hiccups. In the longer
term, the iSeries is a much cheaper option. Windows servers possibly the
most expensive. The cost is not just the hardware, or the software, but
in the cost of additional support staff, disruption to business when
things go wrong, etc, etc.

With the increased integration built into OS/400, the iSeries is many
servers in one allowing a degree of  business and application
integration that is second to none.

When comparing costs, many people only see the prices of the
hardware/software and can't see beyond it. A true review should also
include all the other ancillary costs as well (eg. staffing, training,
staff turn over, downtime, etc).



--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .