|
midrange.com
Yes, I can see that, and that has almost always been our concern. I can
see the benefit of having an end to end solution but I don't think it
always applies in all business cases. However, in the smaller end - how
many times would any of us customers have preferred to put a small iSeries
out in the field but we couldn't afford it.......and perhaps if it was
available we would use OS/400 on a wrist watch. The question was valid, it
seems however, that our definition of scalable is about as consistent as to
what's wrong with iSeries marketing...... :-)
Booth Martin
<booth@xxxxxxxxxx
om> To
Midrange Systems Technical
02/08/2005 02:32 Discussion
PM <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Please respond to Subject
Midrange Systems RE: Scalability
Technical
Discussion
<midrange-l@midra
nge.com>
I agree. Scalability only ever means "up" in planner's minds. The dread
is
that the company suddenly outgrow it's back office and not be able to send
product, invoices, or payables. That is the real issue in my experience.
---------------------------------
Booth Martin
http://www.martinvt.com
---------------------------------
-------Original Message-------
From: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Date: 02/08/05 13:25:49
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Scalability
The issue here as most posts have pointed out is that no one can agree to
scalability or to it's actual relevance. No offense to the put it on a
watch people but I'm not sure how relevant that might be to my perspective
of what is scalable and how it is good for my business. While scaling down
to a diminutive form is of some business sense to some people, the benefits
of what I get out of the iSeries and OS/400 don't necessarily themselves
scale down to a smaller side. And based on the integrated nature of the
product (both hardware and software) I would fully expect it to be harder
to justify the cost and technical effort to get it there. Of course, that
is my perspective on scalable.........I fully understand that others won't
agree. But as mentioned before, that is my personal, professional, and
business take on scalable. It's not the only way but it definitely
works......
Booth Martin
<booth@xxxxxxxxxx
om> To
Midrange Systems Technical
02/08/2005 01:29 Discussion
PM <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Please respond to Subject
Midrange Systems RE: Scalability
Technical
Discussion
<midrange-l@midra
nge.com>
May I ask a tangential question here? I have long wondered about something
pertaining to this discussion of unix & iSeries. Do unix shops deploy
Windows PCs or do they deploy Linux or some variant? Is the iSeries
pretty
well committed to needing Windows workstations? When one is discussing
scalability doesn't unix's ability to fill the need from keyboard to server
give unix the edge? In general what is the discussion one would make about
unix and the user workstations?
---------------------------------
Booth Martin
http://www.martinvt.com
---------------------------------
-------Original Message-------
From: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Date: 02/08/05 12:08:49
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Scalability
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Jones, John (US) wrote:
> To see how valid these claims about how much more expensive iSeries pros
> are than Unix pros, I ran the following. The numbers are approximate
> for a large metropolitan area but should be fairly close based on what
> I've observed. Please feel free to adjust and comment.
Interesting numbers, but they all assume more unix pros are needed than
iSeries pros. Why would you make such an assumption? All the numbers in
the world showing how much more expensive unix guys are over iSeries guys
are pointless if your initial assumption is wrong. Indeed, in my shop and
my customers' iSeries pros outnumber unix 2 to 1, yet in my shop unix
machines outnumber iSeries 4 to 1. My customers all have the same number
of unix machines as iSeries.
James Rich
It's not the software that's free; it's you.
- billyskank on Groklaw
--
--
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 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 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.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
