RE: The IBM iSeries word from FOSE... -- MIDRANGE-L

Mike,

I don't suppose that study is on the net somewhere??  I'd love to have a copy.

Charles Wilt
iSeries Systems Administrator / Developer
Mitsubishi Electric Automotive America
ph: 513-573-4343
fax: 513-398-1121
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Mike.Crump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 4:29 PM
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Subject: RE: The IBM iSeries word from FOSE...
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 04/08/2005 
> 02:08:52 PM:
> 
> > > From: Mike.Crump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > 1.)  I haven't seen any recently quantified and current number
> > comparing
> > > the two....We track our iSeries systems and do well 99.97 
> or better.
> > And
> > > this is with a complex and mixed environment.  But I'd feel better
> > being
> > > able to point to someone's black and white number 
> regarding WINTEL.
> >
> > And who are you going to trust regarding those numbers?  Especially
> > since the issue is so dependent on the type of load, as you 
> mentioned.
> 
> Very true.  I just hate to say that without being able to back it up.
> Either with personal experience or with somebody's data.  
> Without those we
> are in the world of opinions....
> 
> 
> >
> > > 2.)  In a lot of customer environments they probably have good up
> > times.
> > > Like ours for example, we run a fair number of WINTEL 
> servers (even 10
> > > inboard).  Now, of course, each system is effectively running one
> > > application only and in some cases these systems are only 
> providing
> > > rudimentary services and are not full application systems.  But we
> > have
> > > relatively few problems with our systems with regards to downtime.
> >
> > This cracks me up... "Sure, 15 dedicated servers give us as 
> much uptime
> > as the iSeries."  Well, my guess is the cost of 15 servers 
> could also
> > get you a nice iSeries.
> 
> Agreed, but it just goes to a certain attitude.  'Hey we do not have a
> downtime problem with our PC servers.'  It's an extremely shortsighted
> attitude but it's out there.
> 
> 
> >
> > > 3.)  While it is a true cost of ownership item a lot of 
> people tend to
> > > say,
> > > hey if it's not cash I don't treat it the same.  Not that 
> I'd agree
> > with
> > > it...but lately I've even been seeing that kind of mentality creep
> > into
> > > our
> > > environment.  Not cash going out, the concern level is less.
> >
> > That's an education issue: how many servers do you have?  How many
> > people?  How many hours do they spend updating those 
> machines?  TCO is
> > definitely money going out.  But if your management don't understand
> > that, it's time to find a new job, because that company is 
> tanking SOON.
> >
> 
> You aren't telling me anything I don't already know.... :-)
> 
> 
> > > 4.)  And last but not least, I am fully convinced that a 
> lot of WINTEL
> > > people are completely comfortable with living with downtime and
> > security
> > > issues.  I'm not saying it's right but I think there are a lot of
> > people
> > > who accept mediocrity.   Our WINTEL based portal and some 
> of our plant
> > > floor systems rely on SQL server.  Two years ago we had 
> to shut them
> > all
> > > down due to SQL Server virus problems.  24 hours for some while
> > systems
> > > were patched.  Move forward 12 months later we have our CFO saying
> > that
> > > our
> > > SAP platform has to be SQL Server......the same one that 
> was shutdown
> > for
> > > 24 hours......If that had been one of my systems shut down for 24
> > hours
> > > I'd
> > > be hearing that outage as a reason to replace the system 
> for at least
> > the
> > > next five years...........
> >
> > This is why I hate Bill Gates.  His philosophy of 
> delivering cheap crap
> > until there is no competition has single-handedly reduced 
> the state of
> > software development and lowered consumer expectations to 
> rock bottom.
> 
> Well, you can hate him but in some ways you have to admire 
> it.  It works.
> Put it out, make it easy to start, cheap to start, and wait a 
> few years
> before fixing the stuff and making it robust.  M$ has been 
> doing it for
> years and getting away with it.  Personally, I blame the end 
> consumers for
> putting up with it.  And I don't like MS either.
> 
> I still believe in the 3 S's of the iSeries - Security, 
> Scalability, and
> Stability.  My revelation is that lately our reputation as the most
> expensive machine is not accurate.  And I think it has hurt 
> the system just
> as much as any other misconception.
> 
> iSeriesNetwork just ran an article and there was the 
> following quote from
> an analyst (Jeff Hewitt) at Gartner:
> 
> Mr. Hewitt was quoted as saying "Hewitt hasn't heard a 
> one-minute "elevator
> speech" that would convince him that the iSeries is the way 
> to go â nor
> does he believe he's likely to hear one."
> 
> Here is my email that most likely will never get a reply:
> 
> Here is one.....
> 
> 1.) SAP feasibility study for a mid-size manufacturer.
> 2.) Major manufacturing and financial modules implemented.
> 3.) Comparison between WINTEL/SQL Server and iSeries configuration.
> 4.) 20 Wintel server configuration compared to 2 iSeries i5 servers.
> 5.)  Hardware acquisition costs showed the iSeries to be 11% more
> expensive.
> 6.)  Hardware acquisition, software acquisition, hardware 
> maintenance, and
> software maintenance showed the iSeries to be 4% less 
> expensive per year
> given a 3 year depreciation schedule.
> 7.)  Technical personnel (Basis, systems administration, data base
> administration) requirements determined a need for 3-4 iSeries support
> personnel vs 8-12 support personnel for the WINTEL SQL server 
> environment.
> Unix/Oracle solution required 12-14 personnel.  Personnel requirements
> determined by SAP and best practices for the industry.
> 8.)  Annual savings estimated for running SAP on iSeries vs. 
> WINTEL/SQL
> Server estimated to be $500,000 to $800,000 annually.  Unix 
> solution was
> even more expensive.
> 9.)  Personnel costs were for an area (central Indiana) with a cost of
> living below the national average.
> 
> Same product, slightly more stable, slightly more secure.  
> ANNUAL SAVINGS
> OF $500,000 to $800,000.
> 
> That would be my one minute elevator speech.
> 
> Now Joe, I don't disagree with your viewpoints at all.  I 
> just happen to
> think that in certain circumstances the cost differential is 
> to large to
> not lead with.  If a rational analysis is done (key word if, 
> oh wait and
> also rational) the iSeries will come out ahead a lot of the time.  So
> perhaps I should have said something more in line with 'What about
> downtime? And by the way, I bet it isn't more expensive'..............
> 
> And as a result of some of these discussions I do have an updated
> resume......
> 
> -- 
> 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.
> 
>