Re: model 270

["Jim Franz" <franz400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

running mission critical operations on any server with less than
premium drives (or any other parts) is bad for the business (and if
management doesn't support the idea and cost of quality servers then
thats just bad management...) Very, very few  companies can
operate well without a mission critical server.
Which brings me back to the original post - why would you
put an old server (270 or 720), with old drives, limited in future OS 
releases,
in a mission critical position in your network?
jim franz


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <rob@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: model 270


> The technicians here say they average replacing about 20 hard drives a
> year in various PC's.  WAG is ~300 pc's and ~15 servers.
>
> I've replaced several drives in my various flavors of AS/400's and
> iSeries.  Currently we have 119 total drives in all four boxes.  Don't
> know how many per year.  But it's safe to say it's definitely less than
> the seven or eight represented by the ratio of
> 119 * (20 / 315)
> which may be flawed because I am sure that a couple of those servers have
> multiple drives.  But that's probably more than offset by the number of
> servers that are IXS cards.  (and all the WAG involved)
>
> Rob Berendt
> --
> Group Dekko Services, LLC
> Dept 01.073
> PO Box 2000
> Dock 108
> 6928N 400E
> Kendallville, IN 46755
> http://www.dekko.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Jim Oberholtzer <JOberholtzer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> 01/24/2006 11:11 AM
> Please respond to
> Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> To
> midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> cc
>
> Fax to
>
> Subject
> Re: model 270
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <snip>
> OK, not fair.  How about a similarly sized Maxtor 18GB Ultra-320 SCSI 15K
> for $75, or $4.16/GB.  New.
> </snip>
>
> Unfortunately your comparison is apple/oranges.  If you compare drives
> from those same manufacturers that are rated for the same MTBF and service
>
> type, you may have an argument, however the drives you site are not
> manufactured  with the same tolerances.  We have had this discussion
> before. The drives you site in the comparisons are not equivalent drives
> from those manufacturers to the ones IBM uses in its enterprise class
> servers (z, p, & i) .  Even Hitachi who manufactures a very high
> percentage of the drives for IBM has two models in the 17 gig variety. One
>
> for real server usage (i, p, & z) , and the other for the consumer market
> and folks that do the very comparison that you just did.
>
> Sorry if I just won't bite on that argument.
>
> Jim
> --
> 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.