|
To answer the cheapest System i question I look at these things.1) We have many items already on board in the 520+ systems. Dual Ethernet, (One of which can be the console port now) DASD controller, of course processor and memory and cache. There are also USB and serial ports we currently don't use. 2) We now can run a small 520+ with no IOPs at all so that fairly expensive component is out for small systems. It should be noted that IOPless systems tax the CPU a tad more but in the low end like this we will have plenty of 'hidden' CPU to overcome this. 3) If this 'Little Sister' or iSis machine does become reality it makes a ton of sense to limit it to perhaps four drives such that the unit could but 2U high like a system x. 3a) It could then use smaller power supplies such as 'x' uses as well. 3b) It would theoretically be possible to allow the addition of a second cabinet with maybe 4 more drives but that seems expensive.
4) This smaller form factor might accept two or four expansion cards.5) An IOPless tape controller could be added or possibly the internal tape extended to an external solution. 6) It would make sense to remove HSL capability for many reasons. That saves money. 7) We already use a tiny 'laptop' style DVD on the system so that fits the smaller form factor. 8) Throttling back the the P5+ in there solves most of the heat problem a smaller case creates. 9) Maybe (just maybe) the FSP could be dropped and LPAR options removed thus saving more $$s 10) Maybe no RAID support (saves $$s) and require mirroring. Perhaps this limits us to 4x140GB drives but 280GB of disk is still a fair amount for a small box.
Having said all that though it's likely that given total engineering costs simply cranking down the CPW numbers on the current i5-520 and using the IOPless stuff might just be the cheapest way to go. The 520 is pretty small already and I'm guessing that a higher quantity of those components is likely cheaper than a designed and built physically smaller system.
So my guess is that this machine could be built with a small hardware cost on way or the other. I'm not going to speculate on engineering costs though. We know that software would be the same with the possible exception of some SLIC changes.
Software likely would be cheaper still, maybe a P03 group or something.Now who would use one? I think a TON of folks. Today I too have many customers on machines at less than 100 cpw and as low as SIX cpw. Despite the price of today's i5 being cheaper than ever those customers would just love a smaller cheaper unit. The same unit would also open the market to the small office with 3 to 10 users. ISVs would be able to sell to customers who really need System i reliability and longevity but today just don't see the value proposition of an $15,000 or higher server.
If people out there try to shoehorn this machine into accounts that really need 2800, 3800 or more cpw that is an education issue and can be solved.
In any case if Rochester decides to create a machine that would be cheaper and with lower cpw numbers, I say BRING IT ON!
- Larry
I am kind of curious what the CPW would be of the smallest system that could be reasonably made with the least expensive current components? To use an (imperfect) analogy ... Lets say I want a PC (or thin client) to run terminal emulation and web browsing. I can do this with Linux, and some open source apps. But there is simply no way to purchase new hardware that is not ridiculously over-powered for the task. I suspect that this is the case for the System i as well.
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.
midrange.com
