RE: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch

["Lukas Beeler" <l.beeler@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I've never bought-in to the mirrored kool-aid - I prefer RAID-5.  When
> cost is an issue, you're going to have bottlenecks.  And it's true
that

RAID-5 requires a pricier base machine with a more expensive disk
controller.

> IBM charges more out of country than inside the US (usually).  So - be
> that as it may, you've got a system with a disk bottleneck and no
amount

I've said that the smallest 520s IBM sells are vastly underpowered and
slow.

I didn't say that all System i are underpowered and slow, because I
haven't seen anything bigger than a 520.

My main point remains, that the system is far too slow for it's price
point. A machine for 20k should run circles around a pc server for 10k.
But it doesn't. And that's the problem.

There are no 32 way PC servers - but I don't care about 32 way.

> of CPW will fix that.  You can put a 32-way 595 with 1 TB of RAM on 2
> arms and you'll be DYING.  I'll bet lots of body parts on it.  Because
> I've done it to prove a point.

I've never ever SEEN a 595 (except on pictures). We're from different
worlds, it seems.