RE: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch -- MIDRANGE-L

John,
        You hit the nail on the head.  In terms of running WAS, the i5
is enormously expensive and doesn't perform that well for the amount of
hardware consumed.  We find we need much more RAM for iSeries than for
Windows/Unix/Linux deployments of our apps.  The cost to run our apps on
an i5 compared to on Windows/Linux, or even AIX, is out of control.  And
administration seems to be much more painful because of Admin Console
problems and quirks of the qshell (for someone who doesn't admin WAS on
i5 all day every day).

        One could argue that you're paying a premium for the i5
ooey-gooey-goodness with which we're all familiar, but it's still hard
to justify.

        IBM needs to make business regain its sanity.  J2EE has to be
the most complex and expensive way to develop apps ever invented.  There
are no former insurance agents writing javer code for WAS, I can almost
guarantee.  We need to make business understand the value of a simple
programming platform designed to empower domain experts to create
systems that work.  


        Viva la COBOL!  Viva la COOL-2E!  Viva la revolution :)

        I know, I'll be the first one up against the wall when the
revolution comes anyway.

Joe Hayes
Senior WebSphere Administrator

This mail in no way represents the position of my company, and I'll no
doubt be sacked immediately for sending it from a Fiserv e-mail account.



-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces+joe.hayes=fiserv.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces+joe.hayes=fiserv.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jones, John (US)
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 11:46 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch

Brian - Possibly, and I admit we haven't tried to price that scenario,
but the numbers say a consolidated box will need 24-30K CPW and that's
potentially several 520s.  

What we need is an inexpensive but fast engine for WebSphere App Server.
Please withhold the oxymoron comments.  What will run WAS fast & cheap?

1 big 570? Yes and No.  
1-3 Windows servers + a moderate (existing) 570? Yes and Yes.  
1 moderate 570 + 2-4 520 Express machines? Yes and Maybe.

Here's what we're up against: A Dell PowerEdge 2950 with dual Quad-core
Xeons w/2MB cache per core (Quad core is really 2 dual-cores lashed
together and each dual-core has 4MB cache), 16GB RAM, Windows Server
2003 Enterprise, mirrored 73GB disks, and a 3-year gold warranty has a
list of just over $14K.  Probably closer to $12K after our discount.
That's around $1500 per core for a complete server with tons of CPU
capacity, adequate disk, RAM, OS license, and a warranty.  RAM may be a
little shy, I'm not sure, and the 32GB RAM feature is quite pricey, so
I'd add a second server instead of upping to 32GB RAM.  That would also
provides some redundancy.  So for under $25K I'd have 16 cores, 32GB
RAM, and all the trimmings.  Can the iSeries compete with that?  Because
like it or not, iSeries iNtegration advantages or not, like the platform
or not, this is what it boils down to.

(What might count under other circumstances but doesn't this time
around: WebSphere App Server license - we have unlimited.  Server
Administration costs - mostly a wash across scenarios.  Data center
impact - another wash as 2 of the Dells take just as much resource as
the additional CEC in a 4/8-way or 1 extra 520.)

John A. Jones, CISSP
Americas Information Security Officer
Jones Lang LaSalle, Inc.
V: +1-630-455-2787 F: +1-312-601-1782
john.jones@xxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brian
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 10:41 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch

John,

Since adding windows boxes throws away having a "consolidated-server",
would adding one of the express 520s with the turbo feature turned on be
a possibility? This would give you a 3800 CPW box with only a P10
pricing level for the software. Also, if you purchased the DASD and
possibly the RAM for this 520 on the used market, you might be able to
put together a nice box for a lot less than adding to the 570. I think
it would be easier to administer multiple i5s than multiple windows
boxes.

Just a thought.

Kind regards,

BJ


On 12/9/06, Jones, John (US) <John.Jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"One of the interesting problems is that a major benefit of the System

i is also it's drawback. "

Agreed.  As I mentioned in another post we need additional capacity 
for running WebSphere App Server.  I don't need additional capacity 
for BRMS, iSeries Access, and so on.  Unfortunately when pricing an 
iSeries solution there's no compensating for that and I'm stuck at 
$60K/CPU for the OS license on top of the CPU activation cost which in

itself costs twice what a dual-Xeon Wintel box costs.

On single and dual core iSeries, I think a good TCO will show the 
iSeries to be competitive.  But as you scale up, moving to 4 or more 
cores, the value proposition is reduced unless you're workload mix 
scales accordingly.


John A. Jones, CISSP
Americas Information Security Officer
Jones Lang LaSalle, Inc.
V: +1-630-455-2787 F: +1-312-601-1782
john.jones@xxxxxxxxxx

--
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 email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only.  If you
have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately
and then delete it.  If you are not the intended recipient, you must not
keep, use, disclose, copy or distribute this email without the author's
prior permission.  We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of
transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own
virus checks on any attachment to this message.  We cannot accept
liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses.  The
information contained in this communication may be confidential and may
be subject to the attorney-client privilege. If you are the intended
recipient and you do not wish to receive similar electronic messages
from us in the future then please respond to the sender to this effect.

--
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.