RE: The One Percent Club -- MIDRANGE-L

<snip>
good for IBM, not good for those running i5/OS ( no improvements planned
for i5/OS ) 
</snip>

Did we read the same article?

I didn't see anywhere in the link provided earlier that stated i5/OS
would not have any more improvements.  I did see that Frank said that HE
considered i5/OS as more of an application environment than an OS but
that's a far cry from saying the OS wouldn't have any improvements. 


Thanks,
Tommy Holden


-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richter,Steve
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 2:42 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: The One Percent Club



-----Original Message-----
From: Nathan Andelin [mailto:nandelin@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 3:10 PM
To: midrange list
Subject: Re: The One Percent Club

Steve Richter wrote:
I read the article as IBM giving up on i5/OS the OS
and repositioning it as a superior way to run other
operation systems.

Your messages are as full of guile and artifice as they ever were,

Steve.

gosh, thanks for the kind words Nathan.

There are a number of threads running through Frank Soltis's comments.

He's an advocate

of common hardware and software across all platforms.  He may support

homogeneous

branding, too.  But his major theme is the idea of managing multiple

runtime environments

through shared hardware and a single console, where I5/OS is in

control.  He's advocating

server consolidation.


good for IBM, not good for those running i5/OS ( no improvements planned
for i5/OS )

Bring in Windows, Unix, Linux, and I5/OS, under the control of I5/OS,

and Power

processors.  His strategy is an alternative to the proliferation of

disparate systems in

data centers.  He sees a lot of waste in that.  He proposes I5/OS as an

integration and

consolidation strategy.  I5/OS is the only operating system he proposes

for handling the

integration.


are we talking server virtualization? technically, what does i5/OS have
that the p5 HMC does not?

MSFT and VMware are going at it in the server virualization space:

http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh121806-story02.html
"...IDC is also predicting something that VMware has been aching for:
the establishment of virtualization hypervisors as a standard way to
deploy servers, and a virtual machine as a means of deploying
application software that is pre-packaged, pre-installed, and pre-tuned.
..."

I dont understand. Why and how is the i5 supposed to compete against
VMware?

Contrast a platform assimilation strategy (like Java), or a dominant

propriety platform

strategy (like Windows), with a platform integration strategy, where

each platform retains

many distinctive characteristics, but shares hardware, a single

console, and a number of

standard interfaces (like I5/OS).


who cares? none of this provides more capabilities or features to i5/OS
native applications. 

-Steve