Re: cloud services with new development on IBM i on Power

And at the same time re-write your Asp.Net apps to RPG/PHP. Savings erased :-)

Regards,
Richard Schoen
RJS Software Systems Inc.
Where Information Meets Innovation
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business Intelligence
Email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web Site: http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT

------------------------------

message: 6
date: Thu, 16 May 2013 09:36:23 -0700 (PDT)
from: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: cloud services with new development on IBM i on Power

Matt,

That PDF was just the "Executive Summary". The claims are substantiated in the "Detailed Data Section" of the report, not the Executive Summary. I haven't tried to track down the full report, but your allegation about it being a typical marketing document is not true.

Contrast that with the "Microsoft Case Studies" you referenced earlier in this thread. Typical marketing BS. The one cited a migration of Baan ERP off an AS/400 to a pure Microsoft stack. Fact is, Baan ERP does not, nor ever did run under OS/400. The claim that it was hosted on an AS/400 was pure SPIN.

How does Microsoft get away with this stuff? Baan once supported a number of DBMS via ODBC, but after a point dropped support for the OS/400 database. Baan customers were essentially forced to migrate their databases.

I agreed with one point. Supporting disparate technologies is costly. One might save money by migrating to a pure MS technology stack. If you wan't to save even more money, then migrate off MS to a pure IBM i stack.

-Nathan






----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Olson <Matt.Olson@xxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:20 PM
Subject: RE: cloud services with new development on IBM i on Power

Here is what I mentioned a few weeks ago about this IBM marketing slide deck:

There are so many things wrong with that document I stopped counting.? It's a typical marketing document with pretty graphs and no real specifics as to how they came up with those values.?

When you look at the meat behind their pretty graphs you find out it's based off of IBM funded research papers from ITG.? See here for one of the footnote references they used in slide #11, and look at the last page in the footnotes in that PDF file and you can see its funded by IBM: http://www.ngsi.com/company/pol03062usen.pdf

There is NOTHING in that document to substantiate the claim of "44% less than x86, Microsoft Windows Server and Microsoft SQL Server", and "57% less than x86, Linux, Oracle DB".


------------------------------