Re: New loser cost IBM i announced

Real-world scenario: Just had a customer determine to develop their web
presence on CentOS+Node.js.

I sense a set-up here. Node.js doesn't run on on IBM i. One of the
unfortunate consequences of perpetuating the myth that it does run on IBM i
is that it leads to debates over the cost of *nix vs. the cost of IBM i.

People should be more clear about Node.js interfacing with IBM i; never
suggesting or implying that it runs on IBM i.

They hired a Linux guy that can make Linux
sing. He doesn't like to pay for operating systems**. He also made the
claim that Linux is much better put together than PASE. ~Today~ he is
correct in that assertion.

Linux and PASE? The old adage comes to mind, you get what you pay for.
Sorry, that's a little too harsh. I'm mostly suggesting that IBM i offers a
unique value proposition that is hard to compare with *nix. I think Frank
Soltis said it best by asserting that *nix is designed as a single-user
operating system.

At the end of the day, people coming from the Linux world are well equipped

to replace the complications of obtaining an IBM i by going with Linux.
That's why I am complaining.

I would suggest that the bundling and integration that IBM does with IBM i
on Power never will meet the approval of most *nix developers, no matter
how low of a price point drops.