Re: Excellent future for DB2
Bob Jones wrote: >>While I can understand where you are coming from when you say many people >>feel that mainframes are "dated", that doesn't drive the rdbms business. > > > I do feel sorry if this is how my message was interpretated. > > >>Perception of value and of the most suitable platform to run a database on >>is what drives customer investment. Many customers to this day still feel >>that the mainframe is the best place for apps that require the ultimate in >>security, availability, reliability, and performance. That is the reason >>that we still see growth on mainframe platforms. >> > > > I agree it is just perceptions. Mainframe being the only place to get RAS is > one of them. Funny you talked about performance. The cost/performance > picture is not exactly pretty on mainframe, when compared to x86 or RISC > platforms. Yes, there is growth in mainframe. In fact, there is growth in > virtually all platforms. The unit sales per year for mainframe is measured > in thousands, while other major server platforms are measured in millions. > > Bob, Again you are very vague here. cost/performance of what? I have seen figures that mips , all included (labor, number of users supported) are cheaper on a MF than on a PC. Seriously, are your going to tell a large bank or insurance company, that they should swap a mainframe for let's say 10.000 PC's? OK, I agree it would be very good for companies selling IT services and PC software. -- Anton Versteeg IBM Netherlands
Anton Versteeg wrote: > cost/performance of what? > I have seen figures that mips , all included (labor, number of users > supported) are cheaper on a MF than on a PC. > Seriously, are your going to tell a large bank or insurance company, > that they should swap a mainframe for let's say 10.000 PC's? > OK, I agree it would be very good for companies selling IT services and > PC software. Don't forget the rollerblade companies who can sell their stuff to the folks that have to maintain the hardware and replace broken devices. ;-) -- Knut Stolze Information Integration Development IBM Germany / University of Jena
>>>While I can understand where you are coming from when you say many people >>>feel that mainframes are "dated", that doesn't drive the rdbms business. >> >> >> I do feel sorry if this is how my message was interpretated. >> >> >>>Perception of value and of the most suitable platform to run a database >>>on is what drives customer investment. Many customers to this day still >>>feel that the mainframe is the best place for apps that require the >>>ultimate in security, availability, reliability, and performance. That is >>>the reason that we still see growth on mainframe platforms. >>> >> >> >> I agree it is just perceptions. Mainframe being the only place to get RAS >> is one of them. Funny you talked about performance. The cost/performance >> picture is not exactly pretty on mainframe, when compared to x86 or RISC >> platforms. Yes, there is growth in mainframe. In fact, there is growth in >> virtually all platforms. The unit sales per year for mainframe is >> measured in thousands, while other major server platforms are measured in >> millions. >> >> > Bob, > Again you are very vague here. > cost/performance of what? Do I really need to spell everything out? Cost/performance of mainframe systems. > I have seen figures that mips , all included (labor, number of users > supported) are cheaper on a MF than on a PC. This is a joke, right? > Seriously, are your going to tell a large bank or insurance company, that > they should swap a mainframe for let's say 10.000 PC's? > OK, I agree it would be very good for companies selling IT services and PC > software. > Again, I feel sorry about the way my message was interpretated. Maybe my message was not vague, rather it was not read with an objective mind-set.