I would hate to get a reputation as anti-mainframe -- like CC --, but the discussion concerning PSI and their use of Intel Xeon processors to emulate/simulate/whatever they do a z/Series machine should have made everyone realize the power in the non-mainframe chips.
And when you get down to discussing relative I/O performance, just remember that every disk manufacturer mentioned on this list uses a *nix-like chip and operating system to run the disk subsystems that provide the I/O performance you are talking about. I like the mainframe, z/OS and all of its associated subsystems. It has provided me with a good living for a long time. The question concerning why the costs of a "z" machine are considered so high is an interesting one to ponder. There can be many culprits named for this phenomenon. I personally believe that software costs (including and especially IBM) should be at the top of the list. What amazes me is that the costs have not been reduced significantly enough to stop the movement to other platforms. One thing I have noticed is that personnel costs for "z" professionals has not increased. As more of us retire one would think that trend would have to change because of supply and demand. I guess time will tell if that happens or not. Tom Moulder ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
