In me own defense, m'lud, I did write that while under the influence of cold medication and a 102.7 fever. You're right, I did mean z9.
I see, however, that you found no fault with the donut question... :D On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 06:55:50 -0500, Chase, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Doc Farmer >> >> Okay, I'll give it a shot: >> >> >> [ snip ] >> >> 2) The CIO, a big-iron neophyte, wants an explanation why >> you need an upgrade from a z890 to a z900, with an >> addition of 6 new CPUs and 256GB of main memory, as >> well as an appropriate number of shark spindles. What >> do you do? >> A) Explain the business need as outlined by overall >> production growth over the past four years. >> B) Provide RMF charts to show the past 2 years of >> increased use and the next two years of upgrade >> capacity. >> C) Go into a deep technical explanation of hardware >> and software requirements, explaining in hex >> wherever possible. >> D) Bore the CIO into the coma mentioned in Question 1, >> so that you won't catch seven kinds of hell when you >> apply that APAR on production until s/he regains >> consciousness. > >E) Explain why a z900 would be a *downgrade* from a z890. > >(Perhaps you meant "upgrade to a z9"?) > >[ snip ] > > -jc- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
