I wonder what the results would look like if all the extra pieces needed to run an applications are added in.
I am talking of things like monitoring products. These will probably require extra servers in a windows environment, while running on the same mainframe. Gadi -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elardus Engelbrecht Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 10:09 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Comparing Mainframe and Windows Server CICS Transactions per kWh Fred Schmidt wrote: >The latest z/Journal has a study by Microsoft comparing Windows against the mainframe in terms of electrical power usage for CICS web-based applications. It claims that Windows is many times more efficient. >You can find the PDF document at http://www.zjournal.com/redir.cfm?rid=939 >Comments? There is a catch: They're using NetCobol on a z/OS machine on this Microsoft sponsored PDF. What's more, theyre using IBM's published results against a test run on their Fujitsu machines. They really never used a z/OS machine themselves. NetCobol belongs to Fujitsu. Fujistu and Microsoft is co-operating together MMA to lure people from "legacy" z/OS. I would only take this comparision seriously if they ACTUALLY used IBM's own COBOL and WebSphere and that they actually used/rented a z/OS machine. What's more, you can't really use published numbers against actual test results. Go figure... Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
