I have always thought that software pricing on z/OS is ridiculous. There
are way too many options. I suspect that if IBM had drastically cut
software costs on the MVS platform, there would be hundreds of thousands of
mainframes out there, instead of maybe 10 to 20,000 mainframes. I just
talked to a friend of mine today who is getting off the mainframe in a
little over a year. They actually probably save money over what it will
cost them to run the hundreds of servers it will take to replace the
mainframe, even on VMWare. I think IBM has made their pricing so
convoluted, that the impression that mainframe software is too costly will
continue.
When I was at P&H Mining, they actually had the chance to go to all new work
pricing. I can't remember the exact term, but I think if you only ran the
new work stuff, you paid about 10% of the cost for z/OS and some of the
other products. They converted everything to SAP/R3, and thought about
going to a DB2 platform on the mainframe for the database server. They
still would have needed an RS6000 to run SAP/R3, and at that time z/Linux
was an unknown entity for a large SAP/R3 system. The reason they gave for
not doing that was it was too complicated, and it probably was. Certainly,
you had to have 2 computers instead of 1 - 1 z/OS for DB2 and 1 RS6000 for
SAP. It was way to complicated.
Eric Bielefeld
Sr. Systems Programmer
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
414-475-7434
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Kline" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: Offload work to ziip
>I'm not saying it is right. But this is the Pandora's box that Neon
seems to be opening. In reality, a large company would most likely be
much more subtle, and add additional capacity as ZxxP engines instead of
GP's, and stay under the radar so to speak.
Interesting discussion. A few bit-wise systems programmers have likely
already
found similar methods for utilizing ZiiP and ZaaP engines, and Neon may
have
found the legal loopholes or IBM support to profit from it. Good for them.
It's
probably not for publication, but I imagine similar systems programmers
could
just as easily enable all of the physical engines (licensed or not) to run
at full
speed. After all, if you're willing to skirt the license by utilizing
ZiiPs and ZaaPs
for unintended use, then why not go all the way using the argument of, "My
organization bought the machine, and they should have the right to use all
of
it any way they want."
BTW, I have not personally attempted either approach to maximize CPU
availability, although I probably have the ability to do so, and believe
there
are others who can and are willing to do the same.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
