May be Ginny & friends don't want to be left out of all this cool cloud talk at the parties, so they made the claim. It's not like that there is a Cloud(TM) certifying authority that will shut them up :). Service bureaus were surely very much like clouds but were not called clouds and there are not many left that would let you run your own z/OS instance today.
mkk On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 13:21:50 -0400, Phil Smith III <li...@akphs.com> wrote: >OK, so what do we mean by "cloud"? What *customers* seem to mean is "a compute >platform where I can run my stuff but not have to deal with buying hardware >and racking and cabling it and in general all the work of running a data >center". By which definition, of course, traditional timesharing fits. > > > >For x86, this is currently AWS and Google Cloud Platform and Microsoft Azure >(and not HPE Helion). For z, it's more like the IBM Dallas developer systems, >where you can rent a virtual machine that runs z/OS or z/VM or Linux, and then >do whatever you want with that OS. > > > >My conclusion is that the vendors (and IBM) who are saying "IBM Z and cloud" >are not being honest with themselves. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it >one, and saying "We like IBM Z and it *can* do cloud-ish stuff, therefore we >will say it's good for cloud" is not a rational (much less convincing) >argument. > > > >Again, I'd love to be proven wrong. But the relative silence on this thread >tends to suggest that nobody else buys it either. Well, nobody besides Ginny & >Co. > > > >.phsiii > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
