Are any of the IBM OS,s trade marked? On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Steele, Phil <stee...@tabcorp.com.au>wrote:
> Some of this vast proliferation of servers was indeed (in the case of > the vaguely cluey users) about separation of control as Dave notes below. In > my experience, though, far more often it was because the administration of > the company finances found it so much easier to do a case by case > justification, with no view whatsoever of any bigger picture. ( share a > server farm? - you must be joking... it's my bonus here we are talking > about!). It is for this reason that VMware is, in my grumpy opinion, likely > to do little more than add an extra layer of complexity /overhead top of > any new hardware. The original reasoning ( or lack of it) that caused this > proliferation of squillions on servers continues unabated. (Why do I > suspect that the bean counters who run all of these companies never liked IT > folk much any way? and were therefore most relieved when there was an > alternative to the mainframe and hence those weird non-accounting types that > ran them). > > > > > > I know that our z/VM Z/800 has been replaced by megawatts worth of severs, > ( full rack after full rack of them!). > > > > > > On the subject of IBM not trade marking VM, I wonder if it was because once > upon a time, it often meant Virtual *Memory* as well as Virtual *Machine* > ? > > > > > > Philip Steele ( who only sound grumpy sometimes) . > > > > > > 495 Harris St Ultimo NSW 2007 > > > > Australia > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On > > > Behalf Of Dave Wade > > > Sent: Thursday, 1 April 2010 2:32 AM > > > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > > Subject: Re: ACM award - they deserve it.... > > > > > > In my humble opinion the main reason VMWare (an to a lesser extent > > > HyperV) > > > is popular at present is because it allows bean counters to demonstrate > > > huge > > > instant savings. Where I work we have around 200 Windows servers, many > > > were > > > bought around 5 years ago so will need replacing soone. In general we > > > have a > > > separate server not for performance reasons but more for separation of > > > control and software options. Based on a limited trial I would say we > > > could > > > consolidate 75% of these servers at a rate of at least 10 to 1 using > > > VMWare, > > > and still have enough headroom to loose a physical server with no > > > performance impact. So that's take the 150 lowest loaded servers and > > > replace > > > them with 15 servers running VMWare. To a bean counter that's a 90% > > > reduction in power consumption, a 90% reduction in floor space, and a > > > 90% > > > reduction in hardware support costs.I am sure some think that should > > > also be > > > a 90% reduction in support staff, but of course that's not true. Whilst > > > VMWare is fun to manage, it needs managing and also capacity planning. > > > In > > > practice the reduction is some what less than 90%. . To use the > > > vernacular, > > > a VMWare server will be a "fully loaded server" with multiple CPU's, > > > lots of > > > RAM, multiple SAN and Network interfaces for load balancing and > > > resilience. > > > In order to fit these in it will be a 2U server and some of our > > > existing are > > > 1U, on the other hand others are 4U... BUT there will be a big saving. > > > > > > Now compare that with zVM. With that you were frugal from day1 so there > > > aren't any savings. So the bean counters can't show cost reductions, so > > > they > > > don't like it.... > > > > > > .... utterly blinkered.... > > > > > > Dave. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Barton Robinson" <bar...@vm1.velocity-software.com> > > > To: <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 3:53 PM > > > Subject: Re: ACM award - they deserve it.... > > > > > > > > > > If you go to conferences such as CMG (Computer Management Group), > > > that > > > > has been a mainframe organization (meaning MVS or z/OS) since it > > > > started, our VM has never been represented, but VMWare now has many > > > > sessions. It's depressing to see 80 people in entry level > > > performance > > > > session for VMWare and no z/VM sessions on the agenda of a mainframe > > > > conference. > > > > Early this year I was hearing ads for VMWare on the local radio > > > station. > > > > I can only assume that VM is being outmarketed worldwide (or at least > > > > that VMWare is being marketed worldwide and VM is not marketed > > > publicly > > > > at all). > > > > It doesn't matter if our mousetrap is better if nobody is out there > > > > trying to get mindshare (marketing). Preaching/grumbling to the > > > choir > > > > doesn't change anything. > > > > > > > > So when was the last time that any of you tried to get a case study > > > > published showing how great your accomplishments are using z/VM? > > > There > > > > are very few published stories (sorry games on "z" don't impress bean > > > > counters or executives, it's rather demeaning), we need REAL business > > > > case studies showing the value of "z/VM" to real companies. If we > > > get > > > > enough and executives do a google search on VM, maybe they will find > > > > something useful? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *********************************************************************************** > > The information in this e-mail message and any files transmitted with it > are intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or > entity to whom they are addressed. The message and files may be protected by > legal professional privilege, or other legal rules. The confidentiality of > and privilege applying to this message and files is not waived if this > message or files has been sent to you by mistake. If the reader of this > message or files is not the intended recipient, you are notified that > retention, distribution or copying of this message and files are strictly > prohibited. If you receive this message or files in error, please notify us > immediately by telephone or return e-mail and delete all copies from your > computer system. It is the recipient's responsibility to check this message > and files for viruses. > > Thank you. > > > *********************************************************************************** > > >
