Re: Even got the capitalization right!!!
Phil Payne wrote: The IT Jungle piece seems to be a combination of four sources, three of which were reasonable. One was mine, and one was one derived from mine. It's a bit like analysing a commentary on the synoptic Gospels. He's not quite right on many details, but the crucial one is the discrepancy between the z9 ---> z6 native cycle time improvement and the delivered grunt of around +50%. That means this machine works differently. Not worse, not better - differently. Most PHBs don't understand the technical fundamentals required to make the informed decisions upon which their company's technological future rests. They get too easily caught up in irrelevancies. Recognizing this, IBM wisely came out with AMODE(64) processors instead of AMODE(63) processors. The cycle time of the z6 chip is similar window dressing. The idea is that, rather than always being on the defensive having to explain the difference between GHz and throughput, IBM mainframes will cycle fast enough to satisfy even fact checkers for airline magazines. IMHO, it's a smart move even if it isn't really all that meaningful. Let the "other" guys be on the defensive for a change! :-D [snip] I don't buy the "z9 sales affected by z6 leaks" angle. In the first place, there have been no substantive leaks. And in the second, the z9 is very much a known quantity and the safe bet. I would not be at all surprised to see z9 sales pick up slightly in 2008Q1. The fact is that no production mainframe processors based on z6 technology have been pre-announced, announced, or even hinted at. There is only a new chip technology being discussed. Having said that, I can very much believe logical quantum leaps (conclusional jumps?) from those not smart enough to distinguish between the two. And, since we know that paranoia is no guarantee people are not out to get you, they just might be right! -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- 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
Even got the capitalization right!!!
You missed the real cause of my jubilation - that I got the capitalization right almost 2 1/4 years ago. The IT Jungle story still doesn't manage it. But an invitation IBM recently sent to analysts says "... the eClipz processor ..." YES!!! You wouldn't believe how much time was spent on that. You sometimes have to wring clues out of the thinnest information, and the capitalization of a mnemonic can be a major clue to the importance of its components. The IT Jungle piece seems to be a combination of four sources, three of which were reasonable. One was mine, and one was one derived from mine. It's a bit like analysing a commentary on the synoptic Gospels. He's not quite right on many details, but the crucial one is the discrepancy between the z9 ---> z6 native cycle time improvement and the delivered grunt of around +50%. That means this machine works differently. Not worse, not better - differently. And I don't think he understands decimal arithmetic. "Money math". The greatest strength of System/360 even at launch - how does he think it got where it got? ZAP was and is a wonderful instruction, if you were used to what went before. The piece is overcrowded with numbers. Speeds and feeds. What matters is what comes out the back - I've long since stopped caring how it's done. I lack the qualifications to judge design decisions like cache sizes - if you see the guys that make these decisions working, you leave the room with your head spinning. Serious, serious math. Sometimes it gets funny. 1,199 signal pins and a total of 8,765 pins. So what do the other 7,566 pins do? Knit? As I've said here before, I believe it would be a good idea to prepare for some turbulence - similar to but greater in magnitude than the issues we got with the 128 byte cache lines. I'm really not that happy with the implied reduction in SMP factors. I've heard the opposite in some rumours. As I've also said, I do not doubt for one second that IBM will meet the overall box performance target. But I think it would be very prudent to ensure that you can support performance measurements at fine granularity - transaction level, subroutine level - very rapidly if asked to do so. Who markets Strobe these days? Stick a few bucks in the stock. Again, it's the old law that the grumblings of one unhappy user can drown the cheers of 99 happy ones - except this time I'd expect two unhappy users. I don't buy the "z9 sales affected by z6 leaks" angle. In the first place, there have been no substantive leaks. And in the second, the z9 is very much a known quantity and the safe bet. I would not be at all surprised to see z9 sales pick up slightly in 2008Q1. Anyway, next week Charles Webb is going to read his PDF to those analysts too stupid to have found it for themselves. Which is quite a few. I won't be taking part - the bit I miss most is the Q&A at the end where each analyst spends the first 75% of their allotted question time gushing to the executives. "I mean. wow, I'd just like to say how wonderful this is for our customers ..." Get OUTAH HERE, you moron! Anyone with a brain has known this stuff for two years! You frankly wouldn't believe it. "Hi, I'm so-and-so from household-name." And then the dumbest question you've ever heard. I'm sometimes amazed that you can't hear the executives smirking when they answer. On at least one occasion a few years back a question was asked directly of an executive - there was a slightly muffled noise and the facilitator came back with: "Well, I'll ask xyz to answer that one instead." I strongly suspect the original target was rolling on the floor with several colleagues sitting on him, trying to stifle his paroxisms of laughter. -- Phil Payne http://www.isham-research.co.uk +44 7833 654 800 -- 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
Re: Even got the capitalization right!!!
> -Original Message- > From: Phil Payne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 4:54 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Even got the capitalization right!!! > > YES!! > > http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.isham- > research.co.uk/mainframe_2008.html > > Check out the capitalization in the second paragraph. Posted in July 2005 > - OVER TWO YEARS AGO - and as accurate today as the day it was written. > > Anyone still subscribing to Gartner? Why? There's also this one (very recent, you still get the scoop by 2+yrs): http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh110507-story04.html Peter This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- 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
Even got the capitalization right!!!
YES!! http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.isham-research.co.uk/mainframe_2008.html Check out the capitalization in the second paragraph. Posted in July 2005 - OVER TWO YEARS AGO - and as accurate today as the day it was written. Anyone still subscribing to Gartner? Why? You'll all hear more about this on the 16th. http://www.isham-research.co.uk/dd.html#nda Two years late. Why now - so "early"? Because 2007Q4 sucks large rocks through small straws. IBM is hurting. Key question - is this a transient phenomenon or the true end of the mainframe? I'd have thought at least one more generation viable (zFuture) but the economic environment and IBM's FLEX-ES stupidity ... They just won't admit the flight of ISVs. -- Phil Payne http://www.isham-research.co.uk +44 7833 654 800 -- 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
