FW: The PSI Letter V4
More news from PSI on the state of their commercial emulation solution. The next few months seem to hold the potential for interesting developments in this area. Thanks, Sam -Original Message- From: Platform Solutions, Inc. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:03 PM To: Knutson, Sam Subject: The PSI Letter V4 The PSI Letter, Vol. 4 == The third quarter of this year was an active one for PSI, capped with our company's first participation as an official exhibitor at the annual Fall SHARE conference which was held in Baltimore. With a full booth and featuring the first public demonstration of the industry's first open mainframe computer, PSI stepped out onto the show floor for the first time. Given the heritage of SHARE as the premiere industry gathering of the mainframe market, we felt it was without a doubt the most appropriate venue for us to give the market a sneak peak at our first system. And we were proud to do so with our newest Early Ship Program (ESP) customer, Lufthansa Systems, who participated with us in our booth as well as in a joint presentation in which they outlined their needs for a new choice in mainframe platforms and their rationale for selecting PSI. Now, well into the final leg of 2006, we are actively engaged with go-to-market partners and additional new ESP customers as we build our momentum going into the New Year. There is significant energy in the high-end enterprise computing market with many major corporations and progressive mid-size companies contemplating how best to modernize their datacenters. All of these companies realize open technologies are the right path for the future. We're helping many of them understand the strategic business and cost benefits open technologies in the datacenter will provide them, and that we offer them a choice in mainframe platforms they haven't had in a long time. Features this newsletter: = * Spotlight: Database Trends and Applications - Lufthansa Systems Tests Mainframe Platform * SHARE: PSI Demonstrates First Open Mainframe Computer at SHARE * Upcoming Events * PSI in the Industry * PSI in the News * Market Engagements * Quotes of the Week Spotlight = Lufthansa Systems Puts PSI Open Mainframe To The Test *** Lufthansa Systems is one of the leading IT service providers for the airline and aviation industries worldwide. As a systems integrator, the wholly-owned subsidiary of the Lufthansa Group covers the entire range of IT services, including consulting, development, implementation and operation. A longtime IBM mainframe customer, Lufthansa Systems had always supported a second vendor in-house, but there had been no alternative choice since the late 1990's. This lack of alternative options became an issue. The issue was addressed when Lufthansa discovered Platform Solutions, Inc. (PSI) at a SHARE conference and found the PSI systems approach and philosophy fit their needs. PSI offers the first open mainframe servers that can run the z/OS, Linux, UNIX and Windows simultaneously on the same system and Lufthansa is putting it through its paces. Please follow this link to read the full article: http://www.platform-solutions.com/docs/PSI_9_06.pdf SHARE--Baltimore PSI Exhibits At SHARE For First Time -- A Notable Debut & Presence *** SHARE in Baltimore marked a major milestone for PSI. PSI debuted for the first time as an exhibitor and demonstrated its open mainframe for the first time in a public venue. The company attracted a steady crowd into its booth and conducted an endless number of systems demonstrations. It was truly a validating experience. The company also jointly presented along with ESP customer Lufthansa Systems. The two companies presented -- "PSI Open Mainframe Server: Lufthansa Systems, ESP Field Trial Results" -- to a large and attentive group, updating them on their ESP results and their successful implementation to date. To download access their SHARE presentation, please visit: http://www.platform-solutions.com/literature.php. Upcoming Events === Computer Measurement Group (CMG) National 2006: Reno Hilton, Reno, Nevada December 3-8, 2006 *** Join Platform Solutions at CMG 2006. We'll be at booth 215 and be presenting Tuesday December 5th from 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM in the Carson 1 & 2 rooms, "PSI Itanium-based Open Mainframe Server for IBM z/OS." For more information go to: http://www.cmg2006.com/. SHARE 2007 Spring: February 11-16, 2007 *** Join PSI in Tampa, Florida for the Spring SHARE User Event in February. We will be presenting as well as exhibiting. For more information, visit: http://www.share.org/ PSI In The Industry === CEO Michael Maulick Presents at Dow Jones/Datacenter Ventures, September 20, 2006 *
FW: The PSI Letter V4
I'm not sure how many receive the PSI Newsletter, but in case you don't, I've appended the V4 text. There's nothing new in it - it's amazing how many people think they can re-boil old material and dupe gullible reporters. (One copy is enough, guys!) I may be proved wrong. I believe it's happened before, but I can't remember the last occasion. Nothing adds up with PSI. Nothing. I hear random, unsupported comments - supposedly from IBM executives - about PSI "never getting license agreements because we don't deal with patent infringers". And yet PSI exudes confidence. (And on a quite personal note, trying to avoid ad hominems - was it Greg or Simon? Those who know both will know what I mean.) I was sceptical about Hercules. I got slimed for it, but I was right. I was sceptical about UMX. I got slimed for it, but I was right. Not a bad average. I'm sceptical about PSI. Not just about their access to licenses, but especially about their I/O capability, and especially about that in relation to the 66xx. They know what I mean. I give them until Christmas. Do their investors know the truth? Not a good idea to deceive investors, as Sanjay Kumar will attest. === The PSI Letter, Vol. 4 The third quarter of this year was an active one for PSI, capped with our company's first participation as an official exhibitor at the annual Fall SHARE conference which was held in Baltimore. With a full booth and featuring the first public demonstration of the industry's first open mainframe computer, PSI stepped out onto the show floor for the first time. Given the heritage of SHARE as the premiere industry gathering of the mainframe market, we felt it was without a doubt the most appropriate venue for us to give the market a sneak peak at our first system. And we were proud to do so with our newest Early Ship Program (ESP) customer, Lufthansa Systems, who participated with us in our booth as well as in a joint presentation in which they outlined their needs for a new choice in mainframe platforms and their rationale for selecting PSI. Now, well into the final leg of 2006, we are actively engaged with go-to-market partners and additional new ESP customers as we build our momentum going into the New Year. There is significant energy in the high-end enterprise computing market with many major corporations and progressive mid-size companies contemplating how best to modernize their datacenters. All of these companies realize open technologies are the right path for the future. We're helping many of them understand the strategic business and cost benefits open technologies in the datacenter will provide them, and that we offer them a choice in mainframe platforms they haven't had in a long time. Features this newsletter ? Spotlight: Database Trends and Applications - Lufthansa Systems Tests Mainframe Platform ? SHARE: PSI Demonstrates First Open Mainframe Computer at SHARE ? Upcoming Events ? PSI in the Industry ? PSI in the News ? Market Engagements ? Quotes of the Week Spotlight Lufthansa Systems Puts PSI Open Mainframe To The Test Lufthansa Systems is one of the leading IT service providers for the airline and aviation industries worldwide. As a systems integrator, the wholly-owned subsidiary of the Lufthansa Group covers the entire range of IT services, including consulting, development, implementation and operation. A longtime IBM mainframe customer, Lufthansa Systems had always supported a second vendor in-house, but there had been no alternative choice since the late 1990's. This lack of alternative options became an issue. The issue was addressed when Lufthansa discovered Platform Solutions, Inc. (PSI) at a SHARE conference and found the PSI systems approach and philosophy fit their needs. PSI offers the first open mainframe servers that can run the z/OS, Linux, UNIX and Windows simultaneously on the same system and Lufthansa is putting it through its paces. Please follow this link to read the full article: http://www.platform-solutions.com/docs/PSI_9_06.pdf SHARE-Baltimore PSI Exhibits At SHARE For First Time-A Notable Debut & Presence SHARE in Baltimore marked a major milestone for PSI. PSI debuted for the first time as an exhibitor and demonstrated its open mainframe for the first time in a public venue. The company attracted a steady crowd into its booth and conducted an endless number of systems demonstrations. It was truly a validating experience. The company also jointly presented along with ESP customer Lufthansa Systems. The two companies presented-"PSI Open Mainframe Server: Lufthansa Systems, ESP Field Trial Results"-to a large and attentive group, updating them on their ESP results and their successful implementation to date. To download access their SHARE presentation, please visit: http://www.platform-solutions.com/literature.php. Upcoming Events Computer Measurement Group (CMG) National 2006:
FW: The PSI Letter V4
> So, how do you explain the fact that they have demonstrated > running z/OS on one of their machines. Where did that licence > come from. Giggle. This is part of the fun. One of three licenses (allegedly) purchased online via a loophole in IBM's sytems and somewhat questionably transnationally moved with the chassis. But what do Lufthansa Services do? Their major recent issue with IBM was sub-capacity charging for VSE LPARs. They're not really in the z/OS business. A negogiation position? http://www.isham-research.co.uk/platslns4.html I've not much to add to that apart from some scepticism about I/O on 66xx, previously commented. I''m sure aßhole (an IBM lawyer) would be happy to tell you more. Some of the "fun bits" are more fun than anyone could imagine. Late in the days of Amdahl, one of my contacts said: "I was in Buildng x yesterday, and every office was filled by the 'C' team." If I had to make the same comment about PoK - the "D" team. Except the lawyers - the "E" team. We are not talking great competence here. -- 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
FW: The PSI Letter V4
> Neither is the IBM 8668 which is the system used to run an ESL 8 mips FLEX based system. Hi, Seb. Still working for Cornerstone? I think it would only be polite to the list to acknowledge that, if true. Then again perhaps CSI has "terminated" as many people as T3. I know Aled has gone from T3, and I saw T3 CEO Steve Friedman's ed-up attempt to unsubscribe from this list go through here a week or so ago. Back to the point - the system that seems to be occupying the lawyers' attention on all sides - on the list you cite - is the 9662. Apparently there's a worm buried in there, but I don't yet understand how. The list of things I don't know grows daily. I'm half-tempted to get involved again, if only for the fun. And to make sure aßhole gets what he so richly deserves. Gruntfuttock. J Peasemold Gruntfuttock. . -- 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
FW: The PSI Letter V4
> One thing I find "interesting" in the PSI letter is that there is no mention > of z/VM support, correctly licensed or not. :-) That's what happens when you hire ex "Top Gun" mentalities. When they snuck in sometime in early 2005 they were obsessed with Top Gun and went for z/OS. By the time IBM slammed the online software license door shut, it was too late to get z/VM licenses. And as far as I know PSI still has just the three z/OS licenses - one at Lufthansa (it stands for Let Us F*ck The Hostess As No Steward's Available), one used for demos and one back at the lab. z/VM presents some interesting IP issues. You can implement z/VM support using public docs, but it sucks large rocks through small straws. If you want it to perform, you need access to IBM's IP for SIE Assist. If IBM has the slightest suspicion that you may have been a little "cavalier" with their IP already, you can wipe your chances of getting access up your leg, and the same goes for your chances of getting software licenses. While I'm generally somewhat disinclined to approve of IBM''s lawyers (especially aßhole) I must in this instance say they have a perfect right to protect their intellectual property as they see fit. And they are also perfectly entitled to take a track record into account if there is management continuity. So even if PSI does manage to sort out the I/O problems on the 66xx, they still have a minor mountain to climb. Think Olympus Mons. And are they being really honest with their VCs? How long did Sanjay get? -- 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
FW: The PSI Letter V4
> When Amdahl started selling processors, the operating system > was free. When IBM started to charge for it, they knew how much > power an Amdahl processor had and where it fit in the pricing > structure. It's harder for them to know that with am emulator. > What stops you from putting in faster processors, or additional > processors? Rare to see so much ignorance masquerading as authority. a) IBM didn't have a clue how much power an Amdahl (or any other pocessor) had. Amdahl (and I was part of the process) "declared" its processors to IBM. The late (and missed) Henry Cassel's team was responsible - Tom Moore and others of the FBUPALS. Huge efforts were made to make the declaration accurate - if you "under-declared" the user got cheap software but IBM's sales effort would disparage the machine against its own. If you "over-declared" the opposite was true - you got bragging rights but the software was more expensive. And I was also one of the team that "re-declared" the Amdahl 5990-1100 after an IBM announcement. If you think IBM is bad, try getting CA to accept a downwards re-declaration. b) You obviously know NOTHING about emulation, or at least commercial emulation. Fundamental's FLEX-ES is controlled these days by a USB dongle that defines the permitted performance and number of engines. Yes, you can rehost onto a faster Intel processor or add engines - but FSI's code works with the dongle to deliver exactly the licensed "MIPS" on the number of engines licensed. You buy 8 MIPS (actually 7.9) and you get 8 MIPS. There is no uncertainty in the process whatever. It's even more complex - each dongle has a time-limited software key associated with it and the key must be refreshed periodically. (And I remember standing on the top of a fire escape in a hotel in Budapest downloading such a key into my Nokia mobile phone from an FTP site in Fremont at around 03:00am a few years back.) -- 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
FW: The PSI Letter V4
> My point was it is possible to cheat IBM (illegally of course) > without Hercules or PSI machine. So, it is not good excuse > for denying software for PSI machine owners. a) I don't see the connection. b) That isn't the "excuse" in any case. In fact, IBM has not said in public what its response to a request to license its software on a PSI platform would be, just as it never said the same about Hercules. There are very strong parallels between the two. It has only been pointed out that no PSI machines are listed in IBM's tables at http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/library/swpriceinfo/ Well, there are a lot of other systems not listed there that have received licenses, so I wouldn't regard that as definitive just yet. Even IBM's own emulation (xSeries 430) isn't listed. Love to know what a 9662 is, though. I do feel that both PSI and T3 are being less than forthcoming about the state of their licensing agreements with IBM. It's obviously up to them how much they tell the market, but I hope they're telling their VCs the truth. I'd like to hear something about z/VM support, too - I can't see any box being a success today without it. I/O seems to be a major issue, just as it was with Fundamental's FLEX-ES. I held a prototype PCI ESCON card in my hand around five years before it shipped. Few FLEX-ES boxes use external I/O because Flex's DASD emulation and FAKETAPE are so good, but if you're aiming further up the MIPS chart you _need_ external I/O support - and these days that means FICON. -- 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
FW: The PSI Letter V4
> Phil asked: Love to know what a 9662 is, though. > This is (was) a S/390 MicroProcessor Complex (PCI Card) > supported in an RS/6000. > US Announcement Letter is 197-164 (from July 22, 1997) Thanks, Birger. One mystery solved and another deepened - why on earth would there be a worm in that? There are times when the legale beagles quite perplex me. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Knutson, Sam wrote: More news from PSI on the state of their commercial emulation solution. The next few months seem to hold the potential for interesting developments in this area. Thanks, Sam Interesting. Can you do a rough comparison of PSI's offering to FLEX-ES and Hercules? Can PWD people get the software at low cost for all three platforms (well, I know right now that Hercules cannot legally run z/OS without some special dispensation). Clever term "open mainframe", but what does it really mean? Certainly not "open" in the "open source" sense? Kind regards, -Steve Comstock -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
The PSI letter is intriguing. Will it reduce software costs? Will it perform as well as its Big Blue cousin? Will it become a very viable alternative to the server farm? Daniel McLaughlin Z-Series Systems Programmer Crawford & Company 4680 N. Royal Atlanta Tucker GA 30084 phone: 770-621-3256 fax: 770-621-3237 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: www.crawfordandcompany.com This transmission is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are NOT authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this communication, its attachments or any part of them. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this communication from all computers. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Steve Comstock > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 6:57 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 > > Knutson, Sam wrote: > > More news from PSI on the state of their commercial emulation solution. > > The next few months seem to hold the potential for interesting > > developments in this area. > > > > Thanks, Sam > > > > Interesting. Can you do a rough comparison of > PSI's offering to FLEX-ES and Hercules? Can > PWD people get the software at low cost for > all three platforms (well, I know right now > that Hercules cannot legally run z/OS without > some special dispensation). > > Clever term "open mainframe", but what does it > really mean? Certainly not "open" in the "open > source" sense? > > Kind regards, > > -Steve Comstock What I don't understand is if IBM won't allow z/OS to run on a Hercules system, then why would IBM allow z/OS to run on a PSI system? /J -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006 07:18:16 -0700, Jeffrey D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >What I don't understand is if IBM won't allow z/OS to run on >a Hercules system, then why would IBM allow z/OS to run on >a PSI system? > Better legal representation and past history. Remember a company called Amdahl? :-) Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - GITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/ Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.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
Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Jeffrey D. Smith wrote: > What I don't understand is if IBM won't allow z/OS to run on > a Hercules system, then why would IBM allow z/OS to run on > a PSI system? Perhaps because PSI is an established company, like FSI (Flex/ES) and UMX. If a company was marketing a packaged solution based on Hercules, it may be difficult for IBM to refuse to sell z/OS licenses to that company's customers. -- Gilbert Saint-Flour GSF Software http://gsf-soft.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
Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Interesting. Can you do a rough comparison of PSI's offering to FLEX-ES and Hercules? Can PWD people get the software at low cost for all three platforms (well, I know right now that Hercules cannot legally run z/OS without some special dispensation). Clever term "open mainframe", but what does it really mean? Certainly not "open" in the "open source" sense? Kind regards, -Steve Comstock Apparently their definition of "open mainframe" means it runs on an Intel processor. From their press release it is running on an "industry-standard Intel Itanium 2". Since when was the "Itanic" an industry standard? Rex -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On 11/3/06, Phil Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Nothing adds up with PSI. Nothing. I hear random, unsupported comments - supposedly from IBM executives - about PSI "never getting license agreements because we don't deal with patent infringers". -- So, how do you explain the fact that they have demonstrated running z/OS on one of their machines. Where did that licence come from. Jim McAlpine -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On 3 Nov 2006 08:09:13 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pommier, Rex R.) wrote: >Apparently their definition of "open mainframe" means it runs on an >Intel processor. From their press release it is running on an >"industry-standard Intel Itanium 2". Since when was the "Itanic" an >industry standard? Define what industry is being referred to here. Is it the "mainframe computer" industry? The "Information Technology" industry"? Or is it for whatever industry a prospective customer is from? Do they have standards for processors? -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Brazee Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:42 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 On 3 Nov 2006 08:09:13 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pommier, Rex R.) wrote: >Apparently their definition of "open mainframe" means it runs on an >Intel processor. From their press release it is running on an >"industry-standard Intel Itanium 2". Since when was the "Itanic" an >industry standard? Define what industry is being referred to here. Is it the "mainframe computer" industry? The "Information Technology" industry"? Or is it for whatever industry a prospective customer is from? Do they have standards for processors? Howard, I can't define any of these things because PSI didn't in their press release. My guess would be Intel's 64 bit processor industry. Or maybe PSI's "open mainframe" industry. :-) Your questions fall right in line with what Steve asked: What is an "open mainframe". Apparently the answer to all these questions is "whatever the writer of the press release says it is." Rex -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Friday, 11/03/2006 at 07:18 MST, "Jeffrey D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What I don't understand is if IBM won't allow z/OS to run on > a Hercules system, then why would IBM allow z/OS to run on > a PSI system? Please note that no PSI machines are listed at http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/library/swpriceinfo/hardware.html . Before making any assumptions, a customer with questions about IBM software may want to contact IBM. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 01:37 -0500, Alan Altmark wrote: > Before making any assumptions, a customer with questions about IBM > software may want to contact IBM. Pity customer(s) are perceived to be so bloody stupid that this even needs to be stated. I not necessarily disagreeing mind you, just bemoaning the situation. Shane ... -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Sat, 4 Nov 2006 01:37:33 -0500, Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Please note that no PSI machines are listed at >http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/library/swpriceinfo/hardware.html >. Before making any assumptions, a customer with questions about IBM >software may want to contact IBM. Neither is the IBM 8668 which is the system used to run an ESL 8 mips FLEX based system. Intestingly enough, this document was updated on 4/27/2006 (which I take to mean 27 April) whereas IBM dropped ESL pricing 31/12/2005 yet its still listed. Surely if you can no longer get this pricing then it shouldn't be there? Seb. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Saturday, 11/04/2006 at 04:46ZE10, Shane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Before making any assumptions, a customer with questions about IBM > > software may want to contact IBM. > > Pity customer(s) are perceived to be so bloody stupid that this even > needs to be stated. > I not necessarily disagreeing mind you, just bemoaning the situation. Stupid? Hardly. I've just observed that there's just a ... blind spot ... when it comes to licensing agreements. Perhaps it's because sysprogs aren't the people who see and must agree to the Ts&Cs contained therein? In prehistoric times, when I was a customer, I just waited for the box of tapes & manuals to arrive. Paperwork? WDNNS paperwork "The new NCP is here! The new NCP is here! I'm somebody now! I'm somebody now!" (apologies to Steve Martin). I wouldn't want to be the one who says "Let's do X!" only to end up blindsiding my boss because I didn't do my homework. You all are Family to me (I go to WAVV, SHARE, the zExpo, and regional user group), you are paying for my house (thanks, by the way), and I need for you to continue to succeed. So if I sometimes come across as bit paternal, please bear with me. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
One thing I find "interesting" in the PSI letter is that there is no mention of z/VM support, correctly licensed or not. :-) Given that a significant portion of new workloads being moved to the mainframe are zLinux and z/VM based, this is surprising, imho, at least. Perhaps PSI believes that being able to run Linux directly on the Intel processors negates the need to support virtual Linux guests. Of course, this might just be a case of PSI going after the "sweet spot" of the market first (z/OS). I believe that when FLEX-ES first came out, it only supported OS/390, z/OS and VSE. It was only somewhat latter (18 months?) that they got around to adding in support for the SIE instruction and VMmaybe PSI is following the same path DJ -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Stupid? Hardly. I've just observed that there's just a ... blind spot ... when it comes to licensing agreements. Perhaps it's because sysprogs aren't the people who see and must agree to the Ts&Cs contained therein? In prehistoric times, when I was a customer, I just waited for the box of tapes & manuals to arrive. Paperwork? WDNNS paperwork "The new NCP is here! The new NCP is here! I'm somebody now! I'm somebody now!" (apologies to Steve Martin). I wouldn't want to be the one who says "Let's do X!" only to end up blindsiding my boss because I didn't do my homework. You all are Family to me (I go to WAVV, SHARE, the zExpo, and regional user group), you are paying for my house (thanks, by the way), and I need for you to continue to succeed. So if I sometimes come across as bit paternal, please bear with me. Alan, there's nothing wrong with being "paternal", as you put it. But sometimes the policies of IBM seem to be rather foolish. And that sometimes makes IBM's legal reps look equally foolish. As a Hercules user, I can't do the software development I'd like to, because MVS 3.8 doesn't have RACF installed; nor does it have the z/OS features that might make things so much more elegant, and efficient, for my efforts. Begging for z/System time from friends isn't really an option, because of the legal ramifications. And there's a bunch of us in the same boat! Being stuck on a barely-adequate pension, I'd like to augment my income with low-priced software that works well (maybe become another McKinney Systems? ) but IBM's policy about licensing z/OS to run under Hercules (NOT) effectively cuts me out. This after being a loyal IBM fan for nearly 40 years. (grumble) -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
I'm sure that I don't know much about this topic. Let me just ask then how it is that IBM can "ALLOW" z/OS to run on a PSI machine. If PSI totally on its own writes firmware loaded at IPL time to allow z/OS to run on an Itanium 2 dual core processor, then why couldn't the customer buy z/OS and run the software on the machine. Of course the customer would be taking some risk because the support would probably have to come from PSI primarily and not IBM. Seems to me like in the Amdahl days each machine was assigned a "Capacity ID" by IBM and that was used for pricing of software. Have things changed? Am I way off base? I guess my main question goes back to the word "ALLOW". How can IBM have so much control? Tom Moulder Just another dinosaur out here scraping a living off "z" technology -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 12:38 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 On Friday, 11/03/2006 at 07:18 MST, "Jeffrey D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What I don't understand is if IBM won't allow z/OS to run on > a Hercules system, then why would IBM allow z/OS to run on > a PSI system? Please note that no PSI machines are listed at http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/library/swpriceinfo/hardware.h tml . Before making any assumptions, a customer with questions about IBM software may want to contact IBM. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- 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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.26/516 - Release Date: 11/3/2006 -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Sat, 4 Nov 2006 10:32:48 -0600, Tom Moulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'm sure that I don't know much about this topic. > >Let me just ask then how it is that IBM can "ALLOW" z/OS to run on a PSI >machine. If PSI totally on its own writes firmware loaded at IPL time to >allow z/OS to run on an Itanium 2 dual core processor, then why couldn't the >customer buy z/OS and run the software on the machine. You don't "buy" z/OS. You license it to run on a particular machne. > Of course the >customer would be taking some risk because the support would probably have >to come from PSI primarily and not IBM. Seems to me like in the Amdahl days >each machine was assigned a "Capacity ID" by IBM and that was used for >pricing of software. When Amdahl started selling processors, the operating system was free. When IBM started to charge for it, they knew how much power an Amdahl processor had and where it fit in the pricing structure. It's harder for them to know that with am emulator. What stops you from putting in faster processors, or additional processors? Tom Marchant -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Begin Quoted E-mail -- then why couldn't the >customer buy z/OS and run the software on the machine. You don't "buy" z/OS. You license it to run on a particular machne. > Of course the >customer would be taking some risk because the support would probably have >to come from PSI primarily and not IBM. Seems to me like in the Amdahl days >each machine was assigned a "Capacity ID" by IBM and that was used for >pricing of software. When Amdahl started selling processors, the operating system was free. When IBM started to charge for it, they knew how much power an Amdahl processor had and where it fit in the pricing structure. It's harder for them to know that with am emulator. What stops you from putting in faster processors, or additional processors? Tom Marchant End Quoted E-mail -- Excuse me for using the word "buy" -- I knew better that you license software. Upgrades have always been an issue in the "z" environment, now others are taking note of this and trying to do the same things for other platforms. So, there are a lot of devil in the details. Like how PSI would handle the CPU serial number and upgrades to the processor number and speed. I suppose they could change the serial number on an upgrade and force the customer to deal with IBM since the software is licensed to a CPU. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006 15:44:14 -, Phil Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I was sceptical about Hercules. I got slimed for it, but I was right. Can't let you get away with that, Phil - you were dead wrong. You repeatedly stated that IBM would shut Hercules down, harped on about intellectual property infringement (ignoring IBM's stated position that it wouldn't enforce its patents against open-source projects) - hell at several points I recall you predicting that IBM were going to get a 'cease and desist' against the Hercules programmers - here's part of the post, from you: (from the 'missing redbook chapter' saga in 2002) >Clearing the decks for a 'Cease and Desist'. IBM can hardly issue one if >some of its own >documentation seems to sanction Hercules. It's come a bit late, too - back >in Autumn I posted >that I expected it in mid-February, but I guess lawyers get paid by the >hour. Hercules is very much alive and well, and still costs the same as it did when you were sceptical about it :-) Mike http://www.corestore.org -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Tom Marchant wrote: [...] When Amdahl started selling processors, the operating system was free. When IBM started to charge for it, they knew how much power an Amdahl processor had and where it fit in the pricing structure. It's harder for them to know that with am emulator. What stops you from putting in faster processors, or additional processors? What stops you from using z/OS on large z/Series machine without paying for it ? You can buy license for the smallest z9BC and use the same code on 2064-2C16 bought on second-hand market. Or several machines. Or without buying any license, just pay your friendly sysprog for copy of the tapes... It's legal issue, not technical one. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Sat, 4 Nov 2006 15:14:00 -0600, Tom Moulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Begin Quoted E-mail -- > >>then why couldn't the >>customer buy z/OS and run the software on the machine. > > >You don't "buy" z/OS. You license it to run on a particular machne. > > >When Amdahl started selling processors, the operating system was free. >When IBM started to charge for it, they knew how much power an Amdahl >processor had and where it fit in the pricing structure. It's harder >for them to know that with am emulator. What stops you from putting >in faster processors, or additional processors? > >Tom Marchant > >End Quoted E-mail -- > >Excuse me for using the word "buy" -- I knew better that you license >software. As I said, you license the software for *a particular machine.* That's the relevant phrase. You had suggested buying it and running it on another platform, which would be a violation of the licensing terms. > >Upgrades have always been an issue in the "z" environment, now others are >taking note of this and trying to do the same things for other platforms. >So, there are a lot of devil in the details. Like how PSI would handle the >CPU serial number and upgrades to the processor number and speed. I suppose >they could change the serial number on an upgrade and force the customer to >deal with IBM since the software is licensed to a CPU. > As you say, the devil is in the details. You've avoided the question that I asked, so I'll ask it again with emphasis. What stops *you* from putting in faster processors, or additional processors? I didn't ask about PSI upgrading the underlying hardware. Of course, PSI could, in principle, provide the same sort of processor capacity information to the operating system that modern hardware provides. Then, if you put in additional or faster processors, the MSU rating would be provided to MVS. This would be a non-trivial thing to do accurately due to the number of variables involved in system performance. -- Tom Marchant -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
In a message dated 11/5/2006 9:30:54 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You can buy license for the smallest z9BC and use the same code on 2064-2C16 bought on second-hand market. Or several machines. Or without buying any license, just pay your friendly sysprog for copy of the tapes... It's legal issue, not technical one. >> You end paying for all MSUs in service and support. Creatively you can reduce the charges by moving the ISV software around or unloading the print servers to AIX. Guess about the only time I've every loaned anybody software was when a local service bureau was on it's way out and had lost many of it's people and had a big lightning enema. IBM had the service contract but the customer hadn't done maint in a while and their version of ICKDSF wouldn't format the new dasd so I cut them a copy of SAICKDSF and gave it to the SE on the account. Paying for or loaning IBM tapes is illegal in US-Property of IBM. Seen people fired for bringing in unlicensed software to large shops. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Fochtman > Sent: Saturday 04 November 2006 07:55 > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > > Alan, there's nothing wrong with being "paternal", as you put > it. But sometimes the policies of IBM seem to be rather > foolish. And that sometimes makes IBM's legal reps look > equally foolish. As a Hercules user, I can't do the software > development I'd like to, because MVS 3.8 doesn't have RACF > installed; nor does it have the z/OS features that might make > things so much more elegant, and efficient, for my efforts. > Begging for z/System time from friends isn't really an > option, because of the legal ramifications. And there's a > bunch of us in the same boat! > > Being stuck on a barely-adequate pension, I'd like to augment > my income with low-priced software that works well (maybe > become another McKinney Systems? ) but IBM's policy about > licensing z/OS to run under Hercules (NOT) effectively cuts > me out. This after being a loyal IBM fan for nearly 40 years. > (grumble) Amen, Rick. I've got ideas that I'd like to play with but cannot for these very same reasons. In my case, it's after 25+ years (including college days) of being loyal to IBM. The sad thing is that for my prototype application, I'm having to use Visual C++ Express on Windows. I really don't want to (WD4z, anyone?). But the price is right. (Heck, if I could find "free" time on a BS2000/OSD or MSP box, I'd take it. Close enough.) Later, Ray -- M. Ray Mullins Roseville, CA, USA http://www.catherdersoftware.com/ http://www.mrmullins.big-bear-city.ca.us/ http://www.the-bus-stops-here.org/ German is essentially a form of assembly language consisting entirely of far calls heavily accented with throaty guttural sounds. ---ilvi French is essentially German with messed-up pronunciation and spelling. --Robert B Wilson English is essentially French converted to 7-bit ASCII. ---Christophe Pierret [for Alain LaBonté] -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Ed Finnell wrote: In a message dated 11/5/2006 9:30:54 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You can buy license for the smallest z9BC and use the same code on 2064-2C16 bought on second-hand market. Or several machines. Or without buying any license, just pay your friendly sysprog for copy of the tapes... It's legal issue, not technical one. (Ed responses:) [...] Paying for or loaning IBM tapes is illegal in US-Property of IBM. Seen people fired for bringing in unlicensed software to large shops. OF COURSE it is illegal, not only in the US. It is as illegal as running software on bigger machine than licensed one, or on more machines. Breaking any rule from license agreement is illegal (unless law regulations allow for something). My point was it is possible to cheat IBM (illegally of course) without Hercules or PSI machine. So, it is not good excuse for denying software for PSI machine owners. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom Moulder > > I'm sure that I don't know much about this topic. > > Let me just ask then how it is that IBM can "ALLOW" z/OS to > run on a PSI machine. If PSI totally on its own writes > firmware loaded at IPL time to allow z/OS to run on an > Itanium 2 dual core processor, then why couldn't the customer > buy z/OS and run the software on the machine. Of course the > customer would be taking some risk because the support would > probably have to come from PSI primarily and not IBM. Seems > to me like in the Amdahl days each machine was assigned a > "Capacity ID" by IBM and that was used for pricing of > software. Have things changed? Am I way off base? > > I guess my main question goes back to the word "ALLOW". How > can IBM have so much control? IBM owns the software, "lock, stock and barrel". If you want to "drive" it, you comply with IBM's Ts & Cs (Terms & Conditions). It's sort of like driving my car: I grant you a "license" to drive my car, but YOU (and nobody else) may drive it only from "here" to "there" and back, and only on these specific roads, and only during that time of day. If you find these Ts & Cs too restrictive, then drive somebody else's car. -jc- -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Chase, John wrote: -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom Moulder I'm sure that I don't know much about this topic. Let me just ask then how it is that IBM can "ALLOW" z/OS to run on a PSI machine. If PSI totally on its own writes firmware loaded at IPL time to allow z/OS to run on an Itanium 2 dual core processor, then why couldn't the customer buy z/OS and run the software on the machine. Of course the customer would be taking some risk because the support would probably have to come from PSI primarily and not IBM. Seems to me like in the Amdahl days each machine was assigned a "Capacity ID" by IBM and that was used for pricing of software. Have things changed? Am I way off base? I guess my main question goes back to the word "ALLOW". How can IBM have so much control? IBM owns the software, "lock, stock and barrel". If you want to "drive" it, you comply with IBM's Ts & Cs (Terms & Conditions). It's sort of like driving my car: I grant you a "license" to drive my car, but YOU (and nobody else) may drive it only from "here" to "there" and back, and only on these specific roads, and only during that time of day. If you find these Ts & Cs too restrictive, then drive somebody else's car. I think the car example is wrong. If you sell apples (or cars) you cannot refuse someone, because he's disable person, or she's a woman, or he wears short trousers, or he already bought oranges in another shop. Software licenses are sold on similar conditions. Your (seller's) terms & conditions cannot break public law. IBM *had* to sell licenses on non-IBM machines in the past, Amdahl, Hitachi to name a few. I'm pretty sure IBM was not happy of that. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Phil asked: Love to know what a 9662 is, though. This is (was) a S/390 MicroProcessor Complex (PCI Card) supported in an RS/6000. US Announcement Letter is 197-164 (from July 22, 1997) Birger Heede IBM Phil Payne wrote: My point was it is possible to cheat IBM (illegally of course) without Hercules or PSI machine. So, it is not good excuse for denying software for PSI machine owners. a) I don't see the connection. b) That isn't the "excuse" in any case. In fact, IBM has not said in public what its response to a request to license its software on a PSI platform would be, just as it never said the same about Hercules. There are very strong parallels between the two. It has only been pointed out that no PSI machines are listed in IBM's tables at http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/library/swpriceinfo/ Well, there are a lot of other systems not listed there that have received licenses, so I wouldn't regard that as definitive just yet. Even IBM's own emulation (xSeries 430) isn't listed. Love to know what a 9662 is, though. I do feel that both PSI and T3 are being less than forthcoming about the state of their licensing agreements with IBM. It's obviously up to them how much they tell the market, but I hope they're telling their VCs the truth. I'd like to hear something about z/VM support, too - I can't see any box being a success today without it. I/O seems to be a major issue, just as it was with Fundamental's FLEX-ES. I held a prototype PCI ESCON card in my hand around five years before it shipped. Few FLEX-ES boxes use external I/O because Flex's DASD emulation and FAKETAPE are so good, but if you're aiming further up the MIPS chart you _need_ external I/O support - and these days that means FICON. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Moulder > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 3:14 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 > > Upgrades have always been an issue in the "z" environment, > now others are > taking note of this and trying to do the same things for > other platforms. > So, there are a lot of devil in the details. Like how PSI > would handle the > CPU serial number and upgrades to the processor number and > speed. I suppose > they could change the serial number on an upgrade and force > the customer to > deal with IBM since the software is licensed to a CPU. Being the geek-head that I am, I would be greatly tempted to "reverse engineer" the "microcode" to determine where the CPUID and the output from STSI came from and "zap" it to be what I think would be better. Yes, I realize that this would likely be in violation of the license for whatever PSI uses. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 16:31:06 -, Phil Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED] RESEARCH.FREESERVE.CO.UK> wrote: > >a) IBM didn't have a clue how much power an Amdahl (or any other pocessor) had. Amdahl (and I >was part of the process) "declared" its processors to IBM. Ah, yes. Thanks for reminding me. But IBM did have a clue, at least in later years. "Many IBM compatible processor models are also measured for the LSPR, whenever machine time can be obtained." See, for example: http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/lspr/os390t2.html > >b) You obviously know NOTHING about emulation, or at least commercial emulation. Thank you. >Fundamental's FLEX-ES is controlled these days by a USB dongle that defines the permitted >performance and number of engines. Yes, you can rehost onto a faster Intel processor or add >engines - but FSI's code works with the dongle to deliver exactly the licensed "MIPS" on the >number of engines licensed. You buy 8 MIPS (actually 7.9) and you get 8 MIPS. There is no >uncertainty in the process whatever. It sounds to me as if you're saying that MIPS is not meaningless on emulated processors, but very precise. Somehow it's difficult to believe that you'd be saying that. I can see though that the dongle could provide the capacity control or regulation that would be required. These days, with measured usage perhaps the dongle could be used to provide the capacity information needed to z/OS for the change in charging that would go with an upgrade to the underlying hardware. Tom Marchant -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Birger, Was this the old R/390 follow-on to the P/390? Bob Richards -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Birger Heede Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 8:50 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 Phil asked: Love to know what a 9662 is, though. This is (was) a S/390 MicroProcessor Complex (PCI Card) supported in an RS/6000. US Announcement Letter is 197-164 (from July 22, 1997) Birger Heede IBM LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R.S. > Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 9:30 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 > > > What stops you from using z/OS on large z/Series machine > without paying > for it ? > You can buy license for the smallest z9BC and use the same code on > 2064-2C16 bought on second-hand market. Or several machines. > Or without > buying any license, just pay your friendly sysprog for copy > of the tapes... > It's legal issue, not technical one. > -- > Radoslaw Skorupka > Lodz, Poland True for z/OS and IBM software. Not true for most OEM software. Especially CA's software. It locks by CPUID. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Birger Heede wrote: Phil asked: Love to know what a 9662 is, though. This is (was) a S/390 MicroProcessor Complex (PCI Card) supported in an RS/6000. US Announcement Letter is 197-164 (from July 22, 1997) Can we say Phil knows nothing about mainframe machines ? Not good as for consultant. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Bob My ann ltr reference was not actually to the first announce of the P/390 card (just a ref. I had 'close by'). I actually thought we (IBM) used R/390 for the RS/6000 version and P/390 for the PC Server version - but this ann. ltr. did not. I checked one of the redbooks on the subject and realized that this naming stuff is not an easy subject :-) See this reference (page 11): http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg244847.pdf I think the answer to your question is yes and no :-) No - the P/390 is the name of the Card (P=PCI?) (that started with the PC Server implementation) Yes - The P/390 in the RS/6000 implementation is referred to as R/390 (and RS/6000 support came later than the PC support) lots of disclaimers Birger Heede IBM Richards.Bob wrote: Birger, Was this the old R/390 follow-on to the P/390? Bob Richards -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Birger Heede Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 8:50 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 Phil asked: Love to know what a 9662 is, though. This is (was) a S/390 MicroProcessor Complex (PCI Card) supported in an RS/6000. US Announcement Letter is 197-164 (from July 22, 1997) Birger Heede IBM LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- 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
Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4
Can we put this whole thing to bed, please? We all know that IBM owns the intellectual property know as z/OS and can license, or not license it, whenever or whereever they please. The fact that their restrictions may be, to some of us, unreasonable does not negate the point that IBM may have reasons that we don't know, or understand, or agree with, for their licensing decisions. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Birger Heede > > Bob > My ann ltr reference was not actually to the first announce > of the P/390 card (just a ref. I had 'close by'). I actually > thought we (IBM) used R/390 for the RS/6000 version and P/390 > for the PC Server version - but this ann. ltr. did not. I > checked one of the redbooks on the subject and realized that > this naming stuff is not an easy subject :-) See this > reference (page 11): > http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg244847.pdf > > I think the answer to your question is yes and no :-) > > No - the P/390 is the name of the Card (P=PCI?) (that started > with the PC Server implementation) ISTR the P/390 was Micro-Channel At a former job we had a "System/390 Server 330" or something like that. -jc- -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
I would not like you to conclude that. Phil's memory is much better than mine (whether his is hardened on external storage or not). So if he knows nothing where does that leave me? Birger Heede IBM R.S. wrote: Birger Heede wrote: Phil asked: Love to know what a 9662 is, though. This is (was) a S/390 MicroProcessor Complex (PCI Card) supported in an RS/6000. US Announcement Letter is 197-164 (from July 22, 1997) Can we say Phil knows nothing about mainframe machines ? Not good as for consultant. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
AMEN, Brother! Rick Fochtman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 11/06/2006 11:40 AM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List To IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU cc Subject Re: FW: The PSI Letter V4 Can we put this whole thing to bed, please? We all know that IBM owns the intellectual property know as z/OS and can license, or not license it, whenever or whereever they please. The fact that their restrictions may be, to some of us, unreasonable does not negate the point that IBM may have reasons that we don't know, or understand, or agree with, for their licensing decisions. -- 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: FW: The PSI Letter V4
On 6 Nov 2006 08:40:50 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rick Fochtman) wrote: >We all know that IBM owns the intellectual property know as z/OS and can >license, or not license it, whenever or whereever they please. > >The fact that their restrictions may be, to some of us, unreasonable >does not negate the point that IBM may have reasons that we don't know, >or understand, or agree with, for their licensing decisions. It is interesting that Apple had a short while when it licensed its OS to third party vendors - but changed its mind.I don't know what factors entered into its decision, but suspect that it would have been much more difficult to switch to first one than another completely different CPU design if they didn't control the hardware. -- 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
