Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread Harry Wahl
Platform Solutions, Inc. had this technology and much more. Their technology is 
now IBM's.

 

Many people accuse IBM of acquiring PSI to stifle competition, but this is a 
great disservice to the engineers at PSI, particularly former Amdahl engineers, 
who are now bound to silence by NDAs.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/technology/companies/23mainframe.html?_r=3pagewanted=2ref=technologyadxnnlx=1237816804-Ls%2021S/ySzdFWiPCcF03qQ

 

IBM may see the virtualization of Windows onto z architecture as strategic; 
both as servers and workstations and its acquisition of PSI reflects this.

 

From what little Mantissa has disclosed, their approach, IMHO, is inherently 
flawed. Their SHARE presentation seemed to be little more than an obfuscated 
discourse on virtualization in general. Even if their approach works, it would 
have been better, architecturally, to emulate an Itanium for Windows hosting 
because of the nature of the Itanium’s instruction parallelism.

 

A more sensible approach would be to look at creating a Windows HAL (hardware 
abstraction layer), or something conceptually similar, that runs on z/Series. 
Historically, this is how Windows has been made to run on different machine 
architectures. Of course, cooperative development between IBM and Microsoft 
would be necessary.

 

Another possibility is to exploit the Infiniband feature of the z/10. This 
feature is profound in terms of 360-z/series evolution, but has been largely 
ignored, so far. 

 

Infiniband attached external hardware products that expose x86 architecture 
processors, from Intel or IBM itself (or maybe even Intel Larrabee), is an 
ideal way to run Windows on IBM mainframes.

 

 

In the interest of disclosure, I have worked for both IBM and PSI, but the 
opinions I express here are complete conjecture.

 

Harry

harry_w...@hotmail.com

 
 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:08:01 -0700
 From: ps2...@yahoo.com
 Subject: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 
 Will Big Blue mainframes run Windows?
 Track this topic Print story Post comment
 z/VMs get Microsoft rumor
 By Timothy Prickett Morgan • Get more from this author
 
 Posted in Servers, 23rd March 2009 22:34 GMT
 Whitepaper download - Eight CRM essentials
 An obscure mainframe software company called Mantissa Corporation bragged 
 last summer on the IBM VM listserv - which is dedicated to virtual mainframe 
 environments - that it was creating a product called z/VOS that would allow 
 slices of a Windows operating system to run atop z/VM, the 
 hypervisor-as-operating system for IBM mainframes. The product was due in the 
 first quarter of this year, and the story of its impending release has been 
 making the rounds.
 
 According to a report in NetworkWorld, Mantissa's z/VOS, presumably short for 
 Virtual Operating System, is a layer of software for VM that allows desktop 
 and server Windows operating systems to run in emulated mode atop z/VM. 
 Mantissa - which is based in Birmingham, Alabama, and which is a supplier of 
 report distribution and other tools for mainframes - talked about the z/VOS 
 product at the SHARE mainframe user conference in early March in Austin, 
 Texas. But that was not the same thing as a product launch.
 
 
 We've tried to reach the company for several days, but Mantissa has yet to 
 respond.
 
 While IBM and the Linux community for mainframes centered around Marist 
 College in New York have worked to get official mainframe ports done for 
 Linux - Red Hat and Novell officially support mainframes, if you can write a 
 big enough check to get support - there is no native Windows port to IBM 
 mainframes as far as I know. So, the real curiosity is how Mantissa is 
 supporting Windows XP or Vista atop z/VM partitions.
 
 According to the company's development blog, z/VOS includes a translation 
 engine that converts native x86 code to its System z equivalent. See how 
 easy that was? As it translates equivalent results - not creating equivalent 
 machine code, mind you - the instruction that is created by z/VOS is stored 
 in memory so it can be accessed the next time the operating system function 
 inside Windows running on the mainframe is asked for again.
 
 Since Gary Dennis, Mantissa's chief executive officer and founder - and other 
 we've called - are not answering their phones, it is a little hard to take 
 the company seriously. But if it can indeed deliver a layer of abstraction 
 software atop z/VM that lets Windows desktops and servers run on mainframe 
 iron, the company should probably think about getting someone to answer the 
 phones and maybe a salesperson or two to try to take some orders. If the x86 
 translation overhead is not too high, this could be a very interesting 
 development - and one that Big Blue would seem pretty keen on supporting, not 
 quashing. ®
 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/23/mantissa_windows_on_mainframes/
 
 AT least these people

Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread Kirk Wolf
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Harry Wahl harry_w...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Platform Solutions, Inc. had this technology and much more. Their
 technology is now IBM's.


Doesn't PSI does the opposite of what Mantissa claims to be working on?

PSI runs z architecture on x86 hardware whereas Mantissa claims to run x86
architecture on z hardware.

Combine the two and you could run Windows on z/VM on a x86 emulating a z
machine.Sounds snappy :-)

BTW: MacOS did this quite successfully when they switched from 68000 to
Power architecture.   You could run your 68000 binaries and they would be
dynamically translated into a cache Power instructions.   They did it again
when they moved to x86.

See: http://knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Mac_68K_emulator/

Of course, modern byte-code VMs use dynamic translation (JIT) to translate
frequently used byte codes into native machine instructions.  Yet, it is
still amazing how many people think that Java is still only interpreted.
Quoting from an Austin SHARE presentation on PHP:

Unlike Java or other interpretive language, PHP’s focus is to
use the script to invoke “native” C subroutines that do the
actual work at full speed


Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread John McKown
I'm a bit curious. If I understand what is being done, it is similar to a
Java JVM. The z/VOS reads and interprets the x86 arch instructions, with
some JIT on the side. However, other companies, such as AMD, need cross
licensing to create chips which run x86. That cross licensing is part of
IBM's complaint against PSI. PSI was not licensed to create a zArchitecture
emulator. Couldn't Intel shut down Mantissa with a similar suite? I don't
remember reading that Mantissa has an agreement with Intel. I don't think
the fact that z/VOS is a software emulator instead of a harware
implementation is relevant. Of course, IANAL.

-- 
John

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread P S
IANALE, so wild speculation alert:

Emulation *might* be different--PSI kept saying they didn't do
emulation, although it quacked like a duck.

The AMD licensing might be slightly different, since their
architecture is slightly different.

But it's a great question! I'd love to know the answer.

P.S. z/Architecture. Slash for software (and the architecture, oddly
enough, is considered software).

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:36 PM, John McKown joa...@swbell.net wrote:
 I'm a bit curious. If I understand what is being done, it is similar to a
 Java JVM. The z/VOS reads and interprets the x86 arch instructions, with
 some JIT on the side. However, other companies, such as AMD, need cross
 licensing to create chips which run x86. That cross licensing is part of
 IBM's complaint against PSI. PSI was not licensed to create a zArchitecture
 emulator. Couldn't Intel shut down Mantissa with a similar suite? I don't
 remember reading that Mantissa has an agreement with Intel. I don't think
 the fact that z/VOS is a software emulator instead of a harware
 implementation is relevant. Of course, IANAL.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread Gibney, Dave
 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
 Behalf Of Harry Wahl
 Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 5:35 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I
 brought up)
 
 
 
 A more sensible approach would be to look at creating a Windows HAL
 (hardware abstraction layer), or something conceptually similar, that
 runs on z/Series. Historically, this is how Windows has been made to
 run on different machine architectures. Of course, cooperative
 development between IBM and Microsoft would be necessary.
 
 
 
 Another possibility is to exploit the Infiniband feature of the z/10.
 This feature is profound in terms of 360-z/series evolution, but has
 been largely ignored, so far.
 
 
 
 Infiniband attached external hardware products that expose x86
 architecture processors, from Intel or IBM itself (or maybe even Intel
 Larrabee), is an ideal way to run Windows on IBM mainframes.
 
 
 



  It seems to me that the obvious way to do this would be to build z86
on z in millicode. Then, the only real issue would be performance. An
all millicode representation would be somewhat slower than the
silicon.

Dave Gibney
Information Technology Services
Washington State University

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread Tom Marchant
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:36:42 -0500, John McKown wrote:

I'm a bit curious. If I understand what is being done, it is similar to a
Java JVM. The z/VOS reads and interprets the x86 arch instructions, with
some JIT on the side. However, other companies, such as AMD, need cross
licensing to create chips which run x86. 

Do they?

That cross licensing is part of
IBM's complaint against PSI. PSI was not licensed to create a zArchitecture
emulator.

I thought that the problem with PSI (and Hercules, for that matter) was not
about the emulation of the hardware, but the licensing of z/OS.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread John McKown
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:49:26 -0500, Tom Marchant m42tom-ibmm...@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:36:42 -0500, John McKown wrote:

I'm a bit curious. If I understand what is being done, it is similar to a
Java JVM. The z/VOS reads and interprets the x86 arch instructions, with
some JIT on the side. However, other companies, such as AMD, need cross
licensing to create chips which run x86.

Do they?

I am certain that AMD and Via have cross licensing agreements with Intel. I
know because Intel has recently indicated that AMD is violating that agreement.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,7832_12670_12686,00.html


That cross licensing is part of
IBM's complaint against PSI. PSI was not licensed to create a zArchitecture
emulator.

I thought that the problem with PSI (and Hercules, for that matter) was not
about the emulation of the hardware, but the licensing of z/OS.

Hum, parts of z/Architecture are patented. Not the hardware to perform the
function, but the actual function itself - indepandant of the
implementation. Neither Hercules/390 nor PSI had a license for those parts
of the z/Architecture, even though they implemented them (not totally sure
about Hercules/390 on this point).

Also, as I remember (Danger, Will Robinson!), part of IBM's argument was
that PSI's implementation of the z/Architecture was not verified by IBM. IBM
said that in that case, the use of licensed IBM software (z/OS et al.) could
not be guaranteed. However, much of IBM's premium for their software was
due to IBM's guarantees on the reliability of the software. If the hardware
was not up to snuff, then IBM might suffer damage to its reputation for
reliability if the software (z/OS) were to fail. This was the logic as to
why IBM refused to license z/OS et al. on the PSI solution.


--
Tom Marchant

-- 
John

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Re: Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-24 Thread Tom Marchant
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:55:38 -0500, John McKown wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:49:26 -0500, Tom Marchant wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:36:42 -0500, John McKown wrote:

 However, other companies, such as AMD, need cross
licensing to create chips which run x86.

Do they?

I am certain that AMD and Via have cross licensing agreements with Intel. I
know because Intel has recently indicated that AMD is violating that agreement.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,7832_12670_12686,00.html

The only thing I see in the page like that is this:
In October 1991, Intel commenced a federal court action for copyright
infringement. An arbitrator subsequently awarded AMD full rights to make and
sell the Am386. The Supreme Court of California upheld this decision in 1994.

Is that what you are talking about?



That cross licensing is part of
IBM's complaint against PSI. PSI was not licensed to create a zArchitecture
emulator.

I thought that the problem with PSI (and Hercules, for that matter) was not
about the emulation of the hardware, but the licensing of z/OS.


Also, as I remember (Danger, Will Robinson!), part of IBM's argument was
that PSI's implementation of the z/Architecture was not verified by IBM. IBM
said that in that case, the use of licensed IBM software (z/OS et al.) could
not be guaranteed. However, much of IBM's premium for their software was
due to IBM's guarantees on the reliability of the software. If the hardware
was not up to snuff, then IBM might suffer damage to its reputation for
reliability if the software (z/OS) were to fail. This was the logic as to
why IBM refused to license z/OS et al. on the PSI solution.

And one of the factors that makes the 360/370/z et. al. reliable is the
machine check interruption.  Does the Itanium processor have that
capability?  I'm pretty sure that none of the x86 processors do.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Old discussion about Windows running on a mainframe ( I brought up)

2009-03-23 Thread Ed Gould
Will Big Blue mainframes run Windows?
Track this topic Print story Post comment
z/VMs get Microsoft rumor
By Timothy Prickett Morgan • Get more from this author

Posted in Servers, 23rd March 2009 22:34 GMT
Whitepaper download - Eight CRM essentials
An obscure mainframe software company called Mantissa Corporation bragged last 
summer on the IBM VM listserv - which is dedicated to virtual mainframe 
environments - that it was creating a product called z/VOS that would allow 
slices of a Windows operating system to run atop z/VM, the 
hypervisor-as-operating system for IBM mainframes. The product was due in the 
first quarter of this year, and the story of its impending release has been 
making the rounds.

According to a report in NetworkWorld, Mantissa's z/VOS, presumably short for 
Virtual Operating System, is a layer of software for VM that allows desktop and 
server Windows operating systems to run in emulated mode atop z/VM. Mantissa - 
which is based in Birmingham, Alabama, and which is a supplier of report 
distribution and other tools for mainframes - talked about the z/VOS product at 
the SHARE mainframe user conference in early March in Austin, Texas. But that 
was not the same thing as a product launch.


We've tried to reach the company for several days, but Mantissa has yet to 
respond.

While IBM and the Linux community for mainframes centered around Marist College 
in New York have worked to get official mainframe ports done for Linux - Red 
Hat and Novell officially support mainframes, if you can write a big enough 
check to get support - there is no native Windows port to IBM mainframes as far 
as I know. So, the real curiosity is how Mantissa is supporting Windows XP or 
Vista atop z/VM partitions.

According to the company's development blog, z/VOS includes a translation 
engine that converts native x86 code to its System z equivalent. See how easy 
that was? As it translates equivalent results - not creating equivalent machine 
code, mind you - the instruction that is created by z/VOS is stored in memory 
so it can be accessed the next time the operating system function inside 
Windows running on the mainframe is asked for again.

Since Gary Dennis, Mantissa's chief executive officer and founder - and other 
we've called - are not answering their phones, it is a little hard to take the 
company seriously. But if it can indeed deliver a layer of abstraction software 
atop z/VM that lets Windows desktops and servers run on mainframe iron, the 
company should probably think about getting someone to answer the phones and 
maybe a salesperson or two to try to take some orders. If the x86 translation 
overhead is not too high, this could be a very interesting development - and 
one that Big Blue would seem pretty keen on supporting, not quashing. ®
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/23/mantissa_windows_on_mainframes/

AT least these people aren't IBM types and IBM is not eager to dispel it (so I 
have heard)

Ed




  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html