You're making a leap there that -I'm- certainly not ready to make. Speed isn't everything, never has been.
If you want to play games or have application that you don't really care about when it gets done and a lot of times in accurate results and only has 1 or 2 users, you -might- be able to live with putting it on a Unix platform. However, IMHO, the RAS -really- stinks. You can't rely on those boxes being up and available to do -production- work when you need them. One line of bad code or a missing line in a script and the box typically goes into a loop and freezes and a lot of the time can't be gotten control of again without turning the box off or pulling circuit cards to force it to quit. The -whole- attitude of the group of people responsible for the care and feeding of the squatty boxes is one that a -production- environment in a mainframe world can't tolerate. They think nothing of taking a box down or changing an IP address in the middle of the day and without telling anyone they're about to do it. The number of people it takes to support the squatty box environment is unreal (5+to 1) for every application they put up. It's cheaper to maintain the mainframe....overall. The average time for D/R recoverability on a squatty box is measured in days....not hours. And the list could go on and on. Personally, I'd rather have a -slower- box and know that the RAS is there, unless of course I want to play a game. <g> Bill Mainframe - An obsolete device still used by thousands of obsolete companies, serving billions of obsolete customers, and making huge obsolete profits, for their obsolete shareholders. And this year's run twice fast as last year's. -Phil Payne- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
