On 18 Jul 2007 07:33:07 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >If I was making a decision, the H/W platform would be one of the last things >to consider. >Companies don't need bemchmarks, they need *applications*. It is possible to >have good application on poor platform, and it doesn't mean performance or RAS >problems. On the other hand it is possible to have poor application on good >platform. Poor could mean functionality, or poor design, infinite CPU needs, >etc. etc. > >BTW: Most companies I know, when considering *new application* (written from >scratch), they try to *avoid* mainframe. Reason claimed: costs. At least in >some cases I agree with such approach. >Of course I'm talking about companies already having mainframes.
I don't see a lot of companies considering "*new application* (written from scratch)", at the level that a mainframe is a consideration. Enterprise systems like that start off as purchases. Which means that IBM's most significant customers should be companies providing enterprise level software. Then those companies can show their customers that their systems will work with IBM, Sun, server farms, or whatever - and supply performance benchmarks for the end-users. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
