On 2 Sep 2012 10:31:31 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >>>> On 9/2/2012 at 12:47 PM, Clark Morris <[email protected]> wrote: >> Given the great disparity between costs per >> instruction execution, on reading these posts it would seem that >> getting to a secure, fault tolerant operating system on blade clusters >> would be highly cost effective and that all new work should be moved >> to that environment. > >If the hardware costs were the only thing you counted, that would be true. >However, there are a myriad of cost factors and business factors that make >mainframes the best choice for a significant number of workloads. > The major reason for staying on a mainframe (z, Unisys A, Unisys 2200 follow-on) is the horrendous cost of migration. Noting the number of smaller entities that have successfully moved off the z series and its predecessors, I am interested in just how long both COBOL and z have. I am seeing few reasons to go to a z series.
The other question is are few IPS used to accomplish the same amount of work on z series as opposed to the Intel series? Clark Morris > >Mark Post > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
