>>> On 9/3/2012 at 05:05 PM, Richard Hintz <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you have something or can point me to something that shows comparative > metrics for these, especially: > --power/cooling > --floor space > --people > --networking hardware (I really don't understand this, since I would have > thought the networking hardware would be external to the device)
Yes, it is, and in the case of System z, there is far less needed to support a large number of Linux guests than if running discreet systems, or even virtualized ones on Intel/AMD. > --DR > --provisioning > --retirement (not tracking on this, too. See places still running IMS, for > example) All of the ones I have at my fingertips are rather old. The comparisons have only become more favorable to Linux on System z over the years, so they're still worth looking at. The first one is a presentation I did at SHARE, IBM zExpo, and WAVV a number of times. Mark Post Choose the Wrong Architecture and Waste Millions - A Customer Case Study ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/eserver/zseries/zos/vse/pdf3/techconf2007/sanantonio/L76_Choose_the_Wrong_Architecture_and_Waste_Millions_A_Customer_Case_Study.pdf Romney White Erich Amrehn (Dis)Honest TCO Analysis for Linux on System z http://www.share.org/p/do/sd/sid=1569&fid=1568&req=direct Marlin Maddy TCO: Comparing System z and Distributed Environments; Building the Business Case http://www.share.org/p/do/sd/sid=5573&fid=5572&req=direct Lee Stewart z/VM and Linux Disaster Recovery - A Customer Experience http://www.share.org/p/do/sd/sid=3203&fid=3202&req=direct Mark Post ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
