On Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Steve Mitchell wrote: > Having been a technician my entire career I don't posses much knowledge of > the intricacies of the budgeting process. Here in short is what I've been > tasked with: The support of our linux guests was moved to the UNIX (AIX) > Admin group last year about this time. They are now suggesting we move all > the linux work to AIX because its 'cheaper' and 'more reliable'. I've > found and collected the conversation earlier this year regarding a 'costing > method' for linux guest vs Intel servers, so I have that as a starting > point. If anyone has experience with the pros/cons of AIX vs z/VM/LINUX I > would appreciate any information you can share. Aside from that any other > 'food for thought' you can provide is greatly appreciated. Our environment > is essentially WebShpere App server and MQ, accessing DB2 data on z/OS. > Yes, we are using Hipersocket connectivity to z/OS from Linux. > > Thanks. > > Steve Mitchell
"cheaper" = ask for invoices for all the hardware and software. Compare with the invoices for the z/Linux hardware and software. Remember to combine all the AIX systems together for a total cost. One small p and its AIX may well be cheaper than the z. But all of them added together might not be "more reliable" = ask for all hardware and software outages on the p and AIX and applications. Create a similar report on all z, Linux, and applications. Never accept "it is generally know that ...". That is bull. The cynic in me makes me translate their suggestion to "We are used to AIX and don't want to bother with this other stuff." I often get that sort of thing for why something cannot be done or is too expensive or too time consuming or ... . IOW: it may be that they are just lazy. I am not saying that for a fact. -- Q: What do theoretical physicists drink beer from? A: Ein Stein. Maranatha! John McKown
