I somewhat agree. I'm confused by IBM's z "philosophy". I remember when the 
S/370 arch was around and IBM was targetting from mid-size to large shops (4331 
was __small__!). Now the z people seem to be like Bentley dealers. If you're 
not a multimillionaire, you don't even need to consider a Bentley. But that's 
the way Bentley has always been. All of a sudden IBM z is like Ford deciding 
that the family car is too much of a bother, and only go with super-luxury 
models. Old joke: "You want 10 million for a car!?! How many will buy that?" 
Answer: "I only need one!"

And since it's only the PFD instruction (which the PoPs indicates has multiple 
subfunctions, some of which may be a NOP on some models), IBM hardware should 
be able to rather easily make a millicoded PFD instruction on all the z series 
machines which would be a NOP instead of a PIC 1. But I guess it isn't worth 
the development cost to them. <shrug>

--
John McKown 
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets(r)

9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-691-6183 cell
[email protected] * www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The 
MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ivan Warren
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 3:01 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Virtualizing a z10
> 
> On 9/23/2010 7:26 PM, Alan Altmark wrote:
> >
> > No secret:  It uses the PREFETCH DATA instruction in the
> > General-Instructions-Extensions Facility. Of course, since 
> developers are
> > no longer shackled by the z900, they may use other z10+ 
> instructions at
> > their discretion.
> 
> <rant>
> Sheesh... Would it have been hard to add a TM (On the STFLE results) 
> around the PFD/PFDRL ? Don't tell me the labs decided to cast off an 
> entire line of (<4 yo) machines (which cost >$100K) for just *ONE* 
> instruction (and more than that - it's only for performance.. 
> PFD/PFDRL 
> have no operational impact other than performance).
> 
> The "underlying" problem I see is that it is putting a severe dent in 
> people's mind as far as IBM's view of "Invest in long lasting 
> technology" is concerned.. z9 is what ? 4 years old ? and IBM 
> is already 
> issuing SCPs that are no longer compatible..
> 
> I remember a time (yeah.. I'm an old geezer) where the time when IBM 
> would release SCPs that were no longer guaranteed to work on 
> system that 
> were more than 20 year old - or rather had been withdrawn 
> from marketing 
> for more than 20 years.. (I'm quite convinced that with some 
> effort, you 
> could have run VM/SP5 on a S/370 138.. And possible VM/ESA 
> S/370 option!)
> 
> PS : We're not talking about the z900/z800.. or the 
> z990/z890.. But the z9 !
> </rant>
> 
> --Ivan
> 
> 

Reply via email to