How many years ago was it that SUN first compared mainframes to dinosaurs?
The z800 hase a lot of memory so it is appropriate that they chose the name raptor,
since it was a small, smart dinosaur. Only 3 feet tall? But I thought it was really 
'velociraptor'
but I guess you need Velocity Software's products to turn it into that!
Right, Barton?

Phil Payne wrote:

> Well, here's another one.
>
> http://www.bigbluesmoke.com/worldnews2.html
>
> The 'IBM unearths Raptor' story is either deliberately intended to mislead, or the 
>author has
> such a poor appreciation of what IBM did that he/she should be disciplined and not be
> published again without a stringent review.
>
> The statement:"This new baby-frame has been "factory crippled" so that it will only 
>utilize
> 1-4 cpus and only run "Modern" workloads" is flat and completely wrong in both 
>respects - it
> may even be actionable, if IBM can be bothered.
>
> Firstly, the z800 is NOT crippled in any significant way.  It uses a new MCM 
>purpose-developed
> for the machine.  Because it is intended (under other labels) for the Japanese 
>market it has
> VOS3 functionality - which is a significant plus for the machine.    There are a few 
>things
> that the z800 doesn't support, such as parallel channels - but it also doesn't 
>support
> VS1:ECPS, byte multiplexor channels or 1401 emulation.  What does Sun think it is - a
> dinosaur?
>
> Secondly, and IMO much more seriously - the last paragraph of the story creates the 
>very
> strong impression that z/OS.e is a prerequisite, not an additional option.  In fact, 
>there is
> no compulsion for anyone (ISV or user) to change ANYTHING to run on a z800.  Even 
>most stuff
> written up to three decades ago will still run.
>
> The art of good FUD is to build implications around an indisputable fact.  However, 
>these are
> not facts - they are very misleading lies about IBM's product.  They proceed either 
>from quite
> appalling knowledge of a competitor's product or from malfeasance on someone's part.
>
> Whichever it is, it is Sun's responsibility because the site is quite clearly 
>sanctioned by
> Sun.
>
> --
>   Phil Payne
>   http://www.isham-research.com
>   +44 7785 302 803
>   +49 173 6242039

Reply via email to