I don't think that it is fair (nor easy) to compare distributed systems to mainframes in an apples to apples style comparison. One was designed to scale horizontally, the other vertically. Modern Unix and even Intel/AMD based systems with fiber attached DASD can be rather competitive in I/O comparisons and are clearly more suited for CPU intensive operations. It's more about picking the right platform for the job. It is damaging when we take a side either way and try to make it sound as if one platform is superior in all respects to the other, because this just is not true.
-Sam -----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Brock Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 1:36 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Business Week Article My take on it is that, for 390/zSeries architecture, raw computational performance takes a back seat to RAS; just about any time during architecture design that there was a conflict between issues of performance and, say, reliability, reliability would win. To my mind, that is the correct call. Jon <snip> That's what I've heard as well. I've always wondered why the zSeries is so computationally inferior to almost any other current CPU architecture. </snip> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
