RE: Where are all of the /400's going. -- MIDRANGE-L

> From: jt
>
> (as well as many in IBM) buy into the idea that
> Java is the language of choice.

This has nothing to do with Java.  It has to do with web serving.  Not the
same thing by a long shot, and maybe that's part of the problem.


> Back to the original question, then:  how much does 100M of disk
> cost?

8GB AS/400 disk: $1400
20GB IDE disk:     $88

This doesn't take into account labor/installation charge.  Also it should be
noted that the AS/400 disk is  10,000RPM as opposed to the 7200RPM of the
IDE disk.


> But in my limited experience, I don't know too
> many businesses that can claim to be making any sound business
> judgments if they worry about $1000.

I disagree.  If everybody could afford to add GB to their machine, they
would.  Most can't, especially in these economic times.  In some cases, it's
because they've maxed their box, in some cases, it's because they can't
justify it based on the numbers above.  Their CFOs start thinking "$1000
here, $1000 there, pretty soon you're talking about real money."  And they'd
be wrong not to.


> I'm not saying that well.  We're talking do you support a new platform and
> an added layer of management?

The "new platform, new layer of management" argument doesn't apply to a
simple web server.  A web server is an appliance, not the object of a
masters thesis.

Have you ever set up a web server?  An 850MHz box with 256MB of RAM and a
20GB drive, assembled, costs $500, plus a monitor (another $150 if you shell
out for a new one).  You buy NetMax for $50, put in the CD, answer the
questions, and you're up and running in under an hour for about $700.  You
transfer images using Explorer to drag and drop, or by FTP.  Your TCP/IP
person opens up one port in your firewall (preferably using NAT to an
internal 10. address) and you're done.  Not a whole lot of management
required.  Backups are the only management issue, and as I alluded to in a
previous post, if you can't back up a single PC, your IT department is in
serious trouble.

You can have two redundant 20GB web serving platforms up and running for the
same price as 8GB of disk on an AS/400.  Less cost, no load on your AS/400,
the only additional ongoing overhead being a regular PC backup.  How is this
a bad thing?


> I'm sure some businesses make a decision of that magnitude along those
> lines, but I consider that more of a decision based on which way
> the wind is blowing.

Anybody who spends $4000, or even $1000, based on the way the wind is
blowing is eventually going to find themselves the proud owner of a sock
puppet and a chapter 11 filing.

Anyway, there's no arguing this point.  Maybe it's because I grew up with
microcomputers as well as midranges, or maybe it's because I think most
operations staff can handle a PC that sits in a corner and doesn't even need
to be rebooted.  But unless I have no load problems and no space problems,
and don't see any in the future, it doesn't make sense not to at least
explore the option of a dedicated server, especially for static data.


Joe "Right Tool for the Right Job" Pluta
www.plutabrothers.com