RE: subject: iSeries Legends

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: James Rich
>
> Max. File Size
>     Designed to scale to 9 million TB with current hardware supporting
> scalability to 8000 TB on IRIX.  Linux-64, 2 TB Max File Size.

Gz.  Now you're quoting design specs.  How low can you stoop?


> Cough cough.

What was the cough for?  We regularly had clients with item history files
with tens of millions of records in BPCS.  That's GB.  And this was back in
the 80's and 90's.


> Interestingly there may be some substance to the idea that MS products can
> do big work.  In the Top 500 Supercomputers list at
> http://www.top500.org/list/2003/06/ what appears to be a windows machine
> is listed 50th.

This is LDLS (lies, damned lies and statistics).  These are scientific
machines measured in GFlops, a completely irrelevant number for standard
business applications.


> Even so, I can't imagine any MS product being stable or reliable or
> needed.  But Joe is right, you do need to look at the whole package.
> These examples show that there are points where other OSes mop the floor
> with OS/400.  But is that true all around?  Well that's up to you, the
> gentle reader, to decide.  For me, sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.

More LDLS.  "Mop the floor with"?  A 1984 Ford Pinto mops all of those
operating systems when it comes to getting on the freeway.  Which has
exactly the same relation to the original conversation.

We're talking about reliability for business applications.  This list is
almost entirely irrelevant, just like most of the other arguments that are
constantly put forward here.  When I used the term FUD on RPG400-L, it was
in a large part in repsonse to senseless discussions like this.  They sound
like they mean something, but in the end they're just empty numbers.

Joe