Slashdot Mirror
IBM iSeries or Windows server?
Rabid Cougar asks: "I am the network administrator for a small manufacturing company. Our current ERP system has outlived its usefulness and we are in the process of selecting another package. Our present ERP system runs on an IBM AS/400, but there are those in the company who believe we should switch to something that only runs on Windows. My position is this: if we can find software that will meet our needs that runs on an IBM iSeries (new name for the AS/400) then we'd be certifiably crazy to move over to the Windows platform. A co-worker insists there are a ton of reasons to avoid the iSeries like the plague. I'm not trying to start a flamewar, but if you were to bet your career on this issue, which side would you choose and why?"
I would personally seriously question any real software that does not run on multiple platforms. We are not talking games here wich are bound to the OS by choice of libraries.
I can name but only a couple of real world applications that are cross platform and particularily useful. I seriously question any vendor that tries to support a code base across several platforms. I.E. How would you expect them to make bug fixes, service packs, security patches, for several platforms in a timely mannor at a reasonable price?
I would also take a good long hard look at real uptime of such a solution under real workloads. INCLUDE the upcoming wmf patch and such delights as code red wich are bound to happen in the life time of your new erp solution.
So you're going to run your new ERP solution off the same computer that you're doing graphics work on in the case of the ERP (or opening email attachments), or are you running a webserver off your ERP solution's box so that code red would effect you? I'd hope neither, and therefore neither of those listed above is a threat.
I disagree. I'm a Windows server guru, and we run Win Server 2k3/Exchange 2k3. Our system is zero non-maintenance downtime in the 6 months since I was hired and installed it. Total uptime is above 99.95%. I don't quite understand why everyone always comes down so hard on Windows; Linux confuses the hell out of me. In my opinion, why use something that is stuck in the past? GUI is so, like, 1995.
ACs are modded -6. I don't read you, I don't mod you, I don't see you. Don't like it? Don't be a coward.
You should beware that on slashdot opinions are HEAVILY skewed against Microsoft and FOR Linux. Dont bet your job on slashdot opinions... a large portion of these people DONT have jobs.
:).
Nobody has ever been fired for buying Big Iron. But thats probably not true
Youve placed options between iseries and wintel. What about others? Will you consider other architectures?
You should also discuss this with your HR department. Keeping around an iseries person is more expensive than an MCSE. These are 'hidden' costs on the iseries. And everyone already has desktops running windows on them already anyway... with an iseries server youre managing 2 different operating systems. With Wintel youre tied with Microsoft, but have options with hardware (I'd buy xseries). With iseries you run out of options, but IBM isnt going anyway. You just have to be OK with them as your vendor.
My opinion is that you should look more into the merits of the ERP system itself and the company behind it rather than what OS to run on your server. Its a little like asking which OS should I use for my firewall...
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
Yes indeed... most of the cross platform apps I've used have plenty of uptake, and I will present you with two that you've surely heard of before... Apache webserver and Open Office... both of which work admirably (except apache+modssl on windows) However, given that apache runs on everything from AIX to BSD to all the Linux based OS's out there, complaining that it doesn't run on an OS made for gaming and porn watching is like saying that your high powered Detroit diesel motor is a piece of shit because it only runs in your Peterbilt or Freightliner truck instead of running in your mom's toyota... granted most moms shop in toyotas and other small cars of that class, but if you're going to pull 50000 lbs of freight with a toyota, then you'd best go neuter yourself with a wooden ladle (less painful).
:)
I migrated my folks, friends and anyone that asked me to linux or bsd, depending on their needs... (a scant few clueless sods were put on Macs instead) but generally I've never heard them complain of instability, or machine growing slower as it aged.. Also, they were no longer allowed to connect to that "wonderful" piece of utter trash, Microsoft Exchange 2003... oddly enough, the mailservers I admined for them (free of charge, because I find it fun) did not have to constantly be repatched due to being hacked by automated wardialling scripts, constantly turning windows machines into spam zombies (its gorgeous when a windows 2003 exchange box becomes a spam relay, and gets your email domain blocked on one of the ORBLs out there... deservingly so
Anyways, I worked for a microsoft shop, and almost went nuts trying to reconcile what I knew to be true from my own work with Unix/Linux/BSD based systems and that of my closest friends and family (all of whom are or were programmers for fun or profit at some point in their lives), add to that being a linuxite since my days in computer science (where I preferred having a system I could CONTROL at levels lower than just the GUI and a dumbed down CLI that windows offered).
Stil, it is all much like the Chinese outsourcing of US jobs... shittier products at cheap prices... but is it WORTH replacing every year or more often? A few ppl luck out without having products burn out, break, fray, or fall apart... but quite often, I would rather get a free product and know it will continue to improve and that when a "patch is issued' it FIXES the issue (personally prefer freebsd for max uptime servers, but linux hasn't failed me either).
Speaking of security, you're a microsoft fanboy, care to explain why "shatter" attacks STILL work on windows 2003 even after the service pack?? I'm curious to hear your explanation, since MS supposedly fixed it repeatedly over the past 6 years (and yet, Win2k, 2003, XP are all still vulnerable to the same old shatter attacks)... How about the Windows 95 ICMP nuke patch? Anyone remember what they really did? YES, they port blocked 139. You could actually test this, by downloading a copy of winnuke and setting it loose after binding it to a local area network host (non routeable IP on same subnet), they didn't block 139 against localhost attacks until later... with another "patch" heh... Irony at its best... they claim that OSS is a "cheap solution" but the chrome painted tin car is the one labelled Microsoft, with their new and improved INDIAN IT support group... please learn Hindi or Punjabi or you won't get much help.
~D
PPS = These folks already have the AIX infrastructure in place, both in terms of manpower and software... if they are AIX friendly they can adapt to any other UNIX fairly fast. I've worked with AIX systems as well, one was a financial database sitting side by side with two windows servers used for groupware (2003 + exchange, failover cluster of 2, professionaly administered) Oddly, whenever that AIX box went down, their database would cleanly reload without losing any data.... heh... when the windows servers crashed, and often they did... especially when the pros dec
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler