Slashdot Mirror
IBM Launches Linux-Only Mainframes
An anonymous reader writes: IBM is introducing two mainframe servers that only run on Linux. It's part of a new initiative from the Linux Foundation called the Open Mainframe Project. "The idea is that those companies participating in this project can work together, and begin building a set of open source tools and technologies for Linux mainframes, while helping one another overcome common development issues in the same manner as all open source projects." IBM's hardware release is accompanied by 250,000 lines of code that they're open sourcing as well. "Ultimately the mainframe mainstays are hoping to attract a new generation of developers to their platform. To help coax new users, IBM will be offering free access to the LinuxOne cloud, a mainframe simulation tool it developed for creating, testing and piloting Linux mainframe applications." Canonical is working with IBM to bring Ubuntu to mainframes.
Don't forget that Z series is even more stupid expensive than Sun gear. I get that there's a bunch of R/D that goes into mainframes and keeping a non x86 CPU alive (Sparc/PPC/Zseries). But, if you want new things to be built for them, there has to be a reasonable level of entry for small shops.
$20k+ (Sun) or $100k+ (Zseries) is not a low enough entry level that I'd going to develop anything for it.
I notice TFA has no mention of what the hardware will cost, or what IBM will charge for Linux on a mainframe, or even the model numbers of these two mainframes which are Linux only. And MongoDB on an IBM mainframe? Talk about a culture clash.
Yup - first thought that ran through my mind: "Oh, they're selling Z Series with crippled Firmware."
I'm kind of stumped. Linux on a Mainframe is a neat party trick, but it doesn't really make a lot of sense. Modern Z Series hardware is heavily derived from Power. Why not just run Power Linux? Mainframe I/O design is intentionally about as un-PDP-like as possible, so it's a bad match for Unix, Linux, or even Windows for that matter (NT ran on MIPS, so it theoretically could be ported to S/390). Mainframes get their performance by pushing computation into the channel controllers, and while you could do something like that in Linux, are any of your applications ready to treat your database like a device driver? Because that's what you'll have to do. And, incidentally, it's why every attempt from AIX/370 to Linux on Z Series has required virtualization and a ton of independent kernels to get anything resembling decent performance. And that's where Dell will come in and put thousands of cores in a 42U rack for you... No, IBM's own P Series is a better idea, and their former x86 division (now Lenovo) looks even better.
Erik
you wouldn't know you're running on a "mainframe"
Your accountant would know if it were really running on a mainframe. Your users and developers wouldn't notice any benefit, but your accountant can painfully feel the weight of the mainframe.
This is IBM grasping at relevance of their mainframe platform to a wider audience. The problem is that it's not an appealing architecture for those workloads. If anything this may be making some hardcore mainframe shops wonder more strongly if they should be moving off, since even IBM seems to be legitimizing the 'not-mainframe' way of doing it for mainframe users. Along the lines of how OS/2's windows compatibility made it so that workloads shouldn't bother targeting OS/2 since IBM would support it via windows compatibility. IBM hoped windows compatibility would make users prefer OS/2 so they could run both, but it backfired on the developer end.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Presumably, what is meant by that is that their POWER business led to CPU architecture advancements that were strapped onto mainframe tech to power up (pun intended) the extended S/360 ISA. At least that's the thing that would make the most sense to me.
Ezekiel 23:20