A mainframe is NOT a thing of the past !!! What do you think manages your bank account, possibly your salary, certainly your IRS account and probably your pension fund ??? Mainframes, that's what.
Most of the concepts that we enjoy in Linux: high reliability, scalability, etc..., have been present on mainframes for **ages**. I am not flaming, but you have to give each one its due...
What really sets these machines apart (in my personal experience since more than 25 years) are two things: reliability, and high throughput. These machines were designed from the ground up to serve **hundreds** (sometimes thousands) of simultaneous **active** users. You have the hardware facilities to serve literally thousands of concurrent I/Os (this explains the price, of course).
Now about linux: I think that's a good move on IBM's part (who sponsored the port): as I see it, their long-range view would be: one OS (and one set of applications tailored to this OS) on every possible hardware platform. Then application ports would truly be re-compilations only, which profits IBM too (as software developer, and also in the support department)...
If D. Miller could port Linux to high-end Sun machines with 15 processors, why not on IBM mainframe ?
Slashdot Mirror
A mainframe is NOT a thing of the past !!! What do
...
you think manages your bank account, possibly your
salary, certainly your IRS account and probably
your pension fund ??? Mainframes, that's what.
Most of the concepts that we enjoy in Linux: high
reliability, scalability, etc..., have been present on mainframes for **ages**. I am not
flaming, but you have to give each one its due
What really sets these machines apart (in my personal experience since more than 25 years)
are two things: reliability, and high throughput.
These machines were designed from the ground up
to serve **hundreds** (sometimes thousands)
of simultaneous **active** users. You have the
hardware facilities to serve literally thousands
of concurrent I/Os (this explains the price,
of course).
Now about linux: I think that's a good move on
IBM's part (who sponsored the port): as I see it,
their long-range view would be: one OS (and one
set of applications tailored to this OS) on every
possible hardware platform. Then application ports
would truly be re-compilations only, which profits
IBM too (as software developer, and also in the
support department)...
If D. Miller could port Linux to high-end Sun machines with 15 processors, why not on IBM mainframe ?