Why not IBM z15 Coverage on STH?
- Thread starter MiniKnight
- Start date
Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.
I have somewhat of a rough filter based on impact, interest, effort, and capacity.
I think the z15 is undoubtedly cool, but what is STH's impact in the market? If we do a piece on it, how many customers will buy IBM z15 or not based on our piece? How many companies will offer new services or hardware based on it?
My sense is very little. Those systems are more or less a captive set of customers and there are giant sales and marketing teams that are involved. If you are buying that class of system, IBM is already on your list and your salesperson has already contacted you.
Where it did score high on the filter was on the interest. It is interesting to see what IBM is doing.
So we had a maybe 0/10 for impact and a 9/10 for interest.
Given the last two weeks at STH, adding an extra z15 analysis piece with the resources we have was not really practical given we would have had to do a 2000 word piece for it if I wanted to do it well.
I did think about it hard, but in the end, we have a pipeline of the content we need to push through and so adding an off-roadmap piece did not happen.
If you notice, we do not do copy/ paste pieces of press releases. The impact is low since there are so many places that push releases. That also means our cost to create content is higher since there is more effort.
I think the z15 is undoubtedly cool, but what is STH's impact in the market? If we do a piece on it, how many customers will buy IBM z15 or not based on our piece? How many companies will offer new services or hardware based on it?
My sense is very little. Those systems are more or less a captive set of customers and there are giant sales and marketing teams that are involved. If you are buying that class of system, IBM is already on your list and your salesperson has already contacted you.
Where it did score high on the filter was on the interest. It is interesting to see what IBM is doing.
So we had a maybe 0/10 for impact and a 9/10 for interest.
Given the last two weeks at STH, adding an extra z15 analysis piece with the resources we have was not really practical given we would have had to do a 2000 word piece for it if I wanted to do it well.
I did think about it hard, but in the end, we have a pipeline of the content we need to push through and so adding an off-roadmap piece did not happen.
If you notice, we do not do copy/ paste pieces of press releases. The impact is low since there are so many places that push releases. That also means our cost to create content is higher since there is more effort.
If you don't already have mainframes, you're not going to be in the market for one. They would be wasting their money on the enthusiast community unfortunately.
I think with a mainframe, many are current users and just believe the IBM claims on the new models. They had to in the past for prior models and if something fails to match the claim, believe me the customer will not let IBM slide on it. Also IBM sells these things to governments, big banks, etc. Generally customers who they wouldn't want to piss off since many also buy $$$$ worth of software from IBM.
My client got a new z14 last year. We were coming from a z114. The current workload keep the old box at 96% busy. on the new z14, the same workload runs at 6-10% of resources. So this box will last a few years for the client.
But your right on demo - when i was onsite i never saw the unit, locked away in datacenter. There wasnt really any testing or playing with offsite demo. IBM provided workload analysis of how the box would perform. They also did evaluation of intel vs mainframe and how many boxes would be needed to get similar performance. Mainframe won especially due to licensing costs. Intel needed like 40-60 cpus vs 8 of the mainframe which meant licensing for software was like 5x6 times the costs on intel.
again, most people who get these systems already work with them and use them with either mainframe software or z/Vm and run RHEL VMs on them. I dont think there is much on a reporting perspective with the systems. If IBM allowed some detail pictures of the systems insides, i would be interested in seeing that, but other then that they just report standards specs etc.
My client got a new z14 last year. We were coming from a z114. The current workload keep the old box at 96% busy. on the new z14, the same workload runs at 6-10% of resources. So this box will last a few years for the client.
But your right on demo - when i was onsite i never saw the unit, locked away in datacenter. There wasnt really any testing or playing with offsite demo. IBM provided workload analysis of how the box would perform. They also did evaluation of intel vs mainframe and how many boxes would be needed to get similar performance. Mainframe won especially due to licensing costs. Intel needed like 40-60 cpus vs 8 of the mainframe which meant licensing for software was like 5x6 times the costs on intel.
again, most people who get these systems already work with them and use them with either mainframe software or z/Vm and run RHEL VMs on them. I dont think there is much on a reporting perspective with the systems. If IBM allowed some detail pictures of the systems insides, i would be interested in seeing that, but other then that they just report standards specs etc.