[geeks] M$ Ad humor...
lionel4287 at verizon.net
Mon Feb 16 13:32:39 CST 2004
I was flipping through <ducks>PC Magazine</ducks> and noticed an ad from Microsoft, part of their "get the facts" campaign on Linux vs. Windows Server 2003. This one had to do with a "Price Performance Comparison: File Serving."
The contenders are:
- one linux image running on two z900 mainframe CPUs
- one WIndows Server 2003 image running on two 900 MHz Intel Xeon CPUs
So, since these are two comprable CPUs, and since the surrounding hardware and onter considerations are the same, this is a fair comparison, right?
They show the mainframe option costing $415 per Mb/sec, while the Intel solution cost $40.
They claim that this (in part) proves "that IBMz900 mainframe running Linux is much less capable and vastly more expensive that Windows Server 2003 as a platform for server consolidation."
Well, my initial thoughts:
- IBM z900 CPU is not equivalent to a 900 MHz Xeon CPU
- z900 was not designed (AFAIK) as a file server duty
- $ per Mb/sec - is that a popular measurement for file server
Also, anyone want to follow their methodology and create a third data point based on, oh, I don't know, SS/2 workstations? ;^)
Has anyone ever heard of a company deploying a z900 server as part of file server consolidation?
For more such joy, see www.microsoft.com/getthefacts ;^)
Also, in the same magazine, there is an MS ad for "Smart Watches" - the ad depicts a pair of hands opening a pickle jar, wearing one of their new "smart watches" (a data radio inside a digital watch, with a mini display)... Except the watch is upside down - if the (imaginary) person in the drawing were to fold their wrist around to see the "important data" or other data, it would be upside down (but hey, it looks good in the ad!)...
More information about the geeks