3 ms·

Mainframes are locked into an antiquated IBM business model: charging by the CPU usage. This incentivizes writing code in Assembly, and prevented me from writin

Mainframes are locked into an antiquated IBM business model: charging by the CPU usage. This incentivizes writing code in Assembly, and prevented me from writing code in Java. They sell a “Java co processor” which is just an unmetered CPU for running JVM. It’s an insular world in large part because of the pricing model that IBM/SAS doesn’t want to give up. No amount of claimed benefits can make adopting the mainframe a sane decision.

bitwize 4y ago
> Mainframes are locked into an antiquated IBM business model: charging by the CPU usage. As opposed to more modern platforms, like the cloud!
- _fat_santa 4y ago
  (I have very limited experience in Mainframe systems to take my comment with a grain of salt) The problem as I see it is IBM wants to have its cake and eat it too. Typically a Mainframe is leased and then setup onsite. Under this model, it would seem that you would get unlimited use out of it because you’re paying for the power, and it’s literally on site. However by charging per CPU usage, even though you’re using it on site, you still treat it as a “cloud” appliance in terms of pricing If I spin up something in AWS for example, it’s metered yes but that comes to be at the benefit of not having the machine on site and therefore not having to worry about it’s power, upkeep, etc. It would be like a car company selling you a car and then charging you to drive it per mile.
  - MichaelZuo 4y ago
    Well isn't that because most IBM customers don't actually pay upfront for their mainframes, but instead effectively lease them? Car companies DO charge you per mile to drive a leased car beyond the standard allotment. I think your comparing apples to oranges here.
    - lupire 4y ago
      A CPU doesn't have wear and tear like a car does.
      - voxadam 4y ago
        Though, it does have a useful lifespan which is more or less equivalent to wear in an economic sense.
- SenHeng 4y ago
  The difference here is that 'the cloud' like you mention is generalised across an industry of various companies. There may be some pain points moving between vendors but it can be done. Good luck trying to move off that mainframe.
zozbot234 4y ago
> This incentivizes writing code in Assembly, and prevented me from writing code in Java. Go and Rust can compile for Linux on s390x (64-bit zArch). Support for the proprietary zOS platform might be more of a challenge.
- lboc 4y ago
  Go at least, is available for z/OS: https://www.ibm.com/products/open-enterprise-sdk-go-zos https://www.ibm.com/products/open-enterprise-sdk-go-zos
bob1029 4y ago
> No amount of claimed benefits can make adopting the mainframe a sane decision. I feel like engineering teams in payment and finance tech would like a word about this. There are always extreme use cases that demand unconventional techniques. The stability of global financial networks is a fairly tough constraint to argue with.

bitwize 4y ago

> Mainframes are locked into an antiquated IBM business model: charging by the CPU usage. As opposed to more modern platforms, like the cloud!

_fat_santa 4y ago
(I have very limited experience in Mainframe systems to take my comment with a grain of salt) The problem as I see it is IBM wants to have its cake and eat it too. Typically a Mainframe is leased and then setup onsite. Under this model, it would seem that you would get unlimited use out of it because you’re paying for the power, and it’s literally on site. However by charging per CPU usage, even though you’re using it on site, you still treat it as a “cloud” appliance in terms of pricing If I spin up something in AWS for example, it’s metered yes but that comes to be at the benefit of not having the machine on site and therefore not having to worry about it’s power, upkeep, etc. It would be like a car company selling you a car and then charging you to drive it per mile.
- MichaelZuo 4y ago
  Well isn't that because most IBM customers don't actually pay upfront for their mainframes, but instead effectively lease them? Car companies DO charge you per mile to drive a leased car beyond the standard allotment. I think your comparing apples to oranges here.
  - lupire 4y ago
    A CPU doesn't have wear and tear like a car does.
    - voxadam 4y ago
      Though, it does have a useful lifespan which is more or less equivalent to wear in an economic sense.
SenHeng 4y ago
The difference here is that 'the cloud' like you mention is generalised across an industry of various companies. There may be some pain points moving between vendors but it can be done. Good luck trying to move off that mainframe.

zozbot234 4y ago

> This incentivizes writing code in Assembly, and prevented me from writing code in Java. Go and Rust can compile for Linux on s390x (64-bit zArch). Support for the proprietary zOS platform might be more of a challenge.

lboc 4y ago
Go at least, is available for z/OS: https://www.ibm.com/products/open-enterprise-sdk-go-zos https://www.ibm.com/products/open-enterprise-sdk-go-zos

bob1029 4y ago

> No amount of claimed benefits can make adopting the mainframe a sane decision. I feel like engineering teams in payment and finance tech would like a word about this. There are always extreme use cases that demand unconventional techniques. The stability of global financial networks is a fairly tough constraint to argue with.