A recent article discusses the IBM mainframe reinventing itself for the cloud, touting the zEnterprise as a system of systems. The main reinvention of the new z196 mainframe was the inclusion of a BladeCenter extension (zBX) to house non-standard Power and x86 Blades. One of the purported zBX key benefits is to reduce complexity for managing cross-platform hardware in an integrated manner.
So let’s peel back the onion and ask some common questions we’ve heard relative to the zBX:
1) Will the zBX Blades be a replacement for the mainframe specialty engines? No…so you’ll have to determine when to run a workload on a mainframe general processor, a specialty engine, a zBX Power blade or a zBX x86 blade….and these are just the mainframe-centric options.
2) Why the need for unique Power7 and x86 blades specific to the zBX? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of an open environment?
3) Will the zBX have the same availability as the mainframe? No, Just because the zBX is connected to the mainframe does not mean the availability from the mainframe is transferred.
4) Isn’t the business justification more than a little challenging? Much of the cost parameters are based on soft calculations to “increase operational efficiency” (the same which can also be said of non-mainframe platforms). Should the application run on a blade in the zBX, a specialty engine such as an IFL or a mainframe general purpose processor? And don’t get me started on the mainframe pricing schemes from WLC, AWLC, PSLC, zNALC, etc.
5) How about investment protection? Can you use pre-existing IBM Power Blades? No. Pre-existing IBM x86 Blades? No. Pre-existing z10? No. These options were withdrawn by IBM prior to the zBX even being shipped. Why force mainframe owners to upgrade to a z196 just to evaluate the zBX?
6) Will ISV applications need to be retested and recertified? Unknown.
7) What about Windows Server and SQL support? Not available.
8) Is VMware supported? Nope—not there either.
9) The new URM (Unified Resource Manager) will simplify your management, right? Not exactly. URM handles the hardware, but you will still need other products such as Tivoli Provisioning Manager, Tivoli Service Automation Manager and OMEGAMON for automation, control and service management.
That really does not sound like something that reduces complexity. We know your legacy applications are the heart of your business, which is why…
…We’ve got your back.
Your legacy applications are the heart and soul of your business, whether they are in an enterprise or government agency, so there is considerable concern about transforming them to a more flexible and cost-effective platform. Rest easy—in a recent comparison, , the availability on the HP Superdome was similar to a mainframe, but at 1/8 the cost, as shown in this white paper. There are many companies that have moved to HP platforms to actually see better availability than they had seen on the mainframe. For example, after moving off a mainframe, Enbridge now delivers application services at near 100 percent availability with no unplanned downtime in two years of development/ testing and one year of operations.
An isolated example? Hardly. We’ve seen 100 mainframe customers switch to HP systems in the last 12 months. Make no mistake—it is not a “box swap” when moving from the mainframe. It is about carefully and methodically modernizing and transforming your applications in the move to becoming a more Instant-On Enterprise.
