General discussion

Locked

W2K vs AS/400e

By mark.tassin ·
We have already implemented our ERP solution, it's an NT based system using MS SQL server. Our North American WAN is pure NT in terms of our servers.

We have been directed by our international parent company that we must move our email system toLotus Notes. They want us to host this on an AS/400e system.

What we would like to do is make the case that it would be better for us to host Notes/Domino on a series of less expensive NT/W2K servers.

None of our North American IT staff has an experience or training in the use of AS/400's that could be considered current (some of us have training but it's 5 years old on older versions of OS/400).

What technical arguments (especially any having to do with integrating the AS/400e into our ERP using MS SQL server) could we make to justify our hosting our Notes servers on a group of NT boxes instead of the AS/400?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

26 total posts (Page 1 of 3)   01 | 02 | 03   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by calves In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Cost is the first argument. It will cost you near 20 times more to buy, maintain and update the AS400s.
The technical expertize necessary to run the AS400s will require a different breed of IS professionals, much harder to find in the market placetoday; not counting that those professionals make much more than the Microsoft Guys.
Also, look for white papers on SQL running on Microsoft products and IBM products, see if you find arguments there (I haven't heard of any).
In addition, the AS400 system will need to run paralell to Windows Systems. That will require training for the users. In a large scale that could cause months in backup work, service calls, **** on earth.
W2K is promissing to be a good, stable system, and there is no reason to shot yourself in a foot getting something totaly new that nobody understands. It will take years to get a hold of good administration skills for the AS400.
Basicaly, ask them to allow you to run a test of W2K in a small scale, and trully test that sucker.

Go

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by mark.tassin In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Well 20x I don't believe, we were looking at 17K vs 34K but I was looking for actual technical arguments, not opinion.

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by wartena In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Well, actually I cannot give you what you are looking for.

We have an AS/400, model 600, and we have Notes on a NT4 server. I think that the AS400 needs less attention than our NT servers. Maybe you could read some articles on your subject at www.as400network.com.
When we had to make our decisions, the AS400e-models were so new and no one had any experience with Notes native on an AS400 we decided that we did not have the knowledge to make the jump. Now we regret it.
Regards
Steven

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by mark.tassin In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Umm convincing me that the AS/400 is great isn't what I was looking for

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by Al Macintyre In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

There are many more issues here than you are seeing. There are discussion forums for people who have done this & are having problems - you need to see what kinds of problems are systemic & what it costs to fix them ... check out
http://www.as400network.com
http://www.midrange.com
http://www.midrangecomputing.com/forums/
http://www.news400.com/navbar/glance-forums.html

When doing cost comparisons, you are missing some points about the cultural differences. AS/400 is MUCH cheaper from a lifetime cost of operations and MUCH more expensive from an up-front purchase price perspective & you need to understand how come the AS/400 beats out Microsoft & Unix on lifetime operation costs.

It is a combination of factors.
AS/400 does a lotof stuff automatically that other platforms need people to manage or you need to buy extra software & manage it to do what comes native integrated with OS/400.

A downside is that the AS/400 interfaces are clunky & user-hostile from perspective ofpeople accustomed to

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by mark.tassin In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Umm convincing me that the AS/400 is great isn't what I was looking for

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by Al Macintyre In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

I disagree with Calves

With NT on MS servers you need many many servers for different functions. With AS/400 hosting NT, there is just the one hardware server for all the logical functions, so it doesn’t cost 20 times more to buy but less to buy, maintain, and update. My employer chose your route … it is costing us thousands of dollars a month to do stuff on NT external to AS/400 that would not be the case if AS/400 was the host … perhaps we should switch employers … we both lost arguments.

The AS/400 system does NOT need to run parallel to the Windows Systems. The AS/400 can be the host for the Windows. One of the powers of AS/400 is the large number of totally different operating systems that can run offthe same box & you can hot key between MS Windows, Linux, Unix, S/36 SSP, connect Macintosh, all on the same network, without buying any extra servers or communications gear to talk to the different systems because it is all one system under the AS/400 covers.

Yes, A

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by mark.tassin In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Umm convincing me that the AS/400 is great isn't what I was looking for

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by Al Macintyre In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Yes, AS/400 guys earn more, but you do not need as many of them for system administration … your IT staff can move to more enterprise productive work like programming enhancements to your e-ERP, which will still run on NT, which will run on AS/400. All you are really being asked to do is move your NT stuff from MS based hardware to IBM based hardware, for the purpose of accessing Lotus Notes that can be hosted any number of ways, and when you retrain your staff, some will remain in operations & some will move into other areas.

There are also the issues of periodic upgrades … when you upgrade to the next level of an OS, traditionally in the MS world we have to also upgrade our applications running on the OS, and this can be a burden across a large enterprise to implement. When we upgrade to next level of OS/400, it normally has ZERO impact on the applications, other than the notion that certain kinds of software now work more efficiently or less efficiently, so that instead of the burden o

Collapse -

W2K vs AS/400e

by mark.tassin In reply to W2K vs AS/400e

Umm convincing me that the AS/400 is great isn't what I was looking for

Back to Windows Forum
26 total posts (Page 1 of 3)   01 | 02 | 03   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums