Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

IBM iSeries or Windows server?

Posted by Cliff on Fri Dec 30, 2005 08:55 PM
from the which-would-you-choose dept.
IBM Microsoft Operating Systems Software
Rabid Cougar asks: "I am the network administrator for a small manufacturing company. Our current ERP system has outlived its usefulness and we are in the process of selecting another package. Our present ERP system runs on an IBM AS/400, but there are those in the company who believe we should switch to something that only runs on Windows. My position is this: if we can find software that will meet our needs that runs on an IBM iSeries (new name for the AS/400) then we'd be certifiably crazy to move over to the Windows platform. A co-worker insists there are a ton of reasons to avoid the iSeries like the plague. I'm not trying to start a flamewar, but if you were to bet your career on this issue, which side would you choose and why?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

IBM iSeries or Windows server? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • I think I speak for most cautious admins... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Frumious Wombat (845680) on Friday December 30 2005, @09:05PM (#14368418)
    If it currently works on AS/400, and you really need to upgrade the system, then I'd change one variable (the hardware), and keep running the current ERP. If they later wish to transition to a Windows-only solution, make sure that you get a generous time-table and enough technical support to ensure that it's running smoothly before the old system is turned off.

    I'm sure that's being done, but sometimes executives get bit by a buzzword-compliant vendor, and lose sight of what's actually at risk; your entire business. Remember when Hershey shot itself in the foot over a several-month period when their SAP upgrade didn't work as well as it should have.

    Note, I have no particular love for AS/400s, but I do believe in being cautious when potentially screwing up my entire environment and calling months of unpleasant work down on my head.

    • Re:I think I speak for most cautious admins... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by duffbeer703 (177751) on Friday December 30 2005, @10:59PM (#14368744)
      AS/400's are some of the lowest TCO systems on the planet. My wife worked at a place that used an AS/400 system bought in 1989... when she told me about it I laughed, until we realized that the machine had nearly a decade of uptime with about 30 users hitting it every day and no IT staff of any kind.

      The machine eventually had to be rebooted when a hard disk died and the machine phoned home... an IBM guy showed up to replace it and nobody knew that there was a problem.

      The system was replaced about 18 months ago (because spare parts were no longer available) by an Windows/Oracle system that is complete garbage. Bugs in the IBM eSeries lights-out-management card caused the system to reboot every 60 minutes. Things like restoring backups are also much more complicated and error prone. (On the AS/400, restoring the system from bare metal required you to insert the tape into the drive and holding down a function key)
    • Bill Gates even learned the lesson about screwing up an environment a while back whe he gave the order to replace Microsoft's 23 AS/400's with Wintel servers. He ended up with an environment of 1,250 servers that were still not as scalable as the 23 AS/400 machines. Eventually, they killed the project. In order to avoid being teased about owning AS/400's, Bill created a new company. He sold the AS/400's to the new company. He fired all of the AS/400 people working in that department, and hired them at the n

  • Case for security and stability? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Xunker (6905) on Friday December 30 2005, @09:07PM (#14368422) Homepage Journal
    You choice chould be swayed by security; I don't know about the new i5/OS generation, but back when it was called OS/400 it had one of the highest ratings for both security and stability of any mid-range system in its market. Whether this is because OS/400 really was more secure or just too obscure to exploit is up to personal opinion.

    Qsecofr vs. root, eh?

  • I agree, iSeries all the way. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cmdrbuzz (681767) <cmdrbuzz@xerocube.com> on Friday December 30 2005, @09:09PM (#14368426)
    I totally agree with you, I have been in a similar position at work, where our Group IT team were pushing for us to run exchange rather than PMDF. Thankfully our management felt that our zero downtime in 5 years with PMDF and OpenVMS in general was worth something and we got to watch as the rest of the Bank have been plagued with viruses, crashes, and the best, only 2 people on a team may access the workflow system at a time.
    It got so bad that the processing teams actually created little pieces of card that they used as tickets to ensure that they could access workflow (web-based run on windows).

    The users within SI (my dept) have told us that if we ever force them to do the same with our applications, which include DebtManager on AS/400, then we can expect to be very bruised.

    To answer your question, I would point out the mass of windows problems and ask someone to show anything that has gone wrong with (insert midrange / mainframe platform here) that has caused the same effect.

    Good luck.

  • AS/400 (Score:5, Informative)

    by green pizza (159161) on Friday December 30 2005, @09:11PM (#14368433) Homepage
    You'd be certifiably crazy to think that a Windows server would be as stable or as reliable as an AS/400 server. AS/400 (iSeries) systems are almost as hardcore as they come, and much less expensive than S/390 (zSeries) or Tandem->Compaq->HP NonStop Himalaya.

    However, if you have no AS/400 admins in house, but you have plenty of Windows Server gurus, well, then I think you would be better off with Windows. I've seen the same situation with Linux. Company decides to switch servers to Linux but the admins only know how to speak Windows, disaster ensues.

    • Re:AS/400 (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by Southpaw018 (793465) *
      I disagree. I'm a Windows server guru, and we run Win Server 2k3/Exchange 2k3. Our system is zero non-maintenance downtime in the 6 months since I was hired and installed it. Total uptime is above 99.95%. I don't quite understand why everyone always comes down so hard on Windows; Linux confuses the hell out of me. In my opinion, why use something that is stuck in the past? GUI is so, like, 1995.

      • Re:AS/400 (Score:3, Informative)

        by revmoo (652952)
        Probably because 99.95% uptime isn't very impressive of a figure. I can(and have) accomplished this on various machines over the years, none of which were even in a production environment.

        Anyway, a windows server environment like you are describing is miles away from the type of ERP system that the OP is referring to. It's like comparing a Hummer to a A1 Tank.

          • .., 0.05% unscheduled downtime means they lose over $10,000/yr...

            Taking your word that 4.38 hours of downtime equates to $10k, that still has to be weighed against the costs of evaluating/purchasing/installing/training in a new software environment (assuming you're suggesting a move away from Windows for the parent poster) and/or the cost of upgrading to "5 nines" hardware (e.g. Sun boxes with redundant everything). Tough business case to make.

      • Re:AS/400 (Score:4, Insightful)

        by mrsbrisby (60242) on Saturday December 31 2005, @03:43PM (#14371636) Homepage
        Our system is zero non-maintenance downtime in the 6 months since I was hired and installed it. Total uptime is above 99.95%.

        That's the problem. AS/400 systems frequently have zero downtime over the course of over 15 years.

        I don't quite understand why everyone always comes down so hard on Windows

        Because Microsoft believes that 99.5% uptime over the course of a year, or almost a full month of downtime over the course of 15 years is acceptable.

        In practice, that 99.5% uptime is only maintained with the efforts of continuous IT monitoring and maintenance- something that isn't needed when you buy a proper server.

        Linux confuses the hell out of me.

        Its your other inadequecies that are the problem right now: While Linux can run on many pieces of "Big Iron" (where Windows doesn't run at all, by the way), most people still use things like CMS on these things.

        I realize you might not know what that is, but shit, my four year old can use Linux very well, and can't manage to use CMS at all, so maybe you're trying to say that you are confused by something as simple as Linux?

        I don't really understand.

        In my opinion, why use something that is stuck in the past?

        Because it works?

        You see, a large number of people actually value getting work done, and do not care at all whether or not it's the latest and greatest.

        That's part of the appeal of businesses that switch to Linux- it's based on a technology that first matured in the late 1960's or early 1970's (depending on who you ask). That technology is extremely well understood and as a result, it's very easy for a company to deliver a platform based on it that "just works".

        Meanwhile, the Windows platform is a moving target- it's changed fundementally no less frequently than every 5 years, and many can argue significant changes even more frequently.

        The result? It's harder to deliver a platform that a solution-provider can guarantee a certain level of productivity with: Consider this: If we have AS/400 systems or UNIX systems that can be up for 15 years under heavy load, and along comes something else that says they can stay up for "most of a year" under "some load" with "constant maintenece" - how is it anyone is expected to take them seriously?

        GUI is so, like, 1995.

        This makes no sense.

        Are you saying that everything's been graphical since 1995? Or anything's been graphical since 1995? Or perhaps that computers have been usefully graphical since 1995?

        I don't understand.

        Are you suggesting AS/400's aren't graphical? That Linux isn't? That UNIX isn't? That CMS isn't?

        I don't understand.

        Are you suggesting that a graphical system leads to greater productivity? Greater performance? Greater stability? Greater uptime?

        I don't understand.

        I have no idea what this has to do with anything else in your thread.

        I have no idea why you think that other people make decisions on their business, their platform, and their hardware, based on your own inadequecies.

        I have no idea what you could be possibly thinking, and am beginning to suspect you don't.
    • One of my two hands-on experiences with an iSeries saw it crashing all the time -- mostly due to IBM Lotus Domino. I don't believe there's any exotic reliability magic about the things, just for the most part the software is old and stable and debugged. The AS/400 guys kept talking about their "DASD" stuff, but as far as I could tell it was just a standard SCSI RAID setup.

      Other fun facts:
      + OS/400 doesn't come with a text editor, so IBM sold us one for $500
      + Patches still come on "tapes". Well they look like

      • Re:AS/400 (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Trepalium (109107)
        It really would depend on the downtime difference between the two systems. If the AS/400 never or rarely goes down, it might be cheaper even if the IBM support contracts are highway robbery. Everytime a server goes down or needs a reboot during business hours means that you're losing productivity from every user of that server at the time. Hiring reboot monkeys doesn't fix that money sinkhole.
        • Actually, when Lotus shat itself, the entire production line shut down. IBM's contract was fine for what it did, but their shitass consultants put them into a no-win situation just to get them to buy/upgrade more 400 stuff. They would have saved tons of money putting Lotus on Windows, where it belongs.

      • Re:AS/400 (Score:3, Informative)

        by sydb (176695)
        DASD (Direct Access Storage Device, pronounced "Dasdy") is just IBM speak for disk as distinct from tape, which is not direct access. I have worked in long-time IBM shops where even the Windows and Unix people call disks DASD. It's quite common.

      • Re:AS/400 (Score:3, Informative)

        by iSeriesGuy (942415)
        You haven't checked in quite a while. Domino is very stable now. Patches are available via the web now. The Power 5 (soon to be 6) chips are much faster than the PC chips that are available. The product line was introduced in 1988 as a 48 bit processor. When the product line went to 64 bit and from CISC to RISC, the migrations were as simple as restoring your CISC programs and data files to the RISC box, and then running one command to convert the objects. How many Windows environments can say the same? Whe

  • i'm no expert... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by blackcoot (124938) on Friday December 30 2005, @09:13PM (#14368440)
    ... but it seems pretty obvious to me that there's a pretty reasonable way to solve this in a rational manner with a trade study. obviously, the more money at stake, the more time you'll have to be willing to invest in the trade study. as a rough guide:

    1) write down the features you need in an ERP

    2) find ERP packages which fit the bill

    3) define appropriate metrics (cost of administration, expected amount of down time, etc.) i realize that many of these will be fairly fuzzy, but you can still get a reasonable idea. metrics should include both costs (upfront and maintence / tco type estimates, whether you already have admins to do the job or will you have to hire, etc.) and benefits / utility

    4) map out on a matrix how each ERP package performs overall

    5) pick the best ERP in terms of cost/benefit

    6) if the winning ERP runs on multiple hardware platforms, /then/ ask again whether the iSeries or a windows based solution is better. otherwise, your choice of platform is already made for you.

    personally, as i spend more time in industry, i become increasingly agnostic: i don't care if it's linux, os x, solaris, windows, vxworks, etc. — if it's the right tool for the job, then that's what i'll use. which means os x at home, linux for work, and windows for administrivia, time sheets, presentations, etc. in my case.

    • Re:i'm no expert... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by T-Ranger (10520)
      Very good strategy. Except that you miss that while zero-Cost Linux, Windows, "Enterprise" Linux, commercial UNIX may very well be resonably similar as far as administration, down time, etc; And Dell, IBM xSeries, HP, homemade PCs, Sun Fire systems may provide a similar platform, to run you ERP package on; however AS/400 and iSeries is in a distinct class. VMS is perhaps comparable. High end Sun stuff may be (www.sun.com listing "midrange" server starting at $30k).

      Some applications, while supporting differe

  • Apperently your switching ERP software (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Friday December 30 2005, @09:33PM (#14368493) Journal
    As you say yourselve your current ERP software is no longer good enough. I presume that simply upgrading to a new version of the current software is not desired.

    So you are looking at all the ERP packages out there and have to decide on a new one. Should you then let the enviroment it runs on be a deciding factor?

    I think both yes and no. Obviously you should select the package that is best for your needs considering all the factors like costs, reliabilty, likelihood of the software company to continue to exist, security, usability and god knows what more. There are enough books out there to tell you what to check.

    The OS shouldn't have to matter. In an ideal world it doesn't but this world isn't ideal. Choosing one OS or the other has significant effects.

    Flamewar material would be to point out that the current wmf mess would suggest that windows is still as insecure as ever. Then again you can ask wether this security hole is a risk for a backoffice system.

    Then there is a question of lock-in, going for windows only solutions tends to force you to continue with windows only solutions for ever. You will loose your competent admins either because you fire them to replace them with far cheaper window admins or they will quit on their own. You will be another MS shop. Is this bad? Well not really. ERP software is usually a long term solution anyway and who can say if your company is even going to be around a decade from now? Plus a backoffice lock-in can at least be easier broken then a frontoffice lock-in.

    Anyway AS/400 could be considered just as much of a lock-in choice.

    Do the people who want to switch to the Windows only solution do this because that ERP package is the best or because it runs on windows?

    I would personally seriously question any real software that does not run on multiple platforms. We are not talking games here wich are bound to the OS by choice of libraries.

    I would also take a good long hard look at real uptime of such a solution under real workloads. INCLUDE the upcoming wmf patch and such delights as code red wich are bound to happen in the life time of your new erp solution.

    AS/400 == nightmare but at least it is a nightmare you control and not every scriptkiddie on the internet.

    If the choice for the new ERP system is going to be based on OS choice alone however I would recommend you get your CV ready.

      • "I can name but only a couple of real world applications that are cross platform and particularily useful."

        I don't think I could name a half dozen useful applications that are NOT cross platform.

        "I seriously question any vendor that tries to support a code base across several platforms. I.E. How would you expect them to make bug fixes, service packs, security patches, for several platforms in a timely mannor at a reasonable price?"

        Obviously you are not a programmer. Or you are a windows programmer. In a pro
          • Well, I'm in agreement that there's a problem with the /. moderation system. How exactly does someone mod a post as "overrated" when its only received a -1 Flamebait mod? Unless you think even a flamebait mod down is overrated for a clear and concise reply to a previous post.

            Oh wait, no I get it. I said something in support of Microsoft ;) Better suppress my opinion post haste!
          • Looks like you guys are a true cut and dry M$ partner (resemblant of the one I worked for... I presume you are running the action pack or partner pack, instead of paying cold hard cash for M$ stuff. You're the coordinator, which means you'd be more on the business side? Perhaps you can answer that question for me. I do admire you for not accepting resumes... it'll be nice once they start outsourcing everything up there too, I can't wait until they close more plants and call centres, labor unrest is cert
            • Yes I'm the "coordinator". I prefer that term to "manager" or "boss". Since I only have eight employees, I prefer the idea of a flat company hierarchy. I'm largely responsible for the business aspect of the company, but also take care of the difficult technical issues. The note about resumes was in response to a large number that we were receiving each day from people browsing the Canadian business listing and sending us hack resumes. We're considering changing our policy of not reviewing resumes, and inste

  • iSeries (Score:3, Insightful)

    by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Friday December 30 2005, @09:40PM (#14368514)
    If you can find the software you want I'd suggest you stay with the iSeries. Going to Windows makes you subject to all the problems of a commodity piece of hardware and Microsoft's strange ideas of what makes a good server. The iSeries on the other hand has it's roots in a mainframe world where the hardware and OS all come from the same vendor. The result is a far far more stable system.

    There are stories about AS/400s running in offices where an IBM service rep shows up and nobody in the office knows where the machine is - the last person who touched the hardware retired years ago... or even that the machine had been plastered into a closet when the office had been remodeled. These things are designed to run for years continuously without being babied or rebooted. It will make your life much easier.

  • Is cost a factor? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Friday December 30 2005, @09:46PM (#14368524) Homepage Journal
    Do the platform costs factor into the decision at all? I went to a iSeries lecture recently (thanks for the free pizza, Big Blue!), and while the hardware seemed pretty nice, I was completely blown away by the prices the rep tossed around. Some people seem to be perfectly comfortable paying by the MFLOP, but I'm spent too much time around horizontally scaling systems to comprehend dropping that much cash per relatively small unit of performance.

    Now, I'm not saying the iSeries is bad. Given infinite money, it probably makes a lot of sense for a lot of problem sets. I just can't imagine recommending one for any of the applications I've ever been involved with.

    It kills me to say this, but without knowing more of the specifics I'd probably recommend the Windows boxen - or, more likely, a cluster of them. There's more than one way to get the kind of reliability you can squeeze from an AS/400, and most of them are a lot cheaper.

  • Do you have AS400 experts in house?
    Is their an ERP program that fits your needs?
    If so I say AS400/iSeries has some real pluses. I have never heard of an exploit, virus, or malware that targets the AS400. They are proven.

    If you have more windows experience and you can only find software that runs under windows then go for Windows.

    A unix/linux solution may not be a good choice for you. I would suggest that you start getting some in house experience with Linux.

  • here's how it works - you don't deploy new software solutions on iSeries, you go to a more mainstream platform (preferably linux/unix). But if you are entirely happy with your CURRENT software and don't want the massive pain of switching, you stick with iSeries for those applications. Got it?

  • Stick with IBM, and study all ERP solutions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Deathlizard (115856) on Friday December 30 2005, @10:34PM (#14368669) Homepage Journal
    I'd stick with AS/400 if I were you, especially if you have competent admins to administer it. AS/400's reliability and security is second only to large scale mainframes, and last much better than x86 when it comes to long term investment. Sure it costs a lot up front, but when you consider that system could last 7-15 years easily, it sure beats a 3-5 year price cycle of a x86 farm. Also, if the task is mission critical keep in mind that AS/400 up-time will absolutely destroy Windows, Linux and even industrial Unix systems up-time and those x86 machines will only start to approach AS/400 reliability when you start to farm the x86 machines.

    Now if the ERP software your currently using is out of business, or is absoletly prohibitly expensive vs other ERP solutions, then look at all of your ERP options and pick the best one that will work for you and your business regardless of price, platform, or OS. Too many PHB's get sucked into the magical speak that comes out of the guy with the plaid suit and big shiny teeth to see if the software their actually buying will work for them. Make sure that whatever you're going to spend $100,000+ on is really going to do the job that your AS/400 is doing. Period. Call other companies using those solutions, get demos, get all the plaid suit big shiny teeth people in a room and play Corporate ThunderDome. Either way, Hardware wise IBM is the way to go when it comes to hardware and support.
  • There are a great number of ERP systems that only support Windows nowadays, some of then having even been initially developed for unix. This is especially true if you consider yourself to be a _small_ manufacturing company. If you can find an ERP that both meets your needs and runs on your favorite platform, that's great, but I wouldn't make the platform the top requirement.

    I'm a little cautious when it comes to betting my career on anything proprietary, but unfortunately there are only a handful of good op

  • iSeries, hands down (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Skalizar (676291)
    First of all, that guy who's recommending switching to Windows? Ignore his advice about everything (IT or otherwise), he's clearly uninformed, or a moron, or both.

    The AS/400 (iSeries/i5) is going to do a lot more for you in the long run, with less (no) downtime and far fewer headaches involving security, and things like virii and spyware are a complete non-issue. The new boxes are even better, with the ability to run virtual machines in just about any environment you decide to experiment with, while still
  • iSeries is one of the best systems made. It has the top security build from gound up and no viruses and such. You can run multiple Operating systems on in such as OS/400, Windows, Unix in their own logical partitions. It is very reliable piece of hardware and I would pick it every time over intel based windows servers. If you can afford the initial hardware cost, go with iSeries without any thought.
  • The platform is just something you use to run the software. Select the software first + the technical partner that will implement it for you. By far most of the cost of the whole thing will be in those two things. Hardware + os is peanuts compared to that. Then go with the platform recommended by your technical partner. If it happens to run on both windows and ibm, your ibm skills may be reusable (that's the real issue, isn't it?). That should be decided based on cost of ownership.

  • WTF (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Usquebaugh (230216) on Saturday December 31 2005, @05:06AM (#14369661)
    What the hell are you doing choosing ERP software for your company?

    I'm in a similar position, my current employer is evaluating ERP packages and then I'll get told which one we're going to. We currently run BPCS on AS/400 (iSeries). We're probably going to SAP on AIX using DB/2.

    As a dev I don't get to make business decisions. I get to do the tech stuff my employer deems suitable.

    As for this Windows/Unix/iSeries question, it should not be yours to make. Your job is to make what they buy work reliably. If can't or don't want to do the job then find another one pronto.
    • Sorry, but how the fuck do you know what this guy's role is in the purchasing decision? He describes himself as "the network administrator" - in a small company this could effectively mean he is CIO. Whatever his nominal job description, if he is in a position of trust he may be asked to provide input to the decision based on his technical expertise or knowledge of the business operations. You come across like you don't have much experience of real-life work places.

      I mean, you call yourself a "dev". To me t
    • What the hell is your employer doing picking solutions without any technical knowledge? (And, btw, did you miss the part where he said he works at a "small manufacturing company"?)

      In case you haven't noticed, computers aren't cars. Many times you, as the admin, can't just "make them run reliably". And, even if you could, it would probably be a stupid hack or worse, technically illegal.

      That's a common trick that vendors use to drive up their margins: sell an entire system based on a few features of the le
  • It sounds like someone is trying to build an empire in your organisation based on an ERP implementation.

    Being seen as being attached to the current hardware will mean being seen as being attached to the current software as well - and if that needs replacing, that's not a good place to be. Strategic decisions should be made on costs and benefits - but all too often it's a fashion decision taken to help someone's career along.

    It is possible to run Windows systems reliably and securely, but don't underestim
  • Has anyone in your company done even a qualitative risk assessment of the options? For starters, what is the cost to mitigate the risk posed by a failure of the proposed architecture and loss of mission-critical systems due to worm or virus by one of the many known vectors of infection?

    Not to mention the cultural differences, but I'm sure others can comment on that.

  • iSeries all the way.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by psykocrime (61037) <mindcrime AT cpphacker DOT co DOT uk> on Saturday December 31 2005, @11:16PM (#14373074) Homepage Journal
    I've worked with AS/400s quite a bit in the past, and in my experience the damn things
    are wicked stable and reliable. You almost can't destroy the things... One place I used to work
    had an S/38 (the precursor to the AS/400) that was friggin' ancient and still hummed along like
    a champ day in and day out... until we upgraded it to a more modern AS/400. If you could
    find the old one in the junkyard still, I bet you could plug it in and IPL it today.

    Anyway, with the newer iSeries, it's not like you're locked into some obscure technology
    platform if IBM ever decides to kill off OS/400. The newer ones will run Linux
    which gives you a nice migration / upgrade path. In fact, you might be well served
    to start out running Linux on something, whether or not it's an iSeries... then if your
    needs change you can scale up, down or horizontally with much greater ease than if you
    had to switch operating systems to switch to a different hardware platform.
    With Linux you might have to recompile everything, but it's still just Linux.

    Just imagine, you start with Linux on xSeries (x86 boxes), and from there you
    can scale horizontally by clustering, and/or scale up to an iSeries or pSeries
    or OpenPower box, and ultimately you can scale all the way to a zSeries (mainframe). All without
    changing your operating system. That's a pretty strong story, and I'm pretty sure it's
    one main reason IBM is pushing Linux so hard.

    • But back when "Nobody gets fired for buying IBM," there was an insinuation of it being a politically safe, but technically lesser solution.

      One could easily make the same assertion about Microsoft, today. Or Intel, for that matter.
    • Micrsoft's ERP products for manufacturing are second to none

      Huh??? Microsoft is a wannabe in the serious ERP market - but regardless of software vendor, if you're considering the platform question, it becomes a matter of scale. If you need rock-solid reliability, high-volume throughput and widespread realtime access to the data and application, then the iSeries is the obvious choice.

      Just as an example, I'm currently the IT project lead on an ERP installation. The ERP itself can run on a number of differe
      • "I am the network administrator for a small manufacturing company..."

        He says in the first paragraph that he works for a small manufacturing company. So we're not talking about hundreds of thousands of transactions per second. Also, why are you letting the platform dictate the solution? As an IT project lead you of all people should know that you pick the application that best suits the need first--platform is a secondary consideration. By the way, you should look at the latest statistics with Dell(intel)
        • Platform requirements can easily put constraints around the solution choice, while providing plenty of room to pick the app that does the job for the company. Don't forget that ERP's don't operate in a vaccuum. Quite often they have to interface with financial packages, transportation modules, document archival, etc., which may impact the decision due to hardware & support staff that are already in place.
      • Microsoft is a wannabe in the serious ERP market

        This isn't true. For mid-sized business, Great Plains is a good product, not as expensive as other ERP, with a solid customer base. And mid-sized business is a serious market; the economy is not driven by the Fortune 500, pal.

        ...rock-solid reliability, high-volume throughput and widespread realtime access to the data and application...

        Wow, you sound just like a sales rep trying to buzzword his way to a big commission. Or like a IT project lead that has n

      • Microsoft bought mature ERP systems and made them their own. Axapta had all the features we wanted, but their asking price made us laugh a little, triple that of any of the dozens of competing quotes we've received. Their system looked good, but not that good.
        • If you consider Axapta, do your homework and get your staff trained. You need people who are good at tuning servers. Axapta doesn't scale well. There are very few resources available, short of hiring a solutions partner. You should also plan to use the stock configuration whenever possible, it will make life much easier. And of course like you said, deep pockets.
    • Yeah that is a serious problem ... and a big part of it is that "IBM Culture" is based around paying the inhouse operators like crap. Why would anyone spend a couple years of their life learning a bunch of commands which all look like WGFQZMTZ and PUFQWTM on systems which emulate punch cards, only to get paid less than a junior Windows admin?

      • Re:Downsides to 400s/iSeries (Score:4, Informative)

        by Bob Cat - NYMPHS (313647) on Saturday December 31 2005, @08:00AM (#14369975) Homepage
        Actually, commands on an AS/400 look like CRTUSRPRF, DLTPF, and so forth. If you can't figure out that's CreaTe USer PRoFile and DeLeTe Physical File, you need to study for maybe about 10 minutes.

        Need to do an action? GO VERB. Need to do it to some thing? GO SUBJECT. There is no system simpler to figure out than OS/400.
    • As an aside to this good advice, hardware means almost nothing. Software is what matters. Don't start off limiting your software choices based on hardware. But, by all means, do as the parent suggests and don't get locked into a Windows solution either.

      If you have more than 100 employees and at least two competent IT personnel, you're in the perfect position to take advantage of the flexibility of Unix or Linux. Spend the time evaluating all of your options.

      • Re:don't paint yourself into a corner (Score:4, Informative)

        by Knetzar (698216) on Friday December 30 2005, @11:17PM (#14368780)
        Yup, if you buy an iSeries box you can run i5OS (the new OS/400), AIX, and Linux. In addition the virtualization allows you to set up multiple virtual machines that perform really well. As the parent said, this will allow you to (with a single piece of hardware) move from your current AS/400 solution to a Unix/Linux solution.
        What this will not get you is a simple way to move to a windows solution.

        I do want to know, are iSeries and Windows your only options?

        Oh yeah, another benefit of having an iSeries is that IBM will support both your hardware and software. With windows you'll often get vendors arguing whose fault it is when a problem occurs. But I suppose that's your choice, vender lock-in can have (some) benefits.
      • Plus I can pull up a configuration tool and, you know, it isn't...text. I can see what I'm doing and do it quickly and efficiently.

        How the hell was the information conveyed? Pictographs? What are these characters you are reading? Title bars and vendor branded borders are not a very good reason to abandon highly configurable command line based text tools. Many of which even work on the Windows platform.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.