Username or EmailPassword
So, what, is it your goal to bring this textbook strawman argument of yours into every news which touches on mainframes? Glance over replies every time?
Despite it being pointed out at least once ( http://www.osnews.com/comments/25046 and I don't see why to "agree" with something which isn't ever your initial premise, in fact is a rephrasing of what needs to be largely pointed out every time) to you what kind of fallacious point it is and that nobody promotes mainframes as if they were about CPU power, nobody uses mainframes like that, that's not their point ...yet you must criticise them on this non-issue. Nobody seems to treat them as such except you...
You are being dishonest in your evasions. Your premise does boil down to "why would anybody care about mainframes at all, their CPUs are so slow!" ...yes, it presents things like only CPU would matter, like you would dismiss all the other factors.
It's like (inevitable car analogy :p ) you'd bust into some article about a nice articulated, low-floor hybrid bus, and disparage it on the basis that it is slower than a racecar; building on that basis alone your wonder why anybody would choose to ride on it, why public authorities would waste money on buses for public transport instead of simply buying racecars.
(and many servers, services, are idling vast majority of the time, waiting for "random" request which need to be speedily replied to; that's probably a good case for "excessive" virtualisation) Edited 2011-09-14 23:57 UTC