Just weeks after a Windows server took top spot in a key speed test for the first time, a new IBM computer has won the crown back for Unix.
Unix Reclaims Server Speed Crown
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
What’s noteworthy isn’t that IBM reclaimed the speed crown, for whatever that is worth. What’s interesting is that Windows should snatch the crown in the first place. Clearly, that’s an indication of things to come, and just how determined the MS assault on Unix will be in the long run.
and also that HP (running Windows) used 64 processors compared to IBM implementation of 32 processors.
So… just glancing over the article… how software / OS related is this speed crown? It seems that people are just releasing new hardware that runs these neck-and-neck-for-speed OS’s. For crying out loud, give me enough money and *I* could build one or the other in to the “faster OS”!!
IBM (Unix) used only 32 processors whilst the HP (Windows) used 64.
Ok so IBM used half, didn’t say what they used for it, if it’s the same cpu that’s something. If HP was using some Xeons while IBM was Using Power4’s thats a good differance.
And even if the IBM server was very genuinely faster with less hardware, how long do you think it will take before Windows catches up? That’s the point. Just the fact that Windows servers now have enough guts to compete on this level, whether (at the moment) successfully or not, is what should keep unix pundits worried. MS has a lot of money, brains and grits. I think Unix vendors should really take them seriously on the high end.
The point is Microsoft and IBM are very pragmatic and having been working with each other very closely (on all the web services, xml and uddi technologies) for the last couple of years. And IBM and Microsoft are making tons of money off their partnership.
The point is that Oracle lost major market share because they concentrated on Microsoft bashing. SUN lost their technology edge (they no longer do TPC-C testing), lost major market share on Unix server market (somewhat recovered recently) and maintains a tiny 2-4% of the lucrative java market (where IBM and BEA control 2/3 of the market share combined) — because SUN concentrated on Microsoft bashing.
Sweet, darling, where are you? aren’t you going to spew some cheap pro-Windows rhetoric? please, I want to hear that spin!
Sam,
indeed, maybe the linux folk need to just accept the MS will in time concure anything they attempt, even if it takes a try or 3. So instead of bashing everything MS does, they need to go back and keap quiet and get working.
The person who attacks everyone ends up the loser.
Apparently the p690 server used is based on the new POWER4+ running at 1.7 GHz:
http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/news/pressreleases/200…
The POWER4 is a dual core design:
http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/whitepapers/p…
I would love to see IBM sell a low end UNIX/Power4 workstation for around AUS$4000-AUS$5000 running AIX. Nothing would please me more than having another alternative to Windows for those who want a *NIX operating system and hardware that is being developed and maintained by a company that isn’t going to go tits up very soon (yes, I am directing it at SUN).
if IBM did that you would end up with a Linux Workstation not an AIX workstation.
AIX is so fintuned for highend servers and mainframes that it can do very little in a workstation environment.
“if IBM did that you would end up with a Linux Workstation not an AIX workstation.
AIX is so fintuned for highend servers and mainframes that it can do very little in a workstation environment.”
Wrong! IBM sells workstations running AIX. My father has an RS6000 (a workstation) running AIX sitting on his desk at this moment. AIX is good for pretty much anything. Which continues the question why IBM even bothers with linux. Oh wait I know, cause while linux is still hyped they can sell some computers with it.
http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/workstations/
As the previous poster mentioned, it’s not that the don’t exist it’s just they arn’t in the price level people would like to see.
So… just glancing over the article… how software / OS related is this speed crown? It seems that people are just releasing new hardware that runs these neck-and-neck-for-speed OS’s. For crying out loud, give me enough money and *I* could build one or the other in to the “faster OS”!!
Umm, you are right you just glanced or else you would notice that the IBM server used 32 processors while the HP Superdome used 64. Clearly the HP had a hardware advantage; however, the system simply couldn’t take advantage of all that power.
I would imagine IBM’s 64 processor showing will be even more impressive as will HP’s Unix version of Superdome.
Who will be the first computer able to run 1G tpd-C (transaction per day – C)?
Maybe we can live in hope that a 970 PowerPC workstation will be released for those who don’t have AUS$16000+ for a workstation but are still willing to spend AUS$4000-AUS$5000 for one.
How come IBM charges more for their workstations in Australian than in the US? I’ve just had a look and in some cases there is hunndreds of dollars difference.
Are the prices in $US or $Aus?
That could make a difference. Our (Australia’s) exchange rate isn’t exactly great anymore…
I’m quoting Australian dollars, and even at the rate they are now, I don’t really see why IBM can’t create a sub AUS$5000 PowerPC workstation.
Please ignore. SOrry.
hmm……thats interesting. I have never used an AIX workstation and since IBM has focused so much on mainframes and servers I assumed they did not make them…but we all know what happens when people assume 🙂
They may focus a good deal on main frames, but then again they are IBM, they do everything. They are so big even if something is a super small part of their business it’s still big and probably beating competitiors. IBM is still very big in desktop computer sales, most people think they stopped making them. Never count IBM out of any market.
actually if windoes does do something occasionally
and its fast will only draw ever more penguintas
into battle. and trust me, tux love battle
Mandrake 9.1
should we be worried, of course not. prepared ? absolutely
hi eugenia
When Microsoft came for the Word Processor
I did not speak up because I was not WordPerfect.
When Microsoft came for the Spreadsheet I did not
say anything because I was not Lotus123.
When Microsoft came for the Broswer I said nothing
because I was not Netscape.
When Microsoft came for Java I said nothing because I
was not Sun.
When Microsoft came for me there was no one left to
speak for me.
( With apologies to the more serious topic this is
usually used to invoke)
“maybe the linux folk need to just accept the MS will in time concure anything they attempt, even if it takes a try or 3. So instead of bashing everything MS does, they need to go back and keap quiet and get working.”
Yes all the “linux folk” need to just accept their fate. What are your delusional or something? Please.
The fact that you think the people who bash “everything” MS does are the exact same people who code for free sofware products shows just how clueless you are.
If I had a nickel for every idiot who one a daily basis said what “linux users” needed to do, I’d be richer than Bill Gates.
“What’s noteworthy isn’t that IBM reclaimed the speed crown, for whatever that is worth. What’s interesting is that Windows should snatch the crown in the first place. Clearly, that’s an indication of things to come, and just how determined the MS assault on Unix will be in the long run.”
No actually what’s noteworthy is how long Unix vendors have held the crown and how short of a period Windows could hold on to the crown. Now IBM comes along with half the cpu’s and puts Windows back in its place. What’s going to be funny is when HP puts up its Unix version of Superdome and spanks the Windows version.
Windows may be better than the NT 4 days but it still doesn’t cut it for the highest of high end.
Why bother with Windows anyway? Who wants to compromise their morals by buying from a convicted felon who lied in court? Not me.
>>>When Microsoft came for the Word Processor
I did not speak up because I was not WordPerfect.
Don’t cry for Novell because Novell used the money from the Corel deal to launch a bunch of linux start-ups and made billions of dollars off those IPO’s.
>>>When Microsoft came for the Spreadsheet I did not
say anything because I was not Lotus123.
Don’t cry for Lotus because IBM made more money on Lotus’ groupware software.
>>>When Microsoft came for the Broswer I said nothing
because I was not Netscape.
Don’t cry for Netscape shareholders because they were bought out by AOL and then AOL swallowed Time Warner. It’s Time Warner’s side of the shareholders that lost money, the AOL/Netscape side of the shareholders made a lot of money.
>>>When Microsoft came for Java I said nothing because I
was not Sun.
Don’t cry for IBM and BEA — for they are making hundreds of millions of dollars each year on Java.
>>>>No actually what’s noteworthy is how long Unix vendors have held the crown and how short of a period Windows could hold on to the crown.
What’s really noteworthy is that the only people making the big money these days are IBM and Microsoft — because both companies are pragmatic and they teamed up together.
There is no ONE unified unix vendor profile — IBM making money off Unix, HP busy trying to integrate Compaq and trying to build an IT service division that will rival IBM, SUN is basically giving up TPC-C benchmark testing.
Less proc. yet more cash ($7.6m vs $6.4m).
It costs more, plus the Power4’s have 2 cores per die.
“Sweet, darling, where are you? aren’t you going to spew some cheap pro-Windows rhetoric? please, I want to hear that spin!”
Well, darling, all I can say is this…at least it’s not running Linux. 😉