I think it is horses for courses. If you have mainly read only data, then having thousands of "commodity hardware" etc Linux or Windows is a good solution.
If you have a lot of read/write datac which needs to be consistent or where you need a lot(GB/second) of data "close" (sub millisecond) to your servers you might consider the mainframe. it makes sense to move your "read only", non performance critical work from the mainframe to cheaper kit - so the mainframe market will get smaller. Colin On Sun, 2 Mar 2025 at 14:05, Chad Rikansrud <[email protected]> wrote: > Agree that the platform is alive and well, as it should be! > > Can't really agree with this, though: > "Plus it is a lot more secure from hackers." > > It's been my considerable experience that the mainframe is often the lest > best secured platform on an enterprise network. > > Not that it couldn't be among or at the top of the best secured platforms > in the enterprise (I've seen several that are happily exposed to the > internet, are very locked down, and never miss a beat). But, it's dangerous > to say that a platform is inhernetly "secure from hackers." as that just > isn't the case. That takes a lot of work and understnding to do, it's > possible, but it doesn't just "happen" because it's a mainframe. > > > > Chad > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
