<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css" type="text/css" media="screen"?><rss xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
    <title>c0t0d0s0.org - The IT Business</title>
    <link>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/</link>
    <description>the sun in a lighthungry universe</description>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <generator>Serendipity 1.3 - http://www.s9y.org/</generator>
    
    

<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness" type="application/rss+xml" /><item>
    <title>Why Intel doesn´t like 12 inch netbooks</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/506233648/5185-Why-Intel-doesnt-like-12-inch-netbooks.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5185-Why-Intel-doesnt-like-12-inch-netbooks.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5185</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5185</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    There is an article at tech crunch about the dislike of Intel in regard of a <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/06/here-come-the-12-inch-netbooks-and-intel-isnt-happy-about-it/');"  href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/06/here-come-the-12-inch-netbooks-and-intel-isnt-happy-about-it/">12 inch notebook with Atom proc</a>. I think it´s not only the loss of sales for bigger mobile procs. The problem is more wide-ranging. <br />
<br />
The cheap x86 procs for servers are largely subsidised by the desktop sales. It´s almost the same die, thus the development costs are shared, the manufacturing costs are shared. It´s classic economy of scale ... it´s the reason, why a Intel Xeon is cheaper to produce than a RISC CPU. Without the desktop sales you have to increase the price of your server CPU or reduce the margins (server CPUs are an high-margin business)<br />
<br />
Now let´s assume you have a different architecture with different design targets, thus it isn´t possible  to share the development costs.  This can severely disrupt your business modell. You can´t share the costs of your server procs with all the desktop sales. As i wrote before: The current dominance of x86 servers are an result of the decision of a finnish computer science student and many gamers, because the fact that the dominant gaming os runs on it x86 only. Thus Intel has a vast interest in not selling Atom in all possible markets. I perfectly understand  Intel that they don´t like 12-inch netbooks. 10 inch displays are to small for many people, but 12 inch is a different story.<br />
<br />
This the upcoming netbooks and nettops have may have an interesting effect to unrelated markets by changes in the cost models due to decreasing sales.  
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/506233648" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:08:32 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5185-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5185-Why-Intel-doesnt-like-12-inch-netbooks.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>It´s slashing time ...</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/506233649/5184-Its-slashing-time-....html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5184-Its-slashing-time-....html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5184</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5184</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Recent layoffs (besides the Sun RIF):<br />
Lenovo - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/go.theregister.com/feed/www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/01/08/lenovo_axes_2500_jobs/');"  href="http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/01/08/lenovo_axes_2500_jobs/">2500</a><br />
IBM - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;amp;articleId=9124802&amp;amp;source=rss_news');"  href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;articleId=9124802&amp;source=rss_news">16000 (rumored)</a><br />
Unisys - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/23/unisys_layoffs/');"  href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/23/unisys_layoffs/">1300</a> <br />
Microsoft - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2009/01/01/rumor-microsoft-to-lay-off-17-of-staff-on-january-15-2009');"  href="http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2009/01/01/rumor-microsoft-to-lay-off-17-of-staff-on-january-15-2009">15000 (rumored)</a><br />
Logitech - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/06/BUK8154I57.DTL&amp;amp;feed=rss.bayarea');"  href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/06/BUK8154I57.DTL&amp;feed=rss.bayarea">500</a><br />
SGI - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.sgi.com/company_info/newsroom/press_releases/2008/december/plan.html');"  href="http://www.sgi.com/company_info/newsroom/press_releases/2008/december/plan.html">225 (15%)</a><br />
EMC - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.emc.com/about/news/press/2009/20090107-01.htm');"  href="http://www.emc.com/about/news/press/2009/20090107-01.htm">2,400 (7%)</a><br />
Dell - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2009/2009_01_08_rr_000?c=us&amp;amp;l=en&amp;amp;s=corp');"  href="http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2009/2009_01_08_rr_000?c=us&amp;l=en&amp;s=corp">1,900</a><br />
HP - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.pcworld.com/article/151102/.html?tk=rss_news');"  href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/151102/.html?tk=rss_news">24,600 (announced in September 2008)</a><br />
<br />
Tough time at the moment ... 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/506233649" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:45:46 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5184-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5184-Its-slashing-time-....html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>DTrace  in FreeBSD 7.1-RELEASE</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/503296383/5174-DTrace-in-FreeBSD-7.1-RELEASE.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5174-DTrace-in-FreeBSD-7.1-RELEASE.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5174</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5174</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    From the <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.freebsd.org/releases/7.1R/relnotes.html#KERNEL');"  href="http://www.freebsd.org/releases/7.1R/relnotes.html#KERNEL">release notes of FreeBSD 7.1-RELEASE</a>:<blockquote>>The DTrace, a comprehensive dynamic tracing framework and dtrace(1) userland utility have been imported from OpenSolaris. DTrace provides a powerful infrastructure to permit administrators, developers, and service personnel to concisely answer arbitrary questions about the behavior of the operating system and user programs.</blockquote><small>(via <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/twitter.com/timbray/statuses/1096486122');"  href="http://twitter.com/timbray/statuses/1096486122">Tim Bray</a>)</small> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/503296383" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 06:33:30 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5174-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5174-DTrace-in-FreeBSD-7.1-RELEASE.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>What will be after Linux?</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/502561191/5171-What-will-be-after-Linux.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5171-What-will-be-after-Linux.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5171</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5171</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    An tweet on twitter lead me to some thoughts. The question in this tweet was "What will be after Linux?" At first this seems as a question of a Solaris fanboy and obviously you would expect that i would opt for Solaris in this article. I have my opinion but i won´t discuss it here. I won´t even give a hint because honestly spoken, i have no idea. It´s relatively easy to look 6 months in the future, it´s much harder to do this for 12 month and it´s outright impossible to do this for a  point in time in a 5 years interval (okay, when you make your predictions in a generic way, it´s easy).<br />
<br />
When we look into the history of computing, we see many technologies with a vast amount of market share having problems later on. Mainframes are such a example. Yeah ... Sun is such an example ... nobody expected in 1998 that Solaris would have the role of something else than the market leader in web services 10 years later. Many thought of Longhorn as the next big thing killing all other OSes. We´ve got Vista. In ten years we will think about Vista in the same way as Windows 98SE. Otherway round we see many systems which were almost dead with a bright future today. Think about MacOS 9 and MacOS X. Apple was pretty much a few years ago and today the market share on notebooks looks as near to 50%, at least when you walk through the train between Hamburg and Berlin. Other way round: 5 or 6 years ago the Palm Pilot was the unconquered leader of it´s market ... today ... the complete market was sucked up by cellular phone vendors and the vendor of a mp3-player on steroids.  Apache vs. lighttpd or nginx. Sendmail vs. Postfix. Ingres vs. Oracle. CP/M vs. DOS. dBase vs. Access et al.<br />
<br />
This example should show us one thing: There is no thing in IT that keeps it´s lead forever. Comebacks are possible. Complete removal from the market place is possible. It´s foolish to assume that any piece technology is excempted from this rule. <br />
<br />
So Linux will encounter the same lifecycle. Think this is impossible? What would happen, if Linus Torvalds decides to take his midlife crisis and starts to do research on real penguins in a polar station. What would happen, if one of the large proponents (Red Hat, SuSE, Canonical) would collapse under the weight of this or the next recession?  That´s not a linux-only thing ... just think about the "Steven Jobs is ill/dead/the new iGod" rumours.  <br />
<br />
In my opinion Linux is already on the downward path. There wasn´t an innovation in Linux that gave me the thought "Wow, that´s cool" for a long, long time (And to be honest: For many features i thought as cool features in Linux in my early UNIX years i´ve learned later on that they were implemented somewhere else (IRIX, Solaris, some old BSD et al) before) ... but your perspective may vary as your milage. This is nature of opinions. Dbase was moved out of market by other competitors making a faster transition to Windows. lighttpd is used by admins, who think that Apache httpd has grown to far to result into a stable and efficient webserver. <br />
<br />
Furthermore: The user communities in the open source world are more fluid. The Microsoft ecosphere is a little bit different. Microsoft is only able to survive it´s constant underdelivery in regard of their operating system because of their applications. You have to use Windows, if you want to use MS Word or MS Excel. But as i wrote a while ago: In Open Source the binary of an application is just a Makefile away. Thus there is no application-enforced vendor lock-in. When people don´t like their old OS (out of whatever reason) anymore or   just want features of another OS, it´s just an rsync to the new away. Commercial IT would take a little bit longer because of already existing runbooks and processes. But Unixes aren´t that far away from each other to make this impossible.<br />
<br />
Despite what many want to think: Linux isn´t immune to this. So the interesting question is ... what will be after Linux? LinuxNG, OpenSolaris, BSD, Windunix? That´s an interesting question and i have no answer to it. Just an opinion. It the next Linux a already known operating system. Or a completly new operating environment?<br />
<br />
What would be the path of Linux after such an downward path ... it´s a community development. The next interesting question is: Are highly dispersed development communities capable to restart a franchise? Like other restarts: MacOS 9 to X (non-opensouce), like Solaris 9 to 10 (open-sourcE). Both restarts were triggered from large companies with a large interest in the restart and deep pockets to pay developers. Or would the community just move to another prefered development platform moving Linux into a niche, like the BSDs today? <br />
<br />
After writing this article i had an additional answer to the question of a customer: "Why does Sun still develop Solaris instead of supporting Linux the development" aside from all the technological and commercial reasons: Because Linux needs Solaris. Without a strong, innovative competitor  the downward spiral (as the innovation would be just limited to supporting new hardware) would just go faster and this would open an opportunity to other systems. The otherway round Solaris needs Linux ... Solaris 10 would look different without the large impact of Linux in the market and the balance of power between Windows and. Unix would look differently. It´s the same with MacOS. The Apple developers were in need of an improving Windows to restart the MacOS franchise with X. Without it Apple would be a large part of computer history, but not of contemporary IT.<br />
<br />
So, we should think about the time after Linux as well we should think how Linux gain strength in such a phase. But as i wrote at start, it´s hard to think about it, when predictions are such a hard business. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/502561191" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:26:55 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5171-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5171-What-will-be-after-Linux.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Cisco selling blades?</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/486944187/5125-Cisco-selling-blades.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5125-Cisco-selling-blades.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5125</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5125</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Cisco seems to look for new markets - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.networkworld.com/news/2008/121208-cisco-data-center.html?page=1');"  href="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/121208-cisco-data-center.html?page=1">Cisco planning significant data center assault</a>:<blockquote>Perhaps the most important example of that will be a new Cisco blade server system expected next year. This will take the company into the data center compute space, right up against longtime stalwarts  and up to now, Cisco partners  IBM and HP.</blockquote>This matches to rumours and hints i´ve got in in the last few weeks. But i don´t believe that Cisco will play a large role in this business. There are already several players in this game ... IBM,HP,Dell,FSC and Sun. And more important: People think of Cisco as the supplier of their networking equipment ... not of their servers ... and Cisco hasn´t a long track record as a supplier of servers. Cisco needs a real differentiator ... i´m curious what this differentiator might be ... but at the moment i´m not convinced about the success.<br />
<br />
And there is another problem: Network admin departments, storage admin departments and server  admin departments have seperated supplier spheres in many companies. And Cisco is a supplier for the network admin departments and they rarely connection to the server departments. And: Did you know Sun sold an hardware load balancer for a while? No? Cisco will have a similar problem ... 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/486944187" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:46:35 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5125-guid.html</guid>
    <category>blades</category>
<category>cisco</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5125-Cisco-selling-blades.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Extreme Overclocking of an AMD Phenom II</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/482992740/5113-Extreme-Overclocking-of-an-AMD-Phenom-II.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5113-Extreme-Overclocking-of-an-AMD-Phenom-II.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5113</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5113</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    There is an interesting report at <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=210707');"  href="http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=210707">xtremesystems.org</a> with some photos about overclocking an AMD Phenom II to almost 6.3 GHz. Okay ... you need liquid nitrogen to do so, so it isn´t really relevant for most people, but 4,13 GHz with air cooling is interesting as well. An observer writes: <blockquote>- We were able to run Crysis @ 6,1 GHz (2 loops CPU-test)<br />
- Max CPU-Z screenshot and validation we got with 4 cores was 6280 MHz (no dirty tricks)<br />
- With air cooling (Cooler Master Z600) highest we got Crysis stable was @ 4,13 GHz (1,58 V)</blockquote>Looks like the AMD Phenom II has some  potential in regard of it´s frequency.<br />
<br />
PS: By the way ... somebody out there with a spare UltraSPARC T2 system? I would purchase some liquid nitrogen <img src="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/templates/default/img/emoticons/wink.png" alt=";-)" style="display: inline; vertical-align: bottom;" class="emoticon" /> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/482992740" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:38:40 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5113-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5113-Extreme-Overclocking-of-an-AMD-Phenom-II.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Memory wall? Pin Wall!</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/482867349/5112-Memory-wall-Pin-Wall!.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5112-Memory-wall-Pin-Wall!.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5112</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5112</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    There is some discussion about many-cores hitting a "memory wall". Robin Harris writes about it in his article <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/storagemojo.com/2008/12/08/many-cores-hit-the-memory-wall/');"  href="http://storagemojo.com/2008/12/08/many-cores-hit-the-memory-wall/">Many-cores hit the memory wall</a>.  But i think most of this article think not for enough. Who says, that you just can have many cores. You can have many-memorycontrollers as well. The future solution for memory is perhaps not the fastest bus. It´s the bus that transport as much data as possible with the fewest possible amount of socket pins. The real wall may be the pin budget of modern processors as the number of memory controllers is limited by the possible connections to the outside world. <br />
<br />
I don´t think there is a wall at 16 cores in processor design because of memory bandwith mandated by some basic principles, there is just a economic limit of manufacturing costs that prevents you from simply increasing the pin count and thus the numbers memory channels.<br />
<br />
And so the problem of <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081207-analysis-more-than-16-cores-may-well-be-pointless.html');"  href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081207-analysis-more-than-16-cores-may-well-be-pointless.html">such articles like Jon Stokes "Analysis: more than 16 cores may well be pointless"</a> is just the point, that they think in x86 technology and x86 economics. And even there he might be only correct when you just multiply the cores. There is a reason for connecting three channels of memory to an Intel Nehalem. <br />
<br />
At the end the memory-wall discussion is somehow a validation of a Sun technology. You have to do something different. The idea of putting 4 memory controller on a T1  for example. The threading concept in the UltraSPARC T1 and T2 was introduced for a reason, too . The basic idea of this concept was "Live with the limited memory bandwidth and with the latency of memory and make the best out of it". The T1/T2 just switches to another thread in case of a memory stalled  thread. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/482867349" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:33:24 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5112-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5112-Memory-wall-Pin-Wall!.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>History repeating?</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/472376264/5073-History-repeating.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5073-History-repeating.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5073</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5073</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    The TLB bug almost ruined the AMD Phenom franchise.  But it looks like if Intel has a similar problem with the Nehalem. According to <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;amp;task=view&amp;amp;id=10707&amp;amp;Itemid=1');"  href="http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=10707&amp;Itemid=1">Fudzilla</a> the Nehalem is haunted by a TLB bug too and refers to the errata document of this processor. It looks like history repeating.<br />
<br />
At page 16 of the the <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/download.intel.com/design/processor/specupdt/320836.pdf');"  href="http://download.intel.com/design/processor/specupdt/320836.pdf">Intel Core i7 Processor Extreme Edition Series and Intel® Core i7 Processor</a> they write:<blockquote><b>AAJ1. MCi_Status Overflow Bit May Be Incorrectly Set on a Single Instance <br />
of a DTLB Error</b><br />
<b>Problem:</b>A single Data Translation Look Aside Buffer (DTLB) error can incorrectly set the Overflow (bit [62]) in the MCi_Status register. A DTLB error is indicated by MCA error  code (bits [15:0]) appearing as binary value, 000x 0000 0001 0100, in the MCi_Status register. <br />
<b>Implication:</b> Due to this erratum, the Overflow bit in the MCi_Status register may not be an accurate <br />
indication of multiple occurrences of DTLB errors. There is no other impact to normal <br />
processor functionality.</blockquote>But in the clarification for errata AAJ1 on page 37 of the same document they state:<blockquote>In rare instances, improper TLB invalidation may result in unpredictable system behavior, such as system hangs or incorrect data. Developers of operating systems should take this documentation into account when designing TLB invalidation algorithms. For the processors affected, Intel has provided a recommended update to system and BIOS vendors to incorporate into their BIOS to resolve this issue.</blockquote>Doesn´t sound like <i>There is no other impact to normal processor functionality</i>. I don´t think, that this bug has the scale of the AMB TLB bug, but i think customers are a little bit sensitive today when they hear TLB and bug in the same sentence.<br />
<br />
Update: AAJ42 on Page 27 is interesting, too:<blockquote>Under certain conditions when C6 and two logical processors on the same core are  enabled on a processor, an instruction fetch occurring after a logical processor exits  from C6 may incorrectly use the translation lookaside buffer (TLB) address mapping  belonging to the other logical processor in the processor core. </blockquote> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/472376264" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:01:21 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5073-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5073-History-repeating.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Bootup of IBM pSeries systems.</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/465333815/5056-Bootup-of-IBM-pSeries-systems..html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5056-Bootup-of-IBM-pSeries-systems..html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5056</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5056</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Funny discussion about <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.pseriestech.org/forum/pseries-system-p/p595-start-up-2531.html');"  href="http://www.pseriestech.org/forum/pseries-system-p/p595-start-up-2531.html">boot-up times</a> of  pSeries systems:<blockquote>Hey, I manage 7 p595 squadrons and they are all different. For the most part, the startup time depends on the amount of I/O you have installed. Two of mine are 3 frame p595's with 64 hba, 64 nic, about 20 internal HDD, dual power systems and I think 10 d20 I/O drawers. These servers take about 90 minutes just to initialise the hardware, not including starting any LPAR's. So tell your friend that this is normal and take a good book and a really large coffee with him each time he needs a restart</blockquote> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/465333815" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:25:30 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5056-guid.html</guid>
    <category>ibm</category>
<category>pseries</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5056-Bootup-of-IBM-pSeries-systems..html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Afterthought about the Transitive deal</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/458866052/5034-Afterthought-about-the-Transitive-deal.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5034-Afterthought-about-the-Transitive-deal.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5034</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5034</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Hmm, it will be interesting to see where the acquisition of Transitive by IBM will leave Apple (Rosetta is a Transitive technology) or SGI (their ability to execute Irix/MIPS code on their Linux based systems). At least the last system can be viewed as a competition to IBM. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/458866052" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:07:49 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5034-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5034-Afterthought-about-the-Transitive-deal.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>IBM acquires Transitive</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/457716912/5029-IBM-acquires-Transitive.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5029-IBM-acquires-Transitive.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5029</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5029</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Well, as Transitive delivers one of the foundations of IBMs PowerVM technology, i expected, that they would acquire Transitive at some point in time. Today IBM announced such a move according to this press release: <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.marketwatch.com/news/story/IBM-Announces-Plans-Acquire-Transitive/story.aspx?guid={9ED065D0-F8EB-4A79-8EBE-A3C045034D46}');"  href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/IBM-Announces-Plans-Acquire-Transitive/story.aspx?guid={9ED065D0-F8EB-4A79-8EBE-A3C045034D46}">IBM Announces Plans to Acquire Transitive</a>.<br />
<br />
The Transitive stuff allows IBM to run Linux x86 code in a Power LPAR. Okay, i don´t really know if it´s sensible idea to use an expensive Power system to virtualize a cheap x86 system. But they need something like that as Linux on Power doesn´t really have a large support by ISVs. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/457716912" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:12:56 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5029-guid.html</guid>
    <category>ibm</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5029-IBM-acquires-Transitive.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Observations on the new Top 500 list</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/456164588/5028-Observations-on-the-new-Top-500-list.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5028-Observations-on-the-new-Top-500-list.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=5028</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=5028</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Just did an short look on the new <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.top500.org/lists/2008/11');"  href="http://www.top500.org/lists/2008/11">Top500</a> list:<br />
<ul>
  <li>Wow ...<a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.top500.org/stats/list/32/archtype');"  href="http://www.top500.org/stats/list/32/archtype">A Constellation</a> is an own architecture type in the Top 500 list</lu>
  <li>The are just 9 <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.top500.org/stats/list/32/procfam');"  href="http://www.top500.org/stats/list/32/procfam">Itanium</a> systems left in the list.</li>
  <li>The total sum of Gigaflop per second increased from 11705491,49 on 2415203 to 16958600,19 on 3121579 procs. Thus the  yield per CPU increased from 4,85  to 5,43 Gigaflops per proc.</a>
  <li>By the way: Ten year ago, the list sumed up to 29367,61 gigaflops. That´s an performance increas of over 577 times in 10 years.</li>
  <li>When compare the actual increases with Moores law in it´s first derivation (Moore talked about transistor count, not performance), we see some interesting developments.Moores law suggests in it´s first derivation an increase in perfomance very 18 months. Over the 10,5 years period Moore´s law suggested an increase by the factor of 128.  So the performance increase  of the top 500 clusters was higher than Moores law suggest. The Top500 lists suggests a doubled performance in a little over 12 month instead on the long run.</li>
    <li>But this doubling is just correct when you look at the whole cluster. Let´s look at the CPU level and the list of 06/2007. In this list every CPU yielded 4.05 Gigaflop. The number of 06/2008 ist just increased by the factor of  1.3 in 18 month.</li>
    <li>Back to cluster level: In 06/2007 the TOP500 yielded 6974873 Gigaflop/second. In the following 18 months the the list showed an increase of  2.43 (as already mentioned, the total computing power of the Nov 2008 list was 16958600 GF/s)</li>
</ul> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/456164588" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:25:34 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5028-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5028-Observations-on-the-new-Top-500-list.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Fujitsu-Siemens joint-venture is history</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/442459903/4987-Fujitsu-Siemens-joint-venture-is-history.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4987-Fujitsu-Siemens-joint-venture-is-history.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4987</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4987</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Reuters writes in <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINT19288420081104?rpc=44#');"  href="http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINT19288420081104?rpc=44#">Fujitsu to buy Siemens stake in PC joint venture</a>:<blockquote>Japanese electronics conglomerate Fujitsu Ltd will buy Siemens AG's 50 percent stake in their computer joint venture for 450 million euros ($567 million), aiming to boost its presence </blockquote>They just talk about the PC business in this article, so there is no new information about the FSC server business. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/442459903" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 20:44:37 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4987-guid.html</guid>
    <category>fsc</category>
<category>fujitsu</category>
<category>siemens</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4987-Fujitsu-Siemens-joint-venture-is-history.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Something strange with the EMC Symmetrix DMX4</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/439402825/4978-Something-strange-with-the-EMC-Symmetrix-DMX4.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4978-Something-strange-with-the-EMC-Symmetrix-DMX4.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4978</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4978</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    There is something really strange in the numbers for the EMC Symmetrix DMX4. A colleague gave me this hint.  Just look on the <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/specification-sheet/c1166-dmx4-ss.pdf');"  href="http://www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/specification-sheet/c1166-dmx4-ss.pdf">specification sheet</a>. They state on page 2 that this system can house up to 2400 disk (albeit they restrict that in the footnote by writing that more than 1920 drives are just available on RPQ). But that´s not the point. <br />
<br />
Just look at the numbers at system capacity on page 3: They state on this whitepaper, that you can plug 1920 1 TB hard disks into the system. Okay .... let´s take the example for RAID 5 with 7+1. You could cut 240 of this RAIDs out of 1920 disks (1920/8). 240 multiplied with 7 Terabyte is 1680 Terabyte. But the maximum system capacity is stated by EMC with 585.91 Terabyte. WTF ?!?!? Where is the missing Petabyte? The first approx. 670 1 TB disks in your DMX4 gives you capacity, the other approx 1250 disks gives just heat dissipation and some nice blinking lights. <br />
<br />
I don´t really think, that there  is an error in my calculations . Why? When you calculate this for 73 GB you get 122 Terabyte ... almost the system capacity number stated on the specification sheet(you have to deduct some of the storage for internal usage, so it´s slightly less).<br />
<br />
I smell a architectural weakness here. Something like "640 Kilobyte is enough for everyone" decision ... just on a larger scale <img src="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/templates/default/img/emoticons/wink.png" alt=";-)" style="display: inline; vertical-align: bottom;" class="emoticon" /> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/439402825" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 19:27:40 +0100</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4978-guid.html</guid>
    <category>emc</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4978-Something-strange-with-the-EMC-Symmetrix-DMX4.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>HP Q3/2008</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/429369383/4952-HP-Q32008.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4952-HP-Q32008.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4952</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4952</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    The third quarter of HP is the one we call the fourth quarter at Sun. So it covers the time from April to June. There is one interesting chart in the earnings presentation of HP - the revenue for Enterprise Servers ans Storage :<br />
<center><!-- s9ymdb:523 --><img class="serendipity_image_left" width="400" height="325" style="border: 0px; padding-left: 5px; padding-right: 5px;" src="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/uploads/Bild21.serendipityThumb.png" alt=""  /></center><br />
The next earnings announcement will be an interesting one. In the next earning announcement they can´t say that they grew year over year in this area. Nevertheless, there is an clear downward trend in this chart.  Perhaps this is the reason why they bought EDS. They need that business to cover the decreasing revenue from their server branch. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/429369383" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:25:47 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4952-guid.html</guid>
    <category>business</category>
<category>hp</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4952-HP-Q32008.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>IBM results Q3/08</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/428657589/4951-IBM-results-Q308.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4951-IBM-results-Q308.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4951</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4951</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    There is a lot of interesting stuff <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.ibm.com/investor/3q08/press.phtml');"  href="http://www.ibm.com/investor/3q08/press.phtml">in the 3Q 2008 Earnings Presentation of IBM</a> (you find the <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.ibm.com/investor/3q08/presentation/3q08.pdf');"  href="http://www.ibm.com/investor/3q08/presentation/3q08.pdf">pdf</a> here). Let´s have a look at page 12: Legacy System i is 82% down, i assume the 7% up for converged System p comes from customers buying pSeries instead of iSeries. xSeries is down 18% and storage 3%. IBM Microelectronics is down 27% year to year. In total the System&Technology business lost 10% (at constant currency it´s even 11%).<br />
<br />
So yould easily say:  Software and Services rescued IBM in the last quarter.  But not everything is looking bright there. The signings for Global Services for short-term is up, but the signings for long term deals decreased 19% for strategic outsourcing, 17% down for Global Technology Service and 16% down for Global business services. <br />
<br />
By the way: SMB is mentioned often as the big strength of IBM. They make 4,7 billion $ dollars out of this segement. But you have to take into consideration, that IBM has a strong retail equipment department (point-of-sales terminals for example). 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/428657589" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:25:21 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4951-guid.html</guid>
    <category>ibm</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4951-IBM-results-Q308.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Cheap benchmarketing trick</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/426803355/4946-Cheap-benchmarketing-trick.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4946-Cheap-benchmarketing-trick.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4946</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4946</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    I already wrote about the latest benchmarketing trick of IBM in the last blog article, but this article was in german, so i repeat this in english. There was an bold statement in a recent press anouncement of IBM - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/25359.wss');"  href="http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/25359.wss">"IBM Builds on Industry-Leading UNIX Portfolio With New Servers, Software"</a>:<br />
<blockquote>The Power 560 can save up companies up to $840,000 and 80-percent in energy by consolidating 13 Sun Fire V490 servers on a single Power 560 server with PowerVM, as compared to consolidating the same number on four Sun SPARC Enterprise M5000 servers with dynamic system domains."</blockquote>I´ve asked myself, how they get to such numbers. This number of servers couldn´t based on performance. We don´t need 4 M5000 just to substitute 13 V490. But after thinking about after reading the article in the Computerwoche i found out what´s the trick of this comparision.  The trick is a cheap one ... even for IBM marketing.<br />
<br />
You can partition an M5000 in up to 4 domains. When you just want to consolidate 13 servers, you obviously need 4 systems.  This comparision doesn´t compare the compute power of the M5000 with the compute power of the p560. It compares two different virtualisation technologies. So the even the choice of 13 V490 is a really perfidious one. Twelve systems to consolidate would lead to 3 M5000, 13 systems lead to 4 because you have one domain too few. But that´s not the point: You won´t consolidate 13 V490 by using domains. You would use Solaris Containers (perhaps in conjunction with Solaris 9 Containers) for this tasks. By using this Containers you would need only one system, too. And you would need less processing power for it, as Container are a more efficient virtualisation technology in comparison to *PARS.<br />
<br />
By the way: The answer "one system" is false for both systems. Independently from the system architecture, virtualisation technology you want at least two systems and a cluster when you consolidate  13 systems on one. Without an additional standby system you are toast in the case of a system failure or maintainance. But that´s  a persistent error in every benchmarketing comparision of IBM. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/426803355" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:14:18 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4946-guid.html</guid>
    <category>benchmarketing</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4946-Cheap-benchmarketing-trick.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Liebe IBM, das ist nun echt nen selten bloeder Trick ....</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/426803356/4945-Liebe-IBM,-das-ist-nun-echt-nen-selten-bloeder-Trick-.....html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4945-Liebe-IBM,-das-ist-nun-echt-nen-selten-bloeder-Trick-.....html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4945</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4945</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Ein Kollege hat es schon ganz richtig gesagt: Dieser Artikel in der Computerwoche ist eine Denial-of-Service-Attacke auf das Sun-Marketing - <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.computerwoche.de/knowledge_center/mittelstands_it/1876238/');"  href="http://www.computerwoche.de/knowledge_center/mittelstands_it/1876238/">IBM zündet Server-Feuerwerk</a>. Denn was da erzaehlt wird, ist auch fuer IBM-Marketing-Verhältnisse echt billig. So billig, das selbst ich ein paar Minuten brauchte, um dahinter zu kommen, was es damit auf sich hat (und ich beschäftige mich häufiger damit) ...<br />
<blockquote>Der "IBM Power 560 Express"-Server verbindet laut Hersteller die Power6-Prozessor-Technologie mit verbesserter Virtualisierungsfähigkeit und Energieeffizienz. Er eigne sich insbesondere als Server-Konsolidierungs-Plattform oder als Datenbank- oder Applikations-Server. Wie der IT-Riese erklärt, können nun Mittelständler durch die Konsolidierung von dreizehn "Sun Fire V490"-Servern auf einem einzigen Power-560-Server mit PowerVM-Technologie bis zu 80 Prozent der Energie sparen im Vergleich zu einer eventuellen Konsolidierung derselben Server auf vier "Sun Sparc Enterprise M5000"-Servern mit Dynamic System Domains.</blockquote>Ich hätte mir hier von der Computerwoche ein wenig mehr Recherchetätigkeit erwartet, als bloss eine Pressemitteilung von IBM abzuschreiben. <br />
<br />
1. Wird hier wieder der uralte Benchmarketing-Trick benutzt eine eine V490(eine Maschine die sich gerade in der Abkündigung befindet) gegen eine gerade angekuendige Maschine zu vergleichen.<br />
<br />
2. Ich weiss uebrigens nicht, ob man das als Serverfeuerwerk bezeichnen sollen... eine p560 ist lediglich eine p570, die in ihrem Ausbaupotential halbiert worden ist. Also nix Neues.<br />
<br />
3. Rechnen wir doch mal durch, wie man auf vier M5000 gekommen ist. Es geht hier um die Ablöse von 13 Rechnern. Jetzt möchte die IBM diese durch 4 M5000 abloesen. Wie kommt man auf eine solche Anzahl? Es liegt nicht an der Rechenpower, sondern an diesem kleinen Kommentar wegen der Paritionierung.  Das ist recht einfach. Eine M5000 laesst sich in 4 Partitionen  aufteilen. Nutzt man diese als Paritionierungstechnik, so braucht man natuerlich zur Darstellung von 13 Rechnern 4 Systeme. So ist auch die Anzahl 13 in einer aeusserst perfiden Art gewaehlt. Bei 12 Systemen, kaeme man schon mit 3 Systemen aus, wenn man denn so konsolidieren würde. Das ist eben diese Utilisation-Quatsch (20$ fuer Sun, 60% fuer IBM)  nur etwas versteckter.<br />
<br />
Dabei muss man anmerken: Diese M5000 sind weit davon ab, auch nur ansatzweise ausgelastet zu sein. Man braucht sie nur wegen der Limitierung der Domains auf 4 pro System. Das ist der ganze Trick dahinter. Macht man das mit Containern - also auf Betriebsystemebene - kommt man auch hier locker mit einem System aus. Wobei Sun wahrscheinlich dann sogar noch mit einer weniger ausgebauten Maschine auskommen wuerde, da wir den Overhead der Virtualisierung via *PARS nicht haben.<br />
<br />
Sehr interessant ist auch, das man diese seitens IBM immer noch als Dynamic System Domains bezeichnet. Die hiessen so zu Sun Fire E10 und E20k-Zeiten. Man hat wohl bei IBM noch nicht mitbekommen, das sich die Zeit bei der Konkurrenz auch weitergedreht hat.<br />
<br />
Und was hat es jetzt mit dem Kommentar der Denial-of-Service Attacke auf unser Marketing auf sich? Naja, jedes mal, wenn wieder ein solcher Bullshit durch unsere Presselandschaft lanciert wird, muss sich unser Marketing wieder darum kuemmen so einen Mist zu kommentieren. <br />
<br />
Das Dumme ist: Man kann IBM dafuer nicht mal für vors Schienbein treten, den technisch ist das durchaus richtig, man kann eine andere Firma nicht für eine Darstellung einer dümmlichen Architektur verklagen. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/426803356" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:22:30 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4945-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4945-Liebe-IBM,-das-ist-nun-echt-nen-selten-bloeder-Trick-.....html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Analysing a so-called "Comparison" about Virtualisation at IBM Developerworks</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/422328432/4931-Analysing-a-so-called-Comparison-about-Virtualisation-at-IBM-Developerworks.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4931-Analysing-a-so-called-Comparison-about-Virtualisation-at-IBM-Developerworks.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4931</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4931</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Whenever you want to dismiss the claims of a competitor or want to set your own or prefered technology  in a better light, you should do some research on your topic. Otherwise you may end up with a document that´s outright ridiculous.<br />
<br />
I found a really strange piece of "comparison". It´s called <i>"A comparison of virtualization features of HP-UX, Solaris, and AIX"</i>. It´s written by Mr. Ken Milberg. And i wasn´t able to stop my shaking the head in disbelive. This text reinforces my personal impression, that this author is just a hired gun to publish claims even IBM doesn´t want to make. But let´s dissect his newest blurb. You shouldn´t read it ... it´s just a really abysmal document. I´ve sacrified my time to do it for you, so don´t waste your own <img src="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/templates/default/img/emoticons/wink.png" alt=";-)" style="display: inline; vertical-align: bottom;" class="emoticon" /><br />
 <br /><a href="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4931-Analysing-a-so-called-Comparison-about-Virtualisation-at-IBM-Developerworks.html#extended">Continue reading "Analysing a so-called &quot;Comparison&quot; about Virtualisation at IBM Developerworks"</a>
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/422328432" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:46:11 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4931-guid.html</guid>
    <category>ibm</category>
<category>sun</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<category>virtualisation</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4931-Analysing-a-so-called-Comparison-about-Virtualisation-at-IBM-Developerworks.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>TheRegister about the NTAP/Sun lawsuit</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/417833196/4900-TheRegister-about-the-NTAPSun-lawsuit.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4900-TheRegister-about-the-NTAPSun-lawsuit.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4900</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4900</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    The Register writes in <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/07/sun_gets_netapp_patent_invalidated/');"  href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/07/sun_gets_netapp_patent_invalidated/">NetApp faces Sun lawsuit loss</a>:<blockquote>NetApp was unable to comment immediately on this story. Sun's win - if it is a win - and the PTO decisions potentially turn NetApp's WAFL IP into, well, IP waffle. Sun gets a welcome PR boost to its ZFS and open source credentials, leaving NetApp with a bloody nose and a 22-patent IT infringement case to deal with. Oh, and the economy is going down the tubes too. It isn't so sunny in Sunnyvale right now.</blockquote> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/417833196" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:32:26 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4900-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4900-TheRegister-about-the-NTAPSun-lawsuit.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>IBM stock under pressure</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/410285227/4890-IBM-stock-under-pressure.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4890-IBM-stock-under-pressure.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4890</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4890</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    In the last few days the stock of IBM was hit quite hard. Two days with roundabout 5 percent decrease. You can wonder a little bit about this, but there is an interesting article in the "Between the lines" blog: <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10272');"  href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10272">Whats really ailing Big Blue shares? Hint: IBM is part bank</a>. Larry Dignan writes: <blockquote>Big Blues financing unit, which leases hardware and finances projects, is big enough that the Securities and Exchange Commission put IBM on the do not short list. This list is designed to get shortsfolks that bet against stocksoff the backs of financial services companies long enough to raise capital or at least survive.</blockquote>Thus IBM is possibly hit by two trucks: By economic slowdown as a computer ... sorry ... consulting company and by the credit crisis as a financial company. The article is really an interesting read. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/410285227" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 13:31:53 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4890-guid.html</guid>
    <category>ibm</category>
<category>stocks</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4890-IBM-stock-under-pressure.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Zemlin on the NYT article based on Zemlins quotes</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/407281648/4883-Zemlin-on-the-NYT-article-based-on-Zemlins-quotes.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4883-Zemlin-on-the-NYT-article-based-on-Zemlins-quotes.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4883</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4883</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.itwire.com/content/view/20898/1090/');"  href="http://www.itwire.com/content/view/20898/1090/">Interesting quote</a> of the person who got the stone rolling:<blockquote>Linux Foundation executive director Jim Zemlin had two words to describe the article - "sensational and regrettable."</blockquote>Well ... Mr. Zemlin, this sensational article had its start in sensational quotes ... 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/407281648" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:26:42 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4883-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4883-Zemlin-on-the-NYT-article-based-on-Zemlins-quotes.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Server Market in Europe as seen by IDC</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/406426966/4880-Server-Market-in-Europe-as-seen-by-IDC.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4880-Server-Market-in-Europe-as-seen-by-IDC.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4880</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4880</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    TPM cites in <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh092908-story07.html');"  href="http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh092908-story07.html">"RISC and Itanium Server Makers Do Well in Europe, Says IDC"</a> a research of IDC about the server market in Europe:<blockquote>Growth for high-end servers was strong, with banks, telcos, and manufacturers picking up lots of iron and with Power6 and Sparc machines doing particularly well, according to IDC<br />
<i>[...]</i><br />
Sun Microsystems came in third in EMEA, helped hugely by sales of the Sparc Enterprise M line of rebadged Fujitsu iron, with $577 million in sales, up 1.9 percent.</blockquote>But there is another interesting number in the article:<blockquote>Windows servers had a 10.3 percent growth in the quarter in EMEA, but Linux server sales actually fell by 1.8 percent, the first time since early 2002 when Linux showed a decline.</blockquote>This is an interesting development as the complete Unix server market grew at 8 percent. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/406426966" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:41:44 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4880-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4880-Server-Market-in-Europe-as-seen-by-IDC.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Fu(Siemens)tsu-Siemens</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/400727861/4857-FuSiemenstsu-Siemens.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4857-FuSiemenstsu-Siemens.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4857</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4857</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    George Santayana sagte mal: "Wer sich der Geschichte nicht erinnert, ist dazu verdammt, sie zu wiederholen." Danach sieht die Nummer mit dem angeblichen Ausstieg von Siemens irgendwie auch aus. Ein Kollege hat mich darauf hingewiesen, wo das "ji" zwischen "Fu" und "tsu" herkommt. Die <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujitsu');"  href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujitsu">Wikipedia</a> schreibt dazu: <blockquote>Als Hersteller für Telefonzubehör wurde die Fujitsu Limited 1935 in Tokio unter dem Namen Fuji Ts&#363;shinki Seiz&#333; (&#23500;&#22763;&#36890;&#20449;&#27231;&#35069;&#36896;) gegründet. Sie entstand aus dem Kommunikationsbereich der Fuji Electric Company und war ein Joint Venture mit dem deutschen Unternehmen Siemens. Hieraus entstand auch der Name Fujitsu, der sich aus Fuji Electric, J&#299;menzu (Siemens auf Japanisch) und Ts&#363;shin, dem japanischen Wort für Kommunikation, zusammensetzt</blockquote><br />
 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/400727861" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:16:01 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4857-guid.html</guid>
    <category>fsc</category>
<category>fujitsu</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4857-FuSiemenstsu-Siemens.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>TPM at TheRegister?</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/400058869/4854-TPM-at-TheRegister.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4854-TPM-at-TheRegister.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4854</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4854</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Looks like Timothy Prickett Morgan works for the Register. I read an article from him a few minutes ago <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/22/sun_microsystems_server_plans/');"  href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/22/sun_microsystems_server_plans/">Sun faces up to the 64 thread question with T2+</a>. He still didn´t get the correct codenames as in it´s ITjungle columns, even when they <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/blogs.sun.com/marchamilton/entry/the_register_just_isn_t');"  href="http://blogs.sun.com/marchamilton/entry/the_register_just_isn_t">are public</a> for quite a while now .. <img src="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/templates/default/img/emoticons/wink.png" alt=";-)" style="display: inline; vertical-align: bottom;" class="emoticon" /> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/400058869" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:01:35 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4854-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4854-TPM-at-TheRegister.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Fun with Heise.de - today: the SAP SD benchmark</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/398806016/4846-Fun-with-Heise.de-today-the-SAP-SD-benchmark.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4846-Fun-with-Heise.de-today-the-SAP-SD-benchmark.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4846</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4846</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Why did i wrote <a href="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4841-On-Benchmarketing-The-role-of-unicode.html">the article about the "non-unicode/unicode" benchmarketing</a>? Because of articles like this one: <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.heise.de/newsticker/SAP-Benchmarkergebnisse-fuer-Intels-neuen-Hexa-Core-Prozessor--/meldung/115909');"  href="http://www.heise.de/newsticker/SAP-Benchmarkergebnisse-fuer-Intels-neuen-Hexa-Core-Prozessor--/meldung/115909">SAP-Benchmarkergebnisse für Intels neuen Hexa-Core-Prozessor</a>.  It´s frightning. The publications of the publisher Heise had a good reputation in the past. But they jumped the shark long time ago. They should really stay at testing displays and notebooks and something like that and Andreas Stiller should transform his "Prozessorgefluester" column into an independent blog. One of the highlights of the last few day - "Don´t understand the nature of benchmarks": <blockquote>Bei den Vierprozessorsystemen konnte sich HPs ProLiant DL580 G5 mit Windows Server 2003 und Microsoft SQL Server 2005 mit 5155 SD-Usern(1,97 s, 25.380 SAPS) klar vor Suns Fire X4450 mit Solaris 10 und MaxDB 7.6 behaupten, das nur auf 4600 SD-User (1,94s, 23120 SAPS) kommt.</blockquote>As i wrote before, the HP result of 25380 SAPS is a non-unicode result, the Sun result is based on a unicode installation. So dear Heise.de: Before drawing any conclusions from existing data, try to understand the data.<br />
<br />
 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/398806016" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 10:52:52 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4846-guid.html</guid>
    <category>heise</category>
<category>hp</category>
<category>sun</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4846-Fun-with-Heise.de-today-the-SAP-SD-benchmark.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Zerschlagung von FSC?</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/398806017/4845-Zerschlagung-von-FSC.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4845-Zerschlagung-von-FSC.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4845</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4845</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    In der Euro am Sonntag(ich werd nachher mal in den von mir präferierten Bahnhofsbuchhandel gehen) steht ein Bericht über die angeblich schon weit fortgeschrittene Zerschlagung von Fujitsu-Siemens. So schreibt <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.golem.de/0809/62535.html');"  href="http://www.golem.de/0809/62535.html">golem.de</a>:<blockquote>Siemens betreibt die Trennung von Fujitsu Siemens weiter. Wie die Wirtschaftszeitung Euro am Sonntag aus informierten Kreise erfahren hat, wird derzeit ein Modell diskutiert, nachdem der japanische Fujitsu-Konzern den Anteil von Siemens im ersten Schritt übernehmen und das Endkunden-Geschäft später abstoßen wird. Als möglicher Interessent gelte der chinesische Computerhersteller Lenovo, der bereits das Notebookgeschäft IBMs übernommen hat. Fujitsu ist offenbar "vor allem an der Geschäftskundensparte interessiert", so das Blatt weiter. </blockquote>So leid es mir für die Mitarbeiter fuer FSC tut (ich glaube nicht, das das ohne Kahlschlag dort abgehen wird) ... ich denke das kann hier durchaus interessant werden fuer Sun in Deutschland. Siemens ist immer noch eine Firma mit tiefer Verwurzelung im Governmentbereich. Ist halt so irgendwie immer noch eine deutsche Firma, obwohl das bei so grossen Firmen oftmals irgendwie auch nur noch so halb stimmt. Ich denke, das Siemens sich nicht dieses Zubrot entgehen lassen wird, auch wenn vielleicht nicht mehr Teilhabe an FSC hat.<br />
<br />
FSC ist ja nun einer der Vertriebsarme fuer die System der Sparc Enterprise M-Klasse. Frage ist, ob sich Fujitsu diesen Arm in Zukunft noch leisten will, oder ob das dann über Sun laufen wird. Ich stecke aber in den Eigenheiten dieser Zusammenarbeit viel zu wenig drin, um da irgendwas nicht vollkommen Spekulatives sagen zu koennen. Ich denke, da lassen sich in der Zukunft aeusserst interessante zusätzliche Moeglichkeiten der Zusammenarbeit finden. Schaun wir mal ...<br />
<br />
Aber man wird abwarten muessen, wie das Modell wirklich aussehen wird. Interessanter wird hier die Frage, ob es FSC oder der Nachfolger schafft, das Vertrauen aufrecht zu erhalten. Seit der Benq-Nummer verfallen ja Deutsche in solchen Situation in eine kollektive Empörungsschnappatmung.<br />
 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/398806017" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 09:12:19 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4845-guid.html</guid>
    <category>fsc</category>
<category>it-business</category>
<category>siemens</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4845-Zerschlagung-von-FSC.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>The solid part of a bancrupt bank ...</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/396200367/4836-The-solid-part-of-a-bancrupt-bank-....html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4836-The-solid-part-of-a-bancrupt-bank-....html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4836</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4836</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    There are some people with the opinion, that IT doesn´t matter. There are some people making a living from reiterating this thesis again and again. But after a bankruptcy of an investment bank this is pretty much the most valuable  part of the remaining carcass.Datacenter Knowledge writes in "<a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2008/09/17/data-centers-key-to-lehman-sale-to-barclays/');"  href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2008/09/17/data-centers-key-to-lehman-sale-to-barclays/">Data Centers Key to Lehman Sale to Barclays"</a>:<blockquote>Lehman Brothers real estate, including two data centers, proved central to a deal yesterday in which Barclays agreed to pay $1.75 billion to acquire most of Lehmans North American operations. The data centers and Lehmans headquarters building accounted for $1.5 billion of the deals value, with the British bank  paying just $250 million in cash for Lehmans North American investment banking and capital markets businesses.</blockquote> 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/396200367" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:42:55 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4836-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4836-The-solid-part-of-a-bancrupt-bank-....html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>A fabless AMD?</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/387707217/4814-A-fabless-AMD.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4814-A-fabless-AMD.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4814</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4814</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    According to the article <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/09/08/re-engineering-amd/');"  href="http://bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/09/08/re-engineering-amd/">"Re-engineering AMD"</a> in Fortune´s BigTech blog AMD plans to spinoff it´s fabs: <blockquote>Since it cant afford to do this anymore, AMD plans to spin off its chip manufacturing operations by years end, probably by hawking them outright or by inking a partnership with a larger chipmaker  a maneuver akin to selling a house and leasing it back.<br />
[...]<br />
Were going to go away from a captive fab model to more of a fables model for the CPU part of the business, Meyer says. Longer-term, it relieves us of the burden of having to shell out cash for these gigantic factories. So it will be more of a pay-as-you-go model like a traditional fables semiconductor company.</blockquote>Not a good news. I hope that this spin-off won´t lead to lay-offs for the fine people at the Dresden fab. 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/387707217" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:42:46 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4814-guid.html</guid>
    <category>amd</category>
<category>the it business</category>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4814-A-fabless-AMD.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
    <title>Boomerang ad campaigns</title>
    <link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~3/387389573/4810-Boomerang-ad-campaigns.html</link>
            <category>The IT Business</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4810-Boomerang-ad-campaigns.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/wfwcomment.php?cid=4810</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=4810</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>nospam@example.com (Joerg Moellenkamp)</author>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[
    Perhaps you remember Microsofts ad campaign regarding with the fake newspaper "The highly reliable Times". There was one version <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.microsoft.com/uk/getthefacts/default.mspx');"  href="http://www.microsoft.com/uk/getthefacts/default.mspx">with the London Stock Exchange</a>:<br />
<br />
 <center><a class='serendipity_image_link' href='http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/uploads/Bild4.jpg' target="_blank"><!-- s9ymdb:509 --><img class="serendipity_image_center" width="400" height="178" style="border: 0px; padding-left: 5px; padding-right: 5px;" src="http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/uploads/Bild4.serendipityThumb.jpg" alt=""  /></a></center><br />
I think this one got back like a boomerang: <a onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/extlink/www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;amp;articleId=9114283&amp;amp;source=rss_news50');"  href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;articleId=9114283&amp;source=rss_news50">Network failure halts London Stock Exchange trading</a>. Even when it´s not Microsofts fault, this will stick, something like a collateral CNN moment ... 
    <img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/C0t0d0s0org-TheItBusiness/~4/387389573" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 06:59:51 +0200</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4810-guid.html</guid>
    <creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/</creativeCommons:license>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/4810-Boomerang-ad-campaigns.html</feedburner:origLink></item>

</channel>
</rss>
