Regarding VMs: It took quite some time until Microsoft started officially supporting VMs - full support for VMware for example was added last year.
Also note that there is a difference between using consumer oriented products like VMware Workstation, VirtualPC (which sucks in every way), Virtualbox and enterprise oriented virtualization solutions like VMware ESX/ESXi or Microsoft’s Hyper-V. I’ve managed production environments with the latter, and they work well.

The real need for virtualization comes (IMO) in order to segregate applications onto multiple servers - which is a requirement for most 3rd party apps, and even some first party apps. The reasons for this are mostly stupid, but virtualization helps saving hardware in those cases.

In larger environments, virtualization has evolved - vmotion, storage vmotion are new technologies, that also have just been added to IBMs virtualization strategy (partition mobility). They allow new use cases for VMs, like hardware independent deployment, which is very cool.

The per-socket licensing for Windows is done by the Windows Server Datacenter product.

The other more specific entries are valid as well. You well could use less hardware and different cost to justify it out and save money, but I was working from 8 years of Notes and invoices I have collected and was using a very “general” brush to paint it all.

As for the VM comments. I was not aware that Microsoft offered pricing per CPU, that is news to me. I kind of gave up on the idea of Microsoft VMs years ago, they have always had VM issues and have always had points where you have to wonder if its the VM or the Windows causing this trouble. I have never been comfortable with Windows on a VM, I don’t think Windows has either. I will submit that there are plenty of shops out there doing it, I just have to wonder if they are doing it for the “cool” factor or they really mean it.

-David

But the rest of your post is all downhill.

If you make statements like: . First Windows has trouble managing large volumes of data you’lll have to qualify them.

a) What do you mean by “large volumes of data”? Databases? Large files? Many small files? A large number of single files in the same directory?

b) # Windows AD Server (PDC) - Quad CPU - Built for Growth - $10K-$15
Four CPUs for a DC? They’re not usually not CPU bound. Yes, quality hardware isn’t cheap, i would go for a good two socket server, add a quad core CPU, enough RAM to fit the whole ntds.dit (so depending on the size of your AD environment) - for 3000 guys probably around 4-8GB.

Also: There’s no distinction between DCs - there are no BDCs since Windows 2000. Exception: FSMO roles. They do not consume resources in day-to-day usage.

c) # Anti Virus for Windows Servers - ($2K Each) X 8 = $16K
Hmm. McAfee is licensed per node. We have about 50 nodes. We paid about 7000 CHF for all of them (perpetual license). We pay 4000 CHF per year for support & software upgrades.

d) If you wanted to build 50 Windows Virtual Machines, you would pay for that OS 50 times?

No, you would license Windows on a per-CPU base.

e) You can in fact put a Intel based card in your IBM i and run Windows on your POWER system. The cards are cheap compared to a server and as far as you know it’s Windows.

The cards are WDM. They’re replaced by iSCSI attached Blades in an IBM BladeCenter. So they’re exactly the same, except that you use an IBM i as a SAN instead of a DS3300.

f) Say you are paying for support from IBM and version 7 comes out for the IBM i, they just send it to you.

Nice. Microsoft has two seperate offers for that: Software Assurance for the updates, and Support contracts for support. IBM merges them into one product, MS has two.

Please - there is a lot of valid criticism for Microsoft, but the second part of your post is just pointless “Microsoft sucks” drivel. It doesn’t help anyone, it just makes the (very good) first part of your post look worse.

What they all fail to include is the cost or expense that it took to get you to that point and how that is now ll wasted as well.

The IBM Power Systems are a one stop drop in solution in any IT shop. Hands down. If you are not at least looking at that as a solution then you are doing your company and your BoD a disservice.

Thanks for the “HINT”

-David

I do have a question though. In your article you state “If you want the same class of service with IBM you are going to have to pay nearly three times what you pay for IBMs support.”

Did you mean to say “If you want the same class of service with MICROSOFT you are going to have to pay nearly three times what you pay for IBMs support.” or did I misunderstand the sentence?

Too many IBM i shops have seen this or are about to see it and for no other reason than IBM has dropped the ball in getting the word out and Technology C level people today are intimidated by everything IBM puts out because the assume it cost a lot. When it really is in line with what what they want to do with someone eases technology. Sadly most companies under use the IBM i.