IBM's Power 5 gets HP's full-FUD treatment

IBM IS TALKING up its future Power5 architectures and the upcoming delivery of the Power4+ processor in the p690 and p670 servers, but while the friendly and nattily-attired IBM rep drones on about speeds, feeds, and CMP, we at The INQ thinq there is a critical question that Power4 and Power4+ customers should be asking IBM. "Is my Power4 or 4+ system upgradeable to Power5 through an in-chassis upgrade or does it require yet another box swap?"

This, at least, is the full flowing FUD that HP is telling big tin buyers, it has emerged.

Whether the IBM rep squirms, shuffles, or tries to change the subject, the fact is that box swaps often are accompanied by higher total cost of ironship (TCO), due in no small part to the time spent in performing the system transplant as compared to a simple in-chassis upgrade.

The labour cost of a union forklift operator has to be figured into the equation, too. In addition, a box swap requires a change in the system's serial number, impacting the company's financial depreciation and even directly impacting support contracts and software licences.

HP is using the box swap argument and claims that claims that it will offer an in-cabinet upgrade capability for rp54xx, rp7405, rp7410, rp8400, and Superdome servers throughout the life of PA-RISC technology and on to the Intel Itanium architecture.

The HP line is that total cost of ironship is now very important to chief misinformation officers, and claims that IBM's Power architecture is proprietary.

Some might argue that the Itanium itself is proprietary, and the wise will recall that when Eck "Haircut" Pfeiffer bought DEC and the Alpha/Unix technology with it, he had a tough time explaining how "industry standard" had sported a whole new meaning. µ