
Do modern tech companies ever move to mainframes? - greenhouse_gas
In my mind, mainframes are associated with either:<p>1. Old software<p>2. Large not-tech companies who outsource their IT department.<p>Do any modern tech companies actually migrate to mainframes?
======
twunde
I've never heard of one doing so. I'd attribute it to a few things: 1) modern
tech companies already have a workforce that's familiar with the cloud and
modern technologies. They're unlikely to have many employees with Cobol
experience (both coding experience and general Cobol interaction) 2) few of
these companies want to be beholden to IBM and the like for their mainframes.
3) Many of these tech companies have requirements for near real-time streaming
whereas Cobol's wheelhouse is batch processing 4) Reputation that it's
difficult AND expensive to keep cobol/mainframe divisions well-staffed as
there aren't many new developers coming onboard and many of the existing
developers are retiring 5) Relative uncoolness of Cobol

~~~
marktangotango
Minor note, CICS (and impls with screen divisions) implement psuedo-stateful
interactions similar to http with tempoary storage queues in place of
sessions. The 3270 client is textual as opposed to graphical like html of
course.

------
Rjevski
Only when someone is extremely stupid (or has a stake in the outcome) and
falls for the marketing bullshit like the following: [https://www.ibm.com/it-
infrastructure/z](https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z) (warning - graphic
content)

------
AnimalMuppet
Once you had database clusters, it became possible to run a bunch of machines
rather than one giant machine. That turned out to be less expensive for most
people. The machines were cheaper, because they could be commodity machines,
because each individual machine didn't have the insane reliability
requirements that mainframes have.

------
usgroup
Yes, MPI and HDF5 are still a thing and processing on a supercomputer is still
orders of magnitude faster than the usual distributed approaches.

However applications would likely be science, engineering and finance.

All you have to do is go to a vendors page and check out the flagship
customers.

------
Chyzwar
For me, the mainframe is a big expensive box. Vertical scaling is still a
thing. Most RDBMS work best on big boxes. Some Java applications would require
hundreds of GB of ram. There are use-cases for mainframes but people prefer
new shiny Kube clusters.

------
arthev
What’s the difference between a mainframe and ‘the cloud’?

~~~
twunde
I'm pretty sure you're being facetious, but I'll answer anyway for anyone
reading this that doesn't get it.

There was a great article a few years back talking about how mainframes and
the cloud were similar architectures with a focus on the challenges of multi-
tenancy and focused on the fact that the cloud companies were hiring some
people who had helped develop mainframes. For the life of me, I can't find it
now (all my searches just bring up articles about migrating mainframes to the
cloud).

Some of the main differences is that mainframes had an integrated coding
environment (and usually no dev/staging/prod separation). Probably more
important is that mainframes are usually built to be highly reliable (hardware
failures are rare), whereas most cloud providers are using commodity servers
that are meant to fail often (If you're using AWS at any sort of scale, you've
probably seen a server go down because of a hardware failure). With mainframes
you're typically paying the cost upfront (CapEx) and amortizing the cost over
time (with mainframes being expected to last 10+ years?) vs the OpEx cost of
the cloud.

~~~
arthev
I have read some similar article(s), I think.

Pricing models don’t necessarily rely on the underlying technology, IMO.
(Consider the ol’ paid-for vs vendor-bundled browsers.)

I’m not sure whether reliability makes for different categories either:
different OSes have different focus on reliability, but are all OSes, after
all. Definitely makes for different use-cases, though!

I also wonder whether the integrated coding environment and staging aspect
primarily reflects general developments in coding workflow. That is, whether
they are an incidental or intrinsic difference. It would probably have been
much easier to make up my mind on that if I had any mainframe experience.

Categorization depends on how you draw the lines, and I definitely have a bias
towards assuming hyped-up stuff is probably less interesting or new than the
hype makes it out to be. Though, I haven’t made up my mind whether to consider
mainframes and ‘the cloud’ different instances of the same thing.

Thanks for the reply, interesting stuff!

