Is there a point when consolidating / virtualising to a mainframe makes more sense? (2 posts)

Is there a point when consolidating / virtualising to a mainframe makes more sense?

A few months back I wrote about Allianz's decision to consolidate its server farm to a mainframe instead of virtualising to wintel machines. (Here is the story - http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/324815/allianz_consolidates_from_60_servers_1_mainframe_48_hours/)

Since then I've spoken to a number of people about whether big corporations - especially those with lots of transactional business - should skip virtualising to blades / racks and instead go with a mainframe / big iron.

Not surprisingly, the views are divergent dependent on the kind of IT shop you currently run or the vendor you are associated with.

But I'd be interested to hear just when the mainframe / big iron discussion comes into the picture - is there a point at which it just makes more sense?

I can't help but feel that by the time you can actually afford the mainframe, you've learnt to live without it.

People who then go and get the mainframe anyway, are doing more than chosing to use a mainframe. They're changing how they do IT.