Date:         Mon, 30 Sep 1996 16:11:20 -0400
Reply-To:     Tim Browning <timbrowning@CONSULTEC-INC.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
Comments:     RFC822 error: <W> Incorrect or incomplete address field found and
              ignored.
Comments:     RFC822 error: <W> Incorrect or incomplete address field found and
              ignored.
From:         Tim Browning <timbrowning@CONSULTEC-INC.COM>
Organization: Consultec, Inc.
Subject:      MICS vs MXG for Capacity Planning & Performance Reporting

I have used both MICS (a very large and impressive SAS application) and
MXG (a more lean-and-mean but also impressive SAS application) for
capacity planning and performance reporting for multiple MVS systems.
Our company is looking at the relative merits of MICS vs MXG to provide
metrics and reporting on computer performance and capacity as our
computing environment grows.
 
I tend to prefer what I know best, which, in this case, is MICS.
However, MXG is also very impressive. And much, much cheaper.
 
Anyone out there worked with BOTH products in the context of Capacity
Planning that might give me some insight as which is a better product in
large, complex MVS environments?