It probably sounds like a fairy tale to a harried IT manager at a small or medium business (SMB): Do more with less and still keep everybody happy. It doesn't seem possible. However, a number of analysts assert that that's just what can be done, thanks to the integration of the System i and IBM's new BladeCenter.

At businesses with fewer than 1,000 employees, System i servers often run mission-critical applications, but they aren't alone in the data center. Another infrastructure usually supports applications and software such as Microsoft Exchange.

"Small businesses are among the most enthusiastic users of Windows systems. So it's very, very common if you go to small businesses that run System i to see them sitting in the midst of a sea of other Windows servers," says Charles King, principal analyst at Pund-IT research firm.

Backing up this anecdotal observation is IBM's own data. Published reports have Big Blue estimating that three out of four System i installations run in a mixed operating system environment with Windows, UNIX, and Linux possibly present.

It's the navigation of that operating system sea that strains SMB's IT departments. In the past, the multiplicity of architectures has meant growing at least two server footprints to meet expanding demand. Each footprint came with its own maintenance costs, had its own cycle of technology changes, required its own administrative skill set, and presented its own challenges. For example, one of the resource-draining issues with Windows-heavy sites is managing and monitoring multiple servers and administering user IDs and passwords.

These burdens don't fall on organizations that invest substantially in IT staff members. According to surveys done by Forrester Research, SMBs spend 25 percent less of their IT budgets on staffing than do larger, enterprise firms.

However, Forrester analysts noted in a report that combining System i5 with the recently introduced BladeCenter offered shops a way out. In the report, "Windows On IBM System i — Short-List It?", authors Brad Day, Simon Yates, and Christine Atwood suggest that because the two provide streamlined communication through virtual Ethernet, smoother system configuration and management, and an integrated approach to storage and backup, the combination of System i and BladeCenter allows for a virtualized, hybrid architecture that can save space, reduce electricity consumption, and cut cooling costs.

Clay Ryder, president of The Sageza Group, Inc., cited one real-world virtualization example at a data center conference last year. His tale concerned an SMB faced with having to more than double its server farm to accommodate an OS mix of Linux, Windows, and UNIX. By going with a single System i5 with virtual partitions, the firm saved substantial money. For instance, with the new arrangement there was no need to increase the number of IT personnel, which in the old setup would have had to almost double. As a savings bonus, thanks to the server consolidation, the administrative load on the existing IT staff dropped considerably, freeing them for other tasks.

"System i can provide a management environment to help tame the Windows universe and integrate much of the two environments either directly through IXS [Integrated xSeries Server] inside a System i or through IXA [Integrated xSeries Adapter] to external x86 servers or BladeCenter," Ryder says.

However, he adds, such integration doesn't happen by magic. There is effort involved, both in integration activities and the initial work. On the other hand, the benefits often make the effort worthwhile. According to Ryder, the factors that impact the gain from integration involve the size of the IT organization and the number of discrete Windows servers that are to be virtualized.

Pund-IT's King estimates that 100 Windows Intel-based servers can be consolidated to 30 or fewer systems via virtualization. He, too, notes that there can be potential pitfalls such as inadequate contingency planning about what to do if a blade fails. But, he quickly points out, those concerns apply whenever a critical application is running. With server consolidation, the only difference is one of scale, he says. "You need to think ahead about the kind of backup and fail-over solutions you've got in place."