RE: Free OS/400

Having read the messages in the thread so far, I would add my thoughts for 
what they are worth.

The message by Bob Cozzi is a rather bleak one. If it is true, that the 
year 2002/2003 is correct, you may wonder, why IBM put a lot of effort in 
RPG free format syntax (FFS). The community has asked for it for a decade 
and now IBM yields to the request. The FFS resembles in syntax other 
languages like Java and C. (Some would say FFS RPG has specific 
characteristics not found in other languages, on which I would answer: NOT 
FOR LONG!!). I think, it is the next phase of the  transition (first the 
name of the system, then the most used language on that system).

I agree with him on the graphical interface: the nonsense of OpsNav is a 
full lie. You can configure an AS/400 with OpsNav nowadays, in some cases 
thers is no OS/400 alternative (as it should have been): this is like 
configuring an NT-server from a UNIX-box.

I fear, IBM has lost its sense of direction here, because the focus of the 
last years has been on the Web, Java, Lynux, XML; nothing originally IBM's. 
Alas,  perhaps over ten years they will pick up the requests from the 
community.

But the main point is the difference between an GUI like Windows and the 
green screen of an AS/400. The development of recent years has seen a shift 
to GUI and the Web. All new programmes should be focussed on that. The 
AS/400 is not graphical, thus can be used as a server; hence, the revival 
of C/S and the rise of the Web.

Unfortunately, the success of any GUI has not proven a growth in 
productivity or efficiency by the users. Green screen applications are 
better suited for that. But it is the interface, the looks that counts, not 
the functionality, the contents.

Comparing a GUI operating system (OS) like Windows with OS/400 is 
"comparing apples with pears". Both OS's have their qualities and their 
weaknesses (the AS/400 has a green screen, Windows has a blue screen, for 
instance). And yet the two OS's have a lot in common:
multiple processing (think of subsystems);
multiple applications open (on th AS/400: secondary jobs, second sessions 
and most of all: group jobs)

And the tendency to put all applications onto the Web is not a realistic 
approach, either. There are applications that I would never like to 
webenable: applications dealing with financial transactions or  private 
information (human resources, salaries).

There is one application in my shop, that I would like to put on the web. 
That is our resource capacity planning application. It now runs 
interactively on a daily basis and uses a lot of CPU (over 60%). On the Web 
I can utilize all other servers, freeing ours to service other jobs. And 
this application is only for internal use, not worth considering to webenable.


Just my thoughts,

Carel Teijgeler