Re: FAST400 alive and well???

...or will IBM, in time, "suggest" that the user base migrate to JAVA.....

?????

On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Nathan M. Andelin wrote:

> > From: "Chuck Lewis"
> > See you got that email too. I would have thought they
> > would have had to setup shop somewhere else besides
> > England to escape IBM legal (not that I am encouraging
> > that !)...
>
> They sent me an email too.  One interesting side-note.  According to Dave
> Slater at IBM, one of his goals is to "Convert the WebFacing runtime support
> so that WebFaced applications run in batch mode and avoid the
> cost/performance penalties associated with interactive execution."
>
> The question is how will IBM do it?  The easiest solution would be for IBM
> to do something like FAST400, which would be to set the bit that currently
> flags a Webfaced job as interactive.  But that would probably irritate folks
> at Jacada and Pluta Brothers who were forced to come up with their own
> alternatives to IBM's Workstation Interface in order to solve interactive
> performance penalties.
>
> Will IBM's Webfacing product continue to use the existing *DSPF and
> Workstation Interface?  Or will IBM do what it requires it's competition to
> do.  That is, design an alternative interface.  It seems to me that IBM
> could run into trouble if their applications were able to use Interactive
> features (existing workstation interface) without an interactive penalty,
> but the products of other developers could not.
>
> Nathan M. Andelin
> www.relational-data.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>