Re: Cheaper Servers? - Been there - done that

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
1)  Why do people feel that telnet is the only 'native' access to the
iSeries?


Rob Berendt
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin




Dr Syd Nicholson <sydnic@ccs400.com>
Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
04/10/2002 10:50 AM
Please respond to midrange-l


        To:     midrange-l@midrange.com
        cc:
        Fax to:
        Subject:        Re: Cheaper Servers? - Been there - done that


--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
To create a real portable iSeries IBM need to create a GUI AS/400.
Unless that happens we will always need another PC system to connect to
it.

A native OS/400 GUI and native iSeries display, keyboard and mouse. A
prime requirement for a laptop iSeries.

The only 'native' display access an iSeries has is green screen text
based. This must seriously hinder sales in an all GUI world.

Perhaps an X-Server type approach and a third party product such as KDE
or Gnome would be the way forward.

Politically I don't think IBM have any interest in this. They work on
the basis that everyone uses Windoze so they only provide GUI software
(eg. CA/400, Ops Nav, Code/400) to run under Windoze. In so doing they
FORCE all their customers to use Windoze. Please correct me if I am
wrong, but I am not aware of any IBM created CA/400 software for other
operating systems (eg. Linux). They insist we use Ops Nav, and Ops Nav
only runs under Windoze.

Personally I concluded that even maintaining a small Windoze network was
too expensive on my time. I now use Linux (much better, and more stable)
and question IBM's commitment to Linux. They seem to want it on their
servers (the words bandwagon and jump spring to mind) but I don't know
of any serious client side Linux developments. I would love to see a
CA/400 for Linux.

Syd Nicholson



Shields, Ken wrote:

>I guess this explains why the Portable /400 box flopped.
>The technology has changed considerably, hell, they could probably get
Dell to build it for them...shut my mouth!
>LOL
>Ken
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dr Syd Nicholson [mailto:sydnic@ccs400.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:04 AM
>To: midrange-l@midrange.com
>Subject: Re: Cheaper Servers? - Been there - done that
>
>
>I got one of these. Great wee box.
>
>Biggest drawbacks.
>
>  - Too much heavy cabling to attache console, tape drive, etc.  Almost
>makes it non-portable. If the console is not there it still works but
>the yellow light is on and it displays an SRC code. If I go anywhere
>with it I take a MAU, token ring cable, and a lap top as well. A lot of
>stuff to lug about. Not taking the tape drive (which is a another
>significabtly sized box) means I cannot do any back up, saves or
>restores whilst away. The absence of the console cable when away from
>office limits functions that may be required if something goes wrong. If
>I don't leave all these things behind the machine is certainly not
>portable.
>
> - Insufficient disk capacity - only 2 GB. Can't load this with much in
>the way of applications/data. IBM always under sizes disks and charges a
>small fortune for them.
>
> - Insufficent memory - its very slow - 24MB
>
>It is still a useful machine still, even thought it is stuck on V3R2.
>IBM only went part way with this one. I think it must have been an
>experiment to see what kind of response they would get. Unfortnately,
>they didn't make it portable enough, or give it sufficient capacity to
>be realistic and this restricted sales. Perhaps another example of IBM
>not quite understanding their customer requirements.
>
>Syd Nicholson
>
>
>
>Vernon Hamberg wrote:
>
>>FYI - From v3r2 Handbook
>>
>>>AS/400 Advanced Portable is a full-function, multi-user AS/400 that is
>>>easily transportable and capable of running all AS/400 applications. It
>>>can be used for development and testing of new applications, as well as
>>>training and customer support activities consistent with supporting
>>>multiple, remote, or distributed systems.
>>>
>>>AS/400 Advanced Portable is offered in predefined packages, five
>>>twinaxial-based systems (9401-P03, T01, T02, T03, T11, and T12),
>>>three LAN
>>>based systems (9401-P03, L01, L02, and L03), and a server (9401-10S,
>>>S01).
>>>
>>
>>Now, y'all can tell me why this did not fly the last time IBM tried
>>this. I
>>don't know, personally.
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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.
>_______________________________________________
>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.
>

--

_______________________________________________
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.