RE: Open Forum Results (Was: CRTTOIMPF and CSV)

>Ken:
>I not sure it is appropriate to compare an operating system to a
>database. Unless you want to consider OS/400 is considered an 
>operating system and a database.

That would be fine if you held yourself to the same standard.  You said the
CPYTOIMPF was an example of how the iSeries doesn't play well with others.
Were you only talking about other integrated OS/Database platforms?

It seems foolish for you to cry "no fair" when I compare OS/400's CSV export
to other database platforms such as Oracle, particularly when you brought up
"others".

>><snip>
>>You obviously get under my skin with your
>>"typical iSeries" comments because
>>I've worked with people like you for years.
>></snip>
>>
>I suppose if we all went away your preferences can 
>be left to dominate. Millions of fewer people on 
>this planet would sure help as well.

Wow, that's a stretch.

Your selective snipping misses the point.  There will always be
compatibility problems between systems.  Compatibility is a two-way street.
It's not about my preferences.  It's about people who escalate technical
issues and basic compatibility problems into unsupportable, unnecessary
general statements.

>>What I have been taking exception to is the Ken Slaugh dim view.
>Jim..  It is your option to defend what I post. But unless I have offended
>you personally then your personal attacks are out of line.

It's not a personal attack -- a dim view is a dim view.  If you choose to
take it personally perhaps it will lead to a brighter view.

>Attacking the first amendment rights within this 
>forum is counterproductive.

Such drama.  No one attacked your first amendment rights. 

>Actually the reason this forum works so well 
>is that we all can post our problems, opinions 
>and concerns. 

Yep, we all can.

>Through the years I have
>seen many issues or situations posted 
>on midrange-l which far too often are
>minimized or discredited altogether as opinion.
>When this happens, the person who posted doesn't 
>get their resolution, which is exactly what they
>were hoping for in the first place. 

Your issues were answered.  Nothing was "discredited" as opinion -- it was
"identified" as opinion.

>My original post was acted upon in this
>manner when I received replies stating 
>my database was wrong and my network
>was screwed up. Neither of these statements 
>were altogether true or
>productive which caused me to defend my needs.

Wrong.  Your original post was not acted on in this manner.  I replied to
your opinion-laden follow-up.

Be honest.  You haven't been defending your needs -- you've been defending
your opinions.

The FTP post showed that your network WAS configured incorrectly.

And no one said your database was wrong.  My point was that the fixed-length
fields in the database were the root of your problem rather than the
CPYTOIMPF command.

If you think this type of discussion is unfair you might try phrasing your
questions differently.  You could always ask the question and leave out the
opinion.  I'm not saying that opinions aren't allowed.  It's just that you
look quite silly trying to take the technical high road now.  You so quickly
offered these opinions about how your problems are really part of a greater
failure on IBM's part.  Try asking "I'm experiencing poor FTP performance.
Can anyone offer troubleshooting tips?"  instead of creating a subject of
"Why is the iSeries so slow?" and asking "So what am I missing or is the
iSeries really not capable of handling one of the most basic tasks any
simple PC based FTP server can achieve?".  If you're so concerned about
posts being discredited altogether as opinion try also not bothering with
replies such as "To me, this is another classic reason the 'iSeries doesn't
play well with others'".

No one has done you wrong.  You're offering negative opinions against the
iSeries on an iSeries forum.  Instead of backing up your opinions with facts
you've jumped on to the next opinion, blamed counter-opinions on emotions,
and now cried foul.

-Jim