RE: news400 goes negative on IBM?/RE: DRDA Connection Support

(Snippets of posts are below my remarks, combination of two reactions from (two) threads)

Actually, Joe,  I want to establish a database exchange from the AS/400 to another database on another (non-AS/400) platform in a similar manner as an ODBC-connection from a PC to the AS/400. Just two platforms, two databases (in principle), two parties involved.

IBM has provided an ODBC-driver with Client Access, it does not have to provide DRDA drivers, as others have also pointed this out. But, on the other hand, all those database vendors think their database is the center of the Universe, and are aware of the fact, that today many companies are using different platforms/databases and that data have to be joined. Thus it is optional for those vendors to do so.

ODBC is client sided, but Joe implies that with JDBC (which I think is also client sided) it can be done. As if JDBC is the "latest cure" that can connect to any database on any platform, even though the way to connect to those databases is not know. But that means, that JDBC is running as a server, as well.  

Reading the reactions on this topic (and the question has been asked before, and I am not the only one facing this obstacle) software from a third party seems to be required. Unless an unexpected break through, of course. 

And it would have been much easier, if ODBC, DRDA and JDBC could be bidirectional, so connect to ODBC using DRDA, or with DRDA connecting to another database using ODBC/JDBC and their defined DataSources. Wishfull thinking, alas. 

Regards,
Carel Teijgeler.

Joe wrote:

>I don't understand your question.  ... 
>Here's how it works: ODBC clients are not universal.  Each vendor must
>provide all the ODBC drivers for its database, one for each platform
>that they support.  They may also supply a Type 4 JDBC driver, which can
>take the place of an ODBC driver and provide support for any
>Java-enabled platform.  So it's up to the database vendor, not the
>operating system vendor, to ensure that a given database is accessed by a given platform.
>...
>DB2 is perhaps one of the most open databases: you can access it from
>just about anywhere, including both ODBC and DRDA access.  They have
>drivers for just about any platform you can imagine.
>
>Unfortunately, most database vendors are not as open as IBM: they do not
>supply native ODBC clients for OS/400, so that makes it difficult for
>OS/400 to access other databases.  However, more and more vendors are
>supplying Type 4 JDBC drivers, which allow direct access to their
>database engine from any Java-enabled platform.  Thus, rather than
>having to write a specific ODBC driver for every platform, they can just
>supply the JDBC driver.  Then, as demand warrants, they can write
>specific ODBC drivers for a given platform.

Jon wrote:
>I guess my problem is that I think the issue here is _who_ should be
>supplying the driver/connection/name_of_your_choosing ?
>...
>Is it your contention that IBM should write the DRDA drivers and supply them
>FOC for every platform/database combination under the sun?  Doesn't sound
>very realistic to me.