With the notable exception of OV/400, which was dropped altogether. -----Original Message----- From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of DeLong, Eric Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:25 AM To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Subject: RE: MS Vista and iSeries Access support Steve, Your statement was "MSFT is really good about maintaining backwards compatibility".... This has NEVER been a focus of MS.... With MS, when they come out with their next generation of development tools, one must either decide to abandon their current projects and start again in the new platform, OR they can just stay a a backlevel release and continue until MS drops support for their version. Backward compatibility is the traditional hallmark of the IBM midrange. IBM understood the value of stability to business, and has gone to great lengths to maintain backward compatibility. I do think this focus on backward compatibility has hampered IBMs attempts to get our community to move towards newer technologies, but that's not IBMs fault... However, with MS, one is forced to adopt (buy) new technologies every few years, if one wants to remain current. MSFT sales are, at this point, largely driven off product update cycles. Eric -----Original Message----- From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Steve Richter Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 7:10 PM To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Subject: Re: MS Vista and iSeries Access support On 11/13/06, DeLong, Eric <EDeLong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<Steve said...> what technical reason could there be that it would not work? MSFT is really good about maintaining backwards compatibility. <End> Really? That sure doesn't seem to match MY experience with MSFT..... Have you been drinking Mr. Bill's happy juice again? If not, then perhaps you can explain what you mean by this....
I can try ... What problems have you had with MSFT software? My experience as a programmer is that MSFT is by far the best in terms of the programability of their products. Linux does not have an exception handling model, no basic call stack support and knows nothing of managed code. The end result is a Perl program knows nothing of Java which cant interact with SQL procedures, PHP, etc. At least no where to the degree that modern applications need these languages to work together. The i5 is a bit better because it has 15 YO ILE but the grafting on of PASE binaries and SQL procedures has been kludgy at best. MSFT's .NET is proving itself to be everything the smart people who created it said it would be. Programming .NET, esp at the beginner's level, has never been easier. They made over $4B in pre tax profits this past quarter - that tells you a lot of customers like their products. -Steve