I think my "Series i" blunder (although affected by sleep deprivation
at least in part) points out what is, to me at least, the biggest
problem with the name changes. It is *NOT* the frequency, which is
well within the normal range (perhaps even less often than some other
members of the genre). Rather, the problem is that the current names
-- even taken in isolation -- seem to be inherently confusing.
For example, the operating system is "i5/OS". The server name is
"System i5". The platform family is "System i". Yet it is suggested,
sometimes emphatically, that a machine that was built as an "AS/400e"
running "OS/400" (our Model 720) has somehow morphed -- first into an
"iSeries" and then into a "member of the System i family" -- if I've
got that right. Interestingly, that same machine actually *is* capable
of running "i5/OS" even though -- again I venture what I think is
correct -- the Model 720 does not run on a Power 5 chip.
In the "other world" the operating system nomenclature is completely
separate from the CPU nomenclature. M$FT's "Windows" in its various
incarnations cannot be confused with the chip it is running on by
anyone paying the least attention: 80286, 486SX, Pentium, Athlon,
Turion, and a host of others. Ditto for Linux and Mac/OS. Even where
there is a close to one-to-one relationship, the naming distinction is
maintained. It may not make the computer any better, but it sure helps
keep the discussion clearer, IMHO.
Beauty is as beauty does, and we have a beautiful platform to work
with; but ugliness is in the i....
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2013 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact