RE: IBM Commitment (was: Q/400 to Web Query)

Hi Pete,

I don't like QU2 because it looks like it's 10 years old, doesn't
integrate well with the platforms it is sold for, and because it's
expensive. (A lot more then QU1 - might not matter for you enterprise
guys, but I work in the small business sector).

I'm very much in favor in moving forward with technology, and giving
users a modern way to access their reports. The software my employer
sells is completely UI based, natively developed in RPG IV, and offers
clients for Windows and a universal Java client. It works very well, has
all the advantages that of i5/OS, and all the advantages of a native GUI
client. But we still integrated a 5250 emulator for our reporting needs.

We've looked for alternatives to Query/400. We looked at SEQUEL, which
is a pretty nice product (looks a bit dated, though), but it's not
available in German and FAR to expensive. We looked at crystal reports,
which is completely client based (normal versions), or server based
(expensive versions).

When QU2 was announced, I really hoped that IBM would finally bring a
new, modern i5/OS application to the masses, that could be used as an
example for all those System i ISVs that are still stuck in AS/400 land.

But right now we have a big honk running in PASE, using around 5-10GB of
disk space, taking an entire day to install, and only runs on the newest
machines (515), and even there it's sluggish. Customers that bought 600
CPW 520s in the beginning of the year can't use it (I've tested it, far
too slow).

I don't know what V6R1 will bring. Not much info on the web. Oh, and
there was this whole redbook about converting objects. Sadly the PTFs
did not work on our #2939 systems. Opened a PMR. That was over 3 months
ago. PMR is still open.

And my QU2 PMRs are open since last Monday. I can't be the first person
having this problem, but I didn't find any blog/newsgroups posting of
other people having the same problem. IBM told me that the problem was
forwarded to IBI, but no fix in sight.

I'm sorry, but I don't see much positive about this whole QU2 fiasco.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pete Massiello
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 10:50 PM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: IBM Commitment (was: Q/400 to Web Query)

Lukas,

The comment that IBM is no longer committed to i5/OS is Pure
Bu11sh*t. I was in Rochester last week, and they had plans for i5/OS
that
go out to the year 2015 that they shared. That is a long time in
Operating
System lives. We discussed V6R1 in detail and all the really cool stuff
that is in that release, as well as the release that follows V6R1. Most
of
the new features and functions in V6R1, and I don't have the actual
number,
have come from the user community. That in and of itself, means IBM is
listening to us.

So, you might not like WQ because it was a ported application,
but
is it not better then what we have? Every shop I go to is looking at
giving
their users some sort of PC based (GUI enabled) query tool, because the
users are demanding this. Sometimes its not easy to change, and we all
stick with what we know, and I am guilty on this as well. But we do
need to
look at new technology, and move in a forward direction. Otherwise we
will
all be on Twinax for the rest of our lives. If we complain enough to
IBM,
I bet they fix it. If we b*tch to ourselves on this list, nothing will
get
done. Just keep opening those PMRs.

Sorry for the rant, but I just drank the Rochester Cool-Aid, and
I
think that there is some great stuff coming our way.

Pete



-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lukas Beeler
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 4:35 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Q/400 to Web Query

Yeah, and you can't use *LIBL on your queries, moving them from
system-to-system is also a PITA.

QU2 is not an i5/OS application, it's a ported Unix application that has
some very obvious deficits.

It just shows that IBM does no longer commit to i5/OS and the System i
platform. I mean, QU2 is obviously broken in many ways, which could've
been ruled out with even the most simple QA.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff Crosby
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 10:14 PM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: Q/400 to Web Query

All,

Here's some interesting items.

(1) The marketing of Web Query ("WQ") says you can import existing Q/400
queries to Web Query. That's technically true, but it's not 'the truth,
the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth" so to speak.

WQ, during design, accesses files via metadata, not by actually looking
at
the database. Before you can query a file, you must create the metadata
for
that file. WQ then uses the metadata when designing the
report/graph/whatever. Fair enough.

When you import a Q/400 query (and I do mean 'import', not 'convert')
you
have available only what fields were actually used in the Q/400 query,
not
all fields in the file. You cannot add any additional fields from any
of
the files named in the original Q/400 query. WQ sees only the imported
metadata of the Q/400 query. Essentially, the imported query becomes a
file
to WQ.

(2) Another difference in WQ vs Q/400: Once a query has been designed,
you
can't change the file used. In Q/400 if you had 2 (or more) files with
the
same record format, you could change the file name and it would still
run
fine. Not with WQ. There is no way to do that. If you're careful
about
how you load metadata, you _can_ get WQ to use the library list at
runtime.
Or you go direct to the metadata and start changing. I have a DCR open
with
IBM to allow the file to be named at runtime.

Caveat emptor.