As you were saying this, I was thinking about how the community has
asked
for a way to GUI'ize their native applications. IBM listened and gave
us a
variety of solutions - Net.Data, CGIDEV2, VisualAge RPG, IBM's JSF, and
now
EGL/PHP (I am sure I missed some). IMO, they are all IBM failing to
address
the need of solid, easy to develop technologies to further the
enterprise.
Sure they will get an iSeries shop there eventually, but it doesn't
compare
to the programming stack we have with 5250/RPG/DB2/i5OS. I feel IBM
has
used too much open source to try and become successful, when in reality
their past success has been when they created things that are entirely
proprietary.
I can't disagree with this at all. IMHO, back in 1988 and the years
after that the AS/400 was the easiest system to program. OK, DEC had
some nice features but they don't count. :-) Now, things have changed.
One of the major issues is that IBM wants to share everything as best it
can across platforms. And even worse, most of the control or decisions
in that area are now the responsibility of someone outside of
Rochester......
So, remove a lot of advantages of the system and don't advertise the
one's that are still left. Huh.
Michael Crump
Manager, Computing Services
Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc.
1509 S. Macedonia Ave.
Muncie, IN 47302
765.741.7696
765.741.7012 f
"Push to test." <click> "Release to detonate."
This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views
or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Saint-Gobain. If it did, it would be
folded, mutilated, watered down, politically corrected, and would show
up a week later if at all. If you are not the intended recipient of
this email and its attachments, you must take no action based upon them,
nor must you copy or show them to anyone.
Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in
error.
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Aaron Bartell
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 3:55 PM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: IBM not investing in i5/OS was: iSociety
If they are indeed necessary has the poster or the community not made
the
effort to communicate these needs?
As you were saying this, I was thinking about how the community has
asked
for a way to GUI'ize their native applications. IBM listened and gave
us a
variety of solutions - Net.Data, CGIDEV2, VisualAge RPG, IBM's JSF, and
now
EGL/PHP (I am sure I missed some). IMO, they are all IBM failing to
address
the need of solid, easy to develop technologies to further the
enterprise.
Sure they will get an iSeries shop there eventually, but it doesn't
compare
to the programming stack we have with 5250/RPG/DB2/i5OS. I feel IBM has
used too much open source to try and become successful, when in reality
their past success has been when they created things that are entirely
proprietary.
Just a comment for a THursday afternoon...
Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces+albartell=gmail.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces+albartell=gmail.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of
Crump, Mike
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:33 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: IBM not investing in i5/OS was: iSociety
I had a couple of thoughts on this.
One, IBM is investing in i5/OS. Fairly substantial investments. It
might not be enough or in the areas that certain posters want but it's
there. To date the majority of system requirements are generated by two
'user groups' of the system. That does not include COMMON at this time.
The needs of these groups most likely does not reflect the needs of
Steve, Aaron, and others on this list. In my case I am much more
concerned about the lack of investment that IBM's software group is
making to the platform. As far as I'm concerned they are the enemy.
Two, I listen to these have-to-have functions and I don't quite see the
demand. Not saying they are wrong but they aren't issues that are
causing us problems with the system. Which means that they might not be
for others. Sitting here on the sidelines and reading these posts about
what i5/OS has to have in order to compete is a bit frustrating. If
they are indeed necessary has the poster or the community not made the
effort to communicate these needs?
Both of these points seem to indicate that there are issues with user
requirements. Communicating, creating consensus, generating valid
business case, etc.
Michael Crump
Manager, Computing Services
Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc.
1509 S. Macedonia Ave.
Muncie, IN 47302
765.741.7696
765.741.7012 f
Dare to Slack
When birds fly in the right formation, they need only exert half the
effort. Even in nature, teamwork results in collective laziness.
This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views
or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Saint-Gobain. If it did, it would be
folded, mutilated, watered down, politically corrected, and would show
up a week later if at all. If you are not the intended recipient of
this email and its attachments, you must take no action based upon them,
nor must you copy or show them to anyone.
Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in
error.
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces+mike.crump=saint-gobain.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces+mike.crump=saint-gobain.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Steve Richter
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:37 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: IBM not investing in i5/OS was: iSociety
On Nov 15, 2007 11:39 AM, Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Lukas, your dispatches from the front lines of computing are great
reading. Here is a video that illustrates in a small way how MSFT
is cleaning IBM's clock in the world of software applications...
I hate it when Steve Richter snags me in his net of non-stop
complaints about IBM and their handling of the System i. It seems that
about 90% of his posts are offensive hyperbole mixed with bad advise,
and why would dispatches of IBM failing on the front lines be great
reading to him?
gosh Nathan, I apologize. Sounds like what we have here is a failure
to communicate.
Nevertheless I took the bait, and listened to Microsoft's Channel 9
interview with Siemen's smug-faced Scott Carney.
you know the guy?
The kicker for me was when Scott finally admitted some of the
challenges of keeping "cloud-computing" up and running 24 X 7, an how
difficult debugging in a "cloud" was.
which means what? That .NET trails other technologies on the debugging
and problem determination front? My opinion ( just a suggestion,
dont jump out of the window ) is it would be great if i5/OS could be
improved where the complete state of a failed job and the database
files it has open could be saved at the point of failure. That way
the programmer has more complete information for researching what it
was that caused the weekend batch update job to fail.
-Steve
midrange.com
