Re: Classes for IBMi/iSeries?

Jerry,

It was not quite clear.

Did you call the AS/400 a S/36, because it could run S/36 applications?
Did you call the AS/400 a S/38, because it could run S/38 applications?

If the answer is yes, then calling IBM i an AS/400 is the same thing.
If no, then...
Do you call IBM i an AS/400 because it can run AS/400 applications?

We used to say (and some people still do) "I am running S/36 applications
on my AS/400". Why don't we say "I am running AS/400 applications on my
IBM i"? The simple reason is that most people who are complaining about
the "name" or branding are simply missing one really huge thing that
happened in 2008. IBM announced Power Systems, a merger of System i and
System p. This was a bigger deal to IBM than S/36 and S/38 to AS/400, but
unfortunately, it got lost in the IBM i community as "just another name
change" - because the OS appeared to have been just renamed from i5/OS to
IBM i.

It is sad that IBM changed the AS/400 platform name a couple of times, but
that does not take away the fact that IBM i on Power is the best business
platform on the planet today. Far better than AS/400 ever was! It is a
constant surprise that people in our community are still so stubborn or
uneducated about the difference between IBM i and OS/400, and Power
Systems and AS/400.

And when you read all the tales of woe on this forum, about losing AS/400
to other platforms or throwing out iSeries, it becomes obvious that there
is a clear trend. The people who come in to take charge, think the
platform is an AS/400 and tend to run away. The people who see the
platform as IBM i on Power, see it as modern, vital, and having a future.
We need to convert the former to the latter, but the name crap continues.

As I have said many times, it is not about the name, but about the
platform. Unfortunately, AS/400 bigots continue to think it is only about
the name, due to fear of change, inability to learn and grow, or just
plain stuck-in-their-ways habits. Just because you use IBM i like an
AS/400 does not make it an AS/400. Just because IBM does not market the
platform the way you want them to, does not make it an AS/400.
Occasionally, one or two of them might read the FUD and BS coming from
some of the detractors who troll this forum and some others, and believe
that IBM thinks the platform and OS is not strategic. Occasionally, one or
two of them might read one or two of these threads, and see the light. We
have to convert the former to the latter.

I think that the platform deserves the truth, and the occasional
midrange-L spat is worth it. The trolls are, slowly, being proven to be
completely inaccurate again and again. Soon enough, most of the people on
this forum will stand up to their BS. Sometimes it seems like most of you
read their BS and just let it past. But, that just encourages them to
continue their BS. On a forum to celebrate the platform, while debate
should be encouraged, liars, detractors and enemies should not be welcome
here. And if they can enroll, the only way to discourage them is to stand
up to their FUD.

I ask every one of you this. If the platform has done well for you in your
career or business, what are you doing to pay that back? A little
education about the latest platform, a little education about the latest
tools, about the directions of IBM, the commitment of IBM to the platform,
and a little positivity out on the forums is not much to ask. Or, are you
stuck so deep up your AS/400 that you cannot see the light?

Are you willing to make a stand for the future of the platform, or are you
just going to sit back and watch the trolls poop on it again and again so
they can say "I told you so"?

It is your choice.
Trevor



On 9/29/11 8:39 AM, "Jerry C. Adams" <midrange@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Trevor,

I understand most of what you've been saying these many years. But I'm
unclear about the statement " If you stopped calling the S/36 that name
when
the AS/400 came out in 1988." I worked on a System/36 well after 1988,
even
on an AS/236 model. We didn't stop calling it a S/36. Maybe I erred,
but I
don't understand why I would have.

Now, I do specify that most of our company's applications were ported
from a
S/36 to the iSeries (as it was called then) running under the 36
environment. Is that to what you were referring?

Thanks.

Jerry C. Adams
IBM i Programmer/Analyst
The only thing we learn from history is that nobody learns from history.
-Otto von Bismarck
--
A&K Wholesale
Murfreesboro, TN
615-867-5070

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Trevor Perry
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 4:36 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Classes for IBMi/iSeries?

Bob,

Now come up to 2008, when Power Systems were announced. Power Systems was
a major hardware announcement merging the System i and System p hardware -
in fact, a bigger deal than S/36 and S/38 to AS/400. At the same time, it
was announced that Power Systems can run IBM i, AIX and Linux - not just a
single OS.

More than a faceplate change.

If you stopped calling the S/36 that name when the AS/400 came out in
1988, then you should have stopped calling IBM i on Power by any of its
previous names when it was announced in 2008.

Trevor


On 9/27/11 2:44 PM, "Bob P. Roche" <BRoche@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I understand the point being made and this is straying further from the
original topic. Windows originally ran on top of DOS. You could leave
Windows and still be in DOS. so i don't see the comparison your making
there.
I also don't think it is the same thing as changing names for marketing.
The new systems are not AS/400's they are Power hardware, but the
original
name change from AS/400 was just that, a name change The system was not
different. the architecture changed from system 36 to AS/400, nothing
changed from AS/400 to Iseries at the announcement. I was at Common and
saw the keynote where they showed the new Iseries by replacing the old
AS/400 cover with a new one.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.