Re: Overlay printing (was: iSeries revenue plummets)

Buck,

I think you've hit on a big issue here. IBM doesn't bundle some of these
tools into the core system and it is supposed to be 'i' for integrated. I
think Lukas has a complaint that there is no inexpensive, integrated,
modern printing architecture. I'll give him that. The architecture to do
a lot of things is there, but it is not inexpensive. This takes this
thread back towards its original message, "iSeries revenue plummets." I've
heard that IBM is getting set to "unbundle" the system to an even larger
degree. It leaves me wondering what they'll say the 'i' stands for . . .
? ? ?

I would also note my agreement that variable size boxes can be cumbersome.
With the right tools, the rest isn't overly challenging. But I haven't
seen anything that handles drawing variable length boxes in an easy way.
At least not in what I've been exposed to.

Michael

midrange-nontech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 11/27/2007 01:00:04 PM:

date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:53:54 -0500
from: Buck <kc2hiz@xxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: Overlay printing (was: iSeries revenue plummets)

MichaelQuigley@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

The printing architecture is quite capable. If you want something

high

class, it generally costs you something to get it. If you're after a
low-budget solution, is it really honest to complain there is no

modern

printing infrastructure?

These comments are all fair, but I would add that the amount of effort
required to generate very attractive print (say a utility bill with
embedded graphs, full colour, company logo, shading and boxes drawn
around variable length elements) is a tremendous amount of work.

The major complaint I have is that the 'i' in System i is supposed to
mean integrated, not added on at extra expense.
--buck