I'm not talking about Systems Admin functionality as that would have virtually no impact on Sales or end-users referring to it as "The Green Screen Icon" in windows. But there is no native GUI interface on the system. Certainly more and more that is becoming un important since "everyone" has already moved to PCs/Mac and are merely waiting for a non-IBM i solution for their apps to emerge.

You can't have a PC-sized IBM i Power system without a GUI, You can't have an HMC without another platform that supports a GUI running that GUI to manage your IBM i text-based system. Sure I've written GUI apps that use HTML at target the IBM i database and apps, as have thousands of others as well as IBM. But the system itself has no GUI and that is what I was referring to.

On Mar 11, 2019, at 3:04 PM, Rob Berendt <rob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

What defines that the "native" interface is other than GUI?

Having 5250 available is no different than Windows still supporting the command prompt.
One can use any number of interfaces to work on it. HMC, iACS, IBM Navigator for i, and more. Sure, some restricted state operations tend to favor the command line interface. Is that any different than AIX? If TCP/IP was down on my AIX partitions I would use a putty client into my HMC to administer that lpar. At least for the stuff I couldn't get done by the HMC GUI.

Are you saying it only counts as a native GUI interface if it has a hardwired monitor and keyboard/mouse? I have 8 partitions. 5 of IBM i, 2 of VIOS and one of AIX. How would one hardwire each of those? Are you thinking more like, instead of HMC, have a VMWARE type interface? And then one could open up the "console" of each partition from that? I'd argue that outside of a few system adminstrators who would need the character interface?

Are you using the existing graphical interfaces, such as iACS to manage spool files, etc? Or do you stick with the character interface?

-----Original Message-----
From: Consult400 <consult400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Bob Cozzi
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 3:25 PM
To: Consulting on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) <consult400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Consult400] Long-term RPG Contract in Detroit

Curmudgeons day was Jan 29...
But for me, it is everyday.

IMHO AS/400 and 'iSeries" were better names than the non-name nomenclature "i" as it was given when officially announced or "IBM i" which was adopted years later. (I can go to the video if you doubt my statement about the name), in fact when I get into discussions about "AS/400 v IBM i" I say, well, IBM said it is called "Just i" so that's what I call it "just i".

But regardless of how many times we wasted our time with this name-gate debate, IBM doubles-down on it. No one has the guts to go up to the IBM VP in charge and say: Hey, we should call it "IBM Blue" (or insert your favorite trademarkable and google searchable unique brand ID here).
(Sidebar: I have suggested "IBM Blue" circa 2001 to IBMers and they said it was a great idea. Then they joked and said how about "Green OS", which today would probably be a very popular name, actually.)

So at the end of the day, they have a no-name system, that no one cares about (I know, I know, there are 2-dozen or so "insiders" who do care, but that is still statistically no one), a name they have rarely promoted and a name a large percentage of their own customers who run that operating system don't even know the name of. Today "IBM i" is a cash cow for that shrinking group of individuals and VC firms. You get the same group of people anointed as "IBM Champions" year after year, save a few new deserving ones, you get the same group of Speakers at every event world-wide, and you get people talking about integrating things into their workflow "over the next few years" that should have been integrated decades ago.

This is NOT a failure on the community for calling it "AS/400" instead of just i.
This is NOT a failure on the part of the technical capabilities of CPF/XPF/"OS/400"/"i", it has always been the best at what it does at a majority of things, But it is not a pretty system to use (green screens). Some AIX/Linux/U*ix functions are better on those other operating systems. Also Windows is sexy, Mac OS X was sexy and mobile isn't doing green screen (save "Mocha") anytime soon.

No, it isn't us or the community at large that is failing the IBM Power System running the IBM i operating system, it is in my opinion, a huge failure on the "owner" of this platform. It started back in the mid-1990s when someone at IBM sat in a meeting and killed a native GUI for OS/400 (as it was called back then). We now have solid state drives, mobile devices and an Internet with crazy fast speeds in most countries outside of North America. All those things were overlooked in the short-sightedness of whomever made the decision for a non-GUI interface.

But hey, the "owners" of the platform are nearing their retirement too, so do they really care?

-Bob Cozzi


--
This is the Consulting on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (Consult400) mailing list To post a message email: Consult400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/consult400
or email: Consult400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at https://archive.midrange.com/consult400.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.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 on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.