Re: Java and the AS/400 -- JAVA400-L

Chris,

In a message dated 97-11-18 06:46:47 EST, you write:

<<snip agreed stuff to save bandwidth>>

> > Hmmmm.  Hard to argue.  Today's "computer literate" person has, indeed,
>  > become far too comfortable with the "three fingered salute" and having
to
>  > toast a half-day's work because the OS crashed.  Part of the problem 
>  > though, has been businesses' willingness to be a co-conspirator in this
useless 
>  > waste of time.  At most of my client sites, if the /400 were to go down
for even 
>  > 30 seconds during the day there would be _ABSOLUTE HELL_ to pay.  Yet 
>  > these same
>  > sites seem to have no problem with the network going down for 30 minutes
to
>  > THREE HOURS a day (as long as the factory floor isn't affected)!  Do
these
>  > people not realize that office personnel _AVERAGE_ $5/hour higher than
their
>  > factory counterparts in pay?  Why is this acceptable, while factory
outages
>  > aren't?  The factory cannot run without their support personnel any more
than
>  > they can without their shop floor devices!
>  
>  Well, we would go round and round here. It is pathetic the level of
>  reliability acceptable in the workplace today. I have been told by a
number
>  of different people, "Just a minute, I'm rebooting my PC right now." when
I
>  wanted things done. Casual, matter of fact. 
>  
>  But people _do_ accept that. So, when MIS fails to deliver what is asked
>  for, a user gives up nothing by going to an unreliable solution. That is
>  because they didn't expect it to be reliable in the first place. As
>  rebooting becomes more acceptable, and PC platforms become less flakey,
the
>  AS/400 will lose more and more ground. 

Agreed.  All that the users seem to care about these days is if the
application works on those rare occasions that you can get to it.  Just
today, my primary client's entire developement staff was down from an AS/400
perspective because the server was down (except for those few of us still on
OS/2, because CM/2 "don't need no stinkin' network!").  Frankly, I'm still
waiting on that "less flakey" PC though...

>  > I wonder why?  My former employer had $70K worth of hardware and
software
>  > lying around the office not being used because IBM convinced them to
invest
>  > in "CallPath", they also had a telephone switch that was _FAR_ more than
they
>  > needed for the same reason.  IBM "suckered" them in, and then gave no
leads
>  > or support for the application after they had made the capital
investment. 
>  
>  Well, if IBM failed to perform their agreed upon implementation plan, sue
>  'em. But if, as is more likely, your employer went into the purchase
>  without any form of implementation plan and simply bought a shiney toy,
>  then the fault lies at home. 
>  
>  At some point a company has to become responsible for running it's own
>  business.

Cut off your nose to spite your face?  CallPath was to be less than 20% of
overall revenue, the rest was selling new AS/400's with _OTHER_ applications
on them.  Sueing IBM would hardly have been an intelligent choice.

>  > I disagree that new technologies are ignored, and successful
technologies
>  > _NEVER_ become "flavor of the month".  I think that the majority of us
are
>  > just waiting to see if JAVA becomes a successful technology.  Midrange
>  > developers are slow to adopt new technology because it is _OUR_ systems 
> that
>  > run 90% of the world's business -- a trust that is _NOT_ to be taken
lightly
>  > (and the business world is notoriously conservative).  "C" failed, GUI
is
>  > failing, "CASE" (while still providing benefits) hasn't lived up to its
>  > promise, just what _ARE_ we supposed to "jump on" next?
>  
>  Well, I would suggest NT! Because, Dean, if _everyone_ just waits around
to
>  see if a technology becomes a success THEN IT FAILS! So, if IBM introduces
>  plan after plan to enhance client side development for the AS/400, and
each
>  time AS/400 shops all adopt the "wait and see" attitude, the plans all
fail
>  and all the shops pat themselves on the back for being smart enough to not
>  jump on that bandwagon. 

Did you actually _read_ the previous paragraph ;-)?  NT is even less proven
than JAVA!  In fact, there is a _LOT_ more evidence (not anecdotal) of NT
projects either failing or _FAR_ exceeding budget than there is of the same
happening in JAVA implementations.  I'm not saying that the "wait and see"
attitude is what _SHOULD_ happen, I'm saying that it's what _WILL_ happen!
 Why else would the (_EXTREMELY_ wordy and _DEFINITELY NOT_ part of your RAD
plan) COBOL language still run so many of the world's systems?
     
>  > We "Midrangers" don't want to end up like our COBOL brethren on the
ES/9000
>  > but, short of taking advantage of new AS/400 technology, nothing else
has
>  > "shown us the money".  The 36,8/E were bad, native OS/400 applications
were
>  > good.  "C" was bad, ILE RPG was good.  CallPath and FAX/400 were bad, 
>  > TCP/IP...

>  Why not just say, "8088 was good, then it was bad. 80286 was good, then it
>  was bad, " etc. Times change. Vendors try to sell their products. If a
>  product line doesn't make a profit, or is replaced by a newer technology,
>  it fades away. IBM should probably be expected to try to sell their
>  products. 

Because none of my examples were _EVER_ good, other than the fact that the
"environments" allowed 36/38 users to port to the AS/400 without too much
grief from "management".  CallPath and Fax/400 were both inferior to products
from third partys from their inception.  The 8088 was _more_ than good for
its day, and yes times change.

>  Maybe midrangers will never get off the fence. Maybe they will always be
>  "wait and see." If so, I feel the demise of the midrange is not far off.
>  The next decade will see a major decline in market share. 

Oh now _THAT_ was a little premature.  People have been predicting the demise
of the midrange since the advent of the PC.  I don't see HP, DEC, or Tandem
folks exactly "hopping on the JAVA bandwagon" either, and PC's _STILL_ don't
support anywhere _NEAR_ the transaction volume required to replace the
midrange.  PC storage capacity and CPU MHz have grown but, as I stated
before, the CPU still waits at the same speed as all of the others (and
capacity doesn't equal throughput).

>  But I think IBM is trying to fix that by bringing new blood to the
midrange
>  job market.
>  
>  > Yes, but this speaks to the "mix and match" nature of PC hardware and
>  > software.  I'd say that the successful GUI AS/400 developer will make
their
>  > applications work as plug-ins to a major browser, and make the browser
>  > developer handle the hardware differences.
>  
>  That would make them a prime candidate for Java.

That was what I meant by the comment.

>  > Agreed to some degree, but I think that most midrange developers with
which I
>  > am familiar will "jump on" this once it's proven.  I am, however,
familiar
>  > with a plethora of persons that fit your "don't want to change" mode.
 The
>  > skillset in this market will certainly be interesting after the Y2K
"crisis"
>  > is over...
>  
>  My company is leveraging the fact that many AS/400 shops will be slow to
>  move. We are developing a new version of our product using Java, while
>  continuing our RPG implementation. Perhaps this will help to put a couple
>  of the fence sitters out of business.

Good for you!  That should encourage others to do the same, to the benefit of
all!

>  > The sad thing is, $200M is a small portion of the annual budget.  It's
like
>  > AIDS vs. Breast Cancer research -- why spend an exponential amount on
AIDS
>  > research (a disease caused by personal choice) over breast cancer (which
is
>  > nobody's fault and affects _FAR_ more people)?  I'd rather see IBM spend
a
>  > _LOT_ more money on JAVA than I would see them spend _ANY_ more money 
>  > on ILE RPG...
>  
>  Well, it would surprise me to find they were spending anywhere near that
>  much on RPG. My guess would be the spending on RPG is a small fraction of
>  that. 

Let's hope so...

>  It's easy to bitch that IBM isn't spending enough, or doing enough of this
>  or that. But they are doing something. More than anyone else in the world.
>  I think it better to recognise that today IBM spent several hundred
>  thousand dollars to promote the acceptance of a technology which can
>  enhance the future of the AS/400. That is in addition to money spent on
>  enhancing the AS/400 directly and advertising it. 

The only thing I "bitch" about when it comes to IBM is their advertising, and
_THAT's_ only because of what I'm about to say.  IBM, IMHO, has the ABSOLUTE
BEST technology from both a hardware _AND_ software standpoint than any other
vendor in the market when it comes to the AS/400.  "The industry" was
predicting the demise of the AS/400 after eight years, and now here comes the
RISC box, HTML DDS, and JAVA.  The AS/400 is the absolute _BEST_ technology,
dollar for dollar, that can be had today -- that nobody has ever heard of.
 IBM is doing a _FANTASTIC_ job of developing new technology...if only they'd
do as well promoting it.

JMHO,

Dean Asmussen
Enterprise Systems Consulting, Inc.
Fuquay-Varina, NC  USA
E-Mail:  DAsmussen@aol.com

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please
everybody." -- Bill Cosby
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "JAVA400-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to JAVA400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---