RE: WebFacing: Is this really Heaven? NO, it's hell!!!!

> From: Jim Mason
>
> We do WebFacing consulting.  We've taught this stuff
> to IBMers and customers as well.

I just want to make sure that the opposing viewpoint is heard here.  I am
extremely biased, since PSC400 (as showcased in iSeries Network magazine) is
my product, but I think users need to know how it stacks up against the
supposedly "free" WebFacing.


> "Out of the box", basic WebFaced applications often
> don't meet your user's requirements for a web
> interface ESPECIALLY if the web users are new to the
> app..

Out of the box, PSC400 generates a 5250 emulation mode application that
looks and feels almost exactly like the original green screen application.
This allows you to start using the web-based version of your application
without a ton of retraining.  But PSC400 also generates a JSP that is
designed to be customized, which we call the "web application" mode.


> My experience is we can get response times of 1 to 2
> seconds OVER dedicated Internet connections.  We even
> got that on a 170 running Tomcat.  Unfortunately,
> DIALUP users NEVER see good response times ...

We get subsecond response time on an intranet - in fact, we often get times
in the tens of milliseconds.  This is directly related to the amount of HTML
we generate.  Currently, a typical page is 8-10KB, and our target is to cut
that down to about 5KB.  DSL connections have subsecond response times, and
our pages actually work over a 28.8 dialup, although it's not fast - about
2-3 seconds per page, which is what you would expect for 10KB over a 28.8
line (remembering that modem speed is measured in BITS, while page size is
measured in bytes).  WebFacing generates significantly larger pages - I have
heard page sizes of 150KB.  That's why even over a DSL connection WebFacing
is very slow.


> We've run WebSphere v3.5, v4.0 and Tomcat v3.2.3.
> They all work.  We've also customized the generated
> apps to do other things....

Here WebFacing has us beat.  We don't even bother with V4.0, since it's an
extra cost item.  We only work with standard edition.  However, we should
have the Tomcat version tested and ready for release shortly.


> I DO think they produce a good "base" application that
> can be customized FAR cheaper than writing ANYTHING
> else.  It is a great fit IF your web intends to reuse
> a reasonable portion of your existing 5250 stuff.  The
> "out of the box" WebFaced app really only works well
> as an interface for existing users ( that DOES happen
> on intranets alot ...).

And this statement is the one I most disagree with.  The idea of "FAR"
cheaper depends very much on how you measure cost.  First, WebFacing
requires interactive CPW *AND* WebSphere.  PSC400 does not require
interactive CPW, and so can lower the cost of your hardware by as much as
75%.  For example, a model 820_2395 with 35 interactive CPW is $40K, while
the same machine with 240 interactive is nearly $200K, and is in a higher
software tier (P20 vs. P10) to boot.

Applications can also be customized quite easily, by simply changing the
generated JSP.  You can easily make multiple versions of the user interface
available, including the 5250 emulation mode, all using the same RPG
program.

1. The programs are completely converted with a single command
2. The HTML is much smaller and thus has much faster response time
3. You can convert entire systems overnight
4. Installation and conversion can all be done from a green screen command
line without any PC software

Given all the above, I think PSC400 is very competitive with WebFacing.

Joe