RE: ADVERTISING SUPPORT/ComputerWorld 7/28 - LONG

Everyone,

FYI,

I tend to type a little to quickly sometimes, and type the word "USE" when 
I mean "US" and "US" when I mean "USE".  There are other subtleties in my 
e-mail as well. I apologies.  In this one, I initially mistyped "disease"
and selected the wrong replacement when the spell-checker prompted me. So I 
do know the difference between dead and dying.  <g>  Perhaps there's a hint 
of irony in there. <g>

Bob


On Thursday, August 14, 1997 10:14 PM, Joe Teff [SMTP:jteff19@IDT.NET] 
wrote:
> Bob, I agree completely with your point of view. Every couple of years a 
new "magic" solution comes along that will fix everything (4th GL, Case, 
LANS, Client/Server, UNIX....). Each has their niche, but none are the 
final solution. I am planning to learn C++ and Java just because it's 
something new to learn. I learned Flex/Edit. I learned AS/SET. I learned 
Visual Objects. I learned Visual Basic. I learned MS Access. I learned 
Impromptu. I learned Oracle. I still program in RPG using PDM on the AS/400 
everyday for my job. Many shops still use Windows 3.1 on PCs. I know more 
shops that run CISC boxes than RISC boxes. Most are still trying to figure 
out if the Internet will add value to their business (to justify actually 
implementing a solution).
>
> Joe Teff
> QDS
> Bloomington, MN
> ----------
> Bob Cozzi wrote:
>
> The think about JAVA is that it is our industry's decease of the week, 
this
> week.
>
> A few years ago, it was OO, then C++, now Java. None of these things will 
> help the AS/400, and while I don't know Bruce Bond, I think the idea of
> giving up RPG for Java is, well, in a word, STUPID!
>
> Yes, learning Java is fine. I love learning. I encourage learning. But 
most
> of these blanket statements telling use successful AS/400 developers to
> stop using X in order to use Y is stupid. Where are these new decease of
> the week coming from? They come from the rest of the industry. The 
unstable
> industry. Their applications keep not working so they keep coming up with 
> ways to get the job of programming out of the programmer's hands. Yes 
they
> write cool embedded systems, in things like the USRobotics PalmPilot, or
> the Mars Sojourner rover, but they do not like to write general purpose
> business applications.
>
> General Purpose Business applications need stable easy to read, and
> manipulate languages like RPG, COBOL, and PL/I. Java pretty close to an
> okay, stable language and perhaps it will become another COBOL or RPG. 
But
> did the COBOL programmers give up COBOL when RPG on the AS/400 become
> popular? Did the RPG programmers give up RPG when C became popular on the 
> AS/400? Some did, but the other 99.9 percent did not.
>
> Today, again in my opinion, Java is a brain-dead language that requires
> entirely too much coding to do a simple interactive application. This is
> not to say that it may not become a good language at some point, but 
today
> it isn't as useful as magazine writers an analyst say it is. After all, 
we
> all get board with the same thing day in and day out. We get board with
> green screen terminals, so we get color, we get board with color and we 
get
> graphical (OOPS, Rochester still can spell graphical yet.. sorry <g>). 
The
> people writing magazine article and doing lectures get really board 
talking
> about something that "just works". It is much more exciting to write 
about
> the newest and greatest stuff. It is very boring to write about the RPG
> cycle, or the CHAIN opcode.
>
> We as developers get board too. We have the unique opportunity, within 
our
> industry, to actually change our careers without changing our profession. 
> That is if we get board with RPG, we can go do something else, such as 
work
> for Microsoft. Those opportunities are there for us, but for others, it 
is
> much more difficult.
>
> Businesses are in the business of making money, and staying in business 
to
> make money. The AS/400 is still the most reliable system (in my opinion) 
of
> any system ever built, no exceptions. If you're using RPGIII, RPG IV or
> COBOL to make you business applications work, great!  If you're using
> something else, well that's great too.
>
> But a blanket statement that says to move to Java or C or Rexx, or
> whatever, is just dumb. Virtually nobody cares if those languages are
> technically superior to RPG IV. If we really cared about things like that 
> in this industry, we'd all be using OS/2 on our ThinkPads (or better yet, 
> OS/400 <g>).
>
> The fact is, RPG IV works, RPGIII is still the workhorse of our industry. 
> Just because a few developers, magazine writers and analysts are board 
with
> it, doesn't make Java or anything else any better at doing general 
purpose
> business applications.
>
> The difficult part of our job as RPG programmers, is to get IBM Rochester 
> and Toronto to understand that we like RPG, we like the AS/400. We use it 
> because we like it and it works!  The rest of the industry may have this 
or
> that bell or whistle, but the AS/400 is were its at. And the AS/400 means 
> RPG, because "RPG IV, it just works!"
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * This is the Midrange System Mailing List!  To submit a new message,   *
> * send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".  To unsubscribe from     *
> * this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify            *
> * 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.  Questions      *
> * should be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com   *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> umidr
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* This is the Midrange System Mailing List!  To submit a new message,   *
* send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".  To unsubscribe from     *
* this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify            *
* 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.  Questions      *
* should be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *