Re: Any takers? Repeat: Client Access Licensed Programs

Jerome,

> Hey, there's Client Access and there's Client Access and there's Client
> Access....
<snip> 
> I wouldn't expect lots of competition on CA-1 or CA-2 but when you get to
> CA-3 it's a fact that there are many companies (WRQ, Attachmate, NetSoft,
> Wall Data, Nlynx, etc.) that have better, faster, smarter, leaner, and
> cheaper mouse traps than IBM which you deridingly call a KIA as though we
> Murricans are some kind of disallowed undesirables.  That comment is VERY
> distasteful to me on the face of it.

  Well you missed the point of my comments here.  1st) You are correct
about the pieces.  As I noted you don't provide them, but despite that
you continually call for Synapse to be a replacement for CA.  This is
the crux of the issue.  I can't count the times that a post asks for
help with a problem with CA and you make the suggestion that Synapse
is the solution. 2nd) The KIA reference was not intended to be a slam,
rather a comparison: KIA sells two  vehicles that I know of (a small
car and a mini-SUV) while Dodge sells tiny cars, midsize cars, full
size sedans, an extreme sports car, Mini and full size vans, Pickups,
etc (You get the picture). The two product lines are not comparable. 
KIA may very well get you from here to there, and cheaply too while
Dodge can get you there at 180MPH, get you there with 7 tons of stuff
in tow, or anwhere in-between. Additionally you can get parts and
service for your Dodge anywhere, KIA - I think there is ONE dealer in
West Michigan. That comparison works as well.  I've never driven a KIA
(or over one either for that matter) so I'm not commenting on whether
they are any good or not and as I stated, your product may be
everything you say it is, but it is Not Everything.

> I am in the process of updating 300 workstations to be Y2K compliant.  We
> are installing CA/400 base programs (the FREE part of CA/400) for shared
> folders and ODBC to a CISC machine and we are installing Synapse NetWolf
> for display, printer, and file transfer.  The RISC machine has NetServer
> instead of folders so there is nothing to do there.  The customer is saving
> tens of thousands of dollars by doing this and they are very happy with
> NetWolf as, IMHO, it does it all better.  They are very UNHAPPY with CA/400
> because it is so intrusive in their desktops.  It takes from 30MB to 80 MB
> of disk, modifies the registry, changes files in the windows\system folder,
> and comes up with mysterious locks.  It takes an on site knowledgeable tech
> to support it.

  So you are creating a more complicated environment here.  You are
still installing CA, just omitting the $$ parts.  I don't deny that CA
makes the changes you mention but without the $$ parts it still does
most of those things, it just uses less disk.  Now you have to support
CA AND your product.  I disagree about the on-site tech:  I support
many CA customers with Zero tech knowledge on site and usually go to
most of them only to set up new machines.

> In fact, we installed one yesterday and it so hosed the PC that the only
> way to cure it is to format the hard drive and start again from scratch
> according to their most experienced senior tech.  Who can afford this?
> They have a GP fault blue screen of death.  The PC won't start up.  Now
> what?  I wish someone, perhaps you, could explain that.  I know from my
> tech support duties that we are not alone in this experience.

  Certainly there are going to be instances of ANY program install in
Windoze which ends in the BSOD or worse.  I have never experienced it
with CA but have  with several other (non emulator) products.  I have
installed on hundreds of machines with versions from V3R1 to
V4R4(express) and never seen this.  I have created silent installs
including service packs and never seen a crash this bad.

> IBM's solution is to remove all non-IBM drivers, VxD's, software, etc. and
> be prepared to replace all hardware with IBM stuff.  Wow, now that's a
> viable plan.

  You must admit that when solving communications problems most
vendors will recommend as vanilla a setup as possible since you can't
test with everything and the most common test is with a fresh install.
  I've haven't seen a PC with nothing but IBM stuff in it since 1984. 
Even IBM Stuff often isn't IBM stuff any more so that's a pretty lame
recommendation.  I'd like to see where they posted that one.


> You say you've never tried alternatives.  Welcome.  Look around.  CA/400 is
> not the only game in town.  There are better programs.  Do you see everyone
> running just MS stuff on Windows?  Not much.  Yes, of course, no one every
> got fired by buying IBM but really...check it out.

  I never said I didn't try alternatives. I have customers running
WRQ, Netsoft, Rumba, BOS, Wintronix, and others.  I've just never
tried yours.  Many of these have variously caused similair problems
(lockups, other programs crashing, etc).

> Sorry to have offended you.  Hope you take the plunge and look around.  The
> water's fine.

  I'm only offended by what I and others percieve as 'advertising'
rather than constructive suggestions for solutions.

 - Larry


-- 
Larry Bolhuis         | What do you want to reload today?
Arbor Solutions, Inc  | 
(616) 451-2500        | Two rules to success in life:
lbolhui@ibm.net       | 1. Never tell people everything you know.
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---