RE: c++ (was RE: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than zero)

I wrote "b) Some RPG coders don't like to sacrifice what works, based on the
conventional 'wisdom'".

Now I'm VERY well aware that absolutely every single Computer Science
Professor on the planet, and just about the entire industry, would argue
against using RPG and DDS.  Many, if not most, think the concept is
downright laughable, and think those who advocate the advantages of RPG and
DDS exhibit some pre-historic attitudes and/or genetic deficiency... (1/2
;-)


===> However, the market has spoken:  Companies pay a WIDE price
differential in hardware costs, because it DOES work.

You can argue that they pay it because they don't want to pay the cost of
re-training and/or their programmers are a bunch of old dogs that don't want
to learn new tricks.  Makes no difference...  The fact is they DO pay HUGE
sums of money to stay with RPG and DDS.  The market is saying something, by
that fact.

They may not be happy about it, obviously, from the talk on this list.  But
these servers continue to sell and be upgraded.. and even more, be
effectively utilitized to run A LOT of businesses...


In addition, this continues to take place in spite of the fact that MOST
Computer Science professionals have NEVER HEARD of either RPG or DDS...  And
most of those few that have heard about it, and think they know about it,
are basically clueless about it.  The RPG/DDS Community is, in a sense, a
self-supporting grassroots community.

Obviously, JMNSHO...


> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
> [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of jt
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:15 PM
> To: midrange-l@midrange.com
> Subject: c++ (was RE: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than
> zero)
>
>
> Steve,
>
> I do not completely agree with this POV.  I think there is a lot
> of strength
> to the argument that c++, as well as Java, are not very good languages to
> develop business apps in, to begin with.
>
> This can be debated, ad infinitum, so I doubt if I'll pursue it.
>
> The whole industry agrees with your POV, Steve, so it's a trend that's
> pretty hard to buck.  But the sheer numbers of systems still
> running on RPG
> and DDS, IN SPITE OF the fact that basically the ENTIRE industry is
> COMPLETELY against it indicates 2 alternative views of the situation (both
> of which I believe are true, to an extent):
>
> a) Some RPG coders don't like to learn new things
> b) Some RPG coders don't like to sacrifice what works, based on the
> conventional "wisdom"
>
>
> I don't mean to say that OO is all bad, either.. just that it ain't the
> panacea that they've be predicting for 20 years.
>
>
> jt
>
>
> "Have a GREAT day...!  And a BETTER ONE TOMORROW~~~:-)" (sm)
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
> > [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Steve Richter
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:54 PM
> > To: midrange-l@midrange.com
> > Subject: Re: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than zero
> >
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > I think you and others miss the point on why cfint is so bad.
> >
> > With such little cpu available to a pgm, programmers cannot use modern
> > coding techniques such as the encapsulation of data and methods that are
> > used in c++.
> >
> > This results in programmers who do not know much about these techniques,
> > programs that are lmited in their functionality and
> applications which are
> > limited also.
> >
> > Sure many iSeries systems do have the horsepower needed for
> C++, but many
> > more do not, so vendors have less incentive to write applications
> > for these
> > systems because cfint will prevent their appl from running the
> > way it should
> > on many other as400 systems.
> >
> > The end result: IBM makes some money, modern applications are
> not written,
> > and programmers dont learn to code the way they should.
> >
> > -Steve Richter
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Chris Rehm" <javadisciple@earthlink.net>
> > To: <midrange-l@midrange.com>
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:13 PM
> > Subject: Re: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than zero
> >
> >
> > > On Friday 09 November 2001 10:48 am, James Rich wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes.  The small customer says, "Slower, smaller capacity hardware is
> > > > cheaper to produce.  Those lower prices should mean I pay
> less for the
> > > > machine.  I am getting screwed if I have to pay for high-powered
> > hardware
> > > > that is then artificially slowed."
> > >
> > > Your response is a definite, "No it isn't and no you are not."
> > To produce
> > a
> > > seperate line of hardware to address the lower end of the market would
> > > require a different manufacturing line in a plant. The costs
> associated
> > > with this can be very large. If IBM were to need to manufacture a
> > different
> > > processor configuration for each price point in the market the overall
> > cost
> > > would he higher to them than the cost of manufacturing all the
> > processors
> > > on one production line and just licensing them to different customer
> > > requirements.
> > >
> > > The proof of this is that IBM is the one paying the costs. If
> they could
> > be
> > > saving money on the manufacture, they would be. Whether or not
> > they'd pass
> > > that on is debatable maybe, but I don't think they chose the
> > CFINT method
> > > of handling this so they could pay higher marketing costs.
> > >
> > > > The big customer says, "I paid a premium for high-performance.  My
> > > > expensive machine has the same hardware capacity as the inexpensive
> > > > machine.  Why don't I get a lower price if the same hardware
> > can be sold
> > > > more cheaply?  I am getting screwed!"
> > >
> > > "No, you are not." Because IBM offsets some of its
> > manufacturing costs by
> > > licensing some machines to smaller users, the overall cost of
> > delivery to
> > > the big customer is reduced so they pay less, not more. IBM is not
> > crowding
> > > out big deliveries by packing small orders into the production
> > line. They
> > > are letting the production line run at optimum capacity and
> > they are using
> > > the smaller licenses to offset some costs.
> > >
> > > That would be my answer, but that was just off the top of my head. ;-)
> > >
> > > > James Rich
> > > > james@eaerich.com
> > >
> > > --
> > > Chris Rehm
> > > javadisciple@earthlink.net
> > >
> > > And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart...
> > > ...Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other
> > > commandment greater than these. Mark 12:30-31
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
> > list
> > > To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> > > visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
> > > or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
> > > Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> > > at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
> > mailing list
> > To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> > visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
> > or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
> > Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> > at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
> mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>