Re: Web enablement options (previously private)

["Nathan M. Andelin" <nandelin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Your post is a keeper, Walden.  I couldn't find anything to cut.  Every
sentence is insightful.  The big circle you spoke of would pass as a
synopsis of my career.  Try supporting thick client-server at about 200
sites nationwide.  The word "nightmare" isn't too far off.  The word
"quagmire" comes to mind.

Nathan M. Andelin
www.relational-data.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Walden H. Leverich" <WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com>
> I think the web-browser is almost the best interface for any box, not just
> the iSeries. I agree that in some situations 5250 is best, mainly for
> heads-down data entry, but beyond that it's the web browser! It's somewhat
> funny, we've basically gone around in a big circle.
>
> We started with host-controlled screens like 5250, 3270 and the VT100
> family. We then tried this miserable think called client/server where we
> pushed a ton of business logic out to the desktops. That worked great in
the
> lab with five standard, easy to upgrade machines. But when it was pushed
to
> the enterprise all hell broke loose. There were 27 configurations of
> hardware, 5 different operating system (Win31, WFW, Win95, Win98, WinNT)
and
> deploying changes was a nightmare. You can't rollout a new .exe to
everyone
> in two minutes.
>
> From CS we went back to host controlled, web browsers. Sure, they're
> graphical and "pretty" but at the end of the day, they're host-controlled
> green-screens that aren't green.