RE: FAST400 alive and well???

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Nathan M. Andelin
>
> The question is how will IBM do it?  The easiest solution would be for IBM
> to do something like FAST400, which would be to set the bit that currently
> flags a Webfaced job as interactive.  But that would probably
> irritate folks
> at Jacada and Pluta Brothers who were forced to come up with their own
> alternatives to IBM's Workstation Interface in order to solve interactive
> performance penalties.

Actually, Nathan, I'm not too terribly worried about IBM removing the
interactive penalty on WebFacing, because IBM's approach is pretty different
from mine.  While PSC400 uses an HTML interface, the underlying e-Deployment
architecture allows any sort of client, thick or thin, to be attached to a
converted program.  WebFacing, on the other hand, is pretty much a hard
DDS-to-HTML conversion.

What I'd truly like to see is exit programs on the display file - or even a
fully supported "SPECIAL" file like we had back in the old S/3 days.  That
would work quite nicely with my architecture, and would allow people to
quickly encapsulate existing interactive programs into batch server
programs.

Joe