|
Definitely some interesting points Nathan ! <They sent me an email too. One interesting side-note. According to Dave Slater at IBM, one of his goals is to "Convert the WebFacing runtime support so that WebFaced applications run in batch mode and avoid the cost/performance penalties associated with interactive execution." 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. Will IBM's Webfacing product continue to use the existing *DSPF and Workstation Interface? Or will IBM do what it requires it's competition to do. That is, design an alternative interface. It seems to me that IBM could run into trouble if their applications were able to use Interactive features (existing workstation interface) without an interactive penalty, but the products of other developers could not. Nathan M. Andelin www.relational-data.com>
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.