Re: Cheaper Servers? - Been there - done that

[rob@xxxxxxxxx]

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
2)  Why do people feel that, (other than this theoretical tiny model) that
a server needs a graphical interface?  All access is from the clients
regardless if the client is Windows, OS/2, Unix, Linux, browser, or even a
dumb 5250 terminal.  The 400, (or even the S/36) has never had an
integrated client - 5250 or otherwise.  I think the S/38 was the last
machine to do so.


Rob Berendt
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin




Dr Syd Nicholson <sydnic@ccs400.com>
Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
04/10/2002 10:50 AM
Please respond to midrange-l


        To:     midrange-l@midrange.com
        cc:
        Fax to:
        Subject:        Re: Cheaper Servers? - Been there - done that


--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
To create a real portable iSeries IBM need to create a GUI AS/400.
Unless that happens we will always need another PC system to connect to
it.

A native OS/400 GUI and native iSeries display, keyboard and mouse. A
prime requirement for a laptop iSeries.

The only 'native' display access an iSeries has is green screen text
based. This must seriously hinder sales in an all GUI world.

Perhaps an X-Server type approach and a third party product such as KDE
or Gnome would be the way forward.

Politically I don't think IBM have any interest in this. They work on
the basis that everyone uses Windoze so they only provide GUI software
(eg. CA/400, Ops Nav, Code/400) to run under Windoze. In so doing they
FORCE all their customers to use Windoze. Please correct me if I am
wrong, but I am not aware of any IBM created CA/400 software for other
operating systems (eg. Linux). They insist we use Ops Nav, and Ops Nav
only runs under Windoze.

Personally I concluded that even maintaining a small Windoze network was
too expensive on my time. I now use Linux (much better, and more stable)
and question IBM's commitment to Linux. They seem to want it on their
servers (the words bandwagon and jump spring to mind) but I don't know
of any serious client side Linux developments. I would love to see a
CA/400 for Linux.

Syd Nicholson