Re: Cheaper Servers?

[Dr Syd Nicholson <sydnic@xxxxxxxxxx>]

DeLong, Eric wrote:

>You keep hitting on this point, but I don't see why this is the deal-breaker
>you imagine it to be.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but Linux itself does not
>directly support a graphical interface.  It uses a shell to implement the
>graphical environment.  As IBM continues to migrate OOPS Navigator into
>Java, IBM could offer the laptop with two partitions, OS400 and Linux, with
>the Linux partition customized to use the laptop display and keyboard, just
>like you have on your desktop.  Linux partition uses TN5250 to access the
>OS400 partition.  IMO, this is an even better example of the flexibility and
>stability of iSeries architecture.
>
This is exactly the point I am trying to make.

Imagine an iSeries with it its own native support for VGA, keyboard and
mouse. This would be the console. The bit mapped display would be
delivered by means of a native OS/400 X-server and a shell - NOT a
separate partition, NOT another PC, but native support for a real
iSeries console. Eliminate the reliance on other software and operating
systems. Why should the iSeries get screwed when some other piece of
hardware or software fails or changes.

The other advantage of native X is clients (other PCs, unix boxes, etc)
could be connected directly to the machine. Any system that supports X
could have a graphic display that is native to OS/400. No need to rely
on operating system (Windows) dependent client software. No need for new
releases/PTFs of CA/400 for different versions of Windows. CA/400 become
independent of other operating sytems.

This would not eliminate the other forms of OS/400 connection that
already exist. These would still remain.

I have dream - but will it become reality.

Syd Nicholson