Re: Cheaper Servers? -- MIDRANGE-L

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
The only freedom of choice you are giving for the console is who makes the
terminal, keyboard and mouse.  Wouldn't you still be locking them into a
client of some sort, be it xWindows, 5250 or some other thing?

And if you are talking xWindows:

>primarily administrative
People are quite enamored with the 5250 client, be it good, bad or
indifferent.  What would be the rush to xWindows?  Many do not seem to be
willing to change to Op's nav or anything else for that matter.

>demos
What would you demo on xWindows?
- 5250?
- web applications
- Client Server applications based on the prospects current client set?



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
04/12/2002 12:17 PM
Please respond to midrange-l


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


What one gains is stability, and reliablity. It would not be a client,
it would not be a separate machine. It would be a console. It does not
rule out other clients, people are still free to choose.

What one gains is a machine that stands by itself. It does not rely on
MS Windows for its existence.

It would not necessarily replace the other console connections. If IBM
went this way, hopefully people would still be free to choose.

It would not be biult in. Instead I envision standard video, keyboard,
and mouse out ports, much as you would expect on a PC. Any standard
display (plug and play?), keyboard and mouse should be capable of being
used. But they would not need to be connected up if you use something
else for the console.

Remember, its a console, its task would be primarily administrative.
However, it would make the machine more portable when it comes to demos,
etc. It also makes it much easier for IBM to make significant in roads
into the NT server market.

Syd Nicholson



rob@dekko.com wrote:

>This is a multipart message in MIME format.
>--
>[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
><snip>
>my goal?? -- To allow the iSeries to be a stand alone box with its own
>console. I don't see why this console needs to be a separate machine.
><endsnip>
>
>For what purpose?
>- demos
>- development
>- replace all desktops with os/400?
>
>I am just trying to see what the big advantage is to a built in console.
>As far as I am concerned a built in console locks you into a specific
>client.  Shouldn't one be free to chose?
>
>
>Rob Berendt
>--
>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>Benjamin Franklin
>_______________________________________________
>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>


_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.