Re: Cheaper Servers?

[rob@xxxxxxxxx]

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I agree with you.  Submit a DCR.  The way op's nav currently works, even
if you highlight 4 and then right click on properties, is to do one at a
time.  And you're right, Windows Explorer doesn't force you to act this
way.

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




Vernon Hamberg <vhamberg@attbi.com>
Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
04/17/2002 09:16 AM
Please respond to midrange-l


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


One of my main complaints about Ops Nav is this: I don't think its
developers understand how much is possible in green screens. Function is
lost, and the knowledge base from the beginning is lost. (A common problem
with age of a system - how many will know PLMI in 10 years?)

My main example is being able to change attributes on multiple spooled
files in a WRKSPLF screen. You put a 2 on the ones you want to change,
then
put your changes on the command line. This kind of thing shows up all over
the place on the 400, PDM, 'Work with Objects', etc.

Ops Nav forces you to make your changes to EVERY SINGLE spooled file that
you have selected. You CAN select more than one, but when you right click
and select the Properties, it does each one individually.

This is NOT necessary in Windows. You CAN gray out options that are not
common to all items and allow changing the rest with a single screen. In
fact, even MS itself does this now with Properties on multiple files in
Explorer.

At 07:56 PM 4/17/02 +1000, you wrote:

>Hello Rob,
>
>You wrote:
> >I agree that the command line interface is nice for some features like
> >stopping or starting programmatically, or configuring.  I still have
> >programs that we would restore from tape and run to configure a new
400.

-snip-

>While I agree that OpsNav is a pleasant enough interface, especially for
>the less technical, it is also slower and less effective for many
reasons.
>My primary objections to OpsNav are:
>         1/ It requires Windoze for which I have no business need.
>         2/ IBM provide no alternative to OpsNav-- it is simply stupid to
>require the world's least reliable OS to configure and manage the world's
>most reliable.

-snip-

>Regards,
>Simon Coulter.

_______________________________________________
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.