RE: Question Re: Piping and Redirection

["jt" <jt@xxxxxx>]

| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Scott Klement
| Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 11:10 AM

| I think you're missing the point.   The point of this thread (IMHO) is
| that the Unix shell allows you a great deal of flexibility.   Not that any
| one particular Unix utility is needed.
|
| I think the tail thing was just one example.
|
| Don't get me wrong...  both systems have their strengths and weaknesses.
| The Unix command-line is much more flexible... simply by piping commands,
| you can do all sorts of useful and imaginitive things that make your life
| easier.   However, OS/400 is much more user-friendly.   Just about
| everything that OS/400 does is done very well...  but it's somewhat
| 'rigid' you can only do what they designed it to do.   In Unix, many
| things are done well.   Some things aren't.   But, it's very, very
| flexible...  by combining the functions of many small programs, you have a
| huge amount of flexibility.
|
| But, simply taking one example and implementing it on OS/400 doesn't make
| it all work.  You need the whole paradigm to be used throughout...


Scott, Your posts are among those I value the most on this forum.  I respect
Your vast knowledge and experience.. and admire the Your contributions to
Open Source (even though I believe Open Source actually destroys software
innovation, by driving the marketspace into, basically, a commodity market).

Hopefully I've conveyed that I respect and admire Your opinions, even in the
case where I don't agree with some of them, like these You've expressed
above.


I've seen case studies and white papers, and have experience in two shops
which swapped 400 for *nix (and vice versa).

>From what I've seen, You could replace the word "flexible", "'rigid'", and
"flexibility" with such words as "payroll intensive", "integrated", and
"unstable", and then I would agree with what You wrote above, entirely.


So I'm suggesting that if You want to stick with a paradigm, OS/400 is both
economically and architecturally sounder.

jm(ns)ho.