RE: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

And not only that, but the kinds of errors we see people really complaining
about in WDSC happen relatively frequently in other PC applications,
including Office and even base Windows.  Ever have a mapped drive just
"unmap" itself?  That's a REAL pain in a production environment.

I'm not apologizing for the bugs in WDSC.  But to refuse to use it because
of some relatively arcane bugs when it gives you so much more power than SEU
and PDM seems to me a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

I'd be interested to see how many people are using WDSC today, and how many
have found errors that completely stop them from working.  I mean, even the
folks at MKS, who are extending the product, don't find a ton of errors.  If
you really think these errors don't exist in iSeries code, just spend a
little time on the BPCS list <grin>.

Joe

> From: rob@xxxxxxxxx
>
> Ok, I concede that WDSC has some issues with robustness.  But if no one
> used it until it was 100% then no one would use it period.  I believe that
> has gotten lots better and will continue to do so.  And some issues may be
> hard to find in a test environment, such as the IBM lab.  It's when you
> get out to customers and the myriad configuration of PC's, applications,
> load, things that they are using WDSC for, etc is some additional errors
> are found.  Just like I believe that IBM does a pretty good job with OS
> and the rest of the LPP's the same thing could be said about some of the
> error's we've all found there too.  Eh?