RE: What's in a name?

My problem is that I am semi-unsure of how to even reference it.  I hear
people say "System i" a lot, but in reality they mean System i5, correct?
System i is a grouping of servers and "our machine" is the System i5, right?

Aaron Bartell

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Trevor Perry
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:32 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: What's in a name?

It occurred to me the other day that we are still living in the past, and
this email just triggered that thought again.

While we keep talking about constant renaming, we are just repeating an old
and tired mantra. IBM has not changed the system name in 12 months! When
will we get behind the manufacturer of OUR platform and support their
efforts in moving us forward. Ok, so some of us don't like the "new" name,
but it is no longer new. It is the name we have, and IBM is planning to use
it for a while. If we continue to be confused inside our world, how will
anyone outside ourworld consider us a viable platform? I really think that
slamming the name change is now very passé, and in fact, simply lazy.

So, what will it take for all us System i developers and users to live in a
System i world, where we sell i5 and the family of servers includes iSeries,
AS/400 and i5, and the octopuses sing - in the shade?

Just pondering...

Trevor

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:10 PM
Subject: What's in a name?

For those who think that the pandemic of rebranding is limited to our 
little
platform, here's something to take notice of: Microsoft has quietly 
dropped
the .NET moniker from just about all of its products.  This may be a 
little
different from the constant renaming of the AS/system/iseries/5, though,
because Microsoft can argue with some credibility that EVERYTHING new in
Windows is now .NET, and thus saying VB.NET is redundant.  But I do get a
kick out of the latest marketing push for Visual Basic (not .NET) 2005: 
"The
Soul of Visual Basic is back!"

Evidently VB.NET sucked the soul OUT of Visual Basic...

Joe