Not really. The other guys don't have the perception problem that we
have. I also don't think the only reason our system is not considered
modern is the lack of a native gui. It's one of them but there are
plenty of other reasons. I also think that those who run old System i
installations are at a greater risk of being replaced than say those who
are running W2K.
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Darrell A Martin
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 12:05 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: New redpaper: i5/OS Program Conversion: Getting readyfor
i5/OSV6R1
Michael:
You are missing something very important. That is, that "the other guys"
have just as many down-level OS users as i5/OS/400. Why do you think
there
was so much howling when Microsoft's update system broke over the
Daylight
Savings change this year? Because such a high percentage of their users
were still running an operating system released in the 1990s, that's
why.
(And I'm talking legitimate, licensed copies, still getting security
patches.)
If you compare the current installed base of any OS to the latest
release
of any other, the latest release will *always* have the advantage. No
flash of insight there. Nevertheless there are still people selling
software that runs on MS-DOS, not because they expect to get rich from
it
but because there is a market and the development costs were sunk long
ago. And you can't begin to compare the hardware reliability of the
typical PC to that of a same-era IBM midrange.
If IBM's hardware broke to the point where it couldn't be fixed, more
often, their installed base would be more modern....
If IBM's i5/OS had a cool-looking GUI as its normal interface, it would
*look* more modern....
Darrell
Darrell A. Martin - 630-754-2141
Manager, Computer Operations
dmartin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 07/23/2007 02:24:32 PM:
Brad wrote:
"I would guess at least 20-30% are pre V5, another 30-40 are V5R1/2
and
the rest maybe V5R3/4. I would be willing to bet other ISVs that do
support lower OS versions would have similar numbers."
Holy *&^%. That might help partially explain why the system is not
considered modern.......V5R1 was announced in 2001, V5R2 was announced
in 2002, V5R3 announced in 2004. Makes almost any other Wintel or
Unix
system look like it is comparatively ultra modern to i5/OS when in
fact
it isn't.
Michael Crump
This e-mail, including attachments, may contain information that is
confidential and/or proprietary, and may only be used by the person to
whom this email is addressed. If the recipient of this e-mail is not the
intended recipient or an authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail is
prohibited. If this e-mail has been delivered to you in error, please
notify the sender by replying to this message and deleting this e-mail
immediately.
midrange.com
