Re: Happy i5/OS 2008?

Does it cause confusion when Windows runs on a 386, 486, Pentium, Pentium 2,
Pentium 3, Pentium 4, Dual Core, Quad Core, etc?

You said "It's just Windows (such as it is)". I would say it's just i5/OS,
such as it is.

And yes, of course, it should be named something smarter than i5/OS. I do
believe this is why i/OS is not available:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco_IOS

Would it be nice to have a new name? Sure.. something smart, something that
shows the amazing value of the OS. But then we would have to fight the "too
many names" syndrome. And of course we expect it to be changed at some
point. Until it does, i5/OS is our glue. Apparently, it is not too sticky!




On 12/31/07 3:26 PM, "David Gibbs" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Trevor Perry wrote:

AS/400, iSeries and System i are all names of servers. If you are referring
to something (an OS) that is running on a Power blade as an AS/400, won't
that cause confusion?
From a user (end or technical) perspective, is there any difference?
And no, I call it i5/OS, no matter whether it runs on AS/400, iSeries, i5 or
System i.

Right ... but won't that cause confusing when it's running on a Power 6
or Power 7 processor? The '5' refers to Power 5, after all. Shouldn't
it be renamed to "i6/os' or "i7/os"?

Personally, I would have been a lot happier if they just called "i/os".

david