Re: Any comments on Fontecchio's blog?

Don,

Here is an example of FUD. All of these points that Steve raises have been
addressed over and over on this and other forums.

There are many people who are pushing IBM to move forward with i5/OS, and it
is working. Have a look at the impact of the COMMON Advisory Councils. Major
changes and updates to the i5/OS direction have been made because of the
input from them. However, these were made in a positive and influential
manner, instead of making noise on every forum you can write on.

While it is nice to have a counterpoint, that counterpoint should not be a
noise beating the same drum that gets smaller and smaller and more and more
irrelevant.

Push for change, but take a positive approach.

Trevor



On 3/7/08 5:23 PM, "Steve Richter" <stephenrichter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Trevor Perry <trevor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Don,

Not a chance. If you and Booth and Steve Richter continue to spread FUD
and
restate the same old tired arguments, then that will be all that can be
found on Google about i5/OS. That would be a disaster.

the flip side of this argument is that if the IBM execs and the community at
large only hear that i5/OS is great and new there will be little awareness
that the pillars of the OS are unchanged since the 1990s and dont match the
advanced features found in Microsoft products. ILE needs to be improved. 10
char object names were outdated in 2000. the pre compiler could and
should be better, CL needs to be enhanced to be a full ILE citizen, would be
really useful if SQL procedures were more integrated with ILE, ...