And, I'll add that it is not the *name* that is the issue... it's the PERCEPTION.
AS400 is perceived to be OLD. Why would I perpetuate that perception?
In the case of our company, "Oracle" was perceived as new/modern/future. Hence... IBM i platform (or, as everyone calls it (despite my efforts) - AS400) is deprecated and on its way out. Users would kill to keep it though.
==========================================
This is from 2016. Can't remember the author (Trevor, maybe?)...
"What do people gain by calling IBM i on Power Systems an AS/400? NOTHING"
I call it IBM i on Power Systems, and educate my users to do the same, because of two main reasons:
1. It's the name of the OS and hardware that we currently run.
2. It ensures that everyone in the company, from shop floor to CEO, is aware we are investing in modern technology. Yes it's backward compatible and runs the old green screen apps, but that Sametime 8.5.2 rich web meeting and PHP web app for production control is thanks to IBM i.
Anyone who mentions "the 400" around me in my shop usually leaves the ensuing conversation with a greater appreciation of our IT department, our systems and, if I do my job right, the confidence we can deliver modern solutions they perhaps thought were not possible on "the 400."
To answer your question, what would/did it take? I had to change my perspective. What would I gain by wrongfully calling it "the 400?" Absolutely nothing. I've gained so much more by rightfully calling it IBM i on Power Systems and taking a little time to provide a little education; something many IT folks have abandoned as not "part of the job." I strongly disagree. Education opens the doors that people aren't even aware of.
An AS/400 is from the 80's and 90's. I don't want my name attached to any business decision that involves moving forward in 2016 with an AS/400.
So, if you call it an AS/400 or an iSeries or a System i...what do you gain from that? Familiarity? A comfort zone? If so, you should've went into accounting or something else relatively stable and safe. As an IT professional, where the tools of the trade change very often, you're losing the opportunity to engage someone and educate them on the technological monster IBM i on Power Systems is!
What is wrong with us?
We all work on the same platform, and the majority of us believe strongly in it and wish for it to have a future.
To that end, we all need to come together and call the platform by its name - the current one. Even in this group (~IBM i~ professionals), many of the discussions reference the platform by one of the OLD names. What causes that mismatch?
On the web, every reference we make to one of the OLD names means we propagate the past. Search engines are picking up all the old names, and storing our disagreement for future reference.
It seems like we have had this name long enough that we could stop arguing about something simple, and just start doing it RIGHT... Certainly, in our own marketing efforts, we must reference the glorious past of the platform - but that should be limited to reaching those who remain confused.
For the rest of us, what is the block that stops us from using the CORRECT terminology? Is it ego? Stubbornness? Ignorance?
What is this strange loyalty to the past that causes us to be complete morons (and I write that in the nicest way) when it comes to what we actually DO?
For clarification, our platform is IBM i. This is an operating system, not a server. It runs on the mainstream hardware platform from IBM, called Power Systems.
My suggestions:
• When you speak, call it 'i' - everyone knows that (iSeries bigots, System i aficionados, i5/OS gurus, IBM i professionals, and even AS/400 faithful know that an 'i' is an AS/400.. really.)
• When you write, call it 'IBM i'. Google can finally catch up!
==========================================
Roger Harman
COMMON Certified Application Developer - ILE RPG on IBM i on Power
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Roger Harman <roger.harman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 2:06 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: AS/400 vs. IBM i
That has worked for me. I will NOT call it AS400 even though 99% of my company does.
Roger Harman
COMMON Certified Application Developer - ILE RPG on IBM i on Power
--
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Holger Scherer <hs@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 10:44 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: AS/400 vs. IBM i
hrhrhr.
I still would prefer „The IBM system“.
-h
Am 23.10.2019 um 19:42 schrieb B Stone <bvstone@xxxxxxxxx>:
I think the next name should be the IBM " " (yes, just a space). That
should make Google hits even easier.
midrange.com
