× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



From: Lukas Beeler

Of course one can just drop all the System i printing stuff, and just
send PDFs generated using Java down to the Client's browser. But then
again, he could run the same Java Stuff on Windows or Linux, with no
disadvantages whatsoever, and the advantage of having faster, better
supported and less expensive systems.

This is the part I don't buy. Just because it's flashy doesn't make it
better. It's only better when it runs mission critical systems reliably and
responds to changing business conditions.

Right now, in most businesses the PC-based systems and kiddie languages need
to do little more than display data in pretty colors, and for that they're
relatively well suited. But when loads rise or complexity spikes, the
kiddie systems start to fall down.

I'll point to Google. Absolutely fantastic at running a quarter-million
servers (yeah, you read that right) doing searches. But that's a very,
specific job. Google has been unable to match that in it's other technology
efforts. I keep pointing to Google Mail, and here's another reason why:

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/111607-gmail.html

Basically, Google is pushing GMail 2.0 down people's throats, and it's
painfully slow, buggy as all get out, and it freezes or crashes browsers.

And I don't buy the "beta" business either - Google Mail has been in beta
for nearly four years now. Only Microsoft runs betas longer than that (they
just never tell you that YOU'RE the beta tester). But this 2.0 is not a
beta: this is the new release and it plain stinks. Oh yeah, what's it
written in? Hmmmm... betcha it's one of those P-languages.

This happens all the time: people try to take inexpensive PC networks and
make them do something which they are not designed for: namely run robust
data-driven applications. Companies try to move stable midrange systems to
flashy, inexpensive PC networks, and they fail miserably (and expensively).
It's my belief that, like outsourcing, it's much more expensive in the long
run to try to do midrange work on a microcomputer operating system. The
question is not whether the C-level executives will figure that out, but
when. Eventually money talks. It's already happening in outsourcing
(revenues are starting to drop for many of the big outsourcers; TCS share
prices have dropped about 30% in the last year), let's hope it happens in
application purchasing before too long.

Then again, I could just be whistling in the dark...

Joe


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.