RE: i5/OS vs. Windows was->RE: i5 Youngsters

5 seconds per screen is responsive? We definitively live in different

worlds then. A screen that needs more than a second is slow, very slow. In a
LAN, a page should not take more than half a second to
load.

For system configuration I have deemed it acceptable (given HTTP admins
track record). But again, I am suffering from it's progression of getting
better when I should probably continue to squek about the reality of it's
slowness. I get sub second responses from _some_of the pages, but most are
in the less-than-two-seconds range. I said five to be fair on the reality
that it is slower than it should be. Wonder if that app was written in
RPG-CGI if it would be faster, or if it is like I proposed, the system API
calls slowing it down??

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-nontech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-nontech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lukas Beeler
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:17 AM
To: Non-Technical Discussion about the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: i5/OS vs. Windows was->RE: i5 Youngsters

On 1/15/08, Aaron Bartell <albartell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I think you definitely have an issue on those machines then. The only

time

I have experienced that type of response time is when starting WAS, which
the HTTP admin server is not (at least it carries a fraction of the
footprint). In my experience the admin HTTP server has been quite
responsive (less than 5 seconds a screen) on 90% of the machines I work on

5 seconds per screen is responsive? We definitively live in different
worlds then. A screen that needs more than a second is slow, very
slow. In a LAN, a page should not take more than half a second to
load.

This doesn't mean that either of us is wrong or right, the truth is
maybe somewhere in the middle. I don't like waiting. Especially not on
a machine.

Couldn't agree with you more. I wish the framework your team developed
wasn't necessary. What does Microsoft have that is better though as it
concerns client server programming? (asking partially out of ignorance).

I can't really help you much with this answer, as i'm not a windows
developer either.

Microsoft tends to favor the fat client approach (which i do not
really like), but RPC can be used to implement client-server
communication. And there's Windows Terminal Server, which can be used
to publish fat clients (which i consider a hack). But WTS has it's
advantages.