Re: Windows As A Development Workstation

I've been fairly quiet through this discussion, but thought I'll chime in here.

I don't think it's a question of which OS is better than any other OS, but
what is best for *me* to enter RPG code into my AS/400.

I have an NT network here (NT Backoffice 4.0), and we have PCs (Win95
and Win98).  We are connected to a WAN with our main office (we recently
merged with a larger corporation that also uses AS/400's).  Through all this,
I still connect to our AS/400's using either 5250 dumb tubes, or 5250 green
screen emulation (Mochasoft).  We do not have Client Access even installed
on our network, although most of the other corporate sites do.  I still enter
code using SEU.

Windows has it's advantages over OS/400 (try to show a JPG on a 5250
dumb tube) as far as look and feel, but OS/400 has it's advantages over
WinTel also (stability, database, etc...).  It's a matter of right tool for the
job, as stated.

Now, I am not going to be installing Client Acess on my systems here if
I can help it because of the huge security whole this opens up to my data
base, and I haven't found the time to research and write all the exit programs
I would need to ensure data security and itegrity.  Which leaves me entering
code in SEU in a green screen.  Which is fine and dandy, and works well
for it's purpose.  Now, I'm learning that IBM has decided that they don't like
the 5250 screens, they are going all client/server based whether I like it or
not, and who cares if client access blows a whole in my AS/400 security big
enough to drive a SQL database through, I'm going to either like it or lump it.

It is no small wonder that Microsoft totally blew the doors off of IBM as far
as software sales goes.  IBM has no idea what people want, nor what they are
doing.

I will continue to use SEU to enter code into my AS/400, and while I"m at it
I will stay at V3R7M0 so IBM can't really force me to do anything.

Regards,

Jim Langston

Paul Cunnane wrote:

> With all due respect, I think it's unfair of you to compare Windows to
> *real* operating systems like OS/400, VMS, AIX etc. My copy of W2K cost less
> than $500, OS/400 cost us $50,000. I think it's reasonable to expect more
> from the latter.
>
> If you want to make a valid comparison, then compare it with DOS, OS/2, Mac,
> and now Linux. I don't know about you, but I've used all four of them and
> had them lock up to the point that a reboot was required.
>
>      Respect noted and reciprocated, but I'll go head-to-head with W2K vs
>      Linux anytime.  My lil' SuSE box has been up for 23 days (and it was
>      down only to be physically carried to another room), despite just
>      today re-compiling the entire desktop environment (Gnome 1.2).
>
> In any event, I'm not interested in an OS debate. I use the best tool for
> the job and avoid getting religious about it. My original point was that if
> you are avoiding the move to a PC based editor simply because of the
> unreliability of Windows, you don't have to let that stop you anymore.
>
>      Agreed that an OS debate is unproductive.  If, however, your choice of
>      PC client is not Windows, you are dramatically short on options for an
>      advanced source editor.  (Once again, any takers for RPG and CL Emacs
>      modes? :)
>
>      --
>      Paul



+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---