So why doesn't IBM do that now? Build a "native" i5 GUI, one based on...
HTML or whatever and provide the architecture to supplant it in 5 or 10
years as technology changes.
IMO, this is exactly what they SHOULD NOT do! Now when I say that I mean
they shouldn't rely on insufficient technologies (i.e. HTML) to create the
next generation native GUI. Why? Because then they have to wait for
standards organizations to approve things (i.e. HTML/CSS/XML/Xforms/etc) and
they have to wait for next versions of frameworks (i.e. JSF/J2EE). (I am
making this next statement without a lot of IBM history knowledge) If you
look at some of IBM's biggest successes (OS/400, RPG, DB2, etc), it has been
when they have developed from scratch and dictated from start to finish -
where they didn't have to go to an external group (i.e. W3C, Eclipse, JSR,
etc) and ask for enhancements, and instead if it made business sense they
just DID IT!!
I don't know if it would ever go over well, but in my mind a "dumb terminal"
that is still GUI would be perfect for internal enterprise desktops. Figure
out what developers want to do as far as custom GUI apps and adhere to that.
Figure out what other apps are used on 90% of all desktops and implement
competing features (i.e. Make Lotus email client run on this "dumb
terminal", find a way to do a browser, etc). I guess I am probably leaning
to OS/2 when I think of it. I used OS/2 a little for an optical backup PC
at a previous employer - but I don't' know that much about it. IBM just
needs to cash in on the knowledge and technologies they have already built.
Some might say "they are too far behind Microsoft to get into GUI now". I
would say that in a few years enterprises are going to be fed up with
Microsoft as many already are (upgrading software, updating virus, upgrading
hardware) and would rather live in the GUI dumb terminal world again where
it was incredibly simple. I still remember back in my operation days when
desktop support consisted of switching out a 15 year old 3696 (I think that
was the model) because the "screen saver" image had burned into it making it
hard to read. Now that was some simple support! IBM could do the exact
same thing with GUI - they have already developed everything necessary, they
just need to put the pieces together.
Those are my thoughts,
Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Bob Cozzi
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 10:08 AM
To: 'RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries'
Subject: i5 GUI [WAS: Max length of a VARYING field]
That is actually my biggest regret for this box, not beating them (IBM) up
enough to get them to put a GUI on it. I pushed this very hard, but from the
outside you can only do so much; you really do need someone inside with
vision to champion something like that.
Ironic that today, "they're" building GUIs left and right for Linux and
throwing out the old ones for new ones, and yet, nobody seems to mind.
So why doesn't IBM do that now? Build a "native" i5 GUI, one based on...
HTML or whatever and provide the architecture to supplant it in 5 or 10
years as technology changes.
Export Ventures did it 10 years ago, but these were the engineers behind the
5250 data stream in the 1970s, so they sort of had an few advantages; they
knew the box and being retired, could just make it happen.
-Bob Cozzi
www.i5PodCast.com
Ask your manager to watch i5 TV
midrange.com
