Re: i5 GUI

Tom Liotta wrote:

7. RE: i5 GUI (albartell)

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!!

The first question that _must_ be answered is "Where will it execute?" Where it executes will have a huge influence over whether existing standards are used or not.

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).

"Dumb terminals" capable of GUIs was tried by IBM a few years ago. I suspect that the underwhelming acceptance of the Network Stations led to general abandonment of any egg of an idea to progress into a native GUI. If it don't sell, why enter the market?

I get the feeling that any serious GUI would need to be _fully_ developed, including _cheap_ hardware easily available before we'd ever see it. It sure doesn't fly when attempts are made to phase it in. (VA-RPG, GUI 5250 components, you name it)

Tom Liotta