WDSCi PTFs / SPs; Win OS requirements -- WDSCI-L




Hi Dan the Man  (not Dale)

(beware troll warning ahead, but really I do mean the following)

WDSCi is IMO a beast of a different stripe.
a.  It is an Open Source product. I have some reservations about this.
b.  It is a PC OS based product.  I also have reservations about this.
c.  It is JAVA based.

Forget all you know about IBM AS400 products.  This is not one of those.
I wonder on IBMs strategy.  I conclude that IBM has certain agendas.
a. IBM wants only ONE programming language.  It is JAVA. IBM eventually
   wants to rationalise/consolidate/reduce costs/reduce heads on all
   its systems developers.
   Why JAVA. It is platform independant. When all your applications run
   on JAVA who needs an AS400.  Just run your application in a JAVA
   environment on a mainframe box or God forbid W200N. Bye Bye AS400.
   Luckily JAVA ia as easy to learn as Egyptian heiroglyphics.
   I try and try and maybe one day I will see the light but it is
   sadly beyond me.
b. IBM wants to weed out the AS400, its like a thorn in its side.
   GSD was created by IBM as a defense on the anti-trust? monopoly
   law suits in the 70s and the S/3 (wot I started on) was laughed at
   as being a toy box. Well the S/3 evolved to S/38 then AS400 and a lot
   of non-GSD IBMers did not and still do not like it.  The toy box got a
   life of its own and due to its customer support was too hard to kill.
c. If you cannot kill the beast what can you do.
   Provide a bridge to other systems and entice those recalcitrants
   across. WDSCi is such a bridge. Luckily it is so complex you need a
   degree in Brain Surgery to operate it and so complex that its bugs
   will never be eradicated, plus one humongous PC to run it.
d. Is this thing truly Open Source.
   Open Source is usually a pet project started by one or two people
   then opened to the public and gradually developed under intense
   peer review pressure so that the code evolves into stability.
   Eclipse was developed by IBM without peer review and 10 million
   lines of code released at once. It makes a mockery of the concept
   of evolved development and peer review. It is the open source you
   have when you dont have Open Source.
e. To make the AS400 capable of running anything on JAVA IBM had to
   make it one powerful beast. A consequence of this is that old
applications
   such as MRP that took HOURS to run now run in MINUTES.  RPG compiles
   faster than you can enter the key strokes to check the compile.
   The old-style applications simply scream along.
   JAVA and web applications, including WDSCi are dogs.
   They consume immense resources. ( I have a 2G PC on my desk)
   and for what;  Well now I can edit my source with pretty colours and by
   the way occasionally it dissapears up its own cable, something SEU
   NEVER EVER did to me.
f. I edit AS400 code on an AS400  for a living. It is my lifes blood.
   Why would you want me to suddenly rely on BILL or the PENGUIN so
   that I can do my job.  Both BILL and the PENGUIN have lots of
   issues.  OK so I use Client Access as an emulator, But I dont have
   to.  I can always get a old terminal and a twin-ax controller.
   Eclipse is a PC application.
   My suggestion is make ECLIPSE an AS400 application, ohh sorry
   it is OPEN SOURCE, cannot do that hmmmmmm.

Frank Kolmann

>date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:15:47 -0400
>from: "Dan Bale" <dbale@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Looking ahead to installing WDSCi 5.1.2, I think we need to bone up on how
>to stay fresh on PTFs / service packs.  Does WDSCi have its own Group PTF?
>Should (/must) it be a standard practice to install the latest PTFs on the
>iSeries, and then let WDSCi clients install from there?  (Unlike iSeries
>Access, where I can download the latest service pack from the web and the
>iSeries box has an older version.)
>
>Also, I know there was a discussion about XP Pro vs. Home editions.  Two
of
>us have XP Pro, the other has W2K.  The W2K user attended the WDSCi
session
>at COMMON last week, and he said there was no mention of OS requirements,
>just that even though stated minimum requirements were 768MB of RAM, the
>developers were recommending 1GB.  Is WDSCi 5.1.2 supported on W2K?  Key
>word is "supported".  I presume that it "works" on W2K.  Please advise.