RE: WAS 5.0 -- WEB400

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: RE: [WEB400] WAS 5.0
From: Buck Calabro <Buck.Calabro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 15:49:43 -0400
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/web400/>
List-help: <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:web400@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/web400>,<mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/web400>,<mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

>3)  People have suggested that, if I am
>just starting out, not to load 3.5
>and then migrate to 4.0 when IBM drops 3.5.
>But to start out at 4.0.  It has been said
>that 3.5 and 4.0 are such different animals.

They are quite different.  That's because 3.5 was IBMs best guess at what
J2EE would finally look like, while 4.0 is J2EE compliant.  I do not know
the particulars of 5.0 but I would be a bit surprised if there was as large
a difference.  I have used 3.5 and 4.0.
  --buck

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.