Re: native PHP in V5R4??? -- WEB400


On 23/02/2006, at 8:51 AM, Walden H. Leverich wrote:

I'm not sure about PHP, but I know IBM's position on PASE in general is
that if it runs under PASE it is "native" to OS/400. I know what you're
saying, but what's the point of making something more native than PASE?
DNS runs in PASE and we all say that the i5 can run DNS, right?

I don't necessarily mind PASE being used to facilitate code running.What I object to strongly is so-called "native" applications that whenrun on OS/400 still look like Unix shite.


I don't want to install using a poxy shell script. I want RSTLICPGM.

I don't want to have to configure using a text file. I want a properCFGxxxx command.

I don't want to have to start QP2TERM or QSHELL to interact with theapplication. I want a proper and complete set of XPF** commands.

I don't want to lose command prompting (what's the syntax of 'insertUnix command here' again?).

I don't want to lose help text (where's my browser window? where'sInfoCenter? where did they hide the 'insert Unix command here'description in this release? What's -k mean again and how is thatdifferent from -K?).

I don't want to lose message help and second-level text. Try pressingF1 on a shell error message and see how far you get.

I don't want to have to remember that -a on one Unix command isdifferent from -a on another Unix command. XPF command objects aresooooo much better than anything out of Unix or WinDOS.


dostuff -gQxpHh-alt-left-shift-handstand ... give me a break!

Dressing Unix shite up with an OpsNav front-end doesn't cut it either:
        a) It forces me use Windows shite.

b) It's as slow as wet week (click, type, click, type, click type...one thing at a time).

        c) It's no more "native" than QSHELL or QP2TERM.
        d) It makes me use the world's worst OS to manage the world's best.

The only good thing to come from a Unix shell is the ability to pipeoutput from one command into another. If that's sooo great it could beadded to the XPF command processor.

If a vendor can't be bothered to make their application look like itbelongs on XPF when porting it I can't be bothered buying it. And whatlevel of XPF support do you think you'll get from a vendor who can't bebothered making a native port? You're running OS what?

**I'm going to use the IBM acronym for the OS product to avoid clumsyOS/400/i5/OS statements.


Regards,
Simon Coulter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
   FlyByNight Software         AS/400 Technical Specialists

   http://www.flybynight.com.au/
   Phone: +61 3 9419 0175   Mobile: +61 0411 091 400        /"\
   Fax:   +61 3 9419 0175                                   \ /
                                                             X
                 ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail  / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------