|
Jim, Larry,I would agree that HATS has broader applicability in that it won't require DDS in order to customize. I am not familiar with the WebFacing tools (although I have them). In my specific case, I was asked to provide a solution on a third part application we don't have source for. It looked like the best overall solution.
I would also characterize WDHT as a bundling of the products for marketing reasons. We ordered HATS but got WDHT because that is how IBM is packing the applications now.
These are very good products and IBM has made them VERY affordable, but they gotta fix the learning curve issues. It isn't overly complex. The resources are just slim and poorly organized (IMHO).
Pete Leibowitz, Larry wrote:
Jim, >From my unofficial view of WDHT (HATS) vs. WebFacing. HATS would be more beneficial to learn over WebFacing. The primary difference between the two is that to WebFace you MUST have DDS Source to convert. With HATS all 5250 screens are converted without the need of DDS Source. So for example all the System i utility screens can be displayed without having to first run the DDS Source thru the WebFacing. Example WRKSPLF, WRKACTJOB, Etc. HATS uses basic rules to apply to all screens for conversion and you can further drill into specific screens for further modification. Please note this is my interpretation of the products and I have less than a month with HATS and a bit over a year with WebFacing. I would also recommend trying both WebFacing and HATS to see the difference yourself.
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.
midrange.com
