Shane,
I couldn't agree with you more...that's one of the main reasons why we went
from Webfaced apps to RPG CGI apps...
I am guessing you are talking about the difference in performance and
stability of Webfacing vs. RPG CGI. It would be great if you could write up
a small piece for imho.midrange.com that declares the scenario you faced and
why Webfacing just didn't work; and then how RPG CGI was just the ticket.
<rant>
IBM knows of our need to do web and rich client apps, but they keep
addressing it with bloated technologies (i.e. Websphere and sort of Java)
that require a decent machine and a fair amount of learning curve to
implement, or they do a poor implementation (VARPG) and start deprecating
it. They need to understand that this simply isn't the answer we, the RPG
i5 community, are looking for. They made the mistake of delivering a second
to none machine, language collection (i.e. RPG, CL, C, etc), and DB access
(talking about easy DB access in RPG) back in the day and now they want us
to lessen the quality of our software implementations by adopting an
approach that is so fragmented even they struggle to make it
seamless/integrated.
</rant>
So again, the more stories of failed Websphere implementations and then the
success of native that we can offer the better we will be as a community. I
am coming to realize that there are some factions in IBM that aren't
aligning well. The Rational group doesn't seem to work well with the i5
hardware/OS people and we are seeing that with the development software and
tools IBM is putting out (i.e. Webfacing, HATS, VARPG, WAS, EGL, etc).
Imagine if those groups were on the same "paycheck" and only when both
succeeded together would they "get paid" - that would change what we are
getting pretty quick.
Anyways... Just had to get that out of my system :-)
Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Shane_Cessna@xxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 7:19 AM
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: [WEB400] Recommendations of web development architecture/tool
for diverse i5 access...
Nathan,
I couldn't agree with you more...that's one of the main reasons why we went
from Webfaced apps to RPG CGI apps...
Shane Cessna
Senior iSeries Programmer
North American Lighting, Inc.
217.465.6600 x7776
Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
06/04/2007 05:36 PM
Please respond to
Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To
Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
Re: [WEB400] Recommendations of web development architecture/tool for
diverse i5 access...
Dave O wrote:
So, tell me again, what language(s) did you use to build your
application(s)?
I use HTML, CSS, and JavaScript for client code. I use RPG for server
code. I normally divide the server code into three (3) modules, following
an MVC design pattern.
My favorite IDE for client code is Macromedia Dreamweaver. I typically
use PDM/SEU for server code.
I understand you have a low opinion of RPG, but performance and
scalability are high priorities to me, which is my primary reason for
using RPG and an interface that offers the shortest path between the
browser and the database. No application server, no object-relational
bridge, and so forth.
Nathan.
midrange.com
