Re: GUI necessary? -- MIDRANGE-L

Roger,

In a message dated 98-12-02 11:02:29 EST, you write:

> >But ... I can think of VERY FEW instances where a GUI is necessary ... or
even
> >advantageous.
>  
>  Wow! That's a pretty strong statement. Are you saying that a multi-tasking,
>  Windowed interface does not add to your productivity? Prior to windowed
>  desktops (note, the reference to teh generic concept not Gate's cash cow)
>  the only way you could do more than one thing with the AS/400 was with
>  multiple terminals or kludgy old group jobs.

As is yours.  I think that the original poster's reference was to the type of
GUI interface to the AS/400 with which most people involved in AS/400
application implementations are familiar -- graphical representations of the
same screens we've used for years, except it takes twice as many screens,
four+ times the machine,  and three times as much time to key and process the
same data, despite the fact that we can minimize fonts and get more than twice
the data on one screen.  Despite the advent of Win32, most AS/400 GUI
applications still remain single-task unless you open multiple sessions under
one of the popular emulation packages.

Yes, it boils down to poor application design.  However, the vendors from
which we receive our code dictate these poor standards in the name of "keeping
current".  Under the old "PC Support", I used to have four sessions on three
different AS/400 machines from an "8088" PC/XT with 640K of memory and a 10Mb
hard drive.  The fourth session was to a /36.  This was a good thing.  Now we
have applications that are cumbersome, require frequent switching from
keyboard to mouse, require 1/2 gig of disk, and multiple sessions is still the
best thing going.

>  The value of GUI is more than simply offering your users checkboxes and
>  pulldown menus. GUI offers your users an easily switchable context of
>  applications, launched at their need. Beyond the sexy appeal of GUI, it's
>  fundamental importance is in letting users control their desktop context.
Go
>  poll the bean counters today using a 5250 emulator and Excel concurrently.
>  Ask them if they'd like to go back to the days of a PC on desk and a 5250
>  dumb terminal on the other. Hardly. It doesn't matter that one of the apps
>  they're using (perhaps the one they're using most) is a green-screen
>  wannabe. They are in control and can launch the apps of their choice, and
>  download data to these apps, as needed.

Yes, but 5250 emulation on a PC has been around since nearly the advent of the
XT.  The difference today is that both PC's and emulator cards have dropped in
price to the point that managers no longer have to choose between "something
sexy for the Controller" and upgrading the DASD on their mission-critical box.
The only reason that the "dual monitor syndrome" existed as long as it did was
IBM's insistence upon the (expensive) emulator card and software .  On my old
Qantel system, emulation happened through a standard serial port and the
software was $150 US for a _SITE_ license -- we had _NO_ dual workstations.

>  As for GUIs not making good heads down data entry devices, that's a
>  green-screen myth of the highest order. Have you ever used Quicken? It is
>  hands down the best data entry I've ever used!
>  
>  Whew. I feel better. Gotta go back to work.

Unfortunately, both Quicken and QuickBooks make equivalent AS/400 GUI software
look like assembler code compared to ILE.  GUI is good, but most AS/400 GUI
gives it a bad name...

JMHO,

Dean Asmussen
Enterprise Systems Consulting, Inc.
Fuquay-Varina, NC  USA
E-Mail:  DAsmussen@aol.com

"A man's got to know his limitations." -- "Dirty Harry" Calahan
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---