RE: Java replacing RPG (was LANSA)

[Colin Williams <Williamsc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At the end of the day, Software/Hardware companys make money from new
products and so need to promote them heavily, which I think is fair
enough, and good luck to them. 

But we the users of RPG have to get the most out of it that we can, why
jump onto the new bandwagon, when you haven't even exhausted the
possibilities of the old one yet. We can't expect the IBM's of this
world to push there old software/hardware when they've got hot new
products to promote, its down to us users and third party technology
companies to make the best use of the tools they've given us, to a
certain degree!!!

                -----Original Message-----
                From:   Jon.Paris@halinfo.it
[mailto:Jon.Paris@halinfo.it]
                Sent:   Sunday, March 21, 1999 4:53 PM
                To:     MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
                Subject:        Java replacing RPG (was LANSA)



                 >> The point isn't one of "replacement" and you know
it!

                Now now Roger - I know you copyrighted "Tee hee"
(Copyright R. Pence - used
                without permission) but you don't have an exclusive on
facetious remarks !!!

                As you stated, I'm very aware that replacement is not
the issue here but I think
                that there are degrees.  For example - your phrase "will
NOT be built with RPG
                in the 21st century."  I think I would modify this to
say "... built completely
                with RPG ..."  There is and will remain a _place_ for
RPG in AS/400  development
                for a number of years.  To say that there are
alternatives for reporting etc. is
                an over simplification - of course there are - there
have been for twenty years
                or more - but they do nothing to help move an existing
app forward.  All the
                time the existing apps stay where they are, movement on
other fronts is harder
                to promote.

                 >> You, of all people, .... should help put a rational
story out. Not one that
                poohs the whole issue with a wink and  nod and conveys a
false sense of
                security.

                And I do .. not exactly the same story as you, but I
hammer away at folks every
                day for their reluctance to use reasonable tools
(Code/400 or Flex rather than
                SEU), their failure to adopt modular programming
techniques, etc. etc.  I
                encourage them to get into Java, Domino, etc. as the way
to the future.  In this
                response I knew that to a large extent that I was
preaching to the choir, so I
                chose to be flip rather than serious.

                I do believe that most RPGers are well served by getting
into RPG IV, using
                Subprocedures etc.  Hooking into C functions, sockets,
IFS, etc. etc.  There
                are, as you and I discussed recently, many reasons
behind the reluctance of
                RPGers to throw off their monolithic code structures -
the absence on tools to
                help them restructure being one of them.

                My biggest gripe with Rochester for years now has been
that they spend millions
                and millions promoting the "latest and greatest" and
encouraging their BPs to
                adopt the technology.  But spend _nothing_ to assist
customers in moving their
                investment forward.  A tiny fraction of what was spent
on idiot moves like the
                infamous "Hamburger" ads could go a long way.  J. D.
Edwards (and others) could
                do a lot to move customers forward by producing a decent
version of the
                old-fashioned monolithic heaps that they continue to
sell, that demonstrated to
                people the _right_way_ to build apps.  They'd reduce
their support costs
                significantly and wouldn't have to rework due to maxing
out the program size.
                Will they do it? not without Rochester encouraging them
and that's not likely to
                happen.

                Enough already, we're on the same side I think - just a
difference in emphasis.
                Unless you wanna pick a fight ........


                +---
                | 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
                +---
+---
| 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
+---