RE: Linux and V5R2

[Scott Klement <klemscot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> That's my point.  It has to be a "supported (by IBM, that is) standard
> development component" on the iseries to be acceptable to both the users and
> the development community.

Agreed!

> But if something like X-Windows (is that the
> right name?) can be developed for Unix, why can't we have a replacement for
> (or addition to) DDS that RPG can communicate with that provides a GUI?

That's absolutely how I feel about this as well.  X11 (or something from
the same paradigm) would be great on OS/400.   The question is, how much
would it cost to develop something like this, and would the needed
computing power make it cost-prohibitive?

I think a native GUI, with the capability of supporting terminals (like X
does) or supporting PCs (like X does) would be ideal.   Write the software
on the server, run it on the server, have the output go to a terminal.
Have all of the logging/auditing/stability features of OS/400, rather than
having a part that runs on the PC that's hard to debug.   All of this is
very doable, X11 shows us that.

Incidentally, since you asked about the name, I found this in the
documentation on my BSD box:

      The X Consortium requests that the following names be used
       when referring to this software:

                                   X
                            X Window System
                              X Version 11
                      X Window System, Version 11
                                  X11

       X Window System is a trademark of X Consortium, Inc.