RE: OS/400 on a Sun unix -- MIDRANGE-L

<This is 'nuther story (and I should-a changed subject on previous reply)>

| -----Original Message-----
| [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of James Rich

| Brad Stone wrote:

| > I understand as is OS400 is quite proprietary, and that's
| > the platform's biggest problem.  Remove that problem and I
| > believe it would become more revenue.  A little work, yes.
| >  But you don't get anything for nothing.
|
| I don't think it's proprietary nature is really the problem you are
| addressing, rather the limited hardware on which it runs.
|
| I think you don't necessarily want to change OS/400 to not be
| proprietary, but rather you just want an OS/400 for PCs.  There is a
| parallel that can be looked at to see how well that might work.  Sun
| Microsystems sells a version of Solaris that runs on Intel architecture.
|   But most people still buy Solaris on SPARC, even though it is more
| expensive.  Solaris for Intel is not very expensive, but it's demand is
| still low - even before linux starting eating away at Sun's marketshare.

Interesting.

| The example of Solaris on Intel shows that putting a big time OS on a
| commodity architecture may not give the results a company hopes for.

I guess I don't get this statement, given that both Windows and Linux run on
commodity architecture.


| I
| believe Sun has sold more machines than IBM has sold AS/400's,

I dunno, but wouldn't surprise me...  However, quantity sold isn't much of
an indicator of anything at all, otherwise Windows 95 would hafta be
recorded as one-a the worlds most successful OSs...;-D

| and there
| are probably more UNIX-trained people than AS/400-trained people.

There's no "probably" about that (and I resist the temptation to write
"duh..."), because *nix is taught in about every University.  ('Course, I
would say you may be using the word "trained" somewhat loosely, when it
follows the word "UNIX-"...;-)


| So it
| seems unlikely that an OS/400 for Intel would do any better than Solaris
| for Intel.

The future would be hard to tell, for most-a us anyway...;-)  I don't know
that this particular analogy is well-suited.


| In fact, the only people for whom OS/400 on Intel makes sense are the
| few hundred or so developers on this list.

You would tend to show a bias against OS/400 having much value, and
consistently have, James...  I could see where it might have some value to
IBM, but they'd get eaten alive between the rock (MicroSoft monopoly) and
the hard place (Linux "monopoly").

| Most other OS/400 users need
| the big time hardware that comprises an iSeries.

Again, I'm not really sure what that assumption is based on.


| But business reasons are only meaningful to businesses.

I believe you have a somewhat limited view of "business", then, James...
Mr. Torvalds, for example, heads up a HUMONGOUS  multi-national business,
even though he's not making any money, directly...  I would think this
obvious, but mebbe not.


| James Rich
|
| "As for security, being lectured by Microsoft is like receiving wise
| words on the subject of compassion from Stalin."
|        -- mormop on lwn.net

Hm.