RE: The Perpetual Myth of iSeries Obsolescence -- MIDRANGE-L

>The reason that people think the AS/400 is obsolete is because 
>it looks obsolete.

I dunno Chris.  Our new 570 looks pretty much like any other server in
the data center -- rack mounted, and some shade of black.

>We can argue all day long whether terminal 
>interface is better then GUI for certain types of tasks. The 
>Unix guys do this to they will talk and talk about how great 
>the command line interface is, but Unix has a GUI too and 
>when it is appropriate to use they use it.

I don't know what the server's interface for administration has to do
with the front end styling of business systems.  I manage a team of Unix
Admins.  They spend 90% of their day on the command line.  They view
Unix's proprietary GUI's pretty much the same way most folks on this
list view the iSeries Navigator.  Our Oracle DBA's spend a heck of a lot
of time on the Unix command line as well.

You're saying that green screen is perceived as obsolete -- graphical
means new.  I don't disagree that people feel that way.  It is, however,
pretty dumb.

What looks obsolete is the traditional interface for the server.  I'm
simultaneously frustrated and amused by folks who think that Windows
means GUI and iSeries / AS/400 means green screen, because of the server
console/interface.  What then, does Unix mean?  The various proprietary
GUI's for Unix have nothing to do with the hosted databases and
applications.  The back-end Windows server we all know and love today
grew out of years of development of a desktop PC with a graphical
interface.  The server IS its own graphical console.  So what?  This
doesn't facilitate the development of modern systems -- the low level
methods of access from client to app server to database server, and the
development tools for development of apps to the client or app server
dictate the ability to produce graphical apps.

The AS/400 / iSeries environment has always allowed an easy method for
deploying workstations to the users.  A Windows server doesn't
facilitate the development or presentation of applications.  You can't
plug in card or switch on a service to hardwire or virtually deploy
Windows sessions from the server to users.  It requires a whole 'nuther
architecture.  Therefore there's never been a traditional Windows
application -- there have been iterations of VB and PowerBuilder and
Cold Fusion, and dot Net... and dozens of other architectures and
presentations for applications.  Many of which are now obsolete.

What's neat to me is that iSeries applications create the impression of
an obsolete system because the apps themselves ARE NOT obsolete.  Folks
are still using third-party and home grown apps because they still run
their businesses, and folks are still writing new ones because they
don't want to invest in the overhead of app servers, web servers, and
more complex relational database management.  The commitment to
backwards compatibility is now viewed as a liability.  Imagine if
applications developed for Windows fifteen years ago were able to
survive the ports from Windows 3.1 on the desktop and NT on the server,
to the current Windows technology.  Folks might then be mocking the
obsolete nature of Windows because of all those clunky client-server
apps still around from the early 90's.  Instead, because these
technologies actually more honestly became obsolete, this generation of
Windows technology doesn't "look obsolete".

The only way to make the iSeries look less obsolete to the unthinking
masses would be to come up with an OS release which cripples 5250
presentation.  Then iSeries would no longer be associated with its
considerable base of stable, reliable (what's the opposite of obsolete)
green screen applications, and no one would be able to quickly and
easily develop new ones.

-Jim