Re: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch -- MIDRANGE-L

Jerry,

Thanks for your perspective.

1. WDSc.

This tool is an integrated developer environment, which runs on yourdesktop. The paradigm is so completely different than SEU. If you are stillviewing SAVE and CTRL+S as the same thing, then you are missing the point ofan IDE, and missing the point of WDSc. SEU does not compare to WDSc in anyway. This is like comparing Notepad to Word functionally. Besides, these areNOT users who are doing this. These are developers - who should have abetter sense of this concept.Another thing, if I ever had to tell my users where the data resides, orwhere the work is being done, then I am living in the 80s. For developerswho live in the 80s, then it is the same thing. For developers whounderstand the right-tool-for-the-right-job, WDSc and SEU do not compare.


2. SQL vs. native

Nathan did NOT say "faster". You did. I answered for "better" - that iscompletely different. And I did not interpret Nathan's reply - I asked himwhat he meant by "better". SQL, for me, is better because it is the futureof System i database access - this is the method which will receive all thesupport and enhancements. I don't think speed is the issue - I think you candesign applications where database access speed is not an issue. That is,you code for performance AND maintainability.


3. Dr.Frank'n'me

It is my opinion that if you are thinking "green" you are thinking mostlyoutdated. Just a generic term to cover AS/400 syndrome - not a term todefine the interface. I agree, record access has nothing to do with the userinterface, but using outdated practices to build applications is the samebackward thinking as avoiding GUI because it is not "better".


Trevor

P.S. I am not sure Dr. Frank would fit he and I in the same bucket when itcomes to the term "futurist". I am sure his bucket has more brains.

----- Original Message -----From: "Jerry Adams" <jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch

Trevor,


Usually I'm in the same camp (philosophically, if not technically) as
you.  But I had a couple of issues with your recent reply.  Inserts below.

* Jerry C. Adams
*IBM System i5/iSeries Programmer/Analyst
B&W Wholesale Distributors, Inc.* *
voice
615.995.7024
fax
615.995.1201
email
jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Trevor Perry wrote:

For example, you compare SAVE in SEU with CTRL+S in WDSc. However, these
things are two completely separate tasks. SAVE in SEU will save youcurrent
member for you to your development system. In WDSc, this function is done
for you. Your PC is the development system, and it keeps all of thechangesyou make as you develop in the Integrated Development Environment. CTRL+Sin
WDSc is publishing your changes from the development server to the
deployment or production server. Not apples to apples. You arecomplaining
about the present based on something different from the past.

While you're obviously correct technically, Trevor, it is
apples-to-apples if one's perception is ultimately to save the source
code.  Where it resides during keying is, of course, relevant
technically, but frankly is not relevant perceptually (sic?).  If I gave
my users answers like that, they'd whop me upside the head with a
baseball or cricket bat: "I want to do a function - period."

And, you did not define what you meant by 'better' when you said "native
record level access is better than SQL for retrieving records by key,
updating them, and writing them". While the AS/400 faithful may think itis'better' in some green outdated sense, the System i futurists do notagree.

My perception of what Nathan meant was that native access is faster when
trying to retrieve one record, usually randomly.  Indeed, the mantra I
have heard at numerous sessions on SQL at COMMON is that SQL is great
for group-at-a-time processing, but barfs (compared to native) on single
record access.

And the term "green outdated sense" makes no sense to me in this or any
context.  Green screen -vs- GUI (presentation) was not the issue; record
access was.  And just who are these "System i futurists" (besides you
and Dr. Frank) and just why do they not agree?  Because the statement
"single record access is faster using native access methods rather than
SQL" is false or because there's something coming down the pike that
will eventually make the statement false?

Trevor

----- Original Message -----From: "Nathan Andelin" <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>

To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: Saving the System i: Fight Rather Than Switch

Trevor Perry:
I wrote about AS/400 Syndrome ...

"Maybe, this ability to see no further than your own technology
is a disease? Letʼs call it AS/400 syndrome, and work on a cure!"

"Are you stuck in the past? Do you have AS400 Syndrome?"

In the past, I entered "save" in the command line of SEU and my program
was saved to disk in the blink of an eye.

In the present, I press CTR+S in Websphere Developer Studio Client and am

somewhat entertained by three (3) iterations of the progress bar(growing

and shrinking, growing and shrinking, growing and shrinking) while I wait
for the file to be saved.

You have a great site, Trevor.  And I appreciate the recognition the
System i platform is gaining from it.  But in some ways, the past is
better than the present.

The AS/400 faithful are a discriminating group.  They've learned for
example that native record level access is better than SQL for retrieving
records by key, updating them, and writing them.

The key is leveraging the the past to ensure the future, not discarding

the past for things that grab immediate attention, but have lessintrinsic

value.

Nathan.

--

This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailinglist

To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.