Re: Classes for IBMi/iSeries? -- MIDRANGE-L

Trevor

That did suffice, but I read it AFTER I posted this.

I'm with you in these points - right down the line. So thanks for saying more!

Of course, neither you nor I can be accused of saying less!

Vern

On 9/29/2011 12:49 PM, Trevor Perry wrote:

Vern,

Did this not suffice: "PHP, Systems Director, RPG Open Access, RD Power,
and so on"?

This is such an open-ended question. Modernization is about leveraging
your existing business logic and moving forward to embrace new
functionality, integrate applications and enhance the user experience.
Keeping the same code you wrote on an AS/400 might be included in your
modernization roadmap, but writing code in 2011 like you did in 2000 is
probably not a modern exercise. Writing new green screen 5250 applications
is a little like asking your Windows users to run everything from the CMD
window.

Advocating change for change sake seems a little narrow minded, of course.
Backwards compatibility is not the issue, but not keeping up with the
platform, not keeping up with I.T. evolution, living in the glorious past
of AS/400 will prevent companies from moving forward. In the end, the
platform will be blamed, when it was the I.T. Department's fault, and
ignorant company management will throw it out.

Seriously, would ~you~ buy a ~new~ green screen application in 2011? Would
you buy an AS/400, or would you prefer IBM i running on Power?

Trevor

On 9/29/11 10:53 AM, "Vern Hamberg"<vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Trevor

The quoted line here from your recent post raised a question that may
help others here. What are the things you do on IBM i that are different

>from AS/400? I believe I can think of a few things - was there Java on

AS/400? I forget the timing. There certainly was not PHP as we know it
now.

So a few examples are appreciated.

As you also mentioned, there is much confusion. Much is made about
backwards compatibility - both a boon and a curse, perhaps. We have
source that was written several years ago - there's no reason to change
it, there's no ROI on making changes just to make changes to working
code. This code was likely written on an AS/400 - it has run on System i
and on iSeries and it now does in i5/OS on POWER. We also do new things
as they are available and as our release level rises.

Not sure where I'm rambling to! This IS Tuxman, after all, and all he
needs is to clean up good! But I look forward to your reply.

Vern

On 9/29/2011 9:09 AM, Trevor Perry wrote:

Just because you use IBM i like an
AS/400 does not make it an AS/400.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
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.