|
> From: Booth Martin > > Interesting article Joe. Will IBM provide any information, especially in > the area of migrations? My experience, limited as it is, says that many > of these conversions have been declared a victory, but only after > expectations were dramatically lowered. Well, IBM doesn't seem to have a vested interest either way. They'll sell you an iSeries, a pSeries, an xSeries or a zSeries. The iSeries group within IBM isn't doing much marketing right now, although today's New Wire Daily from iSeries Network talks about a couple of successful moves from Windows to iSeries. > Another slant to this issue that I have seen is the impact of employee > turnover in these situations. When a conversion goes sour, heads roll. > New > people are brought in, new money pumped in, and the cycle is begun again. > After a couple of these cycles, and a system that is nearly broken, a new > low level of performance is established and from then on each new > performance plateau is heralded as the new wave. Five years later the > system again has much (but not all) of its original functions & features, > and victory is declared. This is the same thing we're seeing with outsourcing. Major projects are outsourced with much ballyhooed cost savings. The projects begin almost immediately to falter, but by that time the folks responsible have taken their bonuses and moved on to "help" other companies. Eventually, if the firm is lucky, the project is taken back in-house before they go bankrupt and the project is finally finished, way over budget and with limited functionality. > As to RPG being renamed, I must admit that I like the current naming > schema RPG-IV says it all. Every 15 years it changes so much it needs > a new name but it is backwards compatible, so IV is the proper suffix > for now. It does surprise me though that the /free ability was not > enough to change the name to RPG-V?. I have to admit that I hadn't considered the backward compatibility aspect, Booth. That's an important and distinguishing characteristic of RPG. Then again, most languages other tan those from Microsoft have some stability from release to release. I was thinking of IBM perhaps even presenting DB2/PL to ANSI. That way the language would get some credibility outside our community. They could make the language platform-independent but preserve the 5250-specific aspects under an iSeries-specific extension. You could add a specification (an S-spec?) to identify the system, sort of like you do with COBOL. Joe
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.