|
On 23/02/2006, at 8:51 AM, Walden H. Leverich wrote:
I'm not sure about PHP, but I know IBM's position on PASE in general is that if it runs under PASE it is "native" to OS/400. I know what you're saying, but what's the point of making something more native than PASE? DNS runs in PASE and we all say that the i5 can run DNS, right?
I don't necessarily mind PASE being used to facilitate code running. What I object to strongly is so-called "native" applications that when run on OS/400 still look like Unix shite.
I don't want to install using a poxy shell script. I want RSTLICPGM.I don't want to have to configure using a text file. I want a proper CFGxxxx command.
I don't want to have to start QP2TERM or QSHELL to interact with the application. I want a proper and complete set of XPF** commands.
I don't want to lose command prompting (what's the syntax of 'insert Unix command here' again?).
I don't want to lose help text (where's my browser window? where's InfoCenter? where did they hide the 'insert Unix command here' description in this release? What's -k mean again and how is that different from -K?).
I don't want to lose message help and second-level text. Try pressing F1 on a shell error message and see how far you get.
I don't want to have to remember that -a on one Unix command is different from -a on another Unix command. XPF command objects are sooooo much better than anything out of Unix or WinDOS.
dostuff -gQxpHh-alt-left-shift-handstand ... give me a break! Dressing Unix shite up with an OpsNav front-end doesn't cut it either: a) It forces me use Windows shite.b) It's as slow as wet week (click, type, click, type, click type... one thing at a time).
c) It's no more "native" than QSHELL or QP2TERM. d) It makes me use the world's worst OS to manage the world's best.The only good thing to come from a Unix shell is the ability to pipe output from one command into another. If that's sooo great it could be added to the XPF command processor.
If a vendor can't be bothered to make their application look like it belongs on XPF when porting it I can't be bothered buying it. And what level of XPF support do you think you'll get from a vendor who can't be bothered making a native port? You're running OS what?
**I'm going to use the IBM acronym for the OS product to avoid clumsy OS/400/i5/OS statements.
Regards, Simon Coulter. -------------------------------------------------------------------- FlyByNight Software AS/400 Technical Specialists http://www.flybynight.com.au/ Phone: +61 3 9419 0175 Mobile: +61 0411 091 400 /"\ Fax: +61 3 9419 0175 \ / X ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail / \ --------------------------------------------------------------------
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.