Re: Vendor presentations

["Bob Cozzi" <cozzi@xxxxxxxxx>]

Joe,
>>In any event, I won't get into a semantic argument with you.

Isn't that what you're doing?  LOL!

-Bob Cozzi
www.RPGxTools.com
RPG xTools - Enjoy programming again.


-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Joe Pluta
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 5:34 PM
To: 'Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries'
Subject: Re: [WEB400] Vendor presentations

> From: Eric Figura
> 
> Joe,
> 
> Just to keep things straight and accurate I did not say "RPG-CGI is
> superior
> to Java".  While I have my own opinions on the subject that is not what I
> said in my post.

Actually, you did:

> "Why such a big lean towards CGI?  Our experience: Numerous RPG based
> development shops find it easier to get their web applications to market,
> they're more comfortable with ILE RPG-CGI than they are with Java, they
> can
> preserve their existing iSeries back end system investment and they can
> keep
> their existing staff who know their business and systems involved in the
> development of their new web systems.  I can go on, however, I'll stop
> here."

All of these statements are reasons why you say that your customers prefer
RPG-CGI.  You might say that "you" aren't saying this, "your customers" are,
but that's simply splitting hairs.  You're the one presenting the
information.  And not only do you present several reasons why RPG-CGI is
better than "Java", you imply you have others.

In any event, I won't get into a semantic argument with you.  If, however,
you want me to reiterate in detail the many problems with RPG-CGI (and why
the term "Java" is a misnomer), I'll be happy to do so.  What I will NOT do,
however, is get into any discussion about the features or lack thereof in
vendor products other than my own.  So, if you want to keep the discussion
going, fine, but understand that I won't discuss your product, only
architectural issues.

Joe