Re: IBM i GUI Frameworks

[Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>]

Rick,

That reminded me of Dorothy's line at the end of The Wizzard of OZ.  "There's no 
place like home, There's no place like home, There's no place like home." 
 Thanks for sharing that.  I personally never fell into the trap of writing 
brittle, monolithic code.  And I haven't seen a lot of it, personally.  I've 
always written modular code.  So it's hard for me to understand the scope of the 
problem.

You should consider sharing your experience with the LinkedIn group.

-Nathan.



----- Original Message ----
From: "Rick.Chevalier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Rick.Chevalier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, September 20, 2010 7:42:05 AM
Subject: Re: [WEB400] IBM i GUI Frameworks

Nathan,

It sounds like Stuart makes an assumption that legacy applications are 'brittle' 
and have no strategic benefit.  While I am sure this is true in some cases, in 
others I don't think so.  I believe my company to be an example.  About 2-3 
years ago we undertook a project to replace our core iSeries application with a 
newer system.  'AS/400' (how the company refers to it) solutions were not even 
considered to my knowledge because they were seen as legacy and old technology.  
At the end of the day it was determined that due to the size of our company we 
needed a mainframe application.  The vendor chosen had a system written in COBOL 
with a GUI front-end tied together with web services.  In the end it was cost 
prohibitive to make the change.  I was struck by the realization that all that 
work just pointed out that we needed what we already had.

Since that time though we have been allowed to update and modernize our iSeries 
applications and move toward a services based architecture.  This wasn't allowed 
prior to that time.

Rick