A future for "business solution" developers

[Guest.Visitor]

Robert, Your quandary of the end-life of the AS/400 is common. Discussion is rampant about the mixed marketing message IBM has delivered over the years. There is one company that I suggest you look into before throwing in the towel, though. It's an IBM tools Partner, ADVANCED BusinessLink, on IBM's technology roadmap. Many companies deal with AS/400-related issues, however BusinessLink provides a broad and deep product suite that can only be challenged by IBM's offerings. But in this case, IBM provides many unrelated products (CA, WebFacing, WebSphere, HATS, Java, MQ Series, Pervasis Wireless), that delivers an intial integration challenge, just to start. Plus separately maintaining proficiency in these different products; plus learning and developing integration with eh AS/400 (As WebSpher-related stuff was ported over). And then there' the overhead burden on the AS/400. Advanced BusinessLink delivers a product suite that was designed from the ground up for eht AS/400, and even more importantly, the people working on the AS/400. The result is a simple fully-inegrated self-contaiend solution. It provides I/F openness: Modernize green screens, deliver browser-based HTML, wireless, XML, Web Services, and more. Obtain language independence; Develop with any AS/400-(iSeries) supported programming langauge. Create multi-language, multi-IF applications, with the straightforward approach of current development. no tiered archtirecture; no 4GL's. Use what you know. Leverage what you have. Evolve applications incrementally. Focus on needs and benfits. Release to users as you go. The approach just makes sense. Regards, John

[robertnesiba@yahoo.com]

I originally posted this on the CGI-RPG versus Webshere/Java thread, but it's important enough to me to start a new conversation related to the future of the iSeries platform because that's the platform that I'm skilled on and I'd like to know whether I have a future that includes continuing to develop business solutions on it. I apologize to ackerman & cdr5000 who may have already responded to this. I followed the ackerman/pluta/dkenzie, and cdr5000, thread regarding browser development via CGI-RPG versus Websphere/Java with interest. I have been able to provide value to my clients for 20 plus years, the most recent being 15 years on the AS/400, I mean, iSeries. Perhaps their arguments are moot depending upon whether the iSeries continues to exist. I pose two questions regarding remaing, useful life: 1) What is your estimate for the remaining, useful life (with application development continuing) for the iSeries? As a custom "business solutions" provider to the iSeries, I have mostly used intelligent design as my forte, and some type of "development assisting" software to execute the design. Heck, I'm even quite skilled using the maligned(earlier in this thread) AS/SET tool. I found it to be much quicker and more flexible than SYNON, although my SYNON experience was more limited. I can't speak directly to rapid and flexible deployment using Websmart, but if it's related in usefulness to ProGen, then I would guess it's intended to be a "business case/ROI" performer. MY remaining, useful life (in application development) seems somewhat tied to the iSeries. To broaden my horizons, I've done some development with ASNA's AVR, and begun .NET training with Visual Studio. But, I see more and more clients moving towards packaged solutions. Then, instead of application development, the programming staff becomes migration/mappers/network admins. 2) Can I continue much longer (10 years) to have a remaining, useful life developing applications with iSeries, using tools like Websmart, or should I hang up my "business solutions" hat, and become a "coder" using some .NET language or even something like SAP's ABAP, or (heaven forbid) resign myself to becoming a sys admin? Thanks for the strategic advice, it may become tactical advice in the very near term. It seems like developing applications where the browser is the client is a good long-term solution to extending the useful life of the iSeries because the interface is what sells to the end-user. If they like the interface (and it works), most do not care what kind of server, unix, mainframe, iSeries, or whatever is in the back room. Is WEBSMART that good?

[cherev]

Shouldn't a discussion this old get aged off to an archive? Anyway, the over-all question has been answered by the System i. By putting AIX and CPF on the same silicon. And, by allowing for Linux (LAMP Linux.Apache.MySQL.PHP/perl) as a guest OS and application environment. Ever since the System/3, someone has been attempting to dig a grave for IBM midrange platforms. But the ROI value of these (even with IBM's and camp-follower overpricing of software) for the SMB enterprises has always exceeded the TCO of mainframes and the Oracle ambit. Only organizations with money to waste and totally feckless managers deploy Microsoft 'products'. Or, only outfits like State Farm Ins. -another entity with money to burn- would put 9370's in every branch office. However, any management who knows enough to use earnings and investment money on activities that enhance income (theirs and stakeholder) will put either the System i (where an industrial-reliable transactional DB is needed) or an AMD Linux platform (for cheap I-O) into offices and warehouses.