Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    > last I knew C for any other system didn't work under > OS/400 because pointers weren't supported due to > OS/400 and AS/400 CPU memory protection. There are a few issues with C under OS/400, but mostly you can indeed take a C example off the web, paste it into a source member, compile and run it. Pointers work great in C and RPG. fork() doesn't work because OS400 won't let another process share memory. > If this C/C++ claim is true, then all that software > written in C elsewhere will run under OS/400 now. I wish! There aren't any true plug & play C programs. That is, no matter what platform you move your C code to, you'll be in there making some changes to make it work on the new OS. > What does this Power5/i5/OS5 etc. etc. do, specifically, > that it didn't do under OS/400, and how? The Hardware Management Console is probably the big one. You no longer need to designate a primary partition in an LPAR arrangement. --buck

    Leave a comment:


  • R.Daugherty
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    The day some business buys an AS/400 because it's called an i5 instead of an AS/400 is the day I eat my hat. I rubbed my eyes reading this, went to the link expecting something to justify this stuff but saw nothing. I know what used to be. If something has changed and even I don't know about it, then the cause is hopeless, but last I knew C for any other system didn't work under OS/400 because pointers weren't supported due to OS/400 and AS/400 CPU memory protection. If this C/C++ claim is true, then all that software written in C elsewhere will run under OS/400 now. Used to require a "port" under AIX to run in something called PASE under OS/400. The only thing ever done that way was what IBM payed to have ported, as far as I know. Windows used to be run by hanging a motherboard on the side of the AS/400. I doubt this changed with a Power5 CPU, unless they include a Pentium in the CPU now. What does this Power5/i5/OS5 etc. etc. do, specifically, that it didn't do under OS/400, and how? Without answers to that question, the rest is marketing puffery. rd

    Leave a comment:


  • J.Pluta
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    The only reason to run an i5 is to host legacy RPG and COBOL applications that started life on long dead platforms. That's about as sweepingly incorrect a generalization as we've had on this forum for a while. For example, anything that's written for the web, by definition, did not "start life on a long dead platform". The beauty of the box is that it's just as good for legacy code as it is for new code. This is as opposed to the toy operating systems which must be replaced every couple of years, thus requiring a rewrite of all the software. I just wonder what's going to happen to the corporate bottom line of all the companies drinking the Wintel kool-aid when all the code currently being written has to be RE-written for Longhorn. That will be an interesting line in the financial statement... Whereas I can write wonderful web applications, extract working code that has been refined for decades and encapsulate it in servers, and yes, even still run 5250 terminal on shop floors where a $50 dumb tube makes a lot more sense than a $500 Wintel box. I can do this in languages from COBOL to REXX, Java to RPG. I can use the native I/O or SQL or JDBC. I can even run partitions with Linux or AIX, all on the same machine. And then I can back it all up on a single tape drive. Did all of this slip your mind, or are you just trolling? I notice this is your first post, and whenever someone's first post is this bizarre, I tend to wonder about motives. Then again, it could just be the black helicopters circling outside my window... Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    http://msn-cnet.com.com/Microsoft+ai...t&subj=ns_2510 How many times have I heard that (crap) ? quote:Microsoft and its partners say that many major developers of software for OS/400, the iSeries' operating system, have stopped writing applications. Funny, ALL of our new development are done in native RPG ILE/DDS/PDM. Ok, we're not a major software developer but there is no way we pulling the plug on our 400 (AS/400, iSeries, whatever...) to replace it with a toy that you have to reboot each time you hit the OK button. LOL

    Leave a comment:


  • dacust
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    It's true that the name changes haven't necessarily happened at the same time as the hardware/software changes. But the i5 AS/400 is a totally different machine then the "Old" AS/400. Different processors (32bit to 64bit, CISC/RISC), different bus, different memory, different drives, different low level OS (totally new low level OS written for the totally different hardware). And enhancements like ILE and partitions. The fact that we can still run the same old code from the S/36 is not because the system hasn't changed, it's due to the geniuses that designed the separate levels of the OS so this type of stuff could happen a distant 15 years in the future. The fact that we can still run the same old code masks, to many outsiders, that the underlying machine is totally different from the old one. OK, so the name doesn't change at the same time, but it IS a different box... -dan

    Leave a comment:


  • semifor
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    The i5 is just the next name in the succession, undoubtedly chosen for its marketing appeal rather than any huge leap in technology. It might as well be called a System/36 or a System/38 for those who will use it to run their legacy applications originally targeted to those systems. The i5 may be the open, non-proprietary system described in the article, but only, it seems to me, if you use it to run Linux. I doubt there's a huge Linux market for the i5. Why run such expensive (by comparison) hardware to host Linux when you could run inexpensive Intel based systems from Dell and other low cost manufacturers? The only reason to run an i5 is to host legacy RPG and COBOL applications that started life on long dead platforms. To that end, there is no better choice, and there are usability and performance advantages in the new line. But renaming the product line adds no benefit for the legacy applications. The main point of the article is valid. There is no need to sell against Microsoft---at least not until Microsoft can do a credible job of running RPG code in 5250 emulation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    David said: "IBM can call it what it wants to call it, but everyone else on the planet will still refer to the box as an AS400." Amen! chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

    Leave a comment:


  • David Abramowitz
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    You can still run S/36 software on the I5. IBM can call it what it wants to call it, but everyone else on the planet will still refer to the box as an AS400. And. . . .there is no one at IBM who will correct you if you say AS400 to them when referring to an "I" box. Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    Having actually grown up with the midrange and each of its incarnations, I don't entirely agree with the idea that i5/OS is revolutionary rather than evolutionary. While OS/400 was really a new OS compared to CPF, to me i5/OS is just a rebranding of a great OS gotten even better. Two reasons: 1. The first "version" of i5/OS is V5R3. 2. Read IBM's own information. If you go to the page you suggest and click on i5/OS, you will go to the iSeries Information Center for V5R3 of OS/400. In fact, it says: Note: IBM i5/OS(TM) is the next generation of OS/400(R). The documentation in the iSeries Information Center may refer to i5/OS as OS/400. I don't know about you, but if I were releasing a new operating system, I'd at least renumber the damn thing and write some new documentation. Kudos on the article, though. It really makes an important point: we don't need to fight Microsoft, we simply need to co-exist with it. OS/400, or whatever IBM chooses to call it, is simply the best OS out there, and it proves it by becoming more and more open. This is the exact opposite of what Microsoft is doing by going ever more proprietary. If anybody remembers the original PC wars, a proprietary closed design is what killed the PS/2. And just as the legendary IBM brand wasn't enough to force consumers to pay outrageous prices for mediocre proprietary computers, Microsoft's near-mythical status isn't going to be enough to answer the world's demands for open software. Frankly, some of us are seeing some serious signs of wear in the old beast already. Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • MCWebsite.Staff
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
    ** This thread discusses the Content article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange0

    Leave a comment:


  • as400pr0
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    You would have to be crazy to get into computers today. Kids would be better off learning a good trade. Every time I need a plumber or auto mechanic, I end up paying at least $120 an hour... and these people are always busy. My car is in for 2 hours and I get charged for 6 hours. Imagine how much money we could make if we got paid hourly for what a book said the hours should be? We would be rich. Not only that, the skills they use to do their jobs don't completely change every few years. They only have to learn how to install a toilet once. I relatively make hardly any money. It just gets worse and worse every year for computer people. I have to rebuild my skills every couple years... I used to just run the AS/400 and that was plenty. Now "for free" I have to run Domino. I have to run Websphere. I have to know Java. I have to run Windows, I have to run Linux, I have to run AIX. I have to know about Apache now. I have to know about Ant and Struts. Javascript, Lotusscript, 10 different scripting languages, SQL, XML. What's next? When will it ever end? And...where is the money we where all promised back in high school and college when we got into computers. This is the thanks we get from saving the world from Y2K? We solved the problem perfectly, there was no after effects, and we were hero's. The problem is that only we know it. Where is our reward for saving the world?

    Leave a comment:


  • as400pr0
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    The point is that Dodge has put Dodge/Chrysler/Plymouth engines in some cars and Mitsubishi engines in others... It is their choice. Apple makes the hardware AND the software. They should be allowed to put their software in their hardware. IBM makes the hardware AND the software. They should be allowed to put their software in their hardware. Dell, HP, ect... make only the hardware. Microsoft makes one OS that can be put on the hardware. Shouldn't the maker of the Hardware get to choose what software they use? Of course, but they can't. Microsoft can't make the hardware because they are already a monopoly. Microsoft used to be "IBM compatable". IBM tried to choose their own PC software for their PC hardware and even they couldn't survive M$. The point is that if you make the hardware, you should get to choose the software. You don't see Ford saying that they are not going to make cars anymore ... but... they are still going to make engines. Since they are still making engines that could go into all other cars... they want to force all the other auto companies to only use their engine. This is of course obsurd. - i5pro

    Leave a comment:


  • David Abramowitz
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    Chuck Ackerman wrote: IBM has done EXACTLY what Microsoft did I would disagree with this statement. The desktop is pervasive, and is found not only in business, but also in homes, schools, etc. To me, at least, there is a difference between marketing to a business sub-segment, and marketing to the planet. Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • R.Daugherty
    replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    all true points, nstelmack. You are not going to believe this, but IBM is so stupid they have claimed to believe for a number of years now, roughly coinciding with when Websphere was deemed to be the reason for IBM's existence, that the AS/400 is some kind of disk server that one should want to partition into Windows, Linux, Unix, and as a shell OS OS/400. Why? you ask. So presumably in this IBM dreamworld someone can start a backup in OS/400 to back up all the disk for all the operating systems in the company. I am not making this up. I wish I were. rd

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

    I don't consider myself an expert by an means. All your arguments are sound, but if I am in a SMB IT shop(I used to be) telling a IT directory your system can run Windows and Linux applications, by adding them on to your expensive I5 server by linking a XSeries server, still doesn't make sense. IT directories want cheap now, this quarter, this year. It saves $ a year or two down the road, good luck. They will say why can't I just run it on a cheap Windows or Linux standalone server or cluster (hey Dell has sale this week), why add another level of complexity. Maybe consolidation is working in big shops, but are the samll shops listening. They'll say most of my small/medium applications use Access, Foxpro, SQL Server or Oracle, maybe DB2 if your lucky what do I need I5/OS server for. #1 Few applications for I5/OS, No advertsing, no knowledge outside of OS400 community(colleges, non tech people), no native GUI(Ops navigator is Microsoft and web based)(what about my Peer to Peer apps that require a GUI on the server), proprietory image, not competitive pricing, continued press about how many more years does this server have before it goes the way of the alpha servers, can I run I5/OS on my PC, can I run it off of Intel/AMD based servers instead of of Power based servers, is it open source like Linux, does come with more modern languages or can they be ported easily i.e Perl, TCL, PHP, whatever scripting language you can think of, can I run my applications without other operating systems being required(What is happening with PACE(which should be free)/QSH), why do you have to pay extra for SQL(isn't that part of DB2), can I run Windows without requiring additional hardware. They'll believe you about the proven reliability, but beyond that will they even listen. This is the best business server as far as I am concerned, but putting it on administrators and business partners to save it is nonsense. I5/OS needs more than a name change to save it. This OS is better in my opinion than Linux, it needs to be sold as such(an all round IT server not just business), not simply say and we can run Windows/Linux too. Wasn't the design of OS/400 S/38 supposedly based on the best ideas of Unix and mainframe technologies and ideas, with the idea of eventually replacing them. Isn't it supposed to be hardware independent. If it only fills that small part of your shop now, they'll find a way to put Windows/Linux there instead. It needs a modern face lift(port X Windows to run natively in I5/OS). They need to take a look at how inferior systems (Microsoft, Linux, Oracle) have been able to sell their products and do the same, if not better. Finally if there is anyway to bring the price down, they need to do it or Windows/Linux supports will have you for lunch.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X