Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

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

  • #16
    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.

    Comment


    • #17
      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

      Comment


      • #18
        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

        Comment


        • #19
          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

          Comment


          • #20
            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

            Comment


            • #21
              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

              Comment


              • #22
                IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                I dont believe it is about a single programming model. I do believe it is about being able to consolidate business solutions onto a single server. These solutions could be based on technology of Linux, AIX, OS/400 or Windows Server. The ability to have a machine running with no OS/400 partition is different.

                Comment


                • #23
                  IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                  ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                  The real problem that IBM faces, and this holds true in almost every AS400/iSeries/i5 shop I have been in, is that most of the users (not all but a vast majority) of this platform are not revolutional type thinkers... they are very happy with "the way things are" and like things the way they used to be. They get comfortable with a platform or technology and don't want to change (other than just making it faster). I have seen countless developers still using PDM, when they have what is, in my opinion, an outstanding IDE in the WebSphere Development Studio client. When asked why? "I just like the green screen, I know how to use it". IBM needs to market this technology, not to the existing customer base, but to fresh meat. They need to get the attention of the IT management that is sick and tired of having to patch and reboot their Windows servers on a daily basis. Or that are sick and tired of Microsoft forcing them to conform to their own standards. So many of the existing iSeries and i5 shops vastly under utilize the capabilities of this platform, just because they are unfamiliar with what it can really do. I think it would be good for IBM to find those shops that are really utilizing some of the newer technology in this platform and hold them up as examples of how it should be used... take them on road shows, bring them to Common, show people real world exmaples of just how powerful this platform is.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                    ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                    bmturney said: "So many of the existing iSeries and i5 shops vastly under utilize the capabilities of this platform, just because they are unfamiliar with what it can really do." The same can be said for Microsoft Word, yet it's the leader. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                      ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                      Word is a leader because of marketing.. not superiority. Word was packaged with a suite of highly useful business related software, none of which are really superior products in their space, but because they were packaged together, and integrated so well, made it attractive to non-technical computer users. It was this marketing scheme that gave Word it's marketshare, not because it was a superior product.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                        ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                        bmturney said: "Word is a leader because of marketing.. not superiority." Bingo! That's often the case in compeitive products. History is littered with inferior products becoming the leader. Not only has the midrange been poorly marketed, it has purposely been supressed by the S/370,S/390,zSeries types who loathed it's superior design. The AS/400 is in the terrible position it is today simply because that's where Armonk wanted it to be. Now "services" is the golden ticket and the midrange is just lingering. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                          ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                          I would really like to see IBM push the i5 through some of the major universities, and working with the schools to offer a class for the i5 server. Schools offer courses in Windows, Unix/Linux, and I have even seen some mainframe courses, but I have not seen any midrange courses offered at any college or university higher than a community college. Maybe they do exist, I have just never seen them. If anyone knows of a major university offering one I would love to hear about it.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                            ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                            LAW OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND. LESS JOB OPPORTUNITY MEANS LESS INTEREST FOR ASPIRING STUDENTS. LESS SUBJECT ENROLLMENT MEANS NO SUBJECT OFFERING BY MAJOR/IVY SCHOOLS.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              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
                              Thanks for that info, buck. I should have said some types of pointer usage is not supported instead of pointers, as far as I could tell from the limited information released about it. I don't have the details of what exactly fails under OS/400, but I saw some comments from knowledgeable writers that seemed to point to pointer manipulation failing to be executed by the OS/400 CPU due to some combination of hardware and OS memory protection from invalid memory access. Whatever it is, because IBM requires a "port" to the OS/400 PASE environment under AIX, my take on it is that IBM can't even get their AIX C compiler to run under PASE. In any event, Chuck said it well in another post. The AS/400 is where the mainframers in Armonk want it. On that note, I'll concentrate on a personal Java project for awhile until perhaps AS/400 RPG projects pick up after the holidays. Merry Christmas, bah, humbug, and all that stuff. rd

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

                                ** This thread discusses the article: IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange **
                                Your sarcasm ignores the fact that Word wasn't superior when it became dominant. Word Perfect was better. 1-2-3 was better. Microsoft did two things that really killed the competition. One was legitimate, and the other wasn't: 1) Bundled the applications together and offered them for slightly more than getting just one of the competing applications. 2) Forced OEMs that wanted to bundle Windows to bundle Office. Notice that neither of these is based on technical superiority. They were "good enough", and the revenue stream they were getting from DOS allowed them to sell Office as a loss-leader to choke off R&D resources the other companies needed. It's very similar to how Wal-Mart has driven Toys R Us to the brink of closing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X