It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

[R.Daugherty]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

I use phpMyAdmin, and although I think the 5250 cursor sensitive function key interface is hard to beat to process business transactions, business software written with the complexity and style of phpMyAdmin would be potent, whether in PHP or RPGCGI or Java. I don't know much about RPGCGI (and even less about Joe's AJAX interface, for example), but if we can generate complex web pages that allow for multiple tangents of inquiry drill down within the screen via AJAX to support retrieving data or decision making for the transaction, and if we can support transferring the data from one focus area to another via a button click, it would be more productive than three or four 5250 sessions with limitation of cut and paste to transfer the data between screens, if not retyping as the norm. This is what I have been advocating for a number of years but felt the GUI must be OS based for intercommunication among the screens, desktop productivity apps, etc., which is what the customer wants and which web pages as islands insulated from the desktop do not provide for. However, AJAX does change the equation, and the intercommunication would be among the web page frames, giving even better productivity if the programming provides for the user changing the focus of inquiry frames as needed for ad hoc decision support during a transaction. It's true, Nathan, we don't have AJAX in 5250. Although now that I think about it it seems to me that a 5250 terminal emulator should be able to send on each keystroke or timeout, whichever came first, and the app provide an updated screen, subfile, etc., based on the keystroke and data to push ala AJAX. Keyboard centric is the key, though. rd

[Gabriel Alarcon]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

Yes it does in most of the case and also it does a good job when converting loockup to %lookup and %Tlookup. I use this utility quite a lot and it does a very good job converting RPG to RPGIV and also to FREE form. The Linoma command RPGWIZ give you a lot of options for the convertion propouse. For example you have the option to insert I/O BIF, convert subroutines to Proc, convert divitions to EVAL Etc. Here is the example you wrote converted by Linoma Sofware (RPGWIZ) See how WSNAME was delcared in the D spec The only move that was not converted in this case was because the field was not defined see second example where i defined WSXYZ to 5 position .

---

Code

[JonFParis]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

> Can linoma convert MOVE? I bet not! If it can, I want a proof that it can convert the following.

You lose the bet. If you chose to have it handle this kind of conversion then under the covers it runs a NOGEN compile so that it knows exactly which kind of conversion to do. If you want proof go to their web site. I believe they have samples that show the different levels to which they can convert. if you're still not convinced, download the free trial version - I think you can convert three programs with it.

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

Well if I loose my bet, it would simply mean that I was right that MOVE/MOVEL is something we would not miss. Joe Pluta's only point was the problem of conversion. There you go. Maybe all IBM needs is to include this technique in their WSDC /free conversion tool. See, I am right one way or the other

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
Mr Cozzi Said: First, they need to move off of RPG III and onto more-capable programming languages. The languages I would move to include RPG IV, C or C++, and Java. I don't mean just one of these languages; I mean any or all of them. Reply: Yes. Companies love to support multi-language shops which require many employees or a few hard to replace multi-talented individuals. They also love hand crafted stick built programs that are each a reflection of the capabilities, interests, and mood of the individual programmer who wrote them. They also just love religious wars over the best way to approach coding subroutines. Companies also adore coders who decide the old program is no longer suitable and, on their own, add superficial changes, now thinking it is modern because it follows the latest coding fad. Who cares about the cost of validation or even the need for it? We all know that companies exist only because of IT and IT is ultimately in charge of everything it decides it wants to meddle with. Forget company wide strategies, of which IT is only a support player. IT should just follow its nose and stick it wherever it wants whenever it chooses.

[brianmay]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
Should IT control the direction of the company? No, but it should be responsible enough to explore new ground and put its findings on the table. Changes should not be brought to the table as "this is the newest thing and we are going to migrate every system to this architecture because it's cool!" The conversation should be along the lines of "we looked into some new technologies/architectures that we would like to use in our company. In doing so, we will be able to provide better services such as .........., and we will be able to give the company an edge in the market because of ........." In short, is IT the ultimate decision maker for the company? No. Should IT step up to the plate and be involved in company strategy? Absolutely.

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
IT managers don't want to move to RPG IV and free-format, etc. due to the fact they themselves do not want to learn the languages,etc. if everything stays on RPG II & RPG III they can still read the code (should they decide to...) without having to invest the time to enhance their own skill set.

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
Sorry Bob, but I have to disagree. Just because something is "old" doesn't necessarily mean that it's out of date or doesn't have a useful purpose anymore. I would hate to be the one to pass on that point of view to my parents!!! Whilst I agree that it is a good thing to embrace new technologies where there is a valid business case for them, change for change's sake is a complete no-no. A number of years ago I worked for a major pharmaceutical company and was running a project to replace their green screen finance software. One of the products we looked at was SAP R3 which had a very nice GUI front end, but had a major flaw when it came to data entry. When it came to entering invoices and payments the green screen won hands down as the ledger clerk could simply key data into a subfile without looking up. Via the GUI she would have had to tab from field to field and use the mouse to move from screen to screen, cutting down her data entry speed dramatically. It might be nice to have the bells and whistles of a GUI front end, but it's not the best in all cases. Jonathan

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
Bob, Do I have this right? Pink ovens were popular in 1955. So, in 1985, they would have been 30 years old. You wouldn't have a pink oven in 1985, so, you wouldn't code in RPGIII, the pink oven of 2006. I'm confused. But, if the pink oven still worked, eventhough the user interface was ugly (it was ugly in 1955, too), would you still replace it with the latest self-cleaning unit? OK, I got it now. I agree with you. The following are bad: pink ovens, green screens, I.T. managers who hang onto either pink ovens or green screens. Thanks for the trip down memory lane, Bob. Tom.

[KathyK]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
I agree with a lot of what Mr. Cozzi says but think that he needs to remember that in a smaller shop, like the 3 I've worked for, education is something that takes a back seat when the belt gets tightened. Unfortunately I also lived and work in an area that has many computer training centers or depts but NONE that focus on RPG IV. I've been looking for a training course that is reasonably priced that I can do on my own but am forced to buy the book and do it on my own time. Now there is nothing wrong with that except for time constraints, boss doesn't want me to sit and read on his time, and play with building new practice applications, and family time is just that, family time. I'm finding some time to read on lunchs and when the kids are in bed but overall, the dedicated time is just not available to me without that structured "classroom/lab" environment. I know your next thought is RPG World or one of the online training courses, but when you are comparing 3 credits at a local college @75 per hour + books to the 1200 + to do online training, well, let's just say it's not a reasonable amount to consider spending because I WANT to learn a new way of doing something. Also, I have to say that IBM had a great thing in interactive debug, and from the point of view of someone who grew up in programming using this, not the old fashioned strdbg command and then havning to look at every single variable individually, it's bulky and hard to use. I miss the interactive version greatly in the programs that I'm working with that have been converted and that has been a big factor in my decision not convert some of my programs into IV or start using it in my new applications. Any reason why they won't do some tips and tricks on using the "hard to use" debug in IV? Thanks for listening.

[GeoffRPG]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
Well Mr. Cozzi, I guess I am prejudiced against GUI. I didn't like Web-Facing, it is ugly, and less trouble free than green screen. I was frustrated when I tried to look at a huge outq with Navigator, and it froze instead of just showing the first eight and waiting for me to do page down or F18. I hated WDSC until I got my PC upgraded. I find it to be an additional complication if all GUI users are dependent on one job running in WRKACTJOB. Also I like to have 4 or 5 sessions open at a time and I imagine there would be performance issues if I had 4 or 5 GUI sessions open. Also it is a myth that you can't use a mouse in green screen(which doesn't have to be green). I began programming in RPG II in 1998 and I made the jump to RPG IV in November and I love it! Before 1998 I was a Physics professor but I left that field in part because I didn't want to give up on using the lecture format and people were saying that chalk and the blackboard were obsolete. So maybe I am a dinosuar.

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
I have my doubts about the path Bob wants us IT managers to take. Sure it would be nice to have the all singing all dancing GUI user interface but at what price ? The more I delve into these new technologies the more daunting it becomes. It is not just a case of deploying a new interface, it's the fundamental shift in the architecture required to even support the applications. From having to install the latest version of JVM or configure some server or other for HTTP or you need to install some application that IBM bundles with PTF012345 or the 12 PCs in Sales will all need to be upgraded and a SP will need to be installed etc. etc, etc. We are too busy attending to the latest mandate from our customers (such as RFID, EDI etc)to worry about whether the order entry application is pleasing to the eye of our minimum wage clerks.

[bharder@nlrha.ab.ca]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
Look, I hear what you're saying about the efficiency of the green screen for data entry. In your example, as the systems stood, that is correct. Where your point falls down is that there isn't anything inherent about GUI's that says they can't be efficient. A well written set of interface screens is a well written set of interface screens, regardless of the technology. Intuit demonstrated this years ago with Quicken, if you need a concrete example that many will be familiar with. OK you say, but then we're just replacing one functional technology with another, right? Well, I think I disagree there too. You see, modern technologies are largely about flexibility and adaptability. The technologies that support 5250 and 3270 terminal interfaces are often severely lacking in this regard. The challenge we face is that we can win the battle and lose the war. If you save 7 seconds per invoice with a green screen, that's great. What if, however, data entry is delegated to end users who need a dead simple Web interface? What if the invoices are entered electronically via some type of EDI-XML interface? These kinds of requirements change the success criteria drastically. There's something else too. The "eye candy" of a graphical interface is often used as a kind of shorthand by nontechnical people. It's a yardstick by which they measure the modernity, sophistication, and comprehensiveness of a computing system. Is this right? It's no substitute for a proper requirements definition certainly. But this effect does exist, and you ignore at your peril. My point is, we can have our cake and eat it too. Why not have an efficient GUI? Isn't that better than having than having an efficient but ugly 5250 screen? Isn't that better than having a pretty but procedurally inefficient GUI? Of course it is.

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
Since Bob got on the /free bandwagon last month he's just going nuts now! I have to agree with this article. As much as I defend the iSeries over and over and over...I start to sound stupid when people look at the front-end green screens that I (say it ain't so!) help design. It MUST change. But what can I do? I do a little CGI stuff. I work with the IFS, lay down some HTML from free-format RPG, mess around with CGI a little. And I just got back from the SOA COMMON conference... The way I look at it, I've got too problems, and I'm guessing others have similar ones; 1) I'm not in a position to FORCE change around here. 2) We are in bed with a vendor that writes TERRIBLE code and their application design is so old school they have RECORD LOCKS all the time!

[Guest.Visitor]

It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age

** This thread discusses the article: It's Time to Get out of the Stone Age **
I can't spell either... maybe someone could replace that 'too' with a 'two'...