AS/400 name change?

[Guest.Visitor]

AS/400 name change?

"Looks like there may be a lot more than a name change. News/400 magazine has an article on page 19 of the September 2000 issue titled "Have You Bought Your Last AS/400?". In it Roger Pence describes a new IBM super server as a one-stop computing platform with "personalities" for NT/2000, Linux, AIX and OS/400." I read a few years ago (when OS/2 instead of NT had a fond place in IBM's heart) that IBM was intent on making OS/400 just one personality among the other IBM OSes on an IBM superserver. Didn't make any sense to me then but it was around the time when IBM would have been making some tough decisions concerning their IPCS (I don't remember all the names before and after for the Intel card). A superserver decision would have migrated OS/2 to run alongside OS/400 and AIX (and maybe a mainframe OS). They ended up deciding to drop OS/2 and continue with NT only on the external card. The superserver that Roger Pence describes is the currently stated direction for the AS/400. IBM has been trying to figure out how to run Unix programs on the /400, going back to implementing the POSIX Open Unix interface into OS/400 to now having the PASE AIX executable environment. With 4.5 now having the real Unix shell environments and IBM advertising that thousands of Unix programs have been ported to the AS/400, they're getting closer every day. However, the details I read of the PASE announcement didn't look as cheery about what it took to port a Unix program, but then I'm just an RPG wienie. NT runs on the IPCS, and IBM just stated that Linux will run on the AS/400 as it does on the mainframe and AIX. I didn't see whether Linux programs will have to compiled on an AIX box as PASE programs must be, and of course any Unix person would not consider PASE as Unix or Linux if that is the case. The alternative is that IBM was able to get their own AIX development environment running in the AS/400 PASE environment, in which case significant superserver news of AIX and Linux running alongside OS/400 would be realized. The addressing issues I saw precluded all but carefully rewritten Unix programs to be prepared under AIX before the executable could be copied over to the AS/400 and run. Hardly what one would call a superserver. As for NT/2000, I vaguely recall versions other than Intel being written, the DEC Alpha coming to mind. Compaq bought DEC and dropped that port. Did Microsoft finish their version for the PowerPC? I thought they dropped all other CPU efforts but the Intel version. If so, NT/2000 still runs on an Intel plugin card, again hardly qualifying the IBM box as a superserver. I will say this, this rumor has legs. OS/2 and Netware have fallen by the wayside and Linux has been picked up, but the game remains the same. A couple of things that come to mind was the Franklin clone of Apple with CP/M with both the 6502 and 8080 CPU's, and multi partition hard drives with a different OS on each partition, pick an OS, any OS, to boot up under. Neither did particularly well outside of hobbyist circles, and I have difficulty envisioning anybody but a serious hobbyist enjoying the prospect of running multiple OS's within different partitions on a couple of different CPU families in an IBM box. If this is to share disk space, the storage division of IBM has far too much clout. Ralph

[Guest.Visitor]

AS/400 name change?

dennis bayne wrote: I suspect IBM still views the As/400 as the little guy's system. They probably have a small profit margin therefore no investment.. It really depends where in IBM that you refer to. IBM is so huge and bureacratic that different parts of IBM react differently. For instance, most everyone you speak to in Rochester is fully committed to the development and advancement of the AS/400, while at Armonk, it is unlikely you will find anyone who can spell AS/400! OTOH In the early 90's IBM was fully aware which product was keeping the company afloat. Dave

[frankgw@adelphia.net]

AS/400 name change?

For more information on this developing story, be sure to read Monday Morning Update for September 4, 2000 by Timothy Prickette Morgan. Don't miss the section "Let's Sound Out 'Mach1' for a Minute" towards the end of that particular Monday Morning Update.

[Guest.Visitor]

AS/400 name change?

"For more information on this developing story, be sure to read Monday Morning Update for September 4, 2000 by Timothy Prickett Morgan." IBM should just go ahead and replace their entire AS/400 marketing staff with Timothy Prickett Morgan. They couldn't make a smarter marketing move, that is if they still give a whit about the AS/400. Or they could save the mind boggling salary that that would cost them and just read his columns... Jumbling thoughts went through my mind reading Monday Morning Update. Interesting that Timothy points out that perhaps only the Vax commands the respect of "the" in front of it's name as does the AS/400. There was no bigger shooting star than the Vax. DEC ruled, and now its remnants are being salvaged by Compaq. A computer that can fall from such heights so quickly should cause uneasiness in every person to whom the AS/400 is their career. DEC handled the VAX better than IBM is handling the AS/400 and still the Vax went down in flames. It should be noted that the Vax was to be replaced with a Unix hybrid similar to the AIX-AS/400 rumored box. Didn't do them any good either. I respect Frank Soltis. I have his book and have had the honor of exchanging a couple of e-mails with him. I respect Timothy Prickett Morgan. And they both are now advocating a Unix-AS/400 hybrid. The question is why? Because the PowerPC CPU can sort of run both OS's by switching hardware modes every few microseconds to timeshare between the OS's? Because Frank Soltis sees an incoherent IBM Unix strategy but thinks that running the entire incoherent strategy on the same box with OS/400 is going to produce a coherently unified IBM midrange solution? Because they see the handwriting on the wall for OS/400 and see slipping OS/400 technology into Unix as the only way for the technology to survive? Because putting the OS/400 environment as a wrapper around the disjointed Unix mess would make it possible for midrange shops to administer and run Unix? Because they see Websphere and Java as OS independent and the future and this is all just to migrate to Websphere? Because they can? By the way, the name change will have all the impact of Prince changing his name to an unpronounceable symbol. The new name can be anything, but it will always be referred to as that which was formerly known as the AS/400. The name AS/400 and it's legacy heritage isn't stopping any sales. In fact, the legacy software solutions is what sells AS/400s. The current AS/400 doesn't cut it with the Unix/Oracle crowd and the NT crowd, together who get almost all new business. IBM's Websphere runs on NT, Sun Solaris, HP-UX, and various other Unixes along with AIX and OS/400. IBM's solution of the future runs on their competitor's OS's. They are throwing it on the AS/400 and calling it the future of the AS/400 as well. They might as well just say that our future is NT and Solaris. Ralph

[Guest.Visitor]

AS/400 name change?

Didn't check MMUpate, but this from WWUpdate From: View Wednesday Windows Update on the Web at http://www.midrangecomputing.com/wwu/currentissue.cfm ...IBM is undertaking a rebranding to try to build a more unified, stronger marketing message to compete against Sun Microsystems, Compaq, Dell, and Hewlett-Packard. IBM reportedly has been considering using the Netfinity brand across its entire server line, not just for Intel-based PC servers. But the word on the street is that the Netfinity brand idea was shot down almost a year ago. (so much for what I thought was the leading contender Netfinity/400) IBM reportedly will use some as-yet-unknown umbrella term to identify its entire server line. IBM's plans also call for new monikers for what used to be called S/390 mainframes, AS/400 and RS/6000 midrange servers, RS/6000 SP parallel supercomputers, and NUMA-Q clustered servers. Exactly what those new monikers are is unknown, but rumor has it that the AS/400 will be called the I/500 or I-500 and that the RS/6000 will be named P-something-or-other. ... (more stuff)... ...fact is that all of IBM's server units have been itching for a more concise marketing message to help them get brand awareness. I've heard "Deep Blue" or some variant of "Blue" was also a possible umbrella marketing theme.

[Guest.Visitor]

AS/400 name change?

Is this name change as important as Silverlake was? Is this the end of the AS/400 and RPG? Is this just a "put a new decal on some stuff we already sell" marketing exercise? Or is this just a buncha rumours that have taken wing? From Tim Morgan's recent column, it seems that it is all but over. But I don't know whether to be confused, worried, complacent, or uninterested.

[Guest.Visitor]

AS/400 name change?

My favorite rumor is that DELL -- which I've heard is a big 400 shop-- will purchase the 400 program from IBM but wants the name changed. bobh

[frankgw@adelphia.net]

AS/400 name change?

And then there is the article titled "The IBM Enterprise Server - Netfinity Technology Pipeline" by Joe Hertvik on page 87 of the September 2000 issue of Midrange Computing. It certainly adds more fuel to the rumor fire. -------------------------------- Joe - Were you intentionally doing that?

[Guest.Visitor]

AS/400 name change?

>>And then there is the article titled "The IBM Enterprise Server - Netfinity Technology Pipeline" by Joe Hertvik on page 87 of the September 2000 issue of Midrange Computing.

>>>It certainly adds more fuel to the rumor fire. -------------------------------- >>>Joe -Were you intentionally doing that? Actually, no, I wasn't trying to start any rumors so please don't take it as such. In my research, I ran across a number of interesting ideas that all seemed to gell into that article you mentioned where I discussed IBM's x-architecture and how it seemed to center on taking successful technologies from other platforms and porting them to Netfinity. The IBM x-architecture Web page (http://www.pc.ibm.com/us/netfinity/xarchitecture.html) had a bunch of references to porting S/390, AS/400, and RS/6000 technology to Netfinity and the x-architecture White Paper at (http://www5.pc.ibm.com/us/me.nsf/web...ty+X-architect ure+2000) also seemed to promote that idea. And when I read the June 27th press release between IBM and ServerWorks about their new five-year technology sharing agreement where they were quoted as saying: "Our agreement with ServerWorks gives us a highly leveraged way to pursue our Netfinity? X-architecture, which translates technologies from IBM's high-end servers into industry-standard platforms," commented Randy Groves, IBM's vice president of Development, IBM Netfinity." BTW, you can read the whole IBM-ServerWorks June 27th press release in the news and events section of the ServerWorks Web site at http://www.serverworks.com/home.html. Well, everything kind of came together there and I was starting to see a stated pattern/intention of leveraging IBM enterprise server technology (RS/6000, AS/400, and S/390) to improve the stability and capabilities of Netfinity. I wrote about this in the September MC and drew some conclusions, including why it's a necessary trend for IBM and where x-architecture might possibly lead in the future. That's where that article came from. It was analysis based on observation and I'll have to paraphrase Wil Rogers when I can honestly say, "All I know is what I read on the Web pages" So, take this information for what it's worth. If you're interested in this article, it's on page 87 of the September MC and it's also posted on the Web at http://www.midrangecomputing.com/mc/...b1506&md=20009 . But, honest, I was just looking at some facts and making some connections. It's part of my job in writing analysis and articles for MC. Where x-architecture leads in the future, your guess is as good as mine but it is certainly interesting. Joe Hertvik Editor-AS/400 Network Expert mailto:jhertvik@midrangecomputing.com http://www.midrangecomputing.com