AS/400? You've got to be kidding.

Post #50,463 by mmoffitt 9/4/02 6:33:17 PM Reply	AS/400? You've got to be kidding. I assume you're not talking about that POS OS/400, right? You're talking hardware only, right? Running something like the Penguin on it. OS/400 is the biggest POS I've ever seen. And don't get me started on that even larger POS DB2/400! Hell, even IBM hates that product (differs significantly from UDB which is not really all that bad). Or are you an old COBOL/RPG hack?
Post #50,470 by admin 9/4/02 6:42:24 PM Reply	Er... We had an AS/400 at my previous job. I worked there for 6 years, and saw it go down twice unexpectedly. Well, one of those times was a result of operator error (resetting the SECOFR password to something he promptly forgot, requiring a manual IPL). The other time was the result of using an obscure serial port debugging tool. OS/400 is rock solid... I'm not really sure what you're on about. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #50,487 by imric 9/4/02 8:16:12 PM Reply	Bullshit. OS/400 is a fine OS - unless, of course, you are dependent on GUI tools - and even there, IBM provides, if you are a Windows hack, anyway. As for the DB, it IS the FS - and it works fine, and performs well... Unless, of course you are comparing out-of-date hardware to SOA systems. That happens, as the system will keep chugging away, and being useful, without being tied to the upgrade treadmill. Of course, it IS an alien architecture - the commands in the OS are all descriptive - named for what they do from two-or three character subs, like WRK, DSP, JOB, PGM, SRC, DBJ, OBJ, SYS, etc. I think I detect someone that cannot adapt to non-hierarchal filesystems, and needs DOS or UNIX style commands to feel comfortable. As for RPG, it's a shame that it's true strength (the program cycle) is completely misunderstood by those weaned on BASIC or C (this lack of adaptbility has lead to the de-emphasis of the cycle by IBM - guess it shows how adaptable most programmers really are)... Again, it's worse 'sin' is being different. So far as COBOL on the '400 goes - well, it really isn't a major language on that platform. And IBM hates DB2/400? Gee - when did that happen? I guess it's because IBM now has Linux on the box, right? Choice means change, right? There can be only one? I guess the only reason the AS/400 and OS/400 exist is the fanatically loyal users that want, like, and use the product. I see your post as saying 'different is bad'. Enjoy Windows, then, and the upgrade treadmill. Imric's Tips for Living Paranoia Is a Survival Trait Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised... Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
Post #50,616 by drewk 9/5/02 11:08:51 AM Reply	Hmm, so OS/400-heads should grok TWiki I think I detect someone that cannot adapt to non-hierarchal filesystems That's one of the hard things about getting used to [link\|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome\|TWiki]. === Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #52,580 by mmoffitt 9/21/02 12:35:42 AM Reply	Heh. >> I guess the only reason the AS/400 and OS/400 exist is the fanatically loyal >> users that want, like, and use the product. No, only those users who are satisfied with a Sql database that doesn't even conform to the ANSI 1992 standard - oops, that's only TEN YEARS behind, good for IBM - and WAIT! they have "STORED PROCEDURES!" in their latest release! WOO-HOO!
Post #52,600 by imric 9/21/02 7:00:00 AM Reply	Those poor bastards. I guess they can't get anything done. Someone ought to tell them. Imric's Tips for Living Paranoia Is a Survival Trait Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised... Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
Post #52,611 by folkert 9/21/02 12:22:39 PM Reply	Really poor bastards.... I guess they can't get anything done. Someone ought to tell them. Well, the ones using [link\|http://www.microsoft.com/windows/default.mspx\|this OS] haven't been getting anything done for years... no-one told them... `greg - Grand-Master Artist in IT, curley95@attbi.com -- [link\|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry/\|REMEMBER ED CURRY!!!] Your friendly Homeland Security Officer reminds: Hold Thumbprint to Screen for 5 seconds, we'll take the imprint, or Just continue to type on your keyboard, and we'll just sample your DNA.`
Post #50,505 by orion 9/4/02 9:08:57 PM Reply	To each their own From 1993-1996 I worked with an AS/400. This was before they started putting in PowerPC chips in them. It ran very slow, and the Showcase ODBC we used to connect up with the database on the AS/400 was slow. All I did was the Client Access/400 software install, and the database to make sure that the Network Administrator did not assign two virtual terminals the same session ID codes. We migrated databases from the AS/400 to a SQL Server running under NT 3.1 and it was much faster. The poor AS/400 had a ton of other users giving it requests and I think a whole bunch of RPG, COBOL, FORTAN, and PL/1 programs running on it, taking up processor time. Many of which were converted to the AS/400 from an old IBM 4381 Mainframe that we happened to get rid of by hiring consultants to quickly port those programs to the AS/400 environment. Piror to the PowerPC upgrades to the AS/400, from what I saw, the AS/400 was very very slow. I assume that the PowerPC upgrades have speed things up now? *[link\|http://games.speakeasy.net/data/files/khan.jpg\|"Khan!!!" -Kirk]*
Post #50,522 by admin 9/4/02 9:47:43 PM Reply	Wrong comparison Yes, the hardware was "slow", if you are looking at interactive speeds. Batch mode, it was quite fast. And also very dependent upon the programmer's skill. From what you said, that box was loaded with things running on it. Take one thing, port it to a different machine on newer hardware, yes it's going to be faster. But it's an asinine comparison to make too. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #50,596 by orion 9/5/02 9:56:48 AM Reply	Wrong idea the point I was trying to make was not that a NT Box was faster than an AS/400, but that the AS/400 had been juggling so much stuff that moving part of it over to a NT Box that did nothing but run a SQL Server made the database run faster. We had AP/AR people upset because it took about 6 to 15 minutes to find an invoice on the AS/400 database. So then it took about 15 to 30 seconds on the SQL Server. The NT SQL Server did not have a ton of stuff running in the background as the AS/400 did. I doubt the NT Server could handle a load like that. It was only a 486, way back when we put NT 3.1 on it. It also ran a Token Ring network card at 4mbs. Remember Token Ring? :) *[link\|http://games.speakeasy.net/data/files/khan.jpg\|"Khan!!!" -Kirk]*
Post #50,567 by slugbug 9/5/02 12:42:54 AM Reply	Actually.... The AS400 now has a built-in Unix subsystem, you can develop and deploy C/C++ and Java, it can run Linux (or Solaris or 'doze) on LPARs. Simply put, they've married all the old school stuff with all the latest stuff. It is truly the most hybrid architecture I think I've ever seen. I'm currently running two Linux LPARs and have developed a bunch of Web services on the platform, too. OT: question for Debian-heads: is there a 64-bit PPC version of Debian available? -Slugbug
Post #50,569 by deSitter 9/5/02 12:57:11 AM Reply	Re: Actually.... Microchannel, baby! -drl
Post #50,578 by ben_tilly 9/5/02 6:57:20 AM Reply	I don't see it in the ports [link\|http://www.debian.org/ports/\|List]. While I see PPC, it is 32-bit. But they have both PPC and other 64-bit platforms out there, so adding 64-bit PPC might not be that hard to do. Cheers, Ben Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. -- Edsger Wybe Dijkstra (1930-2002)
Post #50,706 by slugbug 9/5/02 8:47:34 PM Reply	yup, saw that too... would like to see a 64-bit PPC port.....I have an extra LPAR to play with.

Welcome to IWETHEY!