iSeries COBOL Blog - The Ultimate iSeries COBOL site

AS/400, iSeries, I5, System i?

July 16, 2007 on 10:29 pm | In Welcome, AS/400 vs iSeries |

It seems that someone wants to draw me into this debate about the name of our machine. Trevor Perry, aka Angus the IT Chap, has written about me in his weekly AngusBlogZine. He is the person that posted comments on my blog last week, which I refused to post. Mr Perry has taken it upon himself to correct everyone that does not conform to his opinion.

I will not be drawn into this debate; that is not the purpose of this blog. There are few iSeries COBOL sites on the web. The purpose of my site is to help the newer generation of COBOL programmers. Most of the people requesting my assistance want to become better programmers. I want to help them become better programmers so they can become more successful and hopefully earn more money. I am not sure they want to get into a major debate about the name of our system.

We seemed to have lost a lot of civility and common courtesy on the web. Most people would have been offended, if in our first encounter with Mr Perry, he acted this way. Common courtesy would dictate that I would introduce myself, state my purpose, and ask if the person was open to my position. Had Mr. Perry done this, I would have asked him to post an article about the name change.

At the same time, I would have explained why I choose this name. Mr. Perry assumes that I use the term “iSeries” out of ignorance. COBOL programmers see themselves as either AS/400 COBOL programmers or iSeries COBOL programmers. I have yet to meet an I5/OS or a System i COBOL programmer.

Mr. Perry’s obsession with the “correct” name of the box caused him to overlook what I am really trying to do with my site. I will not take my time to engage in this debate. I will focus on that which really matters–helping my readers become better COBOL programmers. In the future, I only ask that if, Mr. Perry decides to publish my articles in one of his Blogzines, that he would give me proper credit…once again, one of the civilities that we seemed to have lost on the Internet.

15 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Thanks for the link. I needed that.

I think you have take Trevor the wrong way. He is a mad man, but a mad man I can learn to love. He only means well. Really I am not some shill for Trevor, rather someone who fights the same battles he does just not as big and sometimes as loud. I do see both of your points. I understand what Trevor is doing and I also understand what you are saying as well.

IBM has been careless with the naming from the start, but then again they are a big lumbering company who’s best product is not marketing. In fact it is the opposite. They make a damn good OS on some even better hardware. You can call it an 400 or an AS/400 or an iSeries or i or even as Trevor would like a System i, it’s all the same to me and I think Trevor would agree.

What he is trying to do is have people learn the new name and start to use it in creative ways so that we are not stuck with the moniker of “OLD” anymore. Hell UNIX is older then the System i but no one wants to call it OLD, and way? Because UNIX still sounds uber cool. AS/400 does not sound uber. RS/6000 does not sound uber, but System p kind of does and in the end if it don’t sound new and improved it’s old and unusable.

I commend you for taking on Tevor he can be a handful, but I think he is more on your side then you know. He is so PRO-i it’s sad, but I am with him. I get it and I hope you won’t see it as an obsession that is in bad taste, rather he is doing the work that IBM can figure out how to do and fails at over and over again?

Comment by David Vasta — July 17, 2007 #
Also this “I have yet to meet an I5/OS or a System i COBOL programmer.” is not an argument is it? I am a System i Admin, while I know a great deal about the AS/400 and the iSeries, in order to be apart of the “current” ecosystem I am now who I am. Does that not make me an iSeries Admin or an AS/400 Admin? No

I will always hold those platforms near and dear to my heart, but if you were an iSeries COBOL Programmer then you are now a System i COBOL Programmer. I think that is pretty easy to understand? Why be so old fashion?

Comment by David Vasta — July 17, 2007 #
Here’s something i often hear in german newsgroups:

Politeness is the absence of deliberate insults.

(Original Wording: “Höflichkeit ist die Abwesenheit absichtlicher Beleidigungen”)

I’m not quite sure what your obsession with civilty is, i don’t think that Trevor did anything wrong in that regard. He was direct and bland, but that’s nothing wrong. Direct language is much better than backstabbing.

Comment by Lukas Beeler — July 17, 2007 #
David, thanks for the comments.

The problem I had with Mr. Perry was his approach. First, my article in question was about people, not machines. The thesis of my article was how do COBOL programmers see themselves, and how do they market themselves. I cannot stop using the terms “AS/400″ or “iSeries” just because Mr. Perry wants that. COBOL programmers, at this time, cannot market themselves as I5/OS or System i programmers. HR has a check list that they use when reviewing resumes. If they get a resume that has System i COBOL, and their checklist has iSeries COBOL, the resume will end up in the trash. So his comments were completely inappropriate for the subject.

Second, had Mr. Perry approached the situation differently, he would have gotten a different response from me. If Mr. Perry had said, “Hey, there is a third category that you are missing, the System i COBOL programmer.” I would have invited him to write an article for my blog about the System i COBOL programmer. I would have been honored to have Mr. Perry write an article for me. However, based on Mr. Perry’s comments, he seems to look down upon COBOL programmers, especially long time ones.

Now on to your comment about being a System i Admin. As an admin, you are working on so many different levels than the COBOL programmer. COBOL programmers are much more narrow in their view of the machine than system admins. Right now, the COBOL world has not caught up with the new name. As I have stated before, the purpose of this blog is helping COBOL programmers increase their skills. It is not my mission to change people’s vocabulary. Since my audience is COBOL programmers, I will use terms they are familiar with.

Once, again, thank you for you comments.

Comment by iSeries Programmer — July 17, 2007 #
Hi Lukas, thanks for posting your comments. I did think Mr. Perry was being snide. Once again, his comments had nothing to do with the article that I posted. His obession blinded him to my message. I talk about civility because I doubt if we would do this in real life.

For instance, I just finish give a speech on the the topic of the article in question. After I get done speaking, someone I do not know, comes up without introducing himself, and immediately starts to criticize me for using a certain term. His criticism makes be believe that he was not listening to me. Most likely, I would have responded in the somewhat the same way. Somehow we have this idea that we can act one way on the Internet and a different way in person.

I have a feeling that I nailed Mr. Perry for who he really is. He even acknowledge that people will, at times, ignore him when he posts about this subject. Why? Is it possible that people are turned off by his approach? David, in the previous post, appears to be saying that also.

All I am saying is that if Mr. Perry’s real passion is getting people to use the correct name of System i, that he would get better results by changing his approach to people. Mr. Perry exhibited bad behavior on my blog, and I told him that I would not tolerate his bad bahavior.

Once again, thank you for you post.

Comment by iSeries Programmers — July 17, 2007 #
Ignore Trevor, he’s just an ignorant blowhard. As you can see from your correspondence, with Trevor everything old=bad, everything new=good. He’s definitely got some sort of COBOL-phobia thing happening as well. I don’t know why he feels as if he has to be the “System i police”, I’ll use my system in whatever way suits my business and call it whatever the heck I want.

Comment by W.P. Wily — July 18, 2007 #
We have a little COBOL left on our System i and therefore, I guess I am a System i COBOL programmer. Still a darn good language. For many business tasks, it beats anything else in the running. COBOL is not dead and if IBM could figure out an easy way to convert 5250 data stream to HTML, there would no doubt be COBOL based web sites. Long live all relevant languages and all versions of System i. I agree that we should migrate to whatever IBM calls the box because because that is what will be perceived as “new” - maybe not the best solution but all we got!

Comment by an iSeries programmer for many years — July 20, 2007 #
W.P., Thanks for the support

Comment by iSeries-Programmer — July 20, 2007 #
iSeries programmer for many years, I agree that COBOL is a support langauge. Also, if COBOL goes GUI, JAVA is history.

Comment by iSeries-Programmer — July 20, 2007 #
Iseries Programmer,

I started programming in 1984 on the sys/38 and have been on the platform since. I have to agree with Trevor in principal even though his approach might be wrong. I now work as an admin on large installations of System I. One thing you have to understand about Trevor’s point. IBM has created a marketing nightmare by changing the name, but they are doing so to combat the “perception” that the platform is OLD and DYING. By not using the new name, it appears like your admitting that the platform has not evolved and is, in fact, dying.

You mention the difference between AS/400 programmers and Iseries Programmers as those individuals who do not learn the newer coding techniques. I know a couple of programmers like that who still programming OPM AS/400 Style and every year, there is less and less for them to do. One of my tasks as an admin in the next 12 months is to migrate all programmers away from SEU and onto WDSC. IBM has not enhanced SEU in 10 YEARS, and wants everyone to STOP using SEU and move to WDSC! All language enhancements are being done in WDSC.

If you truly want to help the “newer generation of programmers” like you say you do, then embrace the name change. Use the new terminology. Promote the newer programming technologies. Build an excitement around it and promote it. Not only will you be helping your fellow programmers, but you will be helping the platform as well.

Comment by Old Timer — July 20, 2007 #
Hi Old Timer,

Thank you for your post. I am really amazed at the number of people reading about this tiff with Mr. Perry think I am against the new brand name. I have said over and over again that my issue with Mr. Perry has been his approach. Mr. Perry could have had an advocate on this site had he taken a different approach.

I agree with Mr. Perry. I disagree with how he approaches people on this subject. Also, I have stated over and over again that the goal of this site is to help the newer generation of COBOL programmers to become better COBOL programmers. There are other topics that are more important to the stated goal than the System i brand name. It is important, just not at the top of the list. This is where Mr. Perry and I really disagree.

As for WDSC, I agree with you 100%. The points you have made, I make at my job. WDSC is way cool, although I am far from an expert on it. We do need to move from SEU into WDSC and Navigator.

Once again, thank you for posting you comment.

Comment by iSeries-Programmer — July 21, 2007 #
Everyone has a different approach to making people see the platform for what it is. I agree with you on civility, I see many instances on blogs and forums where people will deride others for what they are trying to do. Lets stop the name calling and all work together, that way we will all win.

No one is to blame, no one is right every situation has different solutions and we should consider all of them right until proven wrong.

I hope you continue to help raise the standard of COBOL programmers awareness and help the rest of us keep the platform we all love alive and kicking…

Chris…

Comment by Chris Hird — July 26, 2007 #
Hi Chris, thanks for the comments. I whole-heartedly agree about being civil. Let’s focus on the positive parts of our blogs.

Comment by iSeries-Programmer — July 26, 2007 #
Dear Series Programmer,
There are thousands of truths first envisioned hundreds and thousands of years ago that are as valid today as they were back then. The earth is round, for one. If you judge a truth by how long it has been accepted, time only adds to it’s proof of validity. I agree, programming has evolved significantly over time, but some truths persist because they are still valid. One of those truths, which you don’t seem to recognize is, “Clearly understandable coding is the key to coding productivity” Abbreviations in COBOL coding has been the destroyer of understandable coding in COBOL. COBOL is the only computer language that is conducive to clearly understandable coding because it was based in English. All other computer languages are not conducive to clearly understandable coding because they are machine oriented. How many years will it take to for our “experts” and managers to recognize the utter importance of that fact for Software productivity?
Jerry Sitner
Clarity Concept Systems
NYC
nycnmi@aol.com

Comment by Jerry Sitner — March 19, 2008 #
I just came across your blog and wanted to
drop you, Blogger, a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted here. If you have a moment, please visit my site: COBOL

Comment by Abhijit — March 29, 2008 #

iSeries COBOL Blog - The Ultimate iSeries COBOL site

AS/400, iSeries, I5, System i?

15 Comments »

Leave a comment

Categories:

Contact Me:

Archives:

Meta: