C# and Java are yesterday’s paradigm. Tomorrow’s winner is the Rails framework and it’s clones. If you’ve been paying close attention, you know that Microsoft is soon going to introduce Ruby on Rails into Visual Studio. Katy, bar the door! The meta-programming paradigm is going to replace line-by-line coding as we’ve done it.

If George can create a Rails-like framework around RPG then RPG will stay in the game. Otherwise, cue Don Merideth.

I can’t argue the price point, but I think they live at different levels.

The problem here is longevity. Most small businesses can get very attractive pricing for Microsoft’s Small Business Server. And when they grow, and grow, and become an enterprise, they will already have a mostly-Microsoft Infrastructure, and never even consider the System i. (There are exceptions here, e.G. if a Vendor offers are very interesting software product only on the System i, but the chance for this is rather slim)

Of course you don’t need a windows server at home, but if you’re running a company with more than a few computers, you will need to manage deployment of security patches, program updates, configuration, etc.

The only, currently existing alternative to Windows Clients are Thin Clients, accessing a Windows Server. IBM doesn’t have any offering in that field.

No matter how good the System i currently is, it can’t compete with Microsoft on the Client market. This ensures the existence of Windows in that segment.

Linux has big market share in the infrastructure environment, even in bigger companies, but only by displacing existing Unix machines.

I agree that it isn’t cheap, but again we get back to the discussion of an enterprise server vs. a desktop machine.

I can’t really talk about the enterprise market, because i’m working in the small business market.

Another important thing you might want to consider.

Im currently aged 22, and so far i haven’t found anyone else doing technical work on the System i in switzerland in my age bracket. The reason for this is simple.

When i was younger, i experimented and learned with windows server at home, using an illegal copy. This helped me to build knowledge on that platform, and this is currently to 60-80% my main job.

OTOH, i only started working on the System i because of unusual circumstances, i would have never considered starting in this field, because it is simply to unattractive.

I don’t have a problem with 5250 for administration tasks, a vt100 for my linux servers isn’t much different, the problem is that no one knows the platform, and using 5250 for end users is no longer an option.

A baseline 520 also doesn’t cut it for any type of java work, and i don’t see why i should use a castrated 1.9ghz cpu for running java when i can get 4 uncastrated 2.4 Ghz cores at the same price.

I agree that M$ doesn’t need to do much in the way of working with other platforms simply because most desktops ARE M$’s. Still doesn’t change my stance though, because look at all of the intimate integration they have been able to obtain by not having to work with parties outside of themselves. The iSeries has very similar advantages with i5OS, DB2 and ILE, but that is being lost with IBM thinking that platform independence is a must.

>Additionally, Microsoft’s software and the hardware needed to run Microsoft’s software is pretty cheap, compared to a System i.

I can’t argue the price point, but I think they live at different levels. The System i is an enterprise server (hardware and software) whereas Microsoft is not (yes I know they are trying, but I don’t believe they are even close yet). SO in the end I would EXPECT to pay more for an iSeries because I am getting so much more. The real problem then becomes how does one get introduced to the platform if they can’t buy one and run it in their home.

>And one more point - you will always need a Windows server, as long as your clients are Windows based.

Not sure I follow you here. I work in a remote office (my home) and do not have any Windows servers. I DO have Windows desktops though. But I am connecting to many different servers throughout the day including iSeries, Linux, etc. Up until earlier this year we didn’t have ANY windows servers in our environment because we hosted our web stuff on Debian. Again, I am guessing I don’t understand what you are saying.

>And IBM’s pricing for the System i and it’s software is horrendous.
Here’s a link to an entry level system that my company recently purchased: http://mowyourlawn.com/blog/linkto/systemiconfig.pdf ($12,904)

I agree that it isn’t cheap, but again we get back to the discussion of an enterprise server vs. a desktop machine. I wouldn’t run an enterprise on windows “servers” simply because history has shown they simply aren’t made for that. Again, a costly machine is crippling new developers from coming onto the iSeries.

Thanks for your comments Lukas,
Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com

This strategy is working for Microsoft, because they have broken the critical barrier on market penetrance a long time ago.

Additionally, Microsofts software and the hardware needed to run Microsoft’s software is pretty cheap, compared to a System i.

And one more point - you will always need a Windows server, as long as your clients are Windows based.

And IBM’s pricing for the System i and it’s software is horrendous.

Microsoft has basically given away its development environments, compared to what IBM is doing. And guess where a lot of development is happening.

There are things internally at IBM that probably mitigate against making WDSC too much of a loss leader. But it should be looked at more seriously.

Later

I agree with Aaron I would like to see a drag on drop GUI approach, seems like in intuitive way to move us RPG’ers along.