4 ms·

Can someone give a guided tour to something cool that shows how different AS/400 is from a Unix machine?

by ljosa 12y ago

mschaef 12y ago
One of the more unique aspects of the AS/400 is the single level store. I haven't ever used it, but the general idea is that it does away with the file system in exchange for a single, flat address space. This simplifies the programming model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-level_store http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-level_store The AS/400 also runs something like bytecode, rather than directly on the hardware. This has given IBM the flexibility to change the underlying architecture in fairly radical ways. (new CPU ISAs, etc.) Historically, the AS/400 has some significance to IBM beyond the fact that it's been a commercial success. After IBM did so well with the System/360, they started work on the next big thing: IBM Future System. The idea was that FS was something only IBM could do, because only IBM had the research budget and staff to pull it off. As these things often go, FS didn't achieve its grander goals, but it did spin off several technologies that IBM did commercialize. In addition to several System/370 processors, the Future System work also ultimately resulted in the AS/400.
- scholia 12y ago
  To be specific, the IBM Future System project was a failure, but the System/38 was one of the outcomes. Later the S/38 was renamed AS/400.
  - kps 12y ago
    AS/400 descended from S/38, but is not the same. In particular the System/38 architecture had capability-based addressing¹ — essentially, you can perform a particular kind of access if and only if your pointer contains the necessary permission. ¹Levy, Henry M. (1984). Capability-based computer systems. http://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/index.html http://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/index.html Chapter 8 covers the IBM System/38.
    - scholia 12y ago
      "in June 1988, IBM announced the results of Silverlake as the Application System/400, or AS/400. In many ways, the box was a repackaging of the System/38, with some left over Fort Knox parts," Brian Kelly was an IBM Midrange Systems Engineer for 30 years, and has spent nearly a decade as a System i5 consultant based in Scranton, Pennsylvania. He is also author of thirty AS/400, iSeries, and System i5 books and he serves as an assistant professor at Marywood University, which uses the OS/400 and i5/OS platform and teaches courses in the box as well. http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh040708-story05.html http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh040708-story05.html My point was that the S/38 used some of the detritus from Fort Knox not, directly, the AS/400. Quite a lot of work went into the AS/400 so it wasn't just a renamed S/38, but any discussion of the AS/400 should recognize its origins.
chiph 12y ago
Unix and AS/400 are similar in that both can have uptime measured in years. Typically, with an AS/400, you unpack it and plug it in, and it just works. No drama. Does it have a fancy UI? No. It's designed for line-of-business applications where there's heads-down data entry and reporting. The AS/400 (I refuse to call it "iSeries") is one of the best parts of IBM. I am in dread of how Ginni will fuck up the division.
- dodders 12y ago
  I worked on AS/400s for 10 years and still consider it the most productive environment I've ever used. Uptime was indeed legendary - our IBM rep told me he knew of an AS/400 running at another site that had been up for over 7 years.

Can someone give a guided tour to something cool that shows how different AS/400 is from a Unix machine?

by ljosa 12y ago

Can someone give a guided tour to something cool that shows how different AS/400 is from a Unix machine?

One of the more unique aspects of the AS/400 is the single level store. I haven't ever used it, but the general idea is that it does away with the file system in exchange for a single, flat address space. This simplifies the programming model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-level_store http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-level_store The AS/400 also runs something like bytecode, rather than directly on the hardware. This has given IBM the flexibility to change the underlying architecture in fairly radical ways. (new CPU ISAs, etc.) Historically, the AS/400 has some significance to IBM beyond the fact that it's been a commercial success. After IBM did so well with the System/360, they started work on the next big thing: IBM Future System. The idea was that FS was something only IBM could do, because only IBM had the research budget and staff to pull it off. As these things often go, FS didn't achieve its grander goals, but it did spin off several technologies that IBM did commercialize. In addition to several System/370 processors, the Future System work also ultimately resulted in the AS/400.

scholia 12y ago
To be specific, the IBM Future System project was a failure, but the System/38 was one of the outcomes. Later the S/38 was renamed AS/400.
- kps 12y ago
  AS/400 descended from S/38, but is not the same. In particular the System/38 architecture had capability-based addressing¹ — essentially, you can perform a particular kind of access if and only if your pointer contains the necessary permission. ¹Levy, Henry M. (1984). Capability-based computer systems. http://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/index.html http://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/index.html Chapter 8 covers the IBM System/38.
  - scholia 12y ago
    "in June 1988, IBM announced the results of Silverlake as the Application System/400, or AS/400. In many ways, the box was a repackaging of the System/38, with some left over Fort Knox parts," Brian Kelly was an IBM Midrange Systems Engineer for 30 years, and has spent nearly a decade as a System i5 consultant based in Scranton, Pennsylvania. He is also author of thirty AS/400, iSeries, and System i5 books and he serves as an assistant professor at Marywood University, which uses the OS/400 and i5/OS platform and teaches courses in the box as well. http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh040708-story05.html http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh040708-story05.html My point was that the S/38 used some of the detritus from Fort Knox not, directly, the AS/400. Quite a lot of work went into the AS/400 so it wasn't just a renamed S/38, but any discussion of the AS/400 should recognize its origins.

chiph 12y ago

Unix and AS/400 are similar in that both can have uptime measured in years. Typically, with an AS/400, you unpack it and plug it in, and it just works. No drama. Does it have a fancy UI? No. It's designed for line-of-business applications where there's heads-down data entry and reporting. The AS/400 (I refuse to call it "iSeries") is one of the best parts of IBM. I am in dread of how Ginni will fuck up the division.

dodders 12y ago
I worked on AS/400s for 10 years and still consider it the most productive environment I've ever used. Uptime was indeed legendary - our IBM rep told me he knew of an AS/400 running at another site that had been up for over 7 years.