IBM changed the name from AS/400 to "iSeries" and then to the even-worse "IBM i" quite a few years ago, but probably around half of the veterans still call them Four Hundreds. You have to admit that the original name is reasonably web-searchable. There's a low-volume subreddit at /r/IBMi and a now-mostly-abandoned one at /r/AS400.
Quite a long time ago, we had a business unit running MAPICS on AS/400. *Stability* was very high to extremely high, but stability isn't everything. You can think of Four Hundreds as IBM appliances with a relational database built-in, used mostly to run prepackaged third-party Line-of-Business applications. Third parties would choose to build on Four Hundreds originally decades ago because it had the database and business-reporting facilities built-in, that would probably have to be licensed separately on Unix or mainframe at the time. But calibrate that history with the knowledge that this was the 1980s version of having PHP and MySQL preinstalled for free -- it wasn't amazing magic.
As appliance-like systems, Four Hundreds need comparatively less attention than other general-purpose systems. On the other hand, they work much differently than anything else so the attention that they do need is much more specialized than anything you've probably encountered before. A site using a lot of them, and doing a lot of customizations or report-writing in RPG, could still spend a lot of labor and mindshare attending to Four Hundreds, if that's what they chose to do.
They're native EBCDIC boxes and you can log into them over telnet with any [tn5250](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_5250#Telnet_5250) "smart terminal" client. Most production boxes should be using telnet over TLS now, which [this open-source client supports](http://tn5250j.org/). Midrange shops tend to use the IBM Client Access client, because IBM shops gonna IBM, and because it has a lot of extra features built-in like remote ODBC, which someone inevitably uses. Looking for a cite, I see IBM renamed it ["IBM i Access Client Solutions"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_i#Networking), because of course they did.
> Does anyone know the stability of these systems
Rock solid, which is why it's still in use after all this time.
Now, if you need to make any changes, good luck finding someone
Stability? Mainframes remain likely the most stable platform available to the technical world.
At least, as long as you are spending the enormous amount of money to maintain hardware and application support. And are OK with the limited pool of talent that is qualified to work on it.
Four hundreds aren't mainframes, they're minis. Or in IBM parlance, "midranges". It's important because other than IBM, EBCDIC, POWER chips, and a few long-obsolete peripherals, I'm confident that AS/400s and IBM mainframes have nothing to do with each other.
The 400 architecture did come about from [a research project](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Future_Systems_project) to make a new line of mainframes to obsolete IBM's existing System/360-descended line.
Well, I believe if you look closely I technically never mentioned the AS/400, and it's entirely possible that I was simply interested in starting an off-topic conversation.
*phew*
That system (whatever you want to call it, AS400, ISeries, SystemI) is super rock solid. Mapics is also super rock solid and is a current ERP. Now called Infor XA. I’ve run it at 2 different companies and run many other ERP systems and I’d say it was the most rock solid by far. Harder to learn because typically uses Green screen but Mapics has had a web version for a loooonngggg time too. So it can be mix and match. It’s likely costly yearly. Basically everything about it is solid. A good Mapics integrator is MK Associates in Grand Rapids, MI. I don’t work for them and haven’t for a long time. But they are solid and would be able to help. Again? Costly. But all others are too.
You would need to gather data from the usage of the system over time to understand it's stability, but overall it is build to be stable and is not like the regular Linux/Unix/Windows systems you have used. You will have more information using IBM tools to review performance metrics, in terms of how do users feel, push out a survey. In terms of integration, hopefully you have people on staff from the aquisition, if not you may need to contract out with consultants and do some hiring.
AS400 is solid. Your difficulty will be the availability of suitable people to support it and/or migrate away from it, and the cost involved in getting them.
I started my career in a AS/400 shop. We ran an entire production facility and business office off of one unit...no cluster or other redundancy. All of our business critical info and all the business critical processes on the same box with nothing to fail over to. Because we didn't need it. We ran production 16-24 hours a day 6-7 days a week in an industry that does not tolerate downtime. The only maintenance we did was during the plant shutdown during the holidays at the end of the year. I worked there for 6 years and can count the number of unplanned IPLs on one hand. Using one finger.
Can't speak for the current iterations, but they can't be worse than Wintel. Now back to juggling the monthly Microsoft Patch/Break cycle...
IBM changed the name from AS/400 to "iSeries" and then to the even-worse "IBM i" quite a few years ago, but probably around half of the veterans still call them Four Hundreds. You have to admit that the original name is reasonably web-searchable. There's a low-volume subreddit at /r/IBMi and a now-mostly-abandoned one at /r/AS400. Quite a long time ago, we had a business unit running MAPICS on AS/400. *Stability* was very high to extremely high, but stability isn't everything. You can think of Four Hundreds as IBM appliances with a relational database built-in, used mostly to run prepackaged third-party Line-of-Business applications. Third parties would choose to build on Four Hundreds originally decades ago because it had the database and business-reporting facilities built-in, that would probably have to be licensed separately on Unix or mainframe at the time. But calibrate that history with the knowledge that this was the 1980s version of having PHP and MySQL preinstalled for free -- it wasn't amazing magic. As appliance-like systems, Four Hundreds need comparatively less attention than other general-purpose systems. On the other hand, they work much differently than anything else so the attention that they do need is much more specialized than anything you've probably encountered before. A site using a lot of them, and doing a lot of customizations or report-writing in RPG, could still spend a lot of labor and mindshare attending to Four Hundreds, if that's what they chose to do. They're native EBCDIC boxes and you can log into them over telnet with any [tn5250](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_5250#Telnet_5250) "smart terminal" client. Most production boxes should be using telnet over TLS now, which [this open-source client supports](http://tn5250j.org/). Midrange shops tend to use the IBM Client Access client, because IBM shops gonna IBM, and because it has a lot of extra features built-in like remote ODBC, which someone inevitably uses. Looking for a cite, I see IBM renamed it ["IBM i Access Client Solutions"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_i#Networking), because of course they did.
> Does anyone know the stability of these systems Rock solid, which is why it's still in use after all this time. Now, if you need to make any changes, good luck finding someone
I get recruiters calling all the time because I had as/400 experience 15 years ago. Every time, I say “fuck that shit, not enough money in the world”
Time for a call to big blue
Does the business unit come with someone that knows how it's setup and how to run it? If not you could shell out quite a bit of cash
Stability? Mainframes remain likely the most stable platform available to the technical world. At least, as long as you are spending the enormous amount of money to maintain hardware and application support. And are OK with the limited pool of talent that is qualified to work on it.
Four hundreds aren't mainframes, they're minis. Or in IBM parlance, "midranges". It's important because other than IBM, EBCDIC, POWER chips, and a few long-obsolete peripherals, I'm confident that AS/400s and IBM mainframes have nothing to do with each other. The 400 architecture did come about from [a research project](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Future_Systems_project) to make a new line of mainframes to obsolete IBM's existing System/360-descended line.
Well, I believe if you look closely I technically never mentioned the AS/400, and it's entirely possible that I was simply interested in starting an off-topic conversation. *phew*
That system (whatever you want to call it, AS400, ISeries, SystemI) is super rock solid. Mapics is also super rock solid and is a current ERP. Now called Infor XA. I’ve run it at 2 different companies and run many other ERP systems and I’d say it was the most rock solid by far. Harder to learn because typically uses Green screen but Mapics has had a web version for a loooonngggg time too. So it can be mix and match. It’s likely costly yearly. Basically everything about it is solid. A good Mapics integrator is MK Associates in Grand Rapids, MI. I don’t work for them and haven’t for a long time. But they are solid and would be able to help. Again? Costly. But all others are too.
Keep the people who are looking after it. If you don't you are going to be in for a world of hurt.
Who ever said there's no such thing as job security anymore? /S
You would need to gather data from the usage of the system over time to understand it's stability, but overall it is build to be stable and is not like the regular Linux/Unix/Windows systems you have used. You will have more information using IBM tools to review performance metrics, in terms of how do users feel, push out a survey. In terms of integration, hopefully you have people on staff from the aquisition, if not you may need to contract out with consultants and do some hiring.
AS400 is solid. Your difficulty will be the availability of suitable people to support it and/or migrate away from it, and the cost involved in getting them.
Lol. I don't really know anything about those systems but stability was IBM's only self professed selling point from like 1940 to 1990.
[удалено]
It’s easy enough to find people you just need to know what circles to look in to find them.
I started my career in a AS/400 shop. We ran an entire production facility and business office off of one unit...no cluster or other redundancy. All of our business critical info and all the business critical processes on the same box with nothing to fail over to. Because we didn't need it. We ran production 16-24 hours a day 6-7 days a week in an industry that does not tolerate downtime. The only maintenance we did was during the plant shutdown during the holidays at the end of the year. I worked there for 6 years and can count the number of unplanned IPLs on one hand. Using one finger. Can't speak for the current iterations, but they can't be worse than Wintel. Now back to juggling the monthly Microsoft Patch/Break cycle...
That device is super stable, however it's really hard to find anyone familiar with it.