🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct5.161336.22273@mmm.serc.3m.com> us267384@mmm.serc.3m.com
(Steven M. Anastasi) writes:
>My opinion:  Client/server architectures fit well with the current
>mainframe/terminal based applications in place in many IS shops.
>It allows one to continue to use the mainframe as a central data
>source, possibly by front-ending it with translation tools or 
>a second, more modern, database server.

The C-S model has existed far more than 5-10 years.  Try 20-25 years,
it predated workstations by over a decade.  The problem is: it ain't easy.

My opinion: mainframes (as we know them) are dead meat.
The dinosaur analogy is a good one, but the conserative inertia lingers.
They will still be around (the so-called "soft"ware insures this).
The faster that older architecture tied applications die, the sooner
more portable implementations will come around.  Problems like 32-bit/64-bit
words, character set differences, the turn of the millenia problem, all
conspire against alot of this.

I'm not certain why the first poster used the adjective "scared."
But it can be take in many contexts.  Change will come, slowly with lots of
gotachas.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Associate Editor, Software and Publication Reviews
  Scientific Programming
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya