Announcing IBM i 7.1 TR7

It’s announce day again, so it’s time for a blog about the latest capabilities we’re announcing related to IBM i. Once again, there are a number of different areas being enhanced. I can’t even touch on all of them, but here are highlights in four key areas.

• · DB2: Our DB2 team has another long list of new and improved capabilities. Whether you care about application development, big data, database modernization, administration or performance, there’s an improvement for you with TR7. There’s even a very intriguing new concept: SQL as a Service. To see the details, go to the DB2 developerWorks pages describing the new support.
• · Ruby: Those of you who have been interested in having IBM i adopt the Ruby programming language more closely will be interested to hear about PowerRuby (Check out Tim Rowe’s blog.)
• · Application Runtime Expert: ARE has new scheduling support, and Dawn May’s “i Can” blog will tell you the details.
• · RPG: Perhaps one of the more surprising parts of the announcement relates to the new free-format support announced for RPG. Of course, free-format in RPG is cool enough to be exciting (and often requested). What might make this surprising is that the RPG team has delivered this on top of 7.1. Until this announcement, major enhancements to RPG have nearly always had to wait until major releases. We’re glad to say these significant changes did not have to wait. To get more details, see what Barbara Morris says in her RPG Cafe blog in developerWorks.

I’m going to let the experts tell you about the details in their blogs and on developerWorks. For the rest of this blog, let’s talk about Technology Refreshes and major releases.

If you’re a 7.1 user, one thing you may not have realized is this: with the cumulative effect of all of the post-7.1 additional enhancements, you have now added essentially as much new capability to your release as some of our major releases ever added. Yet you did not have to plan for and install a new release, you did not need to requalify applications, and the changes were isolated by the operating system so that you did not need to slip-install the Licensed Internal Code. (If you don’t know what this means, I refer you back to my post talking about the Layers of i.)

But let’s be clear: there will still be major releases of IBM i. Just in case you didn’t catch it, earlier this year – at the annual COMMON conference – our General Manager told people that there would be a new major release, called IBM i 7.2, in 2014. We are not ready to announce that release yet, obviously. (The calendar tells me it’s still 2013 for a while yet.) Still, I think it’s important that our community understands that some enhancements are simply so pervasive that they will require a new major release. I wanted to mention this again because I have had several occasions recently where people did not understand the future of IBM i on Power Systems.

So there we are – a new announcement with new capabilities on IBM i. All of us responsible for IBM i are pleased to be able to deliver value to you, our clients, more frequently. Let us know your reactions – we’re listening.

 

 

 

Comments

[Scott Klement]

I'm a bit astonished that you are surprised by an enhancement to RPG.

Almost everything provided in previous TRs has been fringe stuff, used by maybe 1-2% of the IBM i customer base. Here's something that will actually be used by a large percentage... upwards of 40%, and you're surprised? Your reaction has really thrown me off... why on earth would this surprise you?

[Tami Deedrick]

I have fixed the RPG Cafe blog link. Thanks to everyone who pointed it out. --Editor

[Steve Will]

Scott -- it is not I who was surprised by the RPG announcement. I surmised that others would be surprised by it, since it is so substantial: It is the kind of function we typically have only added via a major release.

Which is what the rest of my paragraph said. I thought. Guess I didn't make it clear.

[Steve Will]

Another major announcement is the IBM PureFlex Solution for IBM i. Jeff Howard wrote about it in this blog: http://expertintegratedsystemsblog.com/2013/10/spend-more-time-growing-your-business-and-less-time-on-managing-it/

[John Polucci]

The RPG critics have been saying for years that RPG is a "dead language" and IBM will eventually put the language "out to pasture" like IBM did with OS2. I wrote my first RPG program in 1974 and have been listening to the critics all these years. I remember the days of RPG, System 3 and punched cards with the critics back then all saying that RPG could never run on an interactive device like a CRT. RPG is an effective language for writing business rules - now even running on mobile devices. If RPG could not meet the needs of business, the language would have died a long time ago-pure and simple. The RPG critics say that IBM is just enhancing RPG to protect its customer base already using RPG. D-a-a-a-h: I think Microsoft is releasing new versions of Windows and Apple is releasing new iPhones for its customer base as well. Yes, it is true that if the Power System and RPG were just introduced today, that it would not have the customer base it has today. IBM really wanted the RPG community to mass migrate to Java; for whatever reason, it just did not happen!

[Al Brief]

I agree with John Polucci - I have been using RPG since the late 60's and I "hate" people who call it a dead language. They are basically bigots for their language of choice, whatever that may be. The purpose of a programming language is to allow the programmer to write code quickly and efficiently, not trying to write code that is so complicated that no one can understand it (or fix it if necessary). The old KISS formula always works best.
On another note, the link to the RPG Cafe blog is not working. I also tried the IBM web site and either they were so bogged down or it wasn't working because I could not connect. I'll try again tomorrow.

[Dennis]

Once again IBM misses the mark. Do we really need a prettier syntax? You don't seriously believe that having free form code is going to attract anyone to the platform do you? Coders don't make the buying decisions, executives do. We need real, tangible progress on a native GUI, not some extra bells-and-whistles for programmers only.

Not that I won't use it, since I only write new code in free =) but it isn't going to do anything to increase the number of shops running the i.

[Aaron Bartell]

Dennis said: You don't seriously believe that having free form code is going to attract anyone to the platform do you? Coders don't make the buying decisions, executives do.

An executive usually has zero ability to know whether one language is better than the other. They mostly only understand whether developers talk favorably about it. Developers will (hopefully) be talking more favorably about RPG as it continues to get modern features.

Will this single feature cause *new* people to come to IBM i? Probably not. But the combination of many things could cause that to happen.

Btw, it's also time to move on from the native GUI argument. Do you honestly think it's going to happen? At what point do we use logical thinking to move away from that argument and start looking at new modernization paths that keep us on IBM i? (btw, some of those paths are 100% RPG). You're beating a dead horse and are being pessimistic. Poor horse and poor you.

AaronBartell.com

[Mark S. Waterbury]

While I applaud IBM's efforts to deliver new function sooner, via these Technical Refreshes, I fear that IBM has inadvertently "thrown out the baby with the bathwater" in several respects, especially as it affects ISVs.

If I have a software product I sell and support on V7R1, and if I happen to install any of the TRs for V7R1 on my development system, how can I be sure that I have not used some of the new features and functions in our code, only to find out that it "does not work" on some of our customer's systems, because they may not have installed the same TRs?

This problem will only get worse with the introduction of V7R2, because the Target Release mechanism -- the TGTRLS(*PRV) parameter on the SAVxxx commands, has no way to know if a given feature installed by a TR is used, and so it just saves all of the objects. But, the compiled code may very well depend on certain TRs being installed.

I think this is potentially one major oversight that IBM has not properly thought through, in the rush to introduce these "Technical Refreshes" to get new function out the door sooner.