Profound UI – what IBM should have done with EGL
Profound Logic has a press release in a recent ITJungle article that touts their latest feature set of having a platform independent UI layer.
Why did this catch my eye?
Well, because this is EXACTLY what IBM should have done when they were going down the EGL route. What did IBM do? They tried to convince shops that have millions invested in languages like RPG that they should just start migrating that entire infrastructure to be controlled by EGL. IBM wanted to start supporting a single business language across all its platforms (essentially making it easy for them, but hard for those who’ve already adopted one of their other business languages). The problem with that approach? I DON’T HAVE ISSUE WITH RPG, I HAVE ISSUE WITH MY USER INTERFACE – they are not one in the same and I won’t throw the baby out just because the bath water is dirty. Why not just change the portion of my programming stack that I have issue with. Why not just change the portion of my programming stack that can’t run natively on IBM i anyways (i.e. talking specifically how the browser runs many UI’s now and in the future).
What’s interesting about Profound’s new features is a shop that has .NET/Java/RPG/PHP/etc can all use a single front-end HTML/CSS/Javascript layer for designing screens without each one of those platforms having to ditch the server side language that works best for the OS they are running on.
I have to give some serious kudos to Profound for this one. I think it is right on the money. And by storing the screen definition in a non-proprietary very open standard format (JSON) they are ready for change when the next popular UI technology comes down the pipe (maybe from Google?).
I am curious as to whether they will release an express version of this suite so their presence in other servers can grow more quickly - a lot of non-IBM i UI frameworks offer a “free drink” of their tooling (with restrictions) and then use that as a loss leader to get you on a full subscription.
On final note, this approach of having the UI layer agnostic of the server side and stores a formal definition decoupled from the UI technology needs a name. How about “4GL for UI” or maybe “4GLUI”. When you sound that out it kinda sounds catchy – four glu-ee :-) Ok, I obviously need more coffee.
AaronBartell.com
