Interesting blog post this morning from Waleed Youssef on IBM’s Expert Integrated Systems blog comparing IBM’s new PureSystems box with the historical AS/400 systems IBM produced in the late 1980s and in the 1990s. Besides the Rochester connection, there’s a lot of the same philosophies going into their architecture and manufacture.
The one beef I have with the article is that while he’s correct in referring to it as the AS/400 in the historical context he’s talking about (the late 1980s and 1990s), he messes up the current day name of the platform, referring to it as both an IBM System i and a System i. Not as the IBM i operating system running on Power hardware. And this is from an IBMer!
Sigh…
While I’m not as much of an IBM i purist as many others out there, I’d hope IBM would at least get that detail straight???
Can someone in IBM please gently tap Waleed on the shoulder and talk to him about the best way to brand the platform? Better yet, can the IBM people who approve these posts (and I know you’re out there) put it in their guidelines that our beloved OS and machine should always be referred to as the IBM i operating system running on Power hardware (right, Angus?).
Really, it’s not that hard to do. And you’re IBM. You should know and enforce the branding across all of your publications. You don’t make System i machines any more.
You can read the whole post here.
**************************************************
Follow Joe Hertvik on Twitter @JoeHertvik. You can also add Joe to your professional network on LinkedIn by clicking here.
Now we know why there has always been IBM branding confusion about our beloved architecture. Good catch Joe!
Pingback: Worth complaining about? Telling IBM to call an IBM i an IBM i | Hertvik Business Services – Joe's Blog