http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-level_store
The AS/400 also runs something like bytecode, rather than directly on the hardware. This has given IBM the flexibility to change the underlying architecture in fairly radical ways. (new CPU ISAs, etc.)
Historically, the AS/400 has some significance to IBM beyond the fact that it's been a commercial success. After IBM did so well with the System/360, they started work on the next big thing: IBM Future System. The idea was that FS was something only IBM could do, because only IBM had the research budget and staff to pull it off. As these things often go, FS didn't achieve its grander goals, but it did spin off several technologies that IBM did commercialize. In addition to several System/370 processors, the Future System work also ultimately resulted in the AS/400.
¹Levy, Henry M. (1984). Capability-based computer systems. http://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/index.html Chapter 8 covers the IBM System/38.
Brian Kelly was an IBM Midrange Systems Engineer for 30 years, and has spent nearly a decade as a System i5 consultant based in Scranton, Pennsylvania. He is also author of thirty AS/400, iSeries, and System i5 books and he serves as an assistant professor at Marywood University, which uses the OS/400 and i5/OS platform and teaches courses in the box as well. http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh040708-story05.html
My point was that the S/38 used some of the detritus from Fort Knox not, directly, the AS/400.
Quite a lot of work went into the AS/400 so it wasn't just a renamed S/38, but any discussion of the AS/400 should recognize its origins.
Does it have a fancy UI? No. It's designed for line-of-business applications where there's heads-down data entry and reporting.
The AS/400 (I refuse to call it "iSeries") is one of the best parts of IBM. I am in dread of how Ginni will fuck up the division.