LMAO !! ... please forgive me Ma'am, ... I do like you and yes, agree with you wholeheartedly !!.
I had a former post, to JC I believe, and this is what I'd meant, To me, it's so gratifying to call IBM and say .. nope .. don't need your help ... but you need mind ... here is where the problem is now get off your high horse and fix it :-)... Kind Regards Jim Thomas 617-233-4130 (mobile) 636-294-1014 (res) j...@thethomasresidence.us (Email) -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Barbara Nitz Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 11:35 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: ONTOP? >Now we have no source, but we have a >powerful support mechanism in place, and the situation has (at least >somewhat) reversed. The skills now are in collecting appropriate doc, >getting it to IBM quickly, and supplying other relevant information to >Level 2 clearly and factually. Not just anyone can do that. yeah, and don't forget that the oh-so-skilled 'support center' only goes down a checklist on what docs to collect for a certain component, which doesn't mean they have a clue about what is needed. And don't forget that many problems will never get fixed, since the oh-so-skilled 'support center' has no clue how to read a dump, either. I really don't want to count the times when I have bashed the oh-so-skilled 'support center' over the head with the dump showing them where to find the basics (favourite excuse: The data are not in the dump. - yes, they are, you just have to know where to look!). Next-favourite excuse: This is the wrong type of dump. (Wrong for them - they cannot read an sdump!). Next excuse: 'We need a dump'. Then why the hell are they delivering their product with JCL that effectively prohibits the writing of a meaningful dump??? (Read: they put sysudump *and* sysabend dump cards into the JCL and then wonder why they don't get a system dump. Telling them to accept an apar to fix their lousy delivery usually magically gets someone involved who can do something with the 'dump' they wrote.) As for ontop: It used to be a great tool, effectively shortening the time it took to look at a customer problem. By the end of the last millenium, the support-centers were more and more refusing to use ontop (which meant logging on to a customer system to access the dump), on the pretext of 'we cannot use our tools in your installation'. IBM demanded more and more to have the dumps sent to them, ftp'd, as it were. The HLQ ontop (and the system mcevs1, which used to be located in Mainz) are relics from the nineties. They have just been kept because they give a good reference to the actual PMR number. In fact, many customer installations also had/have the HLQ ontop defined. We still do. Barbara ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3777 - Release Date: 07/20/11 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
