My phrasing is getting to be very poor. By STUPID, I meant more that the architecture implementation was primitive compared to today's architecures. Not that the designers or the design was stupid. It just resulted in a "stupid computer" (one with not many abilities) compared to today's "smart computers". Which will be considered "stupid" in the future.
-- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Chris Mason > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 1:08 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: Re: TSO SCREENSIZE > > John > > > 3274 > > 3271 > > > STUPID > > From the perspective of the new millennium. At the time (1970 > approximately) I'm sure it was a sensible design choice. > > Chris Mason > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:48:30 -0600, McKown, John > <john.mck...@healthmarkets.com> wrote: > > > ... > > > >Remember how old the 3270 architecture is. Wikipedia says > about 1972. Think 1 Mhz 8080 as "top of the line" micro > processor. The original 3277 and its controllers were STUPID. > Rather than put a more powerful processor in the controller, > IBM decided to offload the "complicated" function of > calculating the position of the data into the host. Made of > discrete transistors and resistors! Very primitive. So, the > host just sent a simple to understand "buffer address" (a > single number) to the 3274. It basically just starting > stuffing data characters at that location in a RAM buffer. > More power == most cost == fewer purchases. Much like some of > the "krud" in z/OS today due to "short sighted" architects > who were worried about memory and slow CPUs and expensive DASD. > > > >The answer to these problems is obvious: Convert from > archaic z/OS to modern Windows 8! At least that's what a lot > of "Windows weenies" around here are saying. Over and over > and over and over. "Better! Faster!! Cheaper!!!" is their > cry. Anything z/OS can do, they state can be done using > Windows and at lower TCO. Herr Gobbles would be proud of them. > > > >-- > >John McKown > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
