Ed I hope you don't mind the resetting of the Subject since this subdiscussion has no connection with "list etiquette".
> ... I am afraid IBM can do whatever it wants to with acronyms. But the *official* IBM line - obviously not counting the numerous stray moggies - is that VTAM laid a claim to "USS" in the mid-1970s and that claim has *not* lapsed through lack of use given that the IP partner in the Communications Server consortium is opening up a new seam richly mined to this day. > I can't stand it either and you always have to step back and think context when it comes to USS. Perhaps we can stand together, make a lot of fuss, gather some like minds and shoo out the "USS for z/OS UNIX" dictatorship! > Hell if I thought I could get away with it I would not allow LE on my system. The term "pet-peeve" has been used to denigrate what it was thought - not really correctly - I have been on about. However, I did go over in my mind what other "pet-peeves" I could add to this supposed one - and came up with a few - a bit specialised however, for example "PU 2.1", Ugh!, or "FEP", Ugh again! Maybe the protest could be organised as the revolt of the "pet- peeves". The only difficulty I see there is one which also mimics my obvious allusion.[1] The difficulty would be that one man's "pet-peeve" is another man's brilliant innovation and the protesters could fall out among themselves - which tends to be the fate of anarchists. > Heck IBM has got the people on the OE list wanting to stay with command line over either GUI or ISPF. Back in the early 1990s, I was tasked with managing an education class based on the AIX IP network management product - which happened to be called NetView/6000, later NetView for AIX, and probably my "suit" imagined that, since I knew every last nook and cranny of MVS NetView, I was ideally suited - pun! - to move into NetView/6000. Of course, they were(/are) massively different products! Managing and giving this new class involved getting to know the AIX/"traditional UNIX" world. This was great fun but I became aware of a phenomenon which put me in mind of science fiction films where an ostensibly human being is strapped in a chamber, surrounded by some opaque gas and comes out still looking the same but, in effect, now belonging to another race of, say, super-human beings - still looking the same apart from a certain expression around the eyes, that is. In order too prepare for the class and get some assistance, I started working with these UNIX beings. It became clear that no task was too complex that it couldn't be performed by stringing together a series of UNIX commands, the output of one becoming the input to the next to the right and magically the answer appeared, all the typing having happened far too quickly for the definitely mere mortals to follow. All together now: "They can't take that away from me." Chris Mason [1] For the archives, this is being written on the weekend following the resignation of Hosni Mubarak. On Sat, 12 Feb 2011 21:38:14 -0800, Ed Gould <[email protected]> wrote: >Chris: >I m not one that agrees with Ted. >When it comes to USS I sort of agree with him BUT I am afraid IBM can do whatever it wants to with acronyms. I can't stand it either and you always have to setp back and think context when it comes to USS. The IBM people especially when it comes to FTP and other open system services came on board and violated practically every IBM standard. The standards we had argued for years about the OS people just said we aren't going to follow no stinkin standards here are ours and if you don't like it tough ****.The other people, LE are much the same way. Hell if I thought I could get away with it I would not allow LE on my system. I would much rather have some other vendors code other than LE if I had my choice. I would also look at other vendors for FTP. Anything to stay away from the damn open systems people. Heck IBM has got the people on the OE list wanting to stay with command line over either GUI or ISPF. Just wait 10 years and those same people will be > so damn tired of commandline that they will be begging IBM for something else. I suspect when IBM releases a GUI on the mainframe it will be fun watching everyone back track. >Ed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
