On Apr 10, 2006, at 2:52 AM, Edward E. Jaffe wrote:
Ed Gould wrote:
There used to be freebie IBM 1/2 day classes that gave you the
vital information. They were generally free, IIRC. The full day
class was (IIRC) a nominal fee $90 or $100 IIRC. People should
start asking for the classes. It is much easier, IMO to ask for
$100 than $1500 (or more) for SHARE and travel. The budget
watchers are less likely to bitch.
When IBM charged $100 for a full-day technical course, "Tainted
Love" was on the radio, cell phones were as big as a submarine
sandwich, and Ronald Reagan was President of the United States! How
long ago did you retire??
I don't know about cellphones as I haven't owned one until recently.
IIRC they were frowned at in IBM classes (that I attended). I believe
I was at such a class in the late 1990's (don't remember the exact
year) and yes it was $100. I remember having to try and get the boss
to pay for it. The bean counters were a pita then. I also do remember
a freebie half day class from around that time frame. It was a what's
new in JES2, IIRC. There were other freebies, IIRC a whats new in MVS
and a freebie in DFSMS. There was definitely a cut off at over a day
for pricing. There was also a freebie offering for broadcasts but at
the moment any specifics escape me. There was also a series of video
tapes that were available as well. I myself didn't care for them as
there were almost always questions that needed to be asked to clarify
points although they did do a fairly good job.
The exit evaluation/migration service being discussed here is not
training. It is consulting services offered by IBM Global Services.
Like anything else, if you don't have the expertise in-house to
maintain/upgrade your systems, you can hire a consultant to do the
job. To acquire in-house expertise, you need to train your people.
SHARE can provide the more generalized elements of that training.
I know that it is. The classes I talked about were to be considered
bridges never training. I grit my teeth at paying IBM for such
services. At times it comes across as a conflict of interest, IMO. I
would much rather spend the $'s to a consultant (the type that
frequents here) rather than IBM.
I have been on the consultant side and I saw some sleaziness going on
so while I am not an expert, I saw enough to get out of the that side
as soon as I could. I *AM NOT* saying all consultants are sleazy just
some.
IBM consultants that I have seen some are reasonable although they
did treat (at times) the staff with disdain.
I believe in the context of the original writer that the JES exit(s)
were either complex or change was needed to accommodate the change in
JES2 levels. Some one spoke about the management issue in this and I
concur. But that doesn't get the issue resolved. I would suggest a
consultant be hired not only to change the exit but to properly
document the exit so if/when it happens again it should be easier to
change. This will not stop the problem if there is a rewrite in JES2
that will require a exit rewrite but hopefully if its documented well
a consultant will only be briefly needed for the re-write.
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
