On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:47:48 -0500, Rick Fochtman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-------------------------<snip>----------------- With all the respect - I dare to disagree. Totally disagree. While knowledge of "MVS core" is very valuable, it doesn't necessarily mean the person who knows it had to work with OS/360, had been witness of virtual storage introduction, etc. The most clever folks I met are simply to young to remember anything before OS/390. The persons I know, which remember VOD (Very Old Days) usually didn't make any progress since then. I also admit, I know exceptions - very, very knowledgeable folks who still learn new things. I agree that management usually cannot say whether job candidate is OK or simply "looks good". That's why sometimes the rely on tech people to assess candidate's knowledge. In my experience 90% of activities in exploitation team doesn't require any "core MVS" knowledge. It does require good knowledge of "add-ons", like WLM, SMS, HSM, batch scheduler, RACF, DB2 etc. etc. I witnessed opinions & complaints like: "don't tell me about WLM and your goal mode, we DON'T NEED IT" "ah, that's why my VSAM password does not work. Can we switch to the old mode?" "SMS? Why SMS?" "We don't need RMM. Everybody knows about his own tapes" "HSM? We can do backups using our jobs (IEBGENER)" "only UID(0) can access USS shell and files" (common mistake: 700 instead of 755 on "/") "why to protect all the datasets? PROTECTALL is dangerous" Young people can be lazy as the old farts, but also can be diligent, gifted and enthusiastic like the exceptions I mentioned. Those young guys usually start with "add-ons" and then broaden their knowledge. --------------------------<unsnip>--------------------------- Bosh Sam and Radislav make some excellent points here; I tend to split the difference. Some of those new "add-ons" are highly useful and beneficial for both new and legacy applications; others are really more useful for new development work than for any legacy workloads. What always bothered me was that new things came out so fast that it was hard to become proficient with all of them in a timely fashion. So I tended to concentrate on those that would provide the greatest benefit to my current workplace. Doing this and keeping up with the MVS "core" was a full-time job, and then some. Just converting some of my basic tools to keep up with the changes in core mechanisms was often a lengthy learning exercise. Remember chasing ENQ/DEQ information in SQA? Moving to the GRS address space introduced a whole new mechanism for accomplishing the same end. And it's us "Old Farts" that are responsible for many of the tools that seem so essential to us today. Us "Old Farts" still have important places in the IT world, right alongside the "Clever kids" of today. We can all learn from each other. My $0.02 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Bosh? I think maybe you meant "Pish-Posh" as in poo-poo on that? Or maybe that should have been Both.....sorry, I couldn't resist?! Rick, I think the point Sam was making is that "MVS Core" knowledge (regardless of where / when it came) and NOT necessarily starting in the way back days of OS/360, is so valuable and NOT being taken advantage of by younger folks (especially in management). No one said that "add-ons" are NOT highly useful, but the savy experienced MVS SysProg can better understand and utilize, and then explain, how it all fits together in the BIG PICTURE PUZZLE for those less knowledgable. And Radoslaw, maybe in Europe the "youngsters" are better equipped and more highly motivated to excel, but that has NOT necessarily been my experience in the USA. With NO IBM OS (MVS, etc) teaching in college for various degree programs, that knowledge is not learned in the academic world. And MANY young people get involved in the IT business because that's where the money is......and they want top dollar right at the Get-Go without any experience and/or knowledge to support that. And when they don't know something, they come to us "old farts" for the answers, without doing any research "On Their Own"!!!!! Many do not show the initiative to look it up (RTFM) to learn. They just want the answers and solutions handed to them. Us "old farts" didn't learn that way, I would be willing to wager, ay?! And besides, in today's "SERVER" world of PCs, etc., many folks don't understand that a "Mainframe" is NOT just another server, regardless of what IBM calls it (for marketing). And most just "Pish-Posh" the mainframe out of ignorance. They certainly do NOT understand the BIG PICTURE or even how the PUZZLE is supposed to look, but are likely key personnel on the decision making side and those who get to spend the money. Bad investment! I've run across too many hot-shot wiz kids and other so-called experts, who couldn't identify a Mainframe if it were laying across their chests! It's always Windows this, or Windows that, or Server this.....well, you get the idea. That kind of attitude makes me want to call it WINDOZE when they "Poo-Poo" us "old farts" and "MVS"....... Some of those "old farts" became lazy for learning because no one would listen to them, and their responsibilties and influence have been removed and thus waned. Some have been downsized so often, they have caved in. Doesn't mean even they don't have something to offer too. I would agree that we all can learn from each other, alongside the "Clever kids" of today with their fresh prospective, if ONLY they could abide us flanking them (we don't mind the view from the rear with the gear)!! But LISTEN to use, Dammit!! Again, just my $0.02 worth too..... THANX, Mark H. Young ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
