On Jan 14, 2008, at 10:10 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:41:12 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
That is a problem which IBM should have fixed early on but I think
they kept it this way for compatibility reasons. Don't rant or rave
IBM has done other such items for compatibility treason. That is why
for the most part a program assembled 40 years ago still works today
(99 percent of the time). Good or bad (you pick the reason).
If they don't change it, it will never get better. It's that
simple. IBM mainframes can't survive forever on compatibility
with increasingly obsolescent practices.
Our highways nowadays are mostly incompatible with horse-drawn
carriages (well, except in parts of western Pennsylvania).
And in parts of Indiana and IOWA :) They do a great service by
reminding us how it used to be in previous years. Thank goodness we
still don't.
Ed
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
