Good one, Timothy. I bit - then realized it was a joke. Rex
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:08 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 64-bit COBOL No, silly! (May I call that hypothetical unnamed misguided manager that?) It simply means that z/TPF got there first because it was technically doable, sooner, in the way(s) customers wanted and/or because they needed it (or expected to need it) sooner. There's no grand, nefarious, and/or sinister IBM plan for z/TPF to replace WAS z/OS or vice versa. Well, except for this plan: http://www.ibm.com/systems/z/secretplans/ztpf-will-takeover-the-world.ht ml (Watch the wrap.) Anyway, could y'all keep getting those COBOL and PL/I compiler requirements into IBM -- along the lines of the questions I listed? Many thanks. Speaking only for myself. Occasionally with humor and wit (of varying quality). - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific E-Mail: [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
