I own myself second place in this exchange. And it occurred to me only after I hit <Send> that I could have written you privately, rather than publicly; my apologies for that.
--- Bob Bridges, [email protected], cell 336 382-7313 /* There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved. -Jesse Jackson, 1993 */ -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 08:40 > Mr Metz resolutely straightens everyone else's pictures, in this listserv, >but is very sensitive about his own. Actually, I've been know to thank people for correcting me, something Mr. Mills might consider doing. > I perceive no hostility in Mr Mills' post, Examine his posting history and you'll discover the source of my hostility. > Go ahead and flame me immoderately Should you do something to warrant it, then I'll consider it. ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Bob Bridges [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 12:24 AM Mr Metz resolutely straightens everyone else's pictures, in this listserv, but is very sensitive about his own. Most of us, it seems to me, forgive him and ignore it. You did cross a line, though, Seymour, this time. I perceive no hostility in Mr Mills' post, and yours positively bristled with it. I don't think that's hypocrisy on your part, just self-blindness. Ease back, man, and be less eager to posture. Go ahead and flame me immoderately, now, and then forget it. -----Original Message----- From: Seymour J Metz Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 13:45 > Why do you have to be so hostile? Why do you have to be such a hypocrite? I'm not hostile in general. But when you rant about imaginary hostility and gratuitously insult me, I see no reason to be concerned with your delicate feelings in subsequent messages. > I did not see any mention of OS compatibility. That is precisely why I mentioned it. You wrote "If you are going to include OS compatibility as well as hardware compatibility"; that certainly seems to be a false claim that I mentioned it. ________________________________________ From: Charles Mills [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 1:28 PM Why do you have to be so hostile? I did not see any mention of OS compatibility. That is precisely why I mentioned it. I raised additional issues beyond what you raised. WTF indeed. -----Original Message----- From: Seymour J Metz Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 9:48 AM WTF? Where do you see "OS compatibility"? The issues that I raised were all architecture and instruction set. ________________________________________ From: Charles Mills [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 12:39 PM If you are going to include OS compatibility as well as hardware compatibility then there are issues such as control blocks that have been moved above line. -----Original Message----- From: Seymour J Metz Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 9:07 AM That's not the only thing. A program that relies on getting certain program interrupts might fail. Then there's the ASCII bit, although I would be very surprised if anybody actually used it. There are optional instructions that IBM carried over. There's probably more that I haven't thought of. --- > The only thing which might not work would > be something which was CPU speed dependent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
