On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 10:57:00 -0500, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:

> (Ed Jaffe) writes:
>> I've often wondered what the state of the mainframe would be today if
>> IBM had actually done a halfway decent job developing ISPF
>> Client/Server, mSys for Setup, and other similar GUI-based initiatives
>> from the 1990s.
> 
And, please, support a portable GUI protocol such as X11 (perhaps VNC;
perhaps HTTP -- is that what HoD does?)  Don't require an idiosyncratic
agent for every desktop OS.

>re:
>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#39 Resistance to Java
>
>a primary communication group effort fighting off distributed computing
>and client/server was SAA ...
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Systems_Application_Architecture
> 
Ah!  Is that what the misbegotten thing was for?  To demonstrate the
nonviability of distributed computing by exhibiting a nonviable
distributed computing product?

>part of the issue was 3tier was all tcp/ip (and not SNA).
>
>at the same time SAA was kicked off, the communication group was also
>out distributing a lot of misinformation inside the corporation about
>how SNA could be used for the the NSFNET backbone (precursor to modern
>internet). old NSFNET backbone email
>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#nsfnet
>and past posts
>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#nsfnet
> 
Why did that fail?  Just too little, too late?  NIH?

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to