Paul:
It wasn't stubbornness so much I find getting on in my age I try not
to ramble with long names that everybody understands (except for
maybe you) and trying to keep things sharp and focused. I don't have
enough time to go on about every option or (OS) there is. When you
floated the 5 or 6 options I just didn't feel like typing out all the
possibilities that you had. Short and sweet and only when there is a
need explain and since we were talking about Z/os I thought it was
understood that MVS was really the umbrella. Now you can argue more I
don't care to as the understanding is MVS=Z/os in my world.
Ed
On Sep 16, 2014, at 10:58 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 08:25:50 -0700, Phil Smith wrote:
John Chase wrote:
z/OS is a "package". MVS is "just an operating system" that's
included in z/OS.
What he said. I'm as pedantic as the next guy (well, not if the
next guy is some of the people on this list) but there are times
when "MVS" is the correct term. Especially (but not only) when
distinguishing traditional data sets from UNIX System Services files.
My point, perhaps made too subtly, was Ed G's apparent stubborn
refusal
to admit the existence of z/OS. But even so, Unix System Services
(Ed called
it "the 'others'") existed as far back as MVS (not z/OS) 5.2.2 or
earlier.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
