Hi, Alan.
Alan Altmark wrote:
On Thursday, 05/03/2007 at 02:26 AST, Craig Dudley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How about comments on one of the basic premise of this thread - CMS
is "functionally stabilized"? From an external POV, it does appear
that CMS (and adjunct components like SFS) isn't (aren't) being enhanced
for the continuing support role it has in maintaining a z/VM CP
environment.
Wow. Tough question, but a good one.
In the last few years, I'd say that CMS application-oriented enhancements
generally have indeed been limited and primarily focused on:
- security: SSL, new APIs
- networking: IPv6, NFS client, LDAP (including CMS clients!)
No, no new pipelines stages.
That's simply b.s....please see Rob van der Heij's "What's New with CMS
Pipelines" presentation from the zExpo last month. There are at least 5
new Pipes stages that have been introduced and others are on the way.
No, no new PL/I compiler. They are also
nothing to sneeze at considering those investments are being made at a
time when z/VM's value to IBM is its ability to compete in the virtual
server arena.
As soon as the market signals its willingness to substitute "CMS
application development" where it currently says "large scale
virtualization", then you will get dizzy as we swing the development
engine to focus on CMS. As long as it keeps selling new hardware.
But the market will not signal it's willingness until it sees that IBM
(the owner of CMS after all) is committed to the platform and that they
can be sure it will be around for awhile. Why invest time and money if
IBM is not willing to do so.....especially if the development community
knows that, e.g., there are versions of the new z/OS PL/I compilers that
are available for CMS, but IBM chooses not to release them for that
environment.....?
When we have to choose between virtualization and CMS, we choose
virtualization. What we have gained with that strategy exceeds what we
have lost. The CMS changes we have made are those needed to let our
customers conform with new best practices, laws and regulations regarding
privacy, and to allow the system to integrate into tomorrow's networks.
(Still more to do.)
Would CMS be a great AD platform? Yes! Our efficiency and good
interactive response are wonderful. But how many AD platforms does one
company need? on System z? (Stockholder concern peeking through - sorry.)
If I were just graduating from college, I think I'd rather use some fancy
shmancy AD GUI thingy (e.g. eclipse) and run the resulting program on
Linux. Why? Because (a) it's waaay easier than a 3270, and (b) it's what
I know.
And you'd be wrong, with all do respect...that is not the feed back I am
getting from my young, recent college graduate that I am teaching VM to
these days. Once they get past the 3270 hurdles, they think the CMS
environment is waaaay cool. And the way to get them past the 3270
hurdles is to simply demo to them that the 3270 interface is *exactly*
like filling in a form on a web browser...you can only type in certain
areas, and nothing happens until you click on the 'submit" button...they
grok that right away.
"Virtualization. That's what z/VM is all about, Charlie Brown."
Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott
--
DJ
V/Soft
