I definitely agree that college level training for LINUX/390 is needed. I've said it before and may sound like a broken record but IBM has to admit that in the past the use of VM at universities lead to many developments and improvements to VM. VM virtual machines seem to be an obvious choice for LINUX classes. I would think IBM would want to give special mainframe pricing to universities so that college kids will no longer think of the mainframe as that big old machine that's going away. Not only would this provide the corporate world with LINUX/390 knowledgeable workers, just think of the developments the universities will most likely provide. Right now our summer interns only know about SUN and Microsoft. IBM needs to let our future workforce know they exist.
Douglas C Ponte wrote: > Being ~just~ out of college, myself, I don't have the years of experience > of dealing with these IT decisions. Although, I can say that there NEEDS > to be more done at a training/college level. The problem has been > stated...that, unless there is a positive economy within a company, they > cannot even afford to try or buy a mainframe and the talent needed to run > it (which is less than if one had 200-400 Intel/Sun servers, for > instance...ok, that was biased ;) > > Obviously, we have a huge shortage of college-age interest in mainframes > (but, not Linux, which I agree is a major key in solving this via > "crossover potential") due to a few factors such as: microsoft dominance > -over the years I grew up in the education system, for instance-, company > budget squashing, innovative IT's who can't go back to their managers to > tell them that they should get rid of the 100's of servers they bought a > few years ago to replace the mainframes that they should go back to (for > various reasons such as $$$, especially now)....and there are more factors > that I'm sure the professionals on the list can drum up in a heartbeat. > > The necessary training (or even a simple base) is just NOT available to > most colleges...and, for a very obvious and practical reason...it's not as > popular and has been snuffed by a lot of college's who already use, or have > moved to, Unix boxes (of which are the popular college CS lab tools, > including Linux, of course). SU, for instance, has some courses which I > took as a CS major for my Comp. Engineering minor mostly (since Computer > Science is more theory-based in it's core). They teach an assembler course > (not IBM assembler, but it get's you going) and I also took a > microcode/assembler course that was the "sequel" to that one. That was > about it, unless they've changed their courses since. I'm sure some other > colleges have more than that...but, that's a good idea of what we are > dealing with. > > Going to those assembler classes didn't go well for many of the > students...moaning and groaning for most of the way, especially in the > beginning. Why? Boo-hoo, it's not C++. In any case, there are students > like myself who DID find it fascinating to see how this complied C code I'd > been taught so much about was used as assembler...and then as > microcode...learning about fetching, the ALU and parallel computing, etc. > I wish they had 10 more courses, if I had known I'd be working here on the > z/VM product. After college, IBM trained me with assembler classes (which > was good, since IBM zSeries architecture is specific and quite different, > obviously) and OJT, of course. Which was more than sufficient. > > Basically, from a college-age level, you can see that this will not change > much unless the demand grows to where it used to be. I hope that Linux and > zSeries (for one) can really step up the need, that companies will become > aware of the training situation and that this shortage can be alleviated > one day. But, first thing's first. > > Doug Ponte > z/VM, CP I/O Development and Service > zSeries, IBM - Endicott, NY USA > > *** disclaimer: These are the opinions of the poster, and NOT of IBM...and > this should be extremely obvious. *** > > Greetings; > > Re: the training comment. When I first started in DP there was always > one or two trainie operators and programmers on the staff. The first > place I worked we got them from a couple local business schools. We > never hired anyone straight out of college because they didn't know > anything about business DP. You just can't run a business app by > sucking all the appropriate records into memory and processing them > from a table! > > I once had three trainees working for me on a big payroll project. > When the project was completed they got an excellent reference from > us and they all went out and got better jobs than I had. I should > have gotten a clue from that! > > Anyway, OJT is the only way I have ever experienced that gets people > trained in the way things are really done. It is sort of a community > responsibility and until Corp. America realizes that there will > continue to be a shortage of people. > > Good Luck! > Dennis > > Coffin Michael C > <Michael.C.Coffi To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: > Sent by: Linux Subject: Re: Mainframe skill > shortage > on 390 Port > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > RIST.EDU> > > 07/22/02 12:01 > PM > Please respond > to Linux on 390 > Port > > I enjoyed reading this article, but disagree with some of the "conclusions" > reached, for example: > > "People need to accept that there's going to be a shortage of mainframe > skills and a need to migrate off the mainframe." > > If you believe (as I do) that a zero-downtime, ultra-scalable, > cost-effective mainframe mega-processor is the only way to run an > Enterprise, then why would business want to "migrate off the mainframe" to > less stable, less scalable, less cost effective (overall) hardware? I > think > that it is time for business to take a close look at this issue, which > effects them directly in the years to come, and decide to make an > investment > in their own futures by: > > 1. Paying fairly for mainframe talent. > 2. Providing training for new talent for the years to come. > > I have been working with mainframes and, more specifically, VM (and now > Linux/390 as well) since 1981, and as a VM Consultant since 1987. Despite > there being some "dry times", I've always found work. I know many other > mainframe employees and consultants that have given up on the mainframe > entirely because there is so little work, you frequently need to travel to > where the work is, and depending upon the geographic location compensation > may be ridiculously low (don't even THINK of taking a mainframe programming > contract in Florida - the "sunshine tax" will kill you!). > > While the advent of personal computers has some value in the Enterprise > (i.e. your secretary can download pictures of Tom Cruise naked - something > difficult at best on the mainframe!), I still believe that the brunt of > most > corporate computing is, and should be, done on mainframes. > > Personally, you'll have to pry my last mainframe from my cold, dead hands. > :) > > Michael Coffin, VM Systems Programming Consultant > Internal Revenue Service - Room 6527 > 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W. > Washington, D.C. 20224 > > Voice: (202) 927-4188 FAX: (202) 622-3123 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
