date:20230814

Perryman loses again.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 10:45 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 07:21:18 PM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:
> You’re really trying too hard to discredit me. Rather than trying to prove 
> your contention which you can’t.
Aw, you wound me. No need to discredit you since you didn't present any 
verifiable information and never show in any way that my statements are wrong. 
Stop trying to instigate another disagreement that has been resolved because it 
only proves you are the poster child for you can't fix stupid.


  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 07:21:18 PM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:
> You’re really trying too hard to discredit me. Rather than trying to prove 
> your contention which you can’t.
Aw, you wound me. No need to discredit you since you didn't present any 
verifiable information and never show in any way that my statements are wrong. 
Stop trying to instigate another disagreement that has been resolved because it 
only proves you are the poster child for you can't fix stupid.


  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-14 Thread Darren Evans-Young

Can we stop this thread please?!

Darren
List Owner

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Bill Johnson <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 9:20 PM
To: list-ibm-main 
Subject: Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

You’re really trying too hard to discredit me. Rather than trying to prove your 
contention which you can’t.

Metz kicked your a** too.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 10:18 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 07:05:06 PM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:
> My original post was from an expert on the topic. Via Google search.

If he's an expert, then he will have quoted the dates for the events I 
mentioned. Don't include the word "expert" in your searches because random 
idiots claim to be experts.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Bingo


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 10:19 PM, Mike Schwab  
wrote:

They think the Burckle Crater, off Madagascar, was created by a meteor
impact about 2860BCE and the tsunami and torrential downfall is the source
of flooding legends around that time.  Impacted SE coast of South America,
South Africa, Somalia, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, South and West coast of
Australia.  The south coast of the Arabian peninsula is high cliffs so
diverted water toward Iran, which also had high cliffs, so it got very high
and went up the Gulf of Arabia, the Tigris and Euphates River Valleys, to
the mountains of northern Iraq and Turkey, including Mt. Ararat.

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burckle_Crater

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023, 21:04 David Spiegel <
0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Hi Bill,
> You said: "...Noah never collected 2 of every species. .."
> That is close to what the Bible says, but is inaccurate.
> Please see GE 7:2
> (The verse says Noah was commanded to take 7 (possibly 14) of each
> species of "clean" animals. (The Hebrew word טְּהוֹרָ֗ does not translate
> to English. It is usually translated as clean, which although close is
> incorrect.)
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> On 2023-08-14 21:16, Bill Johnson wrote:
> > Yes I do.
> >
> > It has also been seen as a depiction of nomadic conflict, the struggle
> for land and resources (and divine favour) between nomadic herders and
> sedentary farmers. The Academic theologian Joseph Blenkinsopp holds
> that Cain and Abel are symbolic rather than real.
> > And Noah never collected 2 of every species.
> >
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >
> >
> > On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel <
> 0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Bill,
> > You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
> > Do you have proof for this assertion?
> >
> > Regards,
> > David
> >
> > On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:
> >> I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also
> worked with people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into
> IT because they were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10
> posters here a question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster
> thinks his answer is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe
> system programmers, yet the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop
> eliminated the mainframe, mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts
> that say otherwise. Plus, the security on the platform is unmatched.
> Hackers would love to be able to hack the mainframe since that’s where the
> money is. Banks being the big one.
> >>
> >> I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the
> Korean conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the
> Peloponnesian war, from Cain vs Abel?”
> >>
> >> I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life
> Christians” massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200
> years. But did mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.
> >>
> >>
> >> Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who
> can barely breathe and chew gum.
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >>
> >>
> >> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike <
> wayn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson
> by
> >> nature.
> >>
> >> Yeah, I found this on the internet too:
> >>
> >> Noun[edit
> >> <
> https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=johnson=edit=4
> >]
> >>
> >> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
> >> *)
> >>
> >>      1. (slang )
> Penis
> >>      . quotations ▼synonym
> ▲Synonyms:
> >>      *see* Thesaurus:penis <
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Thesaurus:penis>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
> >>> because they can be easily found on the internet?
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
> >>> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> 
> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> 
> 
>  On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike <
> wayn...@gmail.com>
>  wrote:
> 
>  Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
> 
>  On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
>  wrote:
> 
> > *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
>  Timothy
> > Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the
> original
> > operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
>  1980,
> > initially calling it QDOS (Quick and

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

You’re really trying too hard to discredit me. Rather than trying to prove your 
contention which you can’t. 

Metz kicked your a** too.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 10:18 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 07:05:06 PM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:
> My original post was from an expert on the topic. Via Google search.

If he's an expert, then he will have quoted the dates for the events I 
mentioned. Don't include the word "expert" in your searches because random 
idiots claim to be experts.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-14 Thread Mike Schwab

They think the Burckle Crater, off Madagascar, was created by a meteor
impact about 2860BCE and the tsunami and torrential downfall is the source
of flooding legends around that time.  Impacted SE coast of South America,
South Africa, Somalia, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, South and West coast of
Australia.  The south coast of the Arabian peninsula is high cliffs so
diverted water toward Iran, which also had high cliffs, so it got very high
and went up the Gulf of Arabia, the Tigris and Euphates River Valleys, to
the mountains of northern Iraq and Turkey, including Mt. Ararat.

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burckle_Crater

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023, 21:04 David Spiegel <
0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Hi Bill,
> You said: "...Noah never collected 2 of every species. .."
> That is close to what the Bible says, but is inaccurate.
> Please see GE 7:2
> (The verse says Noah was commanded to take 7 (possibly 14) of each
> species of "clean" animals. (The Hebrew word טְּהוֹרָ֗ does not translate
> to English. It is usually translated as clean, which although close is
> incorrect.)
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> On 2023-08-14 21:16, Bill Johnson wrote:
> > Yes I do.
> >
> > It has also been seen as a depiction of nomadic conflict, the struggle
> for land and resources (and divine favour) between nomadic herders and
> sedentary farmers. The Academic theologian Joseph Blenkinsopp holds
> that Cain and Abel are symbolic rather than real.
> > And Noah never collected 2 of every species.
> >
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >
> >
> > On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel <
> 0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Bill,
> > You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
> > Do you have proof for this assertion?
> >
> > Regards,
> > David
> >
> > On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:
> >> I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also
> worked with people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into
> IT because they were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10
> posters here a question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster
> thinks his answer is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe
> system programmers, yet the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop
> eliminated the mainframe, mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts
> that say otherwise. Plus, the security on the platform is unmatched.
> Hackers would love to be able to hack the mainframe since that’s where the
> money is. Banks being the big one.
> >>
> >> I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the
> Korean conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the
> Peloponnesian war, from Cain vs Abel?”
> >>
> >> I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life
> Christians” massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200
> years. But did mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.
> >>
> >>
> >> Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who
> can barely breathe and chew gum.
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >>
> >>
> >> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike <
> wayn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson
> by
> >> nature.
> >>
> >> Yeah, I found this on the internet too:
> >>
> >> Noun[edit
> >> <
> https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=johnson=edit=4
> >]
> >>
> >> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
> >> *)
> >>
> >>  1. (slang )
> Penis
> >>  . quotations ▼synonym
> ▲Synonyms:
> >>  *see* Thesaurus:penis <
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Thesaurus:penis>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
> >>> because they can be easily found on the internet?
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
> >>> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> 
> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> 
> 
>  On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike <
> wayn...@gmail.com>
>  wrote:
> 
>  Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
> 
>  On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
>  wrote:
> 
> > *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
>  Timothy
> > Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the
> original
> > operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
>  1980,
> > initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which
> was
> > soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 07:05:06 PM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:
> My original post was from an expert on the topic. Via Google search.

If he's an expert, then he will have quoted the dates for the events I 
mentioned. Don't include the word "expert" in your searches because random 
idiots claim to be experts.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Nonsense. Religion.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 10:10 PM, David Spiegel 
<0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,
It's a free country and you can believe whatever nonsense you want.

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 21:43, Bill Johnson wrote:
> Extrapolating Adam/Eve are fictional so too are their children.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:42 PM, Bill Johnson 
> <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> Adam and Eve are fictional as well.
>
> Historicity. While a traditional view was that the Book of Genesis was 
> authored by Moses and has been considered historical and metaphorical, modern 
> scholars consider the Genesis creation narrative as one of various ancient 
> origin myths.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel 
> <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
> You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
> Do you have proof for this assertion?
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also worked 
>> with people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into IT 
>> because they were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10 
>> posters here a question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster 
>> thinks his answer is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe 
>> system programmers, yet the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop 
>> eliminated the mainframe, mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts 
>> that say otherwise. Plus, the security on the platform is unmatched. Hackers 
>> would love to be able to hack the mainframe since that’s where the money is. 
>> Banks being the big one.
>>
>> I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean 
>> conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian 
>> war, from Cain vs Abel?”
>>
>> I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” 
>> massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did 
>> mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.
>>
>>
>> Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can 
>> barely breathe and chew gum.
>>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  
>> wrote:
>>
>> A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
>> nature.
>>
>> Yeah, I found this on the internet too:
>>
>> Noun[edit
>> ]
>>
>> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
>> *)
>>
>>      1. (slang ) 
>>Penis
>>      . quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
>>      *see* Thesaurus:penis 
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:
>>
>>> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
>>> because they can be easily found on the internet?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
>>> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>>>
 https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story




 Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


 On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
 wrote:

 Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.

 On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
 wrote:

> *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
 Timothy
> Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
> operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
 1980,
> initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
> soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
> purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM
 for
> their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
> PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
 kept
> pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft
 in
> 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
> platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
> designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
 some
> MS-DOS applications.*
>
> Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
> Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
 95
> as did Windows 3.1.
>
> Really who cares?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Hi Bill,
It's a free country and you can believe whatever nonsense you want.

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 21:43, Bill Johnson wrote:

Extrapolating Adam/Eve are fictional so too are their children.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:42 PM, Bill Johnson
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Adam and Eve are fictional as well.

Historicity. While a traditional view was that the Book of Genesis was authored
by Moses and has been considered historical and metaphorical, modern scholars
consider the Genesis creation narrative as one of various ancient origin myths.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel
<0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,
You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
Do you have proof for this assertion?

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:

I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also worked with
people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into IT because they
were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10 posters here a
question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster thinks his answer
is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe system programmers, yet
the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop eliminated the mainframe,
mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts that say otherwise. Plus, the
security on the platform is unmatched. Hackers would love to be able to hack
the mainframe since that’s where the money is. Banks being the big one.

I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean
conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian
war, from Cain vs Abel?”

I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” massacred
hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did mention Cain
& Abel which is fictional.

Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can barely
breathe and chew gum.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote:

A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
nature.

Yeah, I found this on the internet too:

Noun[edit
]

*johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
*)

1. (slang ) Penis
. quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
*see* Thesaurus:penis

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:

Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
because they can be easily found on the internet?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike
wrote:

Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike
wrote:

*The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer

Timothy

Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in

1980,

initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM

for

their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions

kept

pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft

1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running

some

MS-DOS applications.*

Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN

as did Windows 3.1.

Really who cares?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman

wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:

On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to

start with.

DOS was /Microsoft's.

Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent

story.

Is this different from the story as you understand it?

1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.

2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which

was

to be called PC DOS.

3. Because IBM was

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

The Bible is 100% fiction. Christians have killed and molested more people than 
anyone. Pro life? 


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 10:04 PM, David Spiegel 
<0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,
You said: "...Noah never collected 2 of every species. .."
That is close to what the Bible says, but is inaccurate.
Please see GE 7:2
(The verse says Noah was commanded to take 7 (possibly 14) of each 
species of "clean" animals. (The Hebrew word טְּהוֹרָ֗ does not translate 
to English. It is usually translated as clean, which although close is 
incorrect.)

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 21:16, Bill Johnson wrote:
> Yes I do.
>
> It has also been seen as a depiction of nomadic conflict, the struggle for 
> land and resources (and divine favour) between nomadic herders and sedentary 
> farmers. The Academic theologian Joseph Blenkinsopp holds that Cain and Abel 
> are symbolic rather than real.
> And Noah never collected 2 of every species.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel 
> <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
> You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
> Do you have proof for this assertion?
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also worked 
>> with people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into IT 
>> because they were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10 
>> posters here a question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster 
>> thinks his answer is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe 
>> system programmers, yet the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop 
>> eliminated the mainframe, mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts 
>> that say otherwise. Plus, the security on the platform is unmatched. Hackers 
>> would love to be able to hack the mainframe since that’s where the money is. 
>> Banks being the big one.
>>
>> I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean 
>> conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian 
>> war, from Cain vs Abel?”
>>
>> I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” 
>> massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did 
>> mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.
>>
>>
>> Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can 
>> barely breathe and chew gum.
>>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  
>> wrote:
>>
>> A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
>> nature.
>>
>> Yeah, I found this on the internet too:
>>
>> Noun[edit
>> ]
>>
>> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
>> *)
>>
>>      1. (slang ) 
>>Penis
>>      . quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
>>      *see* Thesaurus:penis 
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:
>>
>>> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
>>> because they can be easily found on the internet?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
>>> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>>>
 https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story




 Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


 On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
 wrote:

 Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.

 On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
 wrote:

> *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
 Timothy
> Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
> operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
 1980,
> initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
> soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
> purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM
 for
> their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
> PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
 kept
> pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft
 in
> 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
> platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
> designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
 some
> MS-DOS applications.*
>
> Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
> Windows

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

My original post was from an expert on the topic. Via Google search. Bwa

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 10:03 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 06:40:44 PM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:
> Translation, can’t find any proof.

Translation of the translation: Too stupid to do a simple web search. I gave 
you enough keywords yet you don't dispute anything.  What are you saying is 
wrong?

    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 06:40:44 PM PDT, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 Translation, can’t find any proof.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> Prove it.

Don't ask me to do a fools errand because you'll never trust any source I may 
quote. You need to find sources you trust. What I'm finding is the first 
release of QDOS was delivered around July1980, IBM / Gates contract signed 
around Nov 1980 and Microsoft bought QDOS in July 1981. It's speculation that 
IBM told MS to buy QDOS but it would make sense because it speeds up IBM's 
timeline.

    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 Prove it.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:03:04 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> A year later, fledgling company Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to sell 
> QDOS, renamed MS-
> DOS, to IBM for their newly developed IBM-PC.

IBM signed their contract with Microsoft in 1980 which happens to be 7 months 
before Microsoft bought QDOS. Rumor has it that IBM told Microsoft to buy it. 
There was no renaming MS-DOS. My understanding is that Microsoft began 
immediate sales of the product, but IBM delayed for a couple of years.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Hi Bill,
You said: "...Noah never collected 2 of every species. .."
That is close to what the Bible says, but is inaccurate.
Please see GE 7:2
(The verse says Noah was commanded to take 7 (possibly 14) of each
species of "clean" animals. (The Hebrew word טְּהוֹרָ֗ does not translate
to English. It is usually translated as clean, which although close is
incorrect.)

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 21:16, Bill Johnson wrote:

Yes I do.

It has also been seen as a depiction of nomadic conflict, the struggle for land
and resources (and divine favour) between nomadic herders and sedentary
farmers. The Academic theologian Joseph Blenkinsopp holds that Cain and Abel
are symbolic rather than real.
And Noah never collected 2 of every species.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel
<0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,
You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
Do you have proof for this assertion?

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:

I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean
conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian
war, from Cain vs Abel?”

I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” massacred
hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did mention Cain
& Abel which is fictional.

Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can barely
breathe and chew gum.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote:

A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
nature.

Yeah, I found this on the internet too:

Noun[edit
]

*johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
*)

1. (slang ) Penis
. quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
*see* Thesaurus:penis

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:

Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
because they can be easily found on the internet?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike
wrote:

Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike
wrote:

*The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer

Timothy

Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in

1980,

for

their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions

kept

pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft

some

MS-DOS applications.*

Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN

as did Windows 3.1.

Really who cares?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman

wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:

On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to

start with.

DOS was /Microsoft's.

Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent

story.

Is this different from the story as you understand it?

1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 06:40:44 PM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:
> Translation, can’t find any proof.

Translation of the translation: Too stupid to do a simple web search. I gave 
you enough keywords yet you don't dispute anything.  What are you saying is 
wrong?

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 06:40:44 PM PDT, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 Translation, can’t find any proof.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> Prove it.

Don't ask me to do a fools errand because you'll never trust any source I may 
quote. You need to find sources you trust. What I'm finding is the first 
release of QDOS was delivered around July1980, IBM / Gates contract signed 
around Nov 1980 and Microsoft bought QDOS in July 1981. It's speculation that 
IBM told MS to buy QDOS but it would make sense because it speeds up IBM's 
timeline.

    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 Prove it.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:03:04 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> A year later, fledgling company Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to sell 
> QDOS, renamed MS-
> DOS, to IBM for their newly developed IBM-PC.

IBM signed their contract with Microsoft in 1980 which happens to be 7 months 
before Microsoft bought QDOS. Rumor has it that IBM told Microsoft to buy it. 
There was no renaming MS-DOS. My understanding is that Microsoft began 
immediate sales of the product, but IBM delayed for a couple of years.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Extrapolating Adam/Eve are fictional so too are their children.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:42 PM, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Adam and Eve are fictional as well. 

Historicity. While a traditional view was that the Book of Genesis was authored 
by Moses and has been considered historical and metaphorical, modern scholars 
consider the Genesis creation narrative as one of various ancient origin myths.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel 
<0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,
You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
Do you have proof for this assertion?

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:
> I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also worked 
> with people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into IT 
> because they were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10 posters 
> here a question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster thinks his 
> answer is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe system 
> programmers, yet the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop eliminated 
> the mainframe, mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts that say 
> otherwise. Plus, the security on the platform is unmatched. Hackers would 
> love to be able to hack the mainframe since that’s where the money is. Banks 
> being the big one.
>
> I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean 
> conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian 
> war, from Cain vs Abel?”
>
> I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” 
> massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did 
> mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.
>
>
> Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can 
> barely breathe and chew gum.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  
> wrote:
>
> A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
> nature.
>
> Yeah, I found this on the internet too:
>
> Noun[edit
> ]
>
> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
> *)
>
>    1. (slang ) Penis
>    . quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
>    *see* Thesaurus:penis 
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:
>
>> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
>> because they can be easily found on the internet?
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
>> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
>>> wrote:
>>>

 *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
>>> Timothy
 Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
 operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
>>> 1980,
 initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
 soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
 purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM
>>> for
 their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
 PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
>>> kept
 pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft
>>> in
 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
 platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
 designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
>>> some
 MS-DOS applications.*

 Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
 Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
>>> 95
 as did Windows 3.1.

 Really who cares?


 On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman 
>>> wrote:
>    > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>
>> My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> start with.
>
>> DOS was /Microsoft's.
>
> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent
>>> story.
> Is this different from the

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Adam and Eve are fictional as well. 

Historicity. While a traditional view was that the Book of Genesis was authored 
by Moses and has been considered historical and metaphorical, modern scholars 
consider the Genesis creation narrative as one of various ancient origin myths.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel 
<0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,
You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
Do you have proof for this assertion?

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:
> I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also worked 
> with people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into IT 
> because they were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10 posters 
> here a question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster thinks his 
> answer is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe system 
> programmers, yet the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop eliminated 
> the mainframe, mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts that say 
> otherwise. Plus, the security on the platform is unmatched. Hackers would 
> love to be able to hack the mainframe since that’s where the money is. Banks 
> being the big one.
>
> I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean 
> conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian 
> war, from Cain vs Abel?”
>
> I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” 
> massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did 
> mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.
>
>
> Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can 
> barely breathe and chew gum.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  
> wrote:
>
> A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
> nature.
>
> Yeah, I found this on the internet too:
>
> Noun[edit
> ]
>
> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
> *)
>
>    1. (slang ) Penis
>    . quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
>    *see* Thesaurus:penis 
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:
>
>> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
>> because they can be easily found on the internet?
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
>> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
>>> wrote:
>>>

 *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
>>> Timothy
 Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
 operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
>>> 1980,
 initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
 soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
 purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM
>>> for
 their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
 PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
>>> kept
 pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft
>>> in
 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
 platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
 designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
>>> some
 MS-DOS applications.*

 Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
 Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
>>> 95
 as did Windows 3.1.

 Really who cares?


 On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman 
>>> wrote:
>    > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>
>> My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> start with.
>
>> DOS was /Microsoft's.
>
> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent
>>> story.
> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>
> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>
> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which
>>> was
> to be called PC

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Translation, can’t find any proof.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> Prove it.

Don't ask me to do a fools errand because you'll never trust any source I may 
quote. You need to find sources you trust. What I'm finding is the first 
release of QDOS was delivered around July1980, IBM / Gates contract signed 
around Nov 1980 and Microsoft bought QDOS in July 1981. It's speculation that 
IBM told MS to buy QDOS but it would make sense because it speeds up IBM's 
timeline.

    On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 Prove it.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:03:04 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> A year later, fledgling company Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to sell 
> QDOS, renamed MS-
> DOS, to IBM for their newly developed IBM-PC.

IBM signed their contract with Microsoft in 1980 which happens to be 7 months 
before Microsoft bought QDOS. Rumor has it that IBM told Microsoft to buy it. 
There was no renaming MS-DOS. My understanding is that Microsoft began 
immediate sales of the product, but IBM delayed for a couple of years.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> Prove it.

Don't ask me to do a fools errand because you'll never trust any source I may 
quote. You need to find sources you trust. What I'm finding is the first 
release of QDOS was delivered around July1980, IBM / Gates contract signed 
around Nov 1980 and Microsoft bought QDOS in July 1981. It's speculation that 
IBM told MS to buy QDOS but it would make sense because it speeds up IBM's 
timeline.

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:43:19 PM PDT, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 Prove it.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:03:04 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> A year later, fledgling company Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to sell 
> QDOS, renamed MS-
> DOS, to IBM for their newly developed IBM-PC.

IBM signed their contract with Microsoft in 1980 which happens to be 7 months 
before Microsoft bought QDOS. Rumor has it that IBM told Microsoft to buy it. 
There was no renaming MS-DOS. My understanding is that Microsoft began 
immediate sales of the product, but IBM delayed for a couple of years.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Yes I do.

It has also been seen as a depiction of nomadic conflict, the struggle for land 
and resources (and divine favour) between nomadic herders and sedentary 
farmers. The Academic theologian Joseph Blenkinsopp holds that Cain and Abel 
are symbolic rather than real.
And Noah never collected 2 of every species.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:12 PM, David Spiegel 
<0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,
You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
Do you have proof for this assertion?

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:
> I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also worked 
> with people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into IT 
> because they were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10 posters 
> here a question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster thinks his 
> answer is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe system 
> programmers, yet the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop eliminated 
> the mainframe, mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts that say 
> otherwise. Plus, the security on the platform is unmatched. Hackers would 
> love to be able to hack the mainframe since that’s where the money is. Banks 
> being the big one.
>
> I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean 
> conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian 
> war, from Cain vs Abel?”
>
> I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” 
> massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did 
> mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.
>
>
> Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can 
> barely breathe and chew gum.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  
> wrote:
>
> A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
> nature.
>
> Yeah, I found this on the internet too:
>
> Noun[edit
> ]
>
> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
> *)
>
>    1. (slang ) Penis
>    . quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
>    *see* Thesaurus:penis 
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:
>
>> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
>> because they can be easily found on the internet?
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
>> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
>>> wrote:
>>>

 *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
>>> Timothy
 Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
 operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
>>> 1980,
 initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
 soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
 purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM
>>> for
 their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
 PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
>>> kept
 pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft
>>> in
 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
 platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
 designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
>>> some
 MS-DOS applications.*

 Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
 Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
>>> 95
 as did Windows 3.1.

 Really who cares?


 On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman 
>>> wrote:
>    > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>
>> My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> start with.
>
>> DOS was /Microsoft's.
>
> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent
>>> story.
> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>
> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>
> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Hi Bill,
You said: "... Cain & Abel which is fictional. ..."
Do you have proof for this assertion?

Regards,
David

On 2023-08-14 20:02, Bill Johnson wrote:

I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean
conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian
war, from Cain vs Abel?”

I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” massacred
hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did mention Cain
& Abel which is fictional.

Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can barely
breathe and chew gum.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote:

A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
nature.

Yeah, I found this on the internet too:

Noun[edit
]

*johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
*)

1. (slang ) Penis
. quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
*see* Thesaurus:penis

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:

Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
because they can be easily found on the internet?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike
wrote:

Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike
wrote:

*The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer

Timothy

Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in

1980,

for

their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions

kept

pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft

some

MS-DOS applications.*

Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN

as did Windows 3.1.

Really who cares?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman

wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:

On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to

start with.

DOS was /Microsoft's.

Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent

story.

Is this different from the story as you understand it?

1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.

2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which

was

to be called PC DOS.

3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to

exclude

ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by

Microsoft.

Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was

owned

by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership

DOS.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:18:31 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
> How did the business learn that Kubernettes could meet business needs,
> much less decide that is what the business wanted to do without first
> testing / evaluating it?
> That initial testing of Kubernettes is the very type of testing that I'm 
> talking about.

In the IBM world, we don't look for solutions that don't have a problem. So you 
believe some random person should decide to look at a product and then find a 
problem that it can solve. 

Kubernettes proves why allowing random people is a waste of time and money. 
Businesses work from top down and the results will be ignored because it's not 
a priority. 2 man-weeks ($3,000) and z/OS ($5,000) with no benefit.

Unix programmers have API's for everything. z/OS has hidden API's and concepts 
that the random programmer doesn't understand. They don't understand the 
important impact of a 200 CPU z machine and how Kubernettes can play an 
important role. They don't understand the role of multi-platforms. They may 
learn the container concept but won't understand the role that makes it 
important. They don't understand that they could have tested on an inexpensive 
PC. 

z/OS is about what the average person does not see. For example, why is JCL 
important? Why is JES2 important? Why is VSAM important? Unix programmers are 
dealing with simple OS concepts that do very little. Ask yourself, over the 
last 30 years, what has changed in reading / writing a simple file and how many 
pages are needed for documentation. z/OS is now up to 50 manuals yet the 
concepts for the average programmer has changed very little.

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:18:31 PM PDT, Grant Taylor 
<023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 On 8/14/23 4:30 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
> We don't ask people to follow blindly. Instead, we don't give them 
> another option. JCL, VSAM, availability to specific products and more 
> ensure you are choosing wisely. Kurbernettes containers, cloud and more 
> are implemented by sysprogs in a manner that meets the business needs.

How did the business learn that Kubernettes could meet business needs, 
much less decide that is what the business wanted to do without first 
testing / evaluating it?

That initial testing of Kubernettes is the very type of testing that I'm 
talking about.

Grant. . . .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-14 Thread Steve Thompson

DOS was Digital Research's CPM if I remember correctly. And so 
M/S renamed it to DOS. Then eventually they had to make changes 
for sub directories (originally it was a single directly level 
file system). I think it was Tandy that at their DOS 2.11 they 
had sub-directories (I was using the Tandy copy of DOS in those 
days).


Steve Thompson

On 8/14/2023 6:14 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:

On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree.  I 
agree that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth 
developing.  And if they had held onto MS-DOS and approached 
its development in the same way that Microsoft did, sure, 
they'd probably be worth bazillions.


My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ 
IBM's to start with.


DOS was /Microsoft's/.

Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive 
rights to use / distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft?




Grant. . . .

-- 


For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO 
IBM-MAIN


--
Regards,
Steve Thompson
VS Strategies LLC
Westfield IN
972-983-9430 cell

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Please do not attack / insult each other.

2023-08-14 Thread John P. Willis

> Please do not attack / insult each other.
> 
> Let's instead have conversations where it's okay to disagree with each
> other while still respecting each other and valuing each other's opinions.
> 
> It's okay to disagree.
> 
> It's not okay to insult the person that you disagree with.
> 

I agree with this wholeheartedly. The last thing the mainframe community needs 
in 2023 is more toxicity and gatekeeping, the latter of which has been 
disturbingly 
rampant on this list of late.

Let's not help the media's panicked declarations of the mainframe's irrelevance 
become true!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Help for US Talent

2023-08-14 Thread rpinion865

I get tons of emails from offshore recruiters. Some are geared toward my listed 
experience. But there are some that do not come close. The only thing that 
matches me is the state I live in.

Sent from Proton Mail mobile

 Original Message 
On Aug 14, 2023, 7:32 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

> I haven't had any recruiters ask me about forklifts, but yeah, I do get some 
> that just match me up with "something computer-related" and contact me about 
> that. But it occurs to me belatedly that you're talking about phone calls. I 
> don't know what you and I are doing differently, but most recruiters email 
> me, and the rare phone calls I get are (so far) all w real gigs for me, I 
> mean gigs that I might conceivably be interested in. The ones that aren't a 
> good match, or when it's two or three recruiters from the same company 
> contacting me about the same req, those all come from just one or two 
> recruiting companies. But they almost never know my name, and I can throw 
> their emails in my Junk folder without pangs of conscience. Mostly if a 
> recruiter knows my name (I mean, addresses his email to me and not just to 
> "Greetings"), I take the trouble to reply politely. They're still my source 
> of work, after all. And I may suddenly need to come out of my 
> semi-retirement, in which case I want them to think well of me. --- Bob 
> Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* The art of not reading 
> is a very important one. It consists in not taking an interest in whatever 
> may be engaging the attention of the general public at any particular time. 
> When some political or ecclesiastical pamphlet, or novel, or poem is making a 
> great commotion, you should remember that he who writes for fools always 
> finds a large public. A precondition for reading good books is not reading 
> bad ones: for life is short. -Schopenhauer */ -Original Message- 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Grant Taylor Sent: Monday, 
> August 14, 2023 18:43 I've dealt with way too many bad recruiters this year. 
> I've told them up front, what I'm looking for in very clear and concise 
> manner. I clearly provided; salary, location / remote, and job function. Too 
> many of them would inquire if I wanted to drive a forklift or install cable 
> TV wiring in a completely different state across the country. It got to the 
> point that I would ban recruiter companies from my mail server after the 3rd 
> such wildly incorrect inquiry. It's routine for different recruiters from the 
> same company to reach out, thinking that filtering is based on email address. 
> I've even had a recruiting company stop sending from their company email 
> addresses and use Gmail in order to avoid email filters. These are the low 
> ball recruiters that I want to simply go away and stop talking to me. --- On 
> 8/14/23 3:23 PM, Bob Bridges wrote: > Am I missing something? Why the 
> interest in making life hard for > recruiters? Ok, I'm a contractor so my 
> continued employment depends > on their existence. Still, why? > > If I 
> thought that you normally work under those conditions - $125/hr > or outside 
> the US half the time - then of course you're just stating > up front one of 
> your requirements. From the tone, though, it sounds > like you're trying to 
> make them unhappy for the fun of it. Is there > something going on here that 
> I'm not aware of? 
> -- For 
> IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
> lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Please do not attack / insult each other.


Please do not attack / insult each other.

Let's instead have conversations where it's okay to disagree with each 
other while still respecting each other and valuing each other's opinions.


It's okay to disagree.

It's not okay to insult the person that you disagree with.



Grant. . . .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:36:47 PM PDT, Andrew Rowley 
 >  wrote:

> where the storage admin has to be involved, but what is a reasonable value?

This is z/OS with SYSPROGS, not Unix with sysadmins where programmers have full 
control to define reasonable. You keep asking the wrong question. Who (not 
what) determines reasonable. Right or wrong, it is their job, not yours. If you 
can't give up control of sysprog duties, then z/OS is not the OS for you.

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:36:47 PM PDT, Andrew Rowley 
 wrote:  

 On 14/08/2023 3:30 pm, Jon Perryman wrote:
>  > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 04:33:24 PM PDT, Andrew Rowley 
> wrote:
>> It comes back to the question I asked earlier - how much space is it
>> reasonable to use *to do your job* before you have to get the storage
>> admin involved?
> Since you put it that way, I've got to say are you insane. The storage admin 
> based his decision on things called facts. He is responsible for storage and 
> his decision is final until his management tells him otherwise. I suggest you 
> inform your company CEO that all decisions must go through you.

That was a question, not a decision.

We all use space on the system, whether it be personal JCL libraries, 
sort work space, job output etc.

If your manager says "Can you investigate this CICS problem from 
yesterday" and you want to analyze the SMF data, at what point do you 
need to ask the storage admin for space for sort work, data files etc?

100MB? 1GB? 100GB?

I recognize that there has to be a limit where the storage admin has to 
be involved, but what is a reasonable value? Should it be different for 
a unix temporary file than for a sort work dataset?

Maybe I decide the best way to investigate this problem is to generate 
JSON from the data and load it into Splunk. Is the disk space available? 
Or should I just download the CICS SMF data to the PC and process it there?

Spool space, sort work space, user datasets - that space all comes from 
pools and when you delete the data the space is returned for use by 
other users. For some reason we set up a system for unix files where 
free space isn't automatically returned, and cannot be used by other 
users. This makes things unnecessarily difficult on the mainframe.

-- 
Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

I worked with many brilliant computer people over the years. I also worked with 
people like most of the usual posters here. People who got into IT because they 
were white and breathing. Many from the military. Ask 10 posters here a 
question and you get 4-5 different answers and every poster thinks his answer 
is absolute. There are literally thousands of mainframe system programmers, yet 
the 20-30 here will swear because their tiny shop eliminated the mainframe, 
mainframes are dying. Even when faced with facts that say otherwise. Plus, the 
security on the platform is unmatched. Hackers would love to be able to hack 
the mainframe since that’s where the money is. Banks being the big one.

I notice Bob Bridges listed these. “Did we learnanything from the Korean 
conflict, from the American civil war, the 100 Years' war, the Peloponnesian 
war, from Cain vs Abel?”

I’m shocked Bob didn’t mention the Crusades. Where “pro life Christians” 
massacred hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions over 200 years. But did 
mention Cain & Abel which is fictional.

Retirement is wonderful. I no longer have to deal with coworkers who can barely 
breathe and chew gum.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:37 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
nature.

Yeah, I found this on the internet too:

Noun[edit
]

*johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
*)

  1. (slang ) Penis
  . quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
  *see* Thesaurus:penis 

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
> because they can be easily found on the internet?
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
>> Timothy
>> > Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
>> > operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
>> 1980,
>> > initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
>> > soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
>> > purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM
>> for
>> > their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
>> > PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
>> kept
>> > pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft
>> in
>> > 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
>> > platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
>> > designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
>> some
>> > MS-DOS applications.*
>> >
>> > Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
>> > Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
>> 95
>> > as did Windows 3.1.
>> >
>> > Really who cares?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
>> >> start with.
>> >>
>> >> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
>> >> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent
>> story.
>> >> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>> >>
>> >> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>> >>
>> >> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which
>> was
>> >> to be called PC DOS.
>> >>
>> >> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to
>> exclude
>> >> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by
>> Microsoft.
>> >>
>> >> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was
>> owned
>> >> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership
>> of
>> >> DOS.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Wayne V. Bickerdike
>> >
>> >
>>

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Prove it.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:36 PM, Jon Perryman  wrote:

> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:03:04 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> A year later, fledgling company Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to sell 
> QDOS, renamed MS-
> DOS, to IBM for their newly developed IBM-PC.

IBM signed their contract with Microsoft in 1980 which happens to be 7 months 
before Microsoft bought QDOS. Rumor has it that IBM told Microsoft to buy it. 
There was no renaming MS-DOS. My understanding is that Microsoft began 
immediate sales of the product, but IBM delayed for a couple of years.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

English major you aren’t.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:34 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
because they can be easily found on the internet?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
> wrote:
>
> Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
> Timothy
> > Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
> > operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in 1980,
> > initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
> > soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
> > purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM for
> > their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
> > PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
> kept
> > pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft in
> > 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
> > platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
> > designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
> some
> > MS-DOS applications.*
> >
> > Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
> > Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
> 95
> > as did Windows 3.1.
> >
> > Really who cares?
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman 
> wrote:
> >
> >>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> >>
> >> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> >> start with.
> >>
> >> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
> >>
> >>
> >> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
> >> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent
> story.
> >> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
> >>
> >> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
> >>
> >> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which
> was
> >> to be called PC DOS.
> >>
> >> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to exclude
> >> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by
> Microsoft.
> >>
> >> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was owned
> >> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership
> of
> >> DOS.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Wayne V. Bickerdike
> >
> >
>
> --
> Wayne V. Bickerdike
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

A bigger head beats a bigger mouth every time. Johnson by name Johnson by
nature.

Yeah, I found this on the internet too:

Noun[edit
]

*johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
*)

   1. (slang ) Penis
   . quotations ▼synonym ▲Synonyms:
   *see* Thesaurus:penis 


On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:33 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

> Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
> because they can be easily found on the internet?
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
>> Timothy
>> > Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
>> > operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in
>> 1980,
>> > initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
>> > soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
>> > purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM
>> for
>> > their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
>> > PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
>> kept
>> > pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft
>> in
>> > 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
>> > platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
>> > designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
>> some
>> > MS-DOS applications.*
>> >
>> > Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
>> > Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
>> 95
>> > as did Windows 3.1.
>> >
>> > Really who cares?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
>> >> start with.
>> >>
>> >> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
>> >> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent
>> story.
>> >> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>> >>
>> >> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>> >>
>> >> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which
>> was
>> >> to be called PC DOS.
>> >>
>> >> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to
>> exclude
>> >> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by
>> Microsoft.
>> >>
>> >> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was
>> owned
>> >> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership
>> of
>> >> DOS.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Wayne V. Bickerdike
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Wayne V. Bickerdike
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
>
>
> --
> Wayne V. Bickerdike
>
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 04:03:04 PM PDT, Bill Johnson  wrote:
> A year later, fledgling company Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to sell 
> QDOS, renamed MS-
> DOS, to IBM for their newly developed IBM-PC.

IBM signed their contract with Microsoft in 1980 which happens to be 7 months 
before Microsoft bought QDOS. Rumor has it that IBM told Microsoft to buy it. 
There was no renaming MS-DOS. My understanding is that Microsoft began 
immediate sales of the product, but IBM delayed for a couple of years.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Way to miss the point Bill. Do you write programs that miss out things
because they can be easily found on the internet?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:23 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
> wrote:
>
> Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike 
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer
> Timothy
> > Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
> > operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in 1980,
> > initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
> > soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
> > purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM for
> > their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
> > PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions
> kept
> > pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft in
> > 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
> > platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
> > designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running
> some
> > MS-DOS applications.*
> >
> > Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
> > Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN
> 95
> > as did Windows 3.1.
> >
> > Really who cares?
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman 
> wrote:
> >
> >>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> >>
> >> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> >> start with.
> >>
> >> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
> >>
> >>
> >> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
> >> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent
> story.
> >> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
> >>
> >> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
> >>
> >> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which
> was
> >> to be called PC DOS.
> >>
> >> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to exclude
> >> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by
> Microsoft.
> >>
> >> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was owned
> >> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership
> of
> >> DOS.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Wayne V. Bickerdike
> >
> >
>
> --
> Wayne V. Bickerdike
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Help for US Talent

I haven't had any recruiters ask me about forklifts, but yeah, I do get some 
that just match me up with "something computer-related" and contact me about 
that.

But it occurs to me belatedly that you're talking about phone calls.  I don't 
know what you and I are doing differently, but most recruiters email me, and 
the rare phone calls I get are (so far) all w real gigs for me, I mean gigs 
that I might conceivably be interested in.

The ones that aren't a good match, or when it's two or three recruiters from 
the same company contacting me about the same req, those all come from just one 
or two recruiting companies.  But they almost never know my name, and I can 
throw their emails in my Junk folder without pangs of conscience.

Mostly if a recruiter knows my name (I mean, addresses his email to me and not 
just to "Greetings"), I take the trouble to reply politely.  They're still my 
source of work, after all.  And I may suddenly need to come out of my 
semi-retirement, in which case I want them to think well of me.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* The art of not reading is a very important one.  It consists in not taking 
an interest in whatever may be engaging the attention of the general public at 
any particular time. When some political or ecclesiastical pamphlet, or novel, 
or poem is making a great commotion, you should remember that he who writes for 
fools always finds a large public. A precondition for reading good books is not 
reading bad ones: for life is short.  -Schopenhauer */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Grant Taylor
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 18:43

I've dealt with way too many bad recruiters this year.  I've told them up 
front, what I'm looking for in very clear and concise manner.

I clearly provided; salary, location / remote, and job function.

Too many of them would inquire if I wanted to drive a forklift or install cable 
TV wiring in a completely different state across the country.

It got to the point that I would ban recruiter companies from my mail server 
after the 3rd such wildly incorrect inquiry.

It's routine for different recruiters from the same company to reach out, 
thinking that filtering is based on email address.  I've even had a recruiting 
company stop sending from their company email addresses and use Gmail in order 
to avoid email filters.

These are the low ball recruiters that I want to simply go away and stop 
talking to me.

--- On 8/14/23 3:23 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> Am I missing something?  Why the interest in making life hard for 
> recruiters?  Ok, I'm a contractor so my continued employment depends 
> on their existence.  Still, why?
>
> If I thought that you normally work under those conditions - $125/hr 
> or outside the US half the time - then of course you're just stating 
> up front one of your requirements.  From the tone, though, it sounds 
> like you're trying to make them unhappy for the fun of it.  Is there 
> something going on here that I'm not aware of?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story




Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:17 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

>
>
> *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer Timothy
> Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
> operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in 1980,
> initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
> soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
> purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM for
> their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
> PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions kept
> pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft in
> 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
> platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
> designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running some
> MS-DOS applications.*
>
> Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
> Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN 95
> as did Windows 3.1.
>
> Really who cares?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman  wrote:
>
>>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>>
>> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
>> start with.
>>
>> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
>>
>>
>> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
>> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent story.
>> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>>
>> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>>
>> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which was
>> to be called PC DOS.
>>
>> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to exclude
>> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by Microsoft.
>>
>> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was owned
>> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership of
>> DOS.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
>
>
> --
> Wayne V. Bickerdike
>
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Those aren’t the facts according to me. They are just the facts. Easily 
attainable via the internet. But, I understand you guys prefer to see who has 
the bigger head.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 7:16 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

*The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer Timothy
Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in 1980,
initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM for
their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions kept
pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft in
1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running some
MS-DOS applications.*

Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN 95
as did Windows 3.1.

Really who cares?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman  wrote:

>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>
> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> start with.
>
> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
>
>
> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent story.
> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>
> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>
> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which was
> to be called PC DOS.
>
> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to exclude
> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by Microsoft.
>
> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was owned
> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership of
> DOS.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features


On 8/14/23 4:30 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
We don't ask people to follow blindly. Instead, we don't give them 
another option. JCL, VSAM, availability to specific products and more 
ensure you are choosing wisely. Kurbernettes containers, cloud and more 
are implemented by sysprogs in a manner that meets the business needs.


How did the business learn that Kubernettes could meet business needs, 
much less decide that is what the business wanted to do without first 
testing / evaluating it?


That initial testing of Kubernettes is the very type of testing that I'm 
talking about.




Grant. . . .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Windows NT came from the VAX guys, I think.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:15 AM Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

>
>
> *The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer Timothy
> Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
> operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in 1980,
> initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
> soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
> purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM for
> their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
> PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions kept
> pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft in
> 1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
> platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
> designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running some
> MS-DOS applications.*
>
> Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
> Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN 95
> as did Windows 3.1.
>
> Really who cares?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman  wrote:
>
>>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>>
>> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
>> start with.
>>
>> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
>>
>>
>> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
>> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent story.
>> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>>
>> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>>
>> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which was
>> to be called PC DOS.
>>
>> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to exclude
>> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by Microsoft.
>>
>> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was owned
>> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership of
>> DOS.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
>
>
> --
> Wayne V. Bickerdike
>
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

*The facts. According to Bill Johnson.American computer programmer Timothy
Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer Products, wrote the original
operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 microprocessor in 1980,
initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System), which was
soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company Microsoft
purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM for
their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as
PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions kept
pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft in
1995, incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS
platform. Starting with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were
designed independently of MS-DOS, though they were capable of running some
MS-DOS applications.*

Facts but missing lots of pivotal events. No mention of Gary Kildall.
Windows 2.0 was a brief look at a Windows O/S. Windows 3.0 preceded WIN 95
as did Windows 3.1.

Really who cares?

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:09 AM Jon Perryman  wrote:

>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
>
> > My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> start with.
>
> > DOS was /Microsoft's.
>
>
> Again, if you want some insights, you can watch
> https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent story.
> Is this different from the story as you understand it?
>
> 1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.
>
> 2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which was
> to be called PC DOS.
>
> 3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to exclude
> ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by Microsoft.
>
> Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was owned
> by IBM and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership of
> DOS.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:15:12 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:

On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

> My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to start 
> with.

> DOS was /Microsoft's.

Again, if you want some insights, you can watch  
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 that seems to be the prevalent story. Is 
this different from the story as you understand it?

1. MS-DOS did not exist prior to IBM / Bill Gates meeting.

2. IBM wanted a new OS. IBM contractred Gates to create this OS which was to be 
called PC DOS.

3. Because IBM was gun shy from anti-trust lawsuits, it chose to exclude 
ownership of PC DOS thus allowing PC-DOS to be sold as MS-DOS by Microsoft.

Microsoft was not the sole owner of DOS. One piece of software was owned by IBM 
and Microsoft. It was IBM's choice not to retain sole ownership of DOS.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

Bank tellers do log on when they start work. Most of these scenarios
require a unique ID and if they hand over for breaks, they log off and a
relief teller will log on with a different ID.

There is generally a "supervisor" override. It used to be a physical key
they inserted and the teller software would detect this and elevate a
privilege, such as writing out a bank cheque (counter cheque or check for
you Yanks).

Similar things exist at supermarket checkouts and we would all have had the
supervisor come over if you didn't place your item in the bagging area.

As for the sysprog/application programmer discus. In the 1970s when I
joined the game, sysprog was either a clerical task or a very intense
assembler programming task. It could be either, however, IBM had the gurus
and the customer followed their best advice.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 2:06 AM Jon Perryman  wrote:

>  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 07:14:36 AM PDT, Phil Smith III <
> li...@akphs.com> wrote:
> > How many users do sites typically have these days?
> > In 1986, University of Waterloo had over 20,000 VM users
>
> z/OS is a server and as such, user counts are often irrelevant. TSO, IMS,
> Unix and CICS can have associated userids which is 1 person affect by 1
> userid. On the other hand, credit card transaction exceed 100M per day but
> it's not 100M people affected because people often use their credit card
> multiple times in a day. You will never know how many users of DB2 are
> affected when SAP is responsible for managing users. Unless you know every
> aspect of your z/OS, you can't say how many people (not users) are affected.
>
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

The facts.

American computer programmer Timothy Paterson, a developer for Seattle Computer 
Products, wrote the original operating system for the Intel Corporation’s 8086 
microprocessor in 1980, initially calling it QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating 
System), which was soon renamed 86-DOS. A year later, fledgling company 
Microsoft purchased exclusive rights to sell the system, renamed MS-DOS, to IBM 
for their newly developed IBM-PC. IBM-compatible versions were marketed as 
PC-DOS. Version 1.0 was released in 1981; additional upgraded versions kept 
pace with the rapidly evolving PC. Windows 95, introduced by Microsoft in 1995, 
incorporated MS-DOS 7.0 but ultimately superseded the MS-DOS platform. Starting 
with Windows NT, Microsoft’s operating systems were designed independently of 
MS-DOS, though they were capable of running some MS-DOS applications.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 6:43 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

IBM never showed enough interest or vision in microcomputer futures.

I quit IBM in 1979 to work with some former colleagues on microcomputer
software development. My IBM manager would have walked me if I had been
joining a competitor. This was the rule of the day. He said to me, "I don't
ever see IBM getting into that market, you can work out your notice period"
, (4 weeks).

At that time, there was no IBM PC, IBM was DP or OP (Data processing or
Office products). I worked for OP in software implementation for internal
systems. DP always assumed the senior position when bidding for sales. We
had the Series/1, System 34/38, Photocopiers, Selectric etc. Not hard to
see why IBM had no futurist identifying the "personal computer". It was
monolithic thinking. That's the SNA mindset, one big hub with dumb
terminals. It worked well but missed a lot of potential for small business
and artisans.

So we as a small business took on the challenge. We had CP/M, MP/M, Apple
Basic, NorthStar Horizon, Cromemco, early MicroFocus COBOL and 8080
Assembler to master. Long nights reading Dr Dobbs journal for hints. It was
challenging and we found it hard to make money. There was no venture
capital, all the money was still in box shifting. One big customer saw our
Catering stock control system and said, "Is it 3270 compatible?". LOL.

After a few years of trying, we went back to mainframe consulting and that
served me well for another forty years.

Somebody once said, "It's the vision thing". That and luck and timing.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 5:15 AM Grant Taylor <
023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> > I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree.  I agree
> > that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth developing.  And if
> > they had held onto MS-DOS and approached its development in the same
> > way that Microsoft did, sure, they'd probably be worth bazillions.
>
> My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> start with.
>
> DOS was /Microsoft's/.
>
> Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive rights to
> use / distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft?
>
>
>
> Grant. . . .
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

IBM never showed enough interest or vision in microcomputer futures.

I quit IBM in 1979 to work with some former colleagues on microcomputer
software development. My IBM manager would have walked me if I had been
joining a competitor. This was the rule of the day. He said to me, "I don't
ever see IBM getting into that market, you can work out your notice period"
, (4 weeks).

At that time, there was no IBM PC, IBM was DP or OP (Data processing or
Office products). I worked for OP in software implementation for internal
systems. DP always assumed the senior position when bidding for sales. We
had the Series/1, System 34/38, Photocopiers, Selectric etc. Not hard to
see why IBM had no futurist identifying the "personal computer". It was
monolithic thinking. That's the SNA mindset, one big hub with dumb
terminals. It worked well but missed a lot of potential for small business
and artisans.

So we as a small business took on the challenge. We had CP/M, MP/M, Apple
Basic, NorthStar Horizon, Cromemco, early MicroFocus COBOL and 8080
Assembler to master. Long nights reading Dr Dobbs journal for hints. It was
challenging and we found it hard to make money. There was no venture
capital, all the money was still in box shifting. One big customer saw our
Catering stock control system and said, "Is it 3270 compatible?". LOL.

After a few years of trying, we went back to mainframe consulting and that
served me well for another forty years.

Somebody once said, "It's the vision thing". That and luck and timing.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 5:15 AM Grant Taylor <
023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> > I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree.  I agree
> > that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth developing.  And if
> > they had held onto MS-DOS and approached its development in the same
> > way that Microsoft did, sure, they'd probably be worth bazillions.
>
> My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to
> start with.
>
> DOS was /Microsoft's/.
>
> Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive rights to
> use / distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft?
>
>
>
> Grant. . . .
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Help for US Talent


On 8/14/23 3:23 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
Am I missing something?  Why the interest in making life hard for 
recruiters?  Ok, I'm a contractor so my continued employment depends 
on their existence.  Still, why?


Recruiters aren't a problem if they are /good/ recruiters.  As in they 
pay attention to what you tell them and they don't bother you with 
things that don't qualify.


I've dealt with some good recruiters.  I've also dealt with some 
exceedingly bad recruiters.


If I thought that you normally work under those conditions - $125/hr 
or outside the US half the time - then of course you're just stating 
up front one of your requirements.  From the tone, though, it sounds 
like you're trying to make them unhappy for the fun of it.  Is there 
something going on here that I'm not aware of?


I've dealt with way too many bad recruiters this year.  I've told them 
up front, what I'm looking for in very clear and concise manner.


I clearly provided; salary, location / remote, and job function.

Too many of them would inquire if I wanted to drive a forklift or 
install cable TV wiring in a completely different state across the country.


It got to the point that I would ban recruiter companies from my mail 
server after the 3rd such wildly incorrect inquiry.


It's routine for different recruiters from the same company to reach 
out, thinking that filtering is based on email address.  I've even had a 
recruiting company stop sending from their company email addresses and 
use Gmail in order to avoid email filters.


These are the low ball recruiters that I want to simply go away and stop 
talking to me.




Grant. . . .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-14 Thread Cameron Conacher

Perhaps he was referring to OS/2?
Microsoft and IBM collaborated for a while.

Thanks

…….Cameron

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 6:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

I dunno. Jon Perryman said they had DOS and they let it go to Microsoft during 
other negotiations; I just took it from there. --- Bob Bridges, robhbridges@ 
gmail. com, cell 336 382-7313 /* You might be a physics major if, when your 
professor

I dunno.  Jon Perryman said they had DOS and they let it go to Microsoft during 
other negotiations; I just took it from there.

---

Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 
382-7313

/* You might be a physics major if, when your professor asks you where your 
homework is, you claim accidentally to have determined its momentum so 
precisely that according to Heisenberg it could be anywhere in the universe. */

-Original Message-

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> On Behalf Of Grant 
Taylor

Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 18:15

My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to start with.

DOS was /Microsoft's/.

Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive rights to use / 
distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft?

--- On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

> I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree.  I agree

> that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth developing.  And if

> they had held onto MS-DOS and approached its development in the same

> way that Microsoft did, sure, they'd probably be worth bazillions.

-Original Message-

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman

Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 00:25

Stories vary widely but the most prevalent can be seen at 
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339
 which I positioned around the relevant time.

The story goes that MS-DOS did not exist at that time and IBM could have 
required exclusive rights but instead intentionally gave up its exclusive 
rights to MS-DOS for $0 during negotiations.

--

For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,

send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with 
the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

American Express made the following annotations

This e-mail was sent to you by a representative of Amex Bank of Canada, P.O. 
Box 3204, Station "F", Toronto, ON, M1W 3W7, www.americanexpress.ca. If you no 
longer wish to receive these e-mails, please notify the sender by reply e-mail.

This e-mail is solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential 
or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
disclosure, copying, use, or distribution of the information included in this 
e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify 
the sender by reply e-mail and immediately and permanently delete this e-mail 
and any attachments. Thank you.

American Express a fait les remarques suivantes
Ce courriel vous a été envoyé par un représentant de la Banque Amex du Canada, 
C.P. 3204, succursale F, Toronto (Ontario) M1W 3W7, www.americanexpress.ca. Si, 
par la suite, vous ne souhaitez plus recevoir ces courriels, veuillez en aviser 
les expéditeurs par courriel.

Ce courriel est réservé au seul destinataire indiqué et peut renfermer des 
renseignements confidentiels et privilégiés. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire 
prévu, toute divulgation, duplication, utilisation ou distribution du courriel 
est interdite. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel par erreur, veuillez en aviser 
l’expéditeur par courriel et détruire immédiatement le courriel et toute pièce 
jointe. Merci.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

I dunno.  Jon Perryman said they had DOS and they let it go to Microsoft during 
other negotiations; I just took it from there.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* You might be a physics major if, when your professor asks you where your 
homework is, you claim accidentally to have determined its momentum so 
precisely that according to Heisenberg it could be anywhere in the universe. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Grant Taylor
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 18:15

My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to start with.

DOS was /Microsoft's/.

Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive rights to use / 
distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft?

--- On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree.  I agree 
> that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth developing.  And if 
> they had held onto MS-DOS and approached its development in the same 
> way that Microsoft did, sure, they'd probably be worth bazillions.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 00:25

Stories vary widely but the most prevalent can be seen at 
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 which I positioned around the relevant time.

The story goes that MS-DOS did not exist at that time and IBM could have 
required exclusive rights but instead intentionally gave up its exclusive 
rights to MS-DOS for $0 during negotiations. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

2023-08-14 Thread Andrew Rowley


On 14/08/2023 3:30 pm, Jon Perryman wrote:

  > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 04:33:24 PM PDT, Andrew Rowley 
 wrote:

It comes back to the question I asked earlier - how much space is it
reasonable to use *to do your job* before you have to get the storage
admin involved?

Since you put it that way, I've got to say are you insane. The storage admin 
based his decision on things called facts. He is responsible for storage and 
his decision is final until his management tells him otherwise. I suggest you 
inform your company CEO that all decisions must go through you.


That was a question, not a decision.

We all use space on the system, whether it be personal JCL libraries, 
sort work space, job output etc.


If your manager says "Can you investigate this CICS problem from 
yesterday" and you want to analyze the SMF data, at what point do you 
need to ask the storage admin for space for sort work, data files etc?


100MB? 1GB? 100GB?

I recognize that there has to be a limit where the storage admin has to 
be involved, but what is a reasonable value? Should it be different for 
a unix temporary file than for a sort work dataset?


Maybe I decide the best way to investigate this problem is to generate 
JSON from the data and load it into Splunk. Is the disk space available? 
Or should I just download the CICS SMF data to the PC and process it there?


Spool space, sort work space, user datasets - that space all comes from 
pools and when you delete the data the space is returned for use by 
other users. For some reason we set up a system for unix files where 
free space isn't automatically returned, and cannot be used by other 
users. This makes things unnecessarily difficult on the mainframe.


--
Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

, I had boss or two in my first thirty years (not all by any means) who 
would occasionally say "Now, Bob, I want you to do this task, but I don't want 
you to write a program to do it - just do it".  From this you would be 
justified in surmising that I like programming, and often write something to 
make the task go faster next time.

When that happened I sometimes just did it, but other times I'd take a little 
extra time and figure out how to code it, maybe on my own time and maybe not.  
To some extent it is to this kind of calculated disobedience that I attribute 
what I am today, working for clients who ~value~ the tools I create for myself 
and others.  I don't blame those old bosses for not being sure of the benefit.  
But I don't try too hard to feel guilty for making up my own mind about it, 
either.

Nowadays I'm better off.  When a PM said that to me a few years ago, I was in a 
position to tell him "With respect, I won't delegate that decision to you.  You 
folks hired me to do the best job for you.  This is my expertise; I'll decide 
whether it's better to write a utility for this or Just Do It."  He and I 
fought a lot, but we respected each other too and we got a ton of work done for 
the client during that tumultuous time.

Mostly, as you say, bosses ~like~ it when you expand your abilities.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* See everything.  Overlook a great deal.  Improve a little.  -Pope John XXIII 
*/

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 17:30

yearly performance review when they discuss advancement? Every manager I 
had discusses personal and job growth which included at least 1 
self-improvement item. Do you feel the need to go behind their backs when there 
is something that you want to learn?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Help for US Talent

2023-08-14 Thread Rupert Reynolds

Best bit of recruiter trolling I heard of was when Dylan Beatie created the
Rockstar programming language :-)

Roops

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023, 20:52 Steve Beaver, <
050e0c375a14-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Every time a recruiter calls me I have a sure way get rid of them and
> increase what they need to pay.
>
>
>
> They ask me if I'm Steve, and I say yes
>
>
>
> Then I tell them "Are you calling me with a job that pays $125/HR W2 or
> $210,000 perm?"
>
>
>
> You hear them fade or die on the other end then I hang up.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe


On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree.  I agree 
that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth developing.  And if 
they had held onto MS-DOS and approached its development in the same 
way that Microsoft did, sure, they'd probably be worth bazillions.


My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to 
start with.


DOS was /Microsoft's/.

Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive rights to 
use / distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft?




Grant. . . .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 06:34:35 AM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>> On 8/14/23 12:54 AM, Jon Perryman wrote:

>> You're confusing z/OS with Unix where all programmers are

>> systems programmers who can do anything they want.

> No, I'm not confusing z/OS with Unix.

> I'm speaking agnosticly about any OS that will run on the platform;

> z/OS, VM, z/TPF, or even Linux.

Of course you are confusing z/OS mentality with UNIX mentality. Based on your 
expectations of z/OS, you come from the Unix world. In z/OS, we expect 
accounting programmers to expand their knowledge about accounting instead 
learning to make their programs perform better. There are sysprogs who monitor 
and solve performance problems.

If you want more control over your life, then become a z/OS sysprog. 

> What is better for the business, discouraging people from learning

Do you sleep during your yearly performance review when they discuss 
advancement? Every manager I had discusses personal and job growth which 
included at least 1 self-improvement item. Do you feel the need to go behind 
their backs when there is something that you want to learn? How much control do 
you need?

> If anything the cost of the system implies that it will be more

> difficult for newcomers to gain access to the platform to learn.

What difficulty for a newcomer are you talking about? IBM has a free learning 
platform that is available for newcomers. If a newcomer is hired, then the 
company has a learning plan in place

> What gives you the impression that any and all things to be investigated

> don't go through the change approval board and don't have managerial support.

Are you saying they were told you needed 100GB but they simply forgot to 
approve that as part of the request?

> My experience is that these older DR systems gain some additional value

> to the business if they are /also/ used to host sandbox VMs / LPARs.

Are you saying that as a programmer, you were trained on the implications of 
using these DR systems? There are monthly hardware, software, personnel and 
facilities costs which is different for everyone. How is it that as a 
programmer, you know all about it?

>> Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control.

> I've never heard that before.

> I question the veracity of the idea that everything is about control.

How long are you willing to be a cobol programmer? If you never heard that, 
then you must have your head buried in the sand because it comes up every 
couple of years.

>> Why do you think it's difficult to get z/OS programmers.

> Would you rather have someone that blindly follows directions

We don't ask people to follow blindly. Instead, we don't give them another 
option. JCL, VSAM, availability to specific products and more ensure you are 
choosing wisely. Kurbernettes containers, cloud and more are implemented by 
sysprogs in a manner that meets the business needs.

> I can't think of a single instance that providing a test / sandbox / lab

> instance has been a net negative.

Are you a sysprog? You're not thinking hard enough. Are you dealing with a 
service provider or are you a service provider? Are you using provisioning or 
some other pricing schedule? You have to look for negatives to find them.

> If you believe that proof of concepts are not necessary, 

I never made that claim. I do however question the wisdom of letting everyone 
do proof of concept for anything they desire. 

> Nothing about a what I'm advocating for negates, sidesteps, or
> usurps change control or approval process. 

Stop using motivated reasoning. The storage admin gives you 100 bytes of 
storage but you want 100GB. You don't think his limit should apply to you and 
therefore don't consider this part of the approval process. You directly want 
to usurp the approval process otherwise we wouldn't be discussing it.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users - State Farm

2023-08-14 Thread Tony Thigpen

For a long time, every State Farm office had an 'unattended VSE' system 
running on a PC370/PC390. They were pulled out late '80s / early '90s.


I remember when the number of installed VSE sites took a nose-dive due 
to these removals. There was a lot of 'neat' things removed from VSE 
afterwards.


Tony Thigpen

Bob Bridges wrote on 8/14/23 2:24 PM:

I had an abbreviated contract at State Farm in [checks his records] the spring 
of 2006; they hired me as a RACF analyst, so I was all TSO there.  No idea 
about other platforms.  I just remember boggling at them having more than a 
hundred LPARs and I forget how many hard-drive units.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* In order to write for "The A-Team", you'd have to be a much better writer than most of those who 
write the evening news at networks and local stations — forget about shows like "Hill Street Blues" 
or "The Muppet Show", where writing REALLY counts.  -Linda Ellerbee in _And So It Goes_ */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Grant Taylor
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 13:45

State Farm is one of the biggest install bases that I'm aware of.  But I 
question how many (emulated) terminals were actually connected to the mainframe.

I know that in the late '80s / early '90s State Farm had dumb terminals on many 
people's desks.  But there were also a lot of PCs running terminal emulation.

What I don't know is how many of those terminals were logged into the mainframe 
vs an AS/400.

I have a family member who was my visibility into the State Farm Regional 
Offices in the '80s and '90s before becoming an agent in the late '90s / early 
'00s.

I know for a fact that in their office as an agent that their dumb terminals 
and terminal emulators were connected to the in office AS/400 and that they 
could do much of, if not all of, the day to day things on the AS/400 even if 
the WAN connection to the mainframe in the R.O. was disconnected.  They would 
run into problems if the link to the R.O. was down overnight as part of batched 
operations.  But day to day things worked perfectly fine disconnected from the 
R.O.

I would consider these users to be logged into the local AS/400 and /not/ 
logged into the mainframe.

Similarly, it's my understanding that State Farm has rows of AS/400s in the 
R.O. that were used to front end the terminals in the R.O.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

2023-08-14 Thread Phil Smith III

Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>I guess it all comes down to what is the OP trying to determine and
>the use of "Users" is ambiguous if you're really counting people
>impacted.

A fair question. It's nothing very specific-more just a sense of "How many 
people CAN/DO log onto TSO in your shop these days?"

It would admittedly be a lot more interesting with historical numbers 
available. A decline also is not, as others have noted, significant in terms of 
the importance of z/OS to a given shop.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: ransomware on z

2023-08-14 Thread Tony Thigpen

And, that I can agree with. Especially when the admin stores passwords 
in their browser.


Tony Thigpen

Timothy Sipples wrote on 8/14/23 12:51 AM:

Responding primarily to Tony, I'll just say that when an adversary (internal or external) 
gains control over the PC that the privileged storage administrator uses, particularly 
when there's no true multi-factor authentication in the loop, then it's probably 
"game over."

—
Timothy Sipples
Senior Architect
Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity
IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific
sipp...@sg.ibm.com


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Certificate labels

2023-08-14 Thread Phil Smith III

Way back 15+ years ago, when we were first porting our product to z/OS, we had 
to implement a transport provider, since there was no curl for z/OS at the time 
(or if there was, there was some reason we couldn't use it-I forget, but since 
several of our other platforms use it, I'm pretty sure we woulda if we coulda). 
So we did, using System SSL. Which has been very stable and reliable; our 
biggest issues, such as they are, have come from the fact that it's a 
lower-level API than libcurl. This means that when, say, TLSv1.2 or SNI come 
along, we have to make code changes, rather than just dropping in a new 
libcurl. But that's ok, we're used to it now.

 

So this isn't a complaint about System SSL. Rather, it's a question that may 
simply come down to doc that's unclear (or at least was to us), and possibly a 
buglet.

 

Our code is an application to the (x86-based) key and policy server, though 
it's an STC on z/OS, which reaches out to that server to get policy, stuff like 
that. All via SSL (and nowadays TLS). So what we need is the appropriate root 
certificate for the server's certificate.

 

In Cryptographic Services System Secure Sockets Layer Programming (SC14-7495-40 
- is that really a -40 version? Wow!!), it says:

GSK_KEYRING_LABEL

Specifies the label of the key that is used to authenticate the application. 
The default key is used if a key label is not specified. GSK_KEYRING_LABEL may 
be specified for an SSL environment or an SSL connection. If either the 
GSK_CLIENT_CERT_CALLBACK function or the GSK_SNI_CALLBACK function is 
registered, the key label can be set or reset by the callback function after a 
call to gsk_secure_socket_init().

 

When we read the doc above, we said, "OK, somebody MIGHT want to specify a 
label on their certificate when they're configuring. Not sure why, but we 
should support it". We thus allow for it on the TrustStore specification, and 
call gsk_attribute_set_buffer() if we find it.

 

Recently, while helping a customer, we wanted to try to figure out which 
specific root certificate (of two) was being used with gskkyman. I thought 
"Well, we can just specify the label", so we did. And it worked: the connection 
worked first try! But I'm a paranoid sort, so I tried the other label. Which 
also worked. Hmm. So I tried a non-existent label, and it failed.

 

In discussion offline with Charles, he noted that he's never seen a use for a 
label with a root certificate. Maybe the doc is just unclear, and "authenticate 
the application" would read better as "authenticate the client application", 
perhaps adding "when using a client certificate"? Maybe "The default key is 
used if a key label is not specified" implies client, and I do see that C-word 
in the fourth sentence, but conditionally-to me, at least, that doesn't scream 
"This is only relevant for client certificates". What say ye? I believe him 
about labels not making sense for roots, but does this seem unclear to others?

 

The rest of the question is of course why it fails with an invalid label. I 
posit that specification of a label causes it to look for it, but then it 
doesn't get used later: So if the search fails, it complains, but if it 
succeeds, it ignores it. That would be a (trivial) bug, if so, I think.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

Jon, maybe you didn't mean to but this is a bait-and-switch.  You baited them 
with "...for more control".  When Mr Spiegel questioned that and asked for 
specifics, you offered something else entirely: Unix is more challenging, and 
there was a claim that it's superior.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Realism demands that we face the good along with the bad. In spite of all 
reductionist theories of human motives, we heartily love mercy, gallantry, 
beauty, heroism and nobility.  -Joseph Sobran, 1998 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 15:42

Is cobol bringing in top computer professionals because of the challenges 
it poses? Who was it that convinced companies to switch from MVS to Unix 
because it is superior? Do you consider Unix files superior when they haven't 
changed since they were first conceived? Programmers flee to Unix because it 
offers real computer challenges instead of z/OS forcing them to focus on the 
business. 

> --- On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:09:33 AM PDT, David Spiegel wrote:
> You said: "...Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full 
> control. I have not once heard any  programmer leave for more control.
> Could this be a west-coast specific mentality? ... It would not be surprising.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Help for US Talent

Am I missing something?  Why the interest in making life hard for recruiters?  
Ok, I'm a contractor so my continued employment depends on their existence.  
Still, why?

If I thought that you normally work under those conditions - $125/hr or outside 
the US half the time - then of course you're just stating up front one of your 
requirements.  From the tone, though, it sounds like you're trying to make them 
unhappy for the fun of it.  Is there something going on here that I'm not aware 
of?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* I have never been hurt by anything I didn't say.  -Calvin Coolidge */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
rpinion865
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 16:01

I ask them, as a US citizen with a legal residence in the State of Tennessee, 
may I work remotely, outside of the USA for at least six months a year? I 
usually never hear from them again.

 Original Message 
On Aug 14, 2023, 3:52 PM, Steve Beaver wrote:

> Every time a recruiter calls me I have a sure way get rid of them and 
> increase what they need to pay. They ask me if I'm Steve, and I say 
> yes Then I tell them "Are you calling me with a job that pays $125/HR 
> W2 or $210,000 perm?" You hear them fade or die on the other end then 
> I hang up. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

2023-08-14 Thread Steve Thompson

"Is it a non-west-coast specific mentality to ignore reality? Is 
COBOL bringing in top computer professionals because of the 
challenges it poses? "


How about the prestigious Schools telling their students that 
COBOL is a dead or dying language? And indicating that Mainframes 
are obsolete and not keeping up with technology?


I have relatives that have retired from a university (in the 
USofA) and one of them worked with Grad Students to help them get 
the computer lab time they needed, while also helping them get 
the resources they needed for any experiments and the like they 
needed to do involving IT.


I also have a relative that retired in Germany from a school 
there, who had been teaching English to students from India. We 
won't get started on this, but I'm not making this stuff up.


And they knew that I worked on mainframes. But when I told them 
that the language you say is dead is also an OO Language now. I 
told them about a few Standards put out for COBOL. They were 
astonished. Now granted, I know more about COBOL's pseudo OO 
abilities than I did back then. But that school got rid of their 
mainframe decades ago.  And they had NO idea that the current IBM 
mainframes could run Java, c/C++, etc.


They had no idea that the majority of their credit card 
transactions were being handled by a mainframe somewhere. They 
didn't know how many Banks, financial entities, Airlines, etc. 
ran their biz using obsolete mainframes making millions of 
obsolete dollars doing it.



It is my opinion that the universities seem to be in their own 
Echo Chamber.


And then to add insult to injury, they weren't (at that time) 
teaching any computer languages, they only taught theory.   Say 
What!?! Yes, they only teach theory. So students have to learn a 
language on their own to get employed in IT.


This is one of the top schools in the country. Not at Harvard's 
level, but something around Stanford's Level (speaking of 
Standford, they are the ones that destroyed the source for Wylbur 
when they migrated it to a non-mainframe environment).


Then, I learned that several people from India that I had been 
working with had degrees, said that the school they went to in 
India only taught theory, they didn't teach any languages either!!


It was no wonder that because I took care of the tool for getting 
compiles done, that they were using me for a help desk so I 
couldn't concentrate on things I needed to get done. The 
"compiler" had thrown an ABEND and I needed to fix it.  The 
"compiler" was the utility for generating JCL to do their 
compiles. So it knew how to put together all the translators 
(CICS, DB2, IDMS, ProCOBOL, and all the linkedit stuff and DB2 
BIND. The ABEND was the step after LINKEDIT which had failed with 
a non-zero CC. We had to put in these ABEND steps because they 
didn't bother to check if everything had worked before they'd 
run|reran their JOB to test the program.


This is the level of people with degrees and a visa we are 
getting. That's my experience at one large insurance company. And 
you wonder about the recruiters that are also here with visas?


Management wants to go cheap. They get what they pay for.

Steve Thompson

ps. Mainframes had color monitors in the mid-70s. Management 
didn't want to pay for them. Today mainframe is called Green 
screen. We had color before the PCs did. Just think about that.



On 8/14/2023 3:41 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:

  > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:09:33 AM PDT, David Spiegel wrote:

You said: "...Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control.
I have not once heard any  programmer leave for more control.
Could this be a west-coast specific mentality? ... It would not be surprising.

Is it a non-west-coast specific mentality to ignore reality? Is cobol bringing 
in top computer professionals because of the challenges it poses? Who was it 
that convinced companies to switch from MVS to Unix because it is superior? Do 
you consider Unix files superior when they haven't changed since they were 
first conceived? Programmers flee to Unix because it offers real computer 
challenges instead of z/OS forcing them to focus on the business.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree.  I agree that IBM 
didn't think the PC software was worth developing.  And if they had held onto 
MS-DOS and approached its development in the same way that Microsoft did, sure, 
they'd probably be worth bazillions.

(Probably.  I suppose there's market perception involved here too; maybe 
customers accepted software from Microsoft in numbers that they wouldn't have 
from IBM.  But I don't know how to evaluate that, so lets pretend it's not an 
issue.)

Where we may disagree is in your belief - what I think is your belief - that 
IBM was therefore short-sighted to let it go.  What I was hinting at a week or 
so ago is that IBM was ~always~ going to judge that MS-DOS wasn't worth their 
bother, and they were never going to develop it as Microsoft did, and therefore 
(in a sense) they did the sensible thing by letting go of it, letting someone 
else take it and run with it.  They did themselves no harm because they would 
never have done it themselves - and incidentally in the process they did the 
rest of us an enormous favor.  And did themselves the same favor, because I can 
be certain without looking that every employee at IBM now has a powerful PC on 
his desk, which would not have happened had they kept control of DOS themselves.

If IBM were a different company, sure, maybe that different company should have 
held on to MS-DOS.  But as it is ...

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* [Your patient] has not yet been anything like long enough with the Enemy to 
have any real humility yet.  What he says, even on his knees, about his own 
sinfulness is all parrot talk.  At bottom, he still believes he has run up a 
very favourable credit balance in the Enemy's ledger by allowing himself to be 
converted  -advice to a tempter from The Screwtape Letters by C S Lewis */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 15:23

I'm saying that if IBM retained control in MS-DOS and put in the same effort as 
z/OS, they could have been worth bazillions. The problem is that IBM has always 
been half-assed in the PC market. Bill Gates didn't do anything groundbreaking. 
MS-Windows came 6 years after Mac. The mouse & GUI was invented by Xerox before 
1973. These corporations simply considered PC's chump change not worth the 
bother. IBM and Xerox failed because they considered PC more of a nuisance than 
a goldmine.

> --- On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 06:56:39 AM PDT, Bob Bridges 
>  wrote:
> Wait, MS-DOS is what you were talking about, before?  You're 
> suggesting that if IBM had hung on to MS-DOS at the time, they would now be 
> worth bazillions instead of Microsoft?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Help for US Talent

2023-08-14 Thread Tom Brennan

Very funny, until they go back to their CIO and say, "This platform is 
getting way too expensive.  Time to look at SAP on x86 again."


On 8/14/2023 12:52 PM, Steve Beaver wrote:

Every time a recruiter calls me I have a sure way get rid of them and
increase what they need to pay.

  


They ask me if I'm Steve, and I say yes

  


Then I tell them "Are you calling me with a job that pays $125/HR W2 or
$210,000 perm?"

  


You hear them fade or die on the other end then I hang up.

  

  



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Help for US Talent

2023-08-14 Thread rpinion865

I ask them, as a US citizen with a legal residence in the State of Tennessee, 
may I work remotely, outside of the USA for at least six months a year? I 
usually never hear from them again.

Sent from Proton Mail mobile

 Original Message 
On Aug 14, 2023, 3:52 PM, Steve Beaver wrote:

> Every time a recruiter calls me I have a sure way get rid of them and 
> increase what they need to pay. They ask me if I'm Steve, and I say yes Then 
> I tell them "Are you calling me with a job that pays $125/HR W2 or $210,000 
> perm?" You hear them fade or die on the other end then I hang up. 
> -- For 
> IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
> lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Help for US Talent

2023-08-14 Thread Steve Beaver

Every time a recruiter calls me I have a sure way get rid of them and
increase what they need to pay.

 

They ask me if I'm Steve, and I say yes 

 

Then I tell them "Are you calling me with a job that pays $125/HR W2 or
$210,000 perm?"

 

You hear them fade or die on the other end then I hang up.

 

 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

 
> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:37:18 AM PDT, Lionel B Dyck 
>  wrote:

> I’ve never heard that before in my 50+ years

I'm surprised that people don't hear about these skills gaps when they are 
mentioned every couple years.
https://techchannel.com/Enterprise/10/2019/closing-cobol-programming-skills-gap



On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:37:18 AM PDT, Lionel B Dyck  
wrote:
 
 
 I’ve never heard that before in my 50+ years. 

Lionel B. Dyck <
Website: www.lbdsoftware.com
Sent from my iPhone 12 Pro

Worry more about your character than your reputation.  Character is what you 
are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John Wooden 

> On Aug 14, 2023, at 5:09 AM, David Spiegel 
> <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jon,
> You said: "...Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control. 
> Why do you think it's difficult to get z/OS programmers. ..."
> I've been doing MVS Systems Programming  for 40+ years and have not once 
> heard any  programmer leave for more control.
> Could this be a west-coast specific mentality? ... It would not be surprising.
> 
> Regards,
> David
> 
>> On 2023-08-14 01:54, Jon Perryman wrote:
>>  > On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 06:04:55 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>> These statements cause me to pause.  They seem somewhat antithetical to
>>> welcoming and encouraging people to use the mainframe / z/OS.
>> 
>>> Why is it absurd to allow everyone to do a Proof Of Concept on z/OS?
>> You're confusing z/OS with Unix where all programmers are systems 
>> programmers who can do anything they want. z/OS is NOT about be welcoming 
>> and encouraging. It's about what's best for the business. Your on a 
>> multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands. As a business programmer 
>> (not Unix sysprog), you're not qualified nor authorized to make these 
>> decisions.
>> 
>> Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control. Why do you 
>> think it's difficult to get z/OS programmers.
>>      On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 06:04:55 PM PDT, Grant Taylor 
>><023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>>>    On 8/7/23 9:56 AM, Jon Perryman wrote:
>>> It's absurd to allow everyone to do Proof Of Concept on z/OS. Are
>>> all POC vital to the business? Are POCs disruptive to the business?
>> These statements cause me to pause.  They seem somewhat antithetical to
>> welcoming and encouraging people to use the mainframe / z/OS.
>> 
>> Why is it absurd to allow everyone to do a Proof Of Concept on z/OS?
>> 
>> Is there anything about z/OS that would cause you to worry about the
>> security and stability of the system?
>> 
>> Do you not trust a tiny VM / LPAR running a test instance of z/OS with
>> absolutely minimal resources explicitly for such PoCs?
>> 
>> I'd think that it would be a huge win for the platform to try to get
>> more people to do things on it.
>> 
>> No, not all PoCs are vital to the business.  But I think that it's
>> difficult to tell if any given PoC is vital until /after/ it has been
>> tested.
>> 
>> I suspect that there were people that thought that TCP/IP wasn't vital
>> to the system back in SNA's heyday.  Yet here we are 20+ years later and
>> the idea of having any system without a TCP/IP stack is unthinkable.
>> How long would TCP/IP for the mainframe have been delayed if someone
>> didn't allow such a PoC until /after/ evidence showed that it was needed.
>> 
>> I sincerely doubt that operators /needed/ to create programs that
>> printed interesting things to printers after hours.  But I suspect that
>> many learned a thing or two about the system while doing so.
>> 
>> I would sincerely hope that VM / LPAR could contain anything running in
>> a tiny z/OS instance such that it couldn't be disruptive to the system.
>> 
>> Or, if it was somehow disruptive to the system, that might be a good
>> indicator that something needs to be tuned or a bug needs to be fixed
>> thereby enhancing the larger mainframe z/OS / z/VM community.
>> 
>> I think that encouraging people to do things on the mainframe / z/OS is
>> a *GOOD* thing.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Grant. . . .
>> 
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>  
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO

Re: USS Features

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 03:09:33 AM PDT, David Spiegel wrote:
> You said: "...Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control. 
> I have not once heard any  programmer leave for more control.
> Could this be a west-coast specific mentality? ... It would not be surprising.

Is it a non-west-coast specific mentality to ignore reality? Is cobol bringing 
in top computer professionals because of the challenges it poses? Who was it 
that convinced companies to switch from MVS to Unix because it is superior? Do 
you consider Unix files superior when they haven't changed since they were 
first conceived? Programmers flee to Unix because it offers real computer 
challenges instead of z/OS forcing them to focus on the business. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 06:56:39 AM PDT, Bob Bridges 
 >  wrote:
> Wait, MS-DOS is what you were talking about, before?  You're suggesting that 
> if IBM had hung on to 
> MS-DOS at the time, they would now be worth bazillions instead of Microsoft?

I'm saying that if IBM retained control in MS-DOS and put in the same effort as 
z/OS, they could have been worth bazillions. The problem is that IBM has always 
been half-assed in the PC market. Bill Gates didn't do anything groundbreaking. 
MS-Windows came 6 years after Mac. The mouse & GUI was invented by Xerox before 
1973. These corporations simply considered PC's chump change not worth the 
bother. IBM and Xerox failed because they considered PC more of a nuisance than 
a goldmine.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

 > On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 07:14:36 AM PDT, Phil Smith III 
 >  wrote:
> How many users do sites typically have these days?
> In 1986, University of Waterloo had over 20,000 VM users

z/OS is a server and as such, user counts are often irrelevant. TSO, IMS, Unix 
and CICS can have associated userids which is 1 person affect by 1 userid. On 
the other hand, credit card transaction exceed 100M per day but it's not 100M 
people affected because people often use their credit card multiple times in a 
day. You will never know how many users of DB2 are affected when SAP is 
responsible for managing users. Unless you know every aspect of your z/OS, you 
can't say how many people (not users) are affected.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

Never thought about any of that.  Since COVID this client has a lot more remote 
workers (as a contract worker I've been remote for the last decade and a bit 
more); does that imply anything?  Probably not; Backhoe Bob would mess 
something up on the grounds of the HQ itself, and if he brought the mainframe 
down it would affect everyone whether or not they're on-site.  Anyway, it 
hasn't happened since they hired me in 2019.

Active vs idle:  There are certainly folks who spend most of their time on the 
mainframe, right?  The IT people of course: developers, sysprogs, operations, 
the security admins.  But in an insurance company I would think the adjustors 
and many of the financial folks would spend lots of time on the mainframe too.  
And there are special agencies that are actually run by in-house folks to 
support the independents, answering questions and addressing problems; they 
probably stay pretty busy.

But about the actual agents out there I know less.  They do connect to the 
mainframe using individual IDs, but what they see is a GUI front end that hits 
up CICS for the information it presents to them in a friendlier format; that 
implies to me that all the mainframe sees is a half-second interaction for each 
inquiry, and I'll bet an agent spends most of his time on the phone and only a 
few minutes at a time looking things up.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is 
possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is 
impossible, he is very probably wrong.  -Arthur C Clarke's 1st law. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Grant Taylor
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 13:45

If you can, please elaborate if those users can function for most of their job 
if the mainframe is inaccessible due to Backhoe Bob chewing on WAN connections 
again?

Do you have any idea how many of those are /active/ vs /idle/ logged in users?

--- On 8/14/23 9:55 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> Currently I have an insurance company as my main client; in-house 
> there are about 220 managers who review access, with let's guess an 
> average of five mainframe reports each.  They also have about 400 
> independent agents that use a system that ultimately connects them to 
> the mainframe, and each of those may have one or two assistants with 
> their own IDs.  That's probably typical for an insurance company.
> I couldn't guess about how many might be logged on at once.  Oh, sure 
> I could, but it's just a guess:  If there are 2000 mainframe IDs, 
> maybe 500 at a time?  Purest guess.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

Reasonable.  As a security geek, I tend to think of "users" as anyone who has 
an ID on the mainframe.  If a back end pulls information on its own authority, 
then thousands of users can use it and it's still just one (high-volume) ID.  
But if, as sometimes happens, the back-end app logs each user on to the 
mainframe under the user's own ID, I tend to count them even though they're 
probably unaware of the process.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Everything comes to him who hustles while he waits.  -Thomas A Edison */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Grant Taylor
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 13:45

I count people that spend any amount of time interacting with the system 
directly, be it a TSO READY prompt, or ISPF, or something with VM, et al.  But 
I don't count things that connect to a front end that make back end calls to 
the mainframe as being logged into the mainframe.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users - State Farm

I had an abbreviated contract at State Farm in [checks his records] the spring 
of 2006; they hired me as a RACF analyst, so I was all TSO there.  No idea 
about other platforms.  I just remember boggling at them having more than a 
hundred LPARs and I forget how many hard-drive units.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* In order to write for "The A-Team", you'd have to be a much better writer 
than most of those who write the evening news at networks and local stations — 
forget about shows like "Hill Street Blues" or "The Muppet Show", where writing 
REALLY counts.  -Linda Ellerbee in _And So It Goes_ */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Grant Taylor
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 13:45

State Farm is one of the biggest install bases that I'm aware of.  But I 
question how many (emulated) terminals were actually connected to the mainframe.

I know that in the late '80s / early '90s State Farm had dumb terminals on many 
people's desks.  But there were also a lot of PCs running terminal emulation.

What I don't know is how many of those terminals were logged into the mainframe 
vs an AS/400.

I have a family member who was my visibility into the State Farm Regional 
Offices in the '80s and '90s before becoming an agent in the late '90s / early 
'00s.

I know for a fact that in their office as an agent that their dumb terminals 
and terminal emulators were connected to the in office AS/400 and that they 
could do much of, if not all of, the day to day things on the AS/400 even if 
the WAN connection to the mainframe in the R.O. was disconnected.  They would 
run into problems if the link to the R.O. was down overnight as part of batched 
operations.  But day to day things worked perfectly fine disconnected from the 
R.O.

I would consider these users to be logged into the local AS/400 and /not/ 
logged into the mainframe.

Similarly, it's my understanding that State Farm has rows of AS/400s in the 
R.O. that were used to front end the terminals in the R.O.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users


On 8/14/23 9:55 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
If we're limiting the count to on-line in-house users - I'm talking 
about TSO, CICS etc - I suspect State Farm might have a thousand 
users logged on at a time (that's a massive system) but a few hundred 
is more usual in the companies I've worked for.


State Farm is one of the biggest install bases that I'm aware of.  But I 
question how many (emulated) terminals were actually connected to the 
mainframe.


I know that in the late '80s / early '90s State Farm had dumb terminals 
on many people's desks.  But there were also a lot of PCs running 
terminal emulation.


What I don't know is how many of those terminals were logged into the 
mainframe vs an AS/400.


I have a family member who was my visibility into the State Farm 
Regional Offices in the '80s and '90s before becoming an agent in the 
late '90s / early '00s.


I know for a fact that in their office as an agent that their dumb 
terminals and terminal emulators were connected to the in office AS/400 
and that they could do much of, if not all of, the day to day things on 
the AS/400 even if the WAN connection to the mainframe in the R.O. was 
disconnected.  They would run into problems if the link to the R.O. was 
down overnight as part of batched operations.  But day to day things 
worked perfectly fine disconnected from the R.O.


I would consider these users to be logged into the local AS/400 and 
/not/ logged into the mainframe.


Similarly, it's my understanding that State Farm has rows of AS/400s in 
the R.O. that were used to front end the terminals in the R.O.


I count people that spend any amount of time interacting with the system 
directly, be it a TSO READY prompt, or ISPF, or something with VM, et 
al.  But I don't count things that connect to a front end that make back 
end calls to the mainframe as being logged into the mainframe.


Currently I have an insurance company as my main client; in-house 
there are about 220 managers who review access, with let's guess an 
average of five mainframe reports each.  They also have about 400 
independent agents that use a system that ultimately connects them 
to the mainframe, and each of those may have one or two assistants 
with their own IDs.  That's probably typical for an insurance company.


If you can, please elaborate if those users can function for most of 
their job if the mainframe is inaccessible do to Backhoe Bob chewing on 
WAN connections again?


I couldn't guess about how many might be logged on at once.  Oh, sure 
I could, but it's just a guess:  If there are 2000 mainframe IDs, 
maybe 500 at a time?  Purest guess.


Do you have any idea how many of those are /active/ vs /idle/ logged in 
users?


But we've also been talking about banks and their ATMs.  Do we count 
ATM customers in the number for Bank of America, with their branches 
around the country?  That could run to thousands at one time, don't 
you think?


As alluded to above, the ATM patrons aren't /mainframe/ users 
themselves.  Rather the ATM /may/ be a mainframe user.  But I've seen 
ATMs for banks that have absolutely nothing to do with a mainframe. 
IMHO ATM != mainframe.  Sure, it suggests, but it doesn't guarantee.




Grant. . . .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

I can find out, if I remember to ask:  Two of my sons have worked as tellers.  
Neither of them happen to be at hand just now, but maybe soon I'll think to ask 
one of them.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* If there is anything dumber than giving a cigarette to a gorilla, it must be 
trying to take one away from him.  -Michael H Milts on a man who lost four 
fingers at the zoo, from "Only a Gringo Would Die for an Anteater" */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Farley, Peter
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 12:56

No clue.  I never worked as a teller either and don’t know anyone who did.  I 
suspect bank service reps (the ones who open or close your accounts or deal 
with other account issues) probably do logon, along with their managers, but I 
am also ignorant of the daily operation of those jobs.

I do seem to remember 3278-class “green screen” terminals at one of the retail 
banks I regularly dealt with as a customer, but that was three or more decades 
ago.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 12:01 PM

Fair enough.  And what about the tellers?  I ask in simple ignorance, never
having been one myself; do they log on to a mainframe ID at the beginning of
their shift?

-Original Message-
From: Farley, Peter
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 11:19

ATM's (and other IOT's like cash register subsystems, etc.) aren't "logged
on" per se, AFAIK.  I believe that those are transactional accesses, one to
check user PIN/Password/authorization of the card, another for each money
withdrawal/deposit/transfer/etc.  I don't believe they are actively
accessing the mainframe the whole time you are using them, only when you
perform an action and then only for that one transaction.

I think you wouldn't count those as "logged on", as opposed to the human
insurance agents who may well be actively logged on from their office
researching plans for a client or even possibly from a mobile device at a
claim investigation site.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

2023-08-14 Thread Farley, Peter

No clue.  I never worked as a teller either and don’t know anyone who did.  I 
suspect bank service reps (the ones who open or close your accounts or deal 
with other account issues) probably do logon, along with their managers, but I 
am also ignorant of the daily operation of those jobs.

I do seem to remember 3278-class “green screen” terminals at one of the retail 
banks I regularly dealt with as a customer, but that was three or more decades 
ago.

Peter

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 12:01 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS users



Fair enough.  And what about the tellers?  I ask in simple ignorance, never

having been one myself; do they log on to a mainframe ID at the beginning of

their shift?



---

Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 
382-7313



/* In order to write for "The A-Team", you'd have to be a much better writer

than most of those who write the evening news at networks and local stations

- forget about shows like "Hill Street Blues" or "The Muppet Show", where

writing REALLY counts.  -Linda Ellerbee in _And So It Goes_ */



-Original Message-

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> On Behalf Of

Farley, Peter

Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 11:19



ATM's (and other IOT's like cash register subsystems, etc.) aren't "logged

on" per se, AFAIK.  I believe that those are transactional accesses, one to

check user PIN/Password/authorization of the card, another for each money

withdrawal/deposit/transfer/etc.  I don't believe they are actively

accessing the mainframe the whole time you are using them, only when you

perform an action and then only for that one transaction.



I think you wouldn't count those as "logged on", as opposed to the human

insurance agents who may well be actively logged on from their office

researching plans for a client or even possibly from a mobile device at a

claim investigation site.



-Original Message-

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> On Behalf Of

Bob Bridges

Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:55 AM



If we're limiting the count to on-line in-house users - I'm talking about

TSO, CICS etc - I suspect State Farm might have a thousand users logged on

at a time (that's a massive system) but a few hundred is more usual in the

companies I've worked for.  Currently I have an insurance company as my main

client; in-house there are about 220 managers who review access, with let's

guess an average of five mainframe reports each.  They also have about 400

independent agents that use a system that ultimately connects them to the

mainframe, and each of those may have one or two assistants with their own

IDs.  That's probably typical for an insurance company.  I couldn't guess

about how many might be logged on at once.  Oh, sure I could, but it's just

a guess:  If there are 2000 mainframe IDs, maybe 500 at a time?  Purest

guess.



But we've also been talking about banks and their ATMs.  Do we count ATM

customers in the number for Bank of America, with their branches around the

country?  That could run to thousands at one time, don't you think?



-Original Message-

From: Phil Smith III

Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:14



In another thread, Jon Perryman wrote, in part:

>[You're] on a multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands.



Pure curiosity here: Without getting into any theology about futures, or

that obviously a single, relatively small app or even database could be used

in some sense by thousands of users via the network:

How many users do sites typically have these days?



In 1986, University of Waterloo had over 20,000 VM users (on four 4341s

running Adesse Single-System Image), which was considered well beyond the

pale by most. We had several thousand logged on at once. Now, that was VM

(VM/SP, to be precise).



How many users does your z/OS shop have defined, and what's your daily

high-water mark of logons? We're a tiny dev shop, so have a grand total of

about four humans who touch z/OS using keyboards, and one of them only does

USS stuff. That's presumably not typical; I mention it just in the spirit of

--



This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message:

Re: z/OS users

2023-08-14 Thread Matt Hogstrom

I guess it all comes down to what is the OP trying to determine and the use of 
“Users” is ambiguous if you’re really counting people impacted.

Matt Hogstrom


“It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
— Hogstrom



> On Aug 14, 2023, at 11:18 AM, Farley, Peter 
> <031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
> I think you wouldn't count those as "logged on", as opposed to the human 
> insurance agents who may well be actively logged on from their office 
> researching plans for a client or even possibly from a mobile device at a 
> claim investigation site.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AMATERSE has a neat trick.

2023-08-14 Thread Steve Beaver

AMATERSE has a neat trick.

 

If you omit the member name in a PDS, AMATERSE will zip down

The PDS or PDSe

 

 

Steve

 

 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

Fair enough.  And what about the tellers?  I ask in simple ignorance, never
having been one myself; do they log on to a mainframe ID at the beginning of
their shift?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* In order to write for "The A-Team", you'd have to be a much better writer
than most of those who write the evening news at networks and local stations
- forget about shows like "Hill Street Blues" or "The Muppet Show", where
writing REALLY counts.  -Linda Ellerbee in _And So It Goes_ */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Farley, Peter
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 11:19

ATM's (and other IOT's like cash register subsystems, etc.) aren't "logged
on" per se, AFAIK.  I believe that those are transactional accesses, one to
check user PIN/Password/authorization of the card, another for each money
withdrawal/deposit/transfer/etc.  I don't believe they are actively
accessing the mainframe the whole time you are using them, only when you
perform an action and then only for that one transaction.

I think you wouldn't count those as "logged on", as opposed to the human
insurance agents who may well be actively logged on from their office
researching plans for a client or even possibly from a mobile device at a
claim investigation site.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Bob Bridges
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:55 AM

If we're limiting the count to on-line in-house users - I'm talking about
TSO, CICS etc - I suspect State Farm might have a thousand users logged on
at a time (that's a massive system) but a few hundred is more usual in the
companies I've worked for.  Currently I have an insurance company as my main
client; in-house there are about 220 managers who review access, with let's
guess an average of five mainframe reports each.  They also have about 400
independent agents that use a system that ultimately connects them to the
mainframe, and each of those may have one or two assistants with their own
IDs.  That's probably typical for an insurance company.  I couldn't guess
about how many might be logged on at once.  Oh, sure I could, but it's just
a guess:  If there are 2000 mainframe IDs, maybe 500 at a time?  Purest
guess.

But we've also been talking about banks and their ATMs.  Do we count ATM
customers in the number for Bank of America, with their branches around the
country?  That could run to thousands at one time, don't you think?

-Original Message-
From: Phil Smith III
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:14

In another thread, Jon Perryman wrote, in part:
>[You're] on a multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands.

Pure curiosity here: Without getting into any theology about futures, or
that obviously a single, relatively small app or even database could be used
in some sense by thousands of users via the network:
How many users do sites typically have these days?

In 1986, University of Waterloo had over 20,000 VM users (on four 4341s
running Adesse Single-System Image), which was considered well beyond the
pale by most. We had several thousand logged on at once. Now, that was VM
(VM/SP, to be precise).

How many users does your z/OS shop have defined, and what's your daily
high-water mark of logons? We're a tiny dev shop, so have a grand total of
about four humans who touch z/OS using keyboards, and one of them only does
USS stuff. That's presumably not typical; I mention it just in the spirit of

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

SFTP and FIPSMODE

2023-08-14 Thread Mark Regan

At my new job, I'm going to be implementing FIPSMODE for SFTP (SFTP was
implemented by someone else). If anyone has gone through the process, I
would like to hear how things went for you and any do's, don'ts, or gotchas
you would be willing to share.

Thanks,

Mark Regan, K8MTR General, EN80tg
CTO1 USNR-Retired (1969-1991)
Nationwide Insurance, Retired, 1986-2017
z/OS Network Systems Programmer (z NetView, z/OS Communications Server)

Email: marktre...@gmail.com
LinkedIn:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-t-regan

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

2023-08-14 Thread Farley, Peter

ATM's (and other IOT's like cash register subsystems, etc.) aren't "logged on" 
per se, AFAIK.  I believe that those are transactional accesses, one to check 
user PIN/Password/authorization of the card, another for each money 
withdrawal/deposit/transfer/etc.  I don't believe they are actively accessing 
the mainframe the whole time you are using them, only when you perform an 
action and then only for that one transaction.

I think you wouldn't count those as "logged on", as opposed to the human 
insurance agents who may well be actively logged on from their office 
researching plans for a client or even possibly from a mobile device at a claim 
investigation site.

Peter

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS users

If we're limiting the count to on-line in-house users - I'm talking about TSO, 
CICS etc - I suspect State Farm might have a thousand users logged on at a time 
(that's a massive system) but a few hundred is more usual in the companies I've 
worked
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

If we're limiting the count to on-line in-house users - I'm talking about

TSO, CICS etc - I suspect State Farm might have a thousand users logged on

at a time (that's a massive system) but a few hundred is more usual in the

companies I've worked for.  Currently I have an insurance company as my main

client; in-house there are about 220 managers who review access, with let's

guess an average of five mainframe reports each.  They also have about 400

independent agents that use a system that ultimately connects them to the

mainframe, and each of those may have one or two assistants with their own

IDs.  That's probably typical for an insurance company.  I couldn't guess

about how many might be logged on at once.  Oh, sure I could, but it's just

a guess:  If there are 2000 mainframe IDs, maybe 500 at a time?  Purest

guess.



But we've also been talking about banks and their ATMs.  Do we count ATM

customers in the number for Bank of America, with their branches around the

country?  That could run to thousands at one time, don't you think?



---

Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 
382-7313



/* It is often stated that of all the theories proposed in this century, the

silliest is quantum theory.  In fact, some say that the only thing that

quantum theory has going for it is that it is unquestionably correct.  -from

"Hyperspace" by Michio Kaku */



-Original Message-

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> On Behalf Of

Phil Smith III

Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:14



In another thread, Jon Perryman wrote, in part:

>[You're] on a multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands.



Pure curiosity here: Without getting into any theology about futures, or

that obviously a single, relatively small app or even database could be used

in some sense by thousands of users via the network:

How many users do sites typically have these days?



In 1986, University of Waterloo had over 20,000 VM users (on four 4341s

running Adesse Single-System Image), which was considered well beyond the

pale by most. We had several thousand logged on at once. Now, that was VM

(VM/SP, to be precise).



How many users does your z/OS shop have defined, and what's your daily

high-water mark of logons? We're a tiny dev shop, so have a grand total of

about four humans who touch z/OS using keyboards, and one of them only does

USS stuff. That's presumably not typical; I mention it just in the spirit of

fair play.



Again, this is purely curiosity-I am not contending that it proves anything

(except what we already know, which is that thanks to networking, there are

a lot of users and uses that show no visible signs of touching the

mainframe, yet are 100% dependent on it).

--


This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS users

If we're limiting the count to on-line in-house users - I'm talking about
TSO, CICS etc - I suspect State Farm might have a thousand users logged on
at a time (that's a massive system) but a few hundred is more usual in the
companies I've worked for.  Currently I have an insurance company as my main
client; in-house there are about 220 managers who review access, with let's
guess an average of five mainframe reports each.  They also have about 400
independent agents that use a system that ultimately connects them to the
mainframe, and each of those may have one or two assistants with their own
IDs.  That's probably typical for an insurance company.  I couldn't guess
about how many might be logged on at once.  Oh, sure I could, but it's just
a guess:  If there are 2000 mainframe IDs, maybe 500 at a time?  Purest
guess.

But we've also been talking about banks and their ATMs.  Do we count ATM
customers in the number for Bank of America, with their branches around the
country?  That could run to thousands at one time, don't you think?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* It is often stated that of all the theories proposed in this century, the
silliest is quantum theory.  In fact, some say that the only thing that
quantum theory has going for it is that it is unquestionably correct.  -from
"Hyperspace" by Michio Kaku */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Phil Smith III
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:14

In another thread, Jon Perryman wrote, in part:
>[You're] on a multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands.

Pure curiosity here: Without getting into any theology about futures, or
that obviously a single, relatively small app or even database could be used
in some sense by thousands of users via the network: 
How many users do sites typically have these days?

In 1986, University of Waterloo had over 20,000 VM users (on four 4341s
running Adesse Single-System Image), which was considered well beyond the
pale by most. We had several thousand logged on at once. Now, that was VM
(VM/SP, to be precise).

How many users does your z/OS shop have defined, and what's your daily
high-water mark of logons? We're a tiny dev shop, so have a grand total of
about four humans who touch z/OS using keyboards, and one of them only does
USS stuff. That's presumably not typical; I mention it just in the spirit of
fair play.

Again, this is purely curiosity-I am not contending that it proves anything
(except what we already know, which is that thanks to networking, there are
a lot of users and uses that show no visible signs of touching the
mainframe, yet are 100% dependent on it).

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Anther definition of Mainframe

2023-08-14 Thread rpinion865

https://www.reddit.com/r/80sdesign/comments/o9d0qw/mainframe_a_new_instore_shop_concept_from_sears/?rdt=41395

Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Never forget the lawsuit the government filed against IBM in 1969 that was 
dropped in 1982. It severely damaged IBM & hindered their attempts to dominate 
the PC business.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 14, 2023, 9:56 AM, Bob Bridges  wrote:

Wait, MS-DOS is what you were talking about, before?  You're suggesting that if 
IBM had hung on to MS-DOS at the time, they would now be worth bazillions 
instead of Microsoft?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* ...Flippancy builds up around a man the finest armour plating against [God] 
that I know, and it is quite free from the dangers inherent in the other 
sources of laughter.  It is a thousand miles away from joy; it deadens, instead 
of sharpening, the intellect; and it excites no affection between those who 
practice it.  -advice to a tempter, from The Screwtape Letters by C S Lewis */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 00:25

Stories vary widely but the most prevalent can be seen at 
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 which I positioned around the relevant time.

The story goes that MS-DOS did not exist at that time and IBM could have 
required exclusive rights but instead intentionally gave up its exclusive 
rights to MS-DOS for $0 during negotiations. 

> --- On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 05:54:10 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
> Please clarify what IBM sold to Microsoft.
>  - Microsoft had (MS-)DOS independent of and without IBM.
>  - Microsoft had a non-exclusive deal with IBM and therefor was allowed
>    to sell it to whomever they wanted, including directly as MS-DOS.

>>--- On 8/7/23 12:26 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
>> Was it a smart decision for IBM to sell the software that became Microsoft?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Dfsort Overlay error

2023-08-14 Thread Ron Thomas

Thanks a lot Kolusu.  Sorry i didn't  articulate what is documented in the user 
guide   in the right way . Anyway thanks again for all the help ..

Regards
Ron T

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

z/OS users

2023-08-14 Thread Phil Smith III

In another thread, Jon Perryman wrote, in part:
>[You're] on a multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands.

Pure curiosity here: Without getting into any theology about futures, or that 
obviously a single, relatively small app or even database could be used in some 
sense by thousands of users via the network: 
How many users do sites typically have these days?

In 1986, University of Waterloo had over 20,000 VM users (on four 4341s running 
Adesse Single-System Image), which was considered well beyond the pale by most. 
We had several thousand logged on at once. Now, that was VM (VM/SP, to be 
precise).

How many users does your z/OS shop have defined, and what's your daily 
high-water mark of logons? We're a tiny dev shop, so have a grand total of 
about four humans who touch z/OS using keyboards, and one of them only does USS 
stuff. That's presumably not typical; I mention it just in the spirit of fair 
play.

Again, this is purely curiosity-I am not contending that it proves anything 
(except what we already know, which is that thanks to networking, there are a 
lot of users and uses that show no visible signs of touching the mainframe, yet 
are 100% dependent on it).


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Wait, MS-DOS is what you were talking about, before?  You're suggesting that if 
IBM had hung on to MS-DOS at the time, they would now be worth bazillions 
instead of Microsoft?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* ...Flippancy builds up around a man the finest armour plating against [God] 
that I know, and it is quite free from the dangers inherent in the other 
sources of laughter.  It is a thousand miles away from joy; it deadens, instead 
of sharpening, the intellect; and it excites no affection between those who 
practice it.  -advice to a tempter, from The Screwtape Letters by C S Lewis */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 00:25

Stories vary widely but the most prevalent can be seen at 
https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 which I positioned around the relevant time.

The story goes that MS-DOS did not exist at that time and IBM could have 
required exclusive rights but instead intentionally gave up its exclusive 
rights to MS-DOS for $0 during negotiations. 

> --- On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 05:54:10 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
> Please clarify what IBM sold to Microsoft.
>   - Microsoft had (MS-)DOS independent of and without IBM.
>   - Microsoft had a non-exclusive deal with IBM and therefor was allowed
> to sell it to whomever they wanted, including directly as MS-DOS.

>>--- On 8/7/23 12:26 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
>> Was it a smart decision for IBM to sell the software that became Microsoft?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features


On 8/14/23 12:54 AM, Jon Perryman wrote:
You're confusing z/OS with Unix where all programmers are 
systems programmers who can do anything they want.


No, I'm not confusing z/OS with Unix.

I'm speaking agnosticly about any OS that will run on the platform; 
z/OS, VM, z/TPF, or even Linux.


N.B. I don't consider USS/OMVS to be it's own independent OS.  This is 
despite it being an integral and important z/OS sub-system.


z/OS is NOT about be welcoming and encouraging. It's about what's best 
for the business.


What is better for the business, discouraging people from learning 
$THING to the point that there is nobody to support and maintain it or 
providing a safe place for newcomers to learn $THING in a controlled 
safe location.


I obviously think that a safe place is better.  Ideally said safe place 
is also accompanied by access to more experienced people to help guide / 
tutor newer more junior people to make sure the newcomers do things safely.



Your on a multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands.


If anything the cost of the system implies that it will be more 
difficult for newcomers to gain access to the platform to learn.  As 
such I think it's more important to provide a safe environment for 
people to learn.


As a business programmer (not Unix sysprog), you're not qualified 
nor authorized to make these decisions.


What gives you the impression that any and all things to be investigated 
don't go through the change approval board and don't have managerial 
support.


Once upon a time Java, or more recently Node.JS, was considered new and 
toy software.  Yet today, they are both critical.


It's my understanding that many, but definitely not all, companies have 
multiple CECs, one (or more) newer for production, and one (or maybe 
more) older for DR.


My experience is that these older DR systems gain some additional value 
to the business if they are /also/ used to host sandbox VMs / LPARs.



Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control.


I've never heard that before.

I question the veracity of the idea that everything is about control.  I 
think there is quite a bit that's about how to safely do tasks on the 
mainframe or z/OS in a way that utilizes it's unique capabilities not 
found on other platforms.



Why do you think it's difficult to get z/OS programmers.


Quite honestly, I think that the mainframe / z/OS is difficult for 
people to get access to in any capacity, and even more difficult for 
them to get access to a small safe sandbox environment for them to learn in.


Would you rather have someone that blindly follows directions that have 
been written out for 30 years with zero understanding of what problems 
any mis-step may cause, or would you rather have someone that has been 
coming up through the ranks and has lots of experience with a procedure 
and has learned what each step of the procedure is for and who it 
impacts the overall process?


I can't think of a single instance that providing a test / sandbox / lab 
instance has been a net negative.  I can think of many instances where 
having a test / sandbox / lab instance to mimic production and test 
changes before applying the changes to production has improved 
understanding, identified problems in procedures, optimized the process, 
or generally helped the overall process in many different ways.


If you believe that proof of concepts are not necessary, then please 
explain why a development system is needed as opposed to just making the 
changes in production directly.


N.B. Nothing about a what I'm advocating for negates, sidesteps, or 
usurps change control or approval process.  If anything I advocate for 
quite the opposite; work within and exercise the established process so 
that you understand it and are familiar with it.  I firmly believe that 
the only way to identify problems in a process and make the process 
better is to use the process.  I firmly believe that it's best to do 
this work in a non-production environment whenever possible.




Grant. . . .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features

2023-08-14 Thread Lionel B Dyck

I’ve never heard that before in my 50+ years. 

Lionel B. Dyck <
Website: www.lbdsoftware.com
Sent from my iPhone 12 Pro

Worry more about your character than your reputation.  Character is what you 
are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John Wooden 

> On Aug 14, 2023, at 5:09 AM, David Spiegel 
> <0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jon,
> You said: "...Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control. 
> Why do you think it's difficult to get z/OS programmers. ..."
> I've been doing MVS Systems Programming  for 40+ years and have not once 
> heard any  programmer leave for more control.
> Could this be a west-coast specific mentality? ... It would not be surprising.
> 
> Regards,
> David
> 
>> On 2023-08-14 01:54, Jon Perryman wrote:
>>  > On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 06:04:55 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>> These statements cause me to pause.  They seem somewhat antithetical to
>>> welcoming and encouraging people to use the mainframe / z/OS.
>> 
>>> Why is it absurd to allow everyone to do a Proof Of Concept on z/OS?
>> You're confusing z/OS with Unix where all programmers are systems 
>> programmers who can do anything they want. z/OS is NOT about be welcoming 
>> and encouraging. It's about what's best for the business. Your on a 
>> multi-million dollar computer shared by thousands. As a business programmer 
>> (not Unix sysprog), you're not qualified nor authorized to make these 
>> decisions.
>> 
>> Programmers leave z/OS for Unix in order to be in full control. Why do you 
>> think it's difficult to get z/OS programmers.
>>   On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 06:04:55 PM PDT, Grant Taylor 
>> <023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>>>On 8/7/23 9:56 AM, Jon Perryman wrote:
>>> It's absurd to allow everyone to do Proof Of Concept on z/OS. Are
>>> all POC vital to the business? Are POCs disruptive to the business?
>> These statements cause me to pause.  They seem somewhat antithetical to
>> welcoming and encouraging people to use the mainframe / z/OS.
>> 
>> Why is it absurd to allow everyone to do a Proof Of Concept on z/OS?
>> 
>> Is there anything about z/OS that would cause you to worry about the
>> security and stability of the system?
>> 
>> Do you not trust a tiny VM / LPAR running a test instance of z/OS with
>> absolutely minimal resources explicitly for such PoCs?
>> 
>> I'd think that it would be a huge win for the platform to try to get
>> more people to do things on it.
>> 
>> No, not all PoCs are vital to the business.  But I think that it's
>> difficult to tell if any given PoC is vital until /after/ it has been
>> tested.
>> 
>> I suspect that there were people that thought that TCP/IP wasn't vital
>> to the system back in SNA's heyday.  Yet here we are 20+ years later and
>> the idea of having any system without a TCP/IP stack is unthinkable.
>> How long would TCP/IP for the mainframe have been delayed if someone
>> didn't allow such a PoC until /after/ evidence showed that it was needed.
>> 
>> I sincerely doubt that operators /needed/ to create programs that
>> printed interesting things to printers after hours.  But I suspect that
>> many learned a thing or two about the system while doing so.
>> 
>> I would sincerely hope that VM / LPAR could contain anything running in
>> a tiny z/OS instance such that it couldn't be disruptive to the system.
>> 
>> Or, if it was somehow disruptive to the system, that might be a good
>> indicator that something needs to be tuned or a bug needs to be fixed
>> thereby enhancing the larger mainframe z/OS / z/VM community.
>> 
>> I think that encouraging people to do things on the mainframe / z/OS is
>> a *GOOD* thing.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Grant. . . .
>> 
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>   
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS Features