"On January 14 1970, DPD rolls out IBM DATA/360, a new program product
that simulates the functions of the IBM 29 keypunch and IBM 59 verifier to
enter data from an IBM 2260 display station to an IBM 2311 or 2314 direct
access storage device, bypassing punched cards;"
we used this w/2270-1 s a
In <6332589144814230.wa.paulgboulderaim@bama.ua.edu>, on
11/14/2011
at 09:40 AM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>Actually, it was never STK during the independent existence of
>Storage Technology Corporation.
Ah, so! Thanks. I had been told that they changed the name due to a
trademark infringemen
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 15:34:21 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>You didn't have the STC (later STK) ...
>
Actually, it was never STK during the independent existence of Storage
Technology Corporation. The approved branding was StorageTek, and
employees were instructed that "STK" was an NYS
In <4ebd9513.4040...@valley.net>, on 11/11/2011
at 04:35 PM, Gerhard Postpischil said:
>The one that didn't handle wrap-around correctly?
After RA the buffer address was left at the beginning instead of the
documented location.
>I fondly recall referring to it as the PIG multiplexer
Up to
LRIO operation in tight loop.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#20 3270 archaeology
san jose disk development in bldg. 14 had numerous testcells on channel
switches and a couple mainframes for testing ... running "stand-alone"
... each testcell got pre-scheduled, stand-alone
On 11/11/2011 3:34 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
Then you should have ordered from GTE :-(
The one that didn't handle wrap-around correctly?
You didn't have the STC (later STK) tape drives where only every other
jumper position was used but the CE documentation didn't mention the
fact?
Gerhard,
I agree with you. We had over 1200 3270's locally attached and never had
issues with IBM controllers or devices. Where we did have issues was we had an
OEM "channel" extender. That gavesusno end of problems. At one time I was
providing the vendor with2 or 3 dumps a day and they were
In <4ebd5c40.8090...@valley.net>, on 11/11/2011
at 12:32 PM, Gerhard Postpischil said:
>Only the AT&T and one Telex gave us problems
Then you should have ordered from GTE :-(
>The worst incident I recall was when the C.E. was asked to plug a
>new 3272 as address 0C0, and he held the board u
In <0A25A0D191144ABB8F0649705ADAA187@DJVBN391>, on 11/11/2011
at 12:07 AM, Larry Chenevert said:
>The channel attached control units for those 3270's were notorious
>for generating interface control checks, which the operating systems
>of the era (OS/VS1, SVS, and MVS 3.8) were notorious for
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#20
a different problem with moving all the electronics back into the 3274
controller (and making terminal response agonizingly slow) was that it
really drove up the channel busy time for any kind of operation.
this is old reference to Jim Gray palming of
On 11/11/2011 1:07 AM, Larry Chenevert wrote:
The channel attached control units for those 3270's were
notorious for generating interface control checks, which the
operating systems of the era (OS/VS1, SVS, and MVS 3.8) were
notorious for responding by entering disabled waits, resulting
in many u
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.) writes:
> That came later, along with the 3278 and 3279,
we complained to kingston that 3274/3278 was much worse for interactive
computing that 3272/3277 ... kingston eventually came back and said that
3274/3278 target market was "data entry"
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of William Donzelli
> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 12:30 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: 3270 archaeology (Was: TSO SCREENSIZE)
>
> > I h
> I happen to have a GX20-1878-3 (October 1978) 3270 Information Display
> System Reference Summary in the top drawer of my desk. It shows the screen
> size of a Mod 1 as 12x40, although I never worked with a Mod 1 or ever even
> saw one, to my knowledge.
Just about the only place you would be ce
ero user think time),
2) test the new application code, and ...
3) facilitate the data migration from the older disparate systems to the new
one.
Larry Chenevert
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Mason"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2
To all actually interested in 3270 pre-history
> And the original IBM 3270 screen size was Model 1, 12 lines by 40 characters.
> Model 2 (24 * 80) didn't come along until later.
It was my possibly faulty recollection that just about all of the first
generation of 3270 equipment was announced -
16 matches
Mail list logo
