Typo corrected!
I am reminded once again of the pitfalls of attempting
written humor with an international audience.
How embarrassing. You got me.
We use to say that a joke that has to be explained is
no longer funny. However, you just proved that this does
not hold true in every case. I'm
In
of23453a55.73fc164a-on85257836.006d58ff-85257836.006f4...@us.ibm.com,
on 02/13/2011
at 03:15 PM, Jim Mulder d10j...@us.ibm.com said:
Instead of an industry standard icon such as :-) to
indicate humor, I used a quote from a fictional character on a recent
episode of a popular situation
Ed
I hope you don't mind the resetting of the Subject since this subdiscussion
has no connection with list etiquette.
... I am afraid IBM can do whatever it wants to with acronyms.
But the *official* IBM line - obviously not counting the numerous stray
moggies - is that VTAM laid a claim to
Rob
Note that I am keeping to the principle of trying to apply an appropriate
Subject since we are now one hopes - moving away from the etiquette issue.
First I'd like to apologise for a word error. I used principle rather
than principal as a kind gentleman pointed out privately. Never let it
Jim
I had all of this in draft before you confessed. Nevertheless, there is many a
true word spoken in jest so I'll let it all stand - although there's a
supposition
that has become a bit pointless ...
-
Thank you for your emollient contribution.
I hope you don't mind the resetting of the
Peter
I'd really love to understand why on earth people like you are defending that
term in the name of VTAM.
If it were only VTAM, the anti-SNA bigot of which I'd really love to
understand why on earth there are so many people like you might have a
point.
But since that term applies now
Message-ID: 4a6f2d35.2080...@us.ibm.com.
corresponds to
http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0907L=ibm-
mainT=0F=S=P=198809
in the archives, if, like me, you wouldn't know what to do with the message-
id.
Chris Mason
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 09:25:04 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-
Mary Ann
I don't really care. Unix Systems Services is too damn long and I will
continue to use USS.
Considering the following post from 21 Jul 2009, I was rather shocked to
read don't care:
http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0907L=ibm-
mainT=0F=S=P=140990
quote
Sorry, yes, I meant the
Ed
I hope you don't mind the resetting of the Subject since this subdiscussion
has no connection with list etiquette.
Actually I'm sorry I forgot!
Chris Mason
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 00:10:55 -0600, Chris Mason
chrisma...@belgacom.net wrote:
...
Perhaps some form of hybrid acronym like zUSS
could serve as being both highly compact and descriptive, while
avoiding potential confusion with prior art.
Jim,
As much as I do respect you, I can't agree with that suggestion.
z/OS' Health Checker compontent has chosen to name its z/OS UNIX
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 02/13/2011
08:48:13 AM:
I'd really love to understand why on earth people like you are defending
that term in the name of VTAM. You won't change this anymore, like
nobody
else will. USS has become the defacto standard name for z/OS
On 2/13/2011 3:15 PM, Jim Mulder wrote:
I will attempt to control my obsession with obscure
referential humor. For a while, at least.
Perhaps we can shift the discussion to why IBM is misusing
RAMAC? g
Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT
Jim,
I really should have caught that reference. I love Big Bang Theory. I
wonder what Dr. Sheldon Cooper would say?
;-)
Probably that he should decide any such weighty matters. And that mere
systems programmers are below engineers. ;-)
Rob
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Jim Mulder
A friend posted he had Chia balls for supper.
I replied hoping he did not come down with an intestinal blockage from
the clay center.
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Rob Schramm rob.schr...@gmail.com wrote:
Jim,
I really should have caught that reference. I love Big Bang Theory. I
wonder
I am reminded once again of the pitfalls of attempting
written humor with an international audience.
How embarrassing. You got me.
We use to say that a joke that has to be explained is
no longer funny. However, you just proved that this does
not hold true in every case. I'm still smiling about
Ted
You are so arogant that I'm not going to bother responding to you ever
again.
It looks like you've already responded once too often!
You carp over such an insignificant trifle and insult people just because
they
use USS in a different context than your oh so perfect world.
There's
Chris,
I would only recommend to the others on the list that non-engagement is
probably the only successful strategy. And to leave you to your opinion of
USS. I would additionally ask that when you experience any outrage about
USS uses, that you would channel the outrage into a new post.
I do
Chris:
I m not one that agrees with Ted.
When it comes to USS I sort of agree with him BUT I am afraid IBM can do
whatever it wants to with acronyms. I can't stand it either and you always have
to setp back and think context when it comes to USS. The IBM people especially
when it comes to FTP
Perhaps some form of hybrid acronym like zUSS
could serve as being both highly compact and descriptive, while
avoiding potential confusion with prior art.
Furthermore, it could establish a precedent for selecting acronyms
for describing similar interface layers on other platforms.
.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 21:26:21 -0500
From: gerh...@valley.net
Subject: Re: USS misuse
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Chris Mason wrote:
Paul
No, in this case more like Cnut ordering back the tide.
Not at all! Cnut was demonstrating to his sycophantic courtiers that he
John
I have just encountered a moggy!
I paid attention to a recent post which mentioned BCPii since it referred
to community name, an apparent oblique reference to SNMP - just to
establish why I should be poking my nose into unfamiliar territory, that is,
not
obviously related to IP or SNA.
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:25:58 -0600, Chris Mason wrote:
I have just encountered a moggy!
...
Although the abbreviation is introduced in the accepted way, we no longer
have the excuse that this document is a presentation. It seems your
colleagues responsible for BCPii are unaware of the
Paul
No, in this case more like Cnut ordering back the tide.
Not at all! Cnut was demonstrating to his sycophantic courtiers that he could
not command the sea. When I'm reminded of this story, I muse that maybe he
tried 12 hours earlier than the incident reported and exclaimed Well, you're
Chris Mason wrote:
Paul
No, in this case more like Cnut ordering back the tide.
Not at all! Cnut was demonstrating to his sycophantic courtiers that he could
not command the sea. When I'm reminded of this story, I muse that maybe he
tried 12 hours earlier than the incident reported and
Gerhard
Quite right. It should have been 6 hours - quite a short feast by Viking
standards!
Chris Mason
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 21:26:21 -0500, Gerhard Postpischil
gerh...@valley.net wrote:
Chris Mason wrote:
Paul
No, in this case more like Cnut ordering back the tide.
Not at all! Cnut was
Barbara
No USS in my post!
It was my intention to change the Subject line to your new one - but I forgot!
Sorry.
There are some subject line policemen out there of whom we need to be wary!
Chris Mason
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 01:04:08 -0500, Barbara Nitz nitz-...@gmx.net
wrote:
... only the
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 00:44:20 -0500, Barbara Nitz nitz-...@gmx.net wrote:
What did NOT come down were the three corresponding telnet address spaces
(TCPTNx they're called here). Two of them made OMVS spit out a BPX
message that shutdown was aborted because TCPTNx was blocking it, but the
things did
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:24:59 -0500, Ed Rabara
edrab...@yahoo.com wrote:
...
By design, the standalone TN3270 Telnet Servers were to remain
active when the
TCPIP address space was terminated, with the expectation that
TCPIP will restart
shortly.
...
Ed, you made the same misinterpretation I
Thanks for the correction Patrick. I missed the other topic/chain discussion
and zoned out on the OMVS shutdown and restart. I was too caught up on the
Standalone TN3270 Telnet Server vis-a-vis TCPIP (stack) relationship.
Went searching for your post/response to Barbara. I get it.
On Tue, 11 Aug
... but I also remembered the Resolver address space and INET/CINET.
Yes, and my abendb78 in resolver code (and subsequent 0C4 in BPXsomething)
will both get fixed in BPX code:-)
Regarding your problems with your TCPTNx address spaces: I hope this is all
to do with TN3270 address spaces and
Yes. This sounds like APARable behavior. Unless they designed
the server to purposefully hang.
:-) Broken as designed?
I'm sort of surprised that anything in TCP/IP worked after a restart
of OMVS, and I'm not surprised that different parts failed (or not)
in different ways. There must have
Not really. UNIX System Services has got involved with the Communications
Server (CS) IP component over the years and, I expect, will into the
future.
However, it started before UNIX System Services and its predecessors
appeared - or perhaps about the same time but was completely independent.
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 00:05:02 -0500, Barbara Nitz nitz-...@gmx.net
wrote:
What did NOT come down were the three corresponding telnet
address spaces.
This was by design. (Not just working as designed.)
But that's not true! When OMVS starts to go away, without *any*
stop or other command the
Mark
Let's take a for instance: checking through last month's posts in the archive
in order to see if I had covered all relevant ones - and this isn't the only
USS
thread in which I am currently participating - I came across something
guaranteed to get my goat. If the topic is the correct USS
, or
some such.
Regards,
Steve Thompson
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Chris Mason
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 4:51 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: USS misuse (was Re: Mainframe hacking)
How ridiculous to propose
Ted
Even IBM used USS ...
Sadly, some IBMers are as careless as some list participants.
... unless the context is confusing ...
As the Howard Rifkind, Ivan Warren and Mary Anne Matyaz cases illustrate,
simply the use can confuse.
Chris Mason
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:12:42 +, Ted MacNEIL
Pat
I followed up on Steve's archived posts from the last time this topic flared
up.
It's clear I misunderstood his short phrases. Incidentally that point
3, misrouting, comes from a response to a post of yours!
-
It's clear what I should have done is to enclose USS in quotation marks. It
Mark
If you enter IBMTEST when the SNA LU is in the SSCP-LU - as opposed to the
LU-LU state - and the LU is supported by Unformatted System Services
(USS), the SSCP (VTAM) will echo back to you whatever you have specified
as the second positional operand the number of times you specify as the
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 4:10 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse (was Re: Mainframe hacking)
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:03:34 -0500, Patrick O'Keefe
patrick.oke...@wamu.net
Ted
Even IBM used USS ...
Sadly, some IBMers are as careless as some list participants.
I DON'T think it's carelessness!n
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
Barbara
Thanks for the points about the Communications Server (CS) IP component -
yes that's your TCPIP address space(s) - and their dependency on UNIX
System Services. Tom Russell emphasis the API but I also remembered the
Resolver address space and INET/CINET.
Regarding your problems with
Edward
If you will allow me a small but significant correction:
Chris Mason *posted* 14 messages on the same subject within 24 minutes. I
guess we can more or less safely assume that I did write 14 posts and no
more but that I took a while actually to write them!
In addition I hope you will
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse
Chris Mason wrote:
...
Fourteen messages on the same subject within 24 minutes. This has all
the earmarks of a denial of service attack being launched against
IBM-MAIN. :-)
--
Edward E Jaffe
Tom
Thanks for the insight.
After that post I worried about this matter of the extent to which the
Communications Server IP component depended on UNIX System services.
First I wondered about APIs since you seem to need to refer to the UNIX
System Services Messages and Codes manual for those
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 4:12 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse (was Re: Mainframe hacking)
Ted
Even IBM used USS ...
Sadly, some IBMers are as careless
Ted
I suspect you don't think it's carelessness because some IBMers - and some
list participants - imagine they are entitled to misuse USS for UNIX System
Services. That - as the reason this whole (set of) threads got started
demonstrates - betrays another type of carelessness, the type indeed
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 17:26:54 -0400, Thompson, Steve
steve_thomp...@stercomm.com wrote:
...
It is also a problem that some time after 1991, the IBM internal
standards were apparently discarded (apparently with management
blessing). There were specific naming standards, specific requirements
for
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:08:39 -0500, Chris Mason chrisma...@belgacom.net wrote:
Mark
If you enter IBMTEST when the SNA LU is in the SSCP-LU - as opposed to the
LU-LU state - and the LU is supported by Unformatted System Services
(USS), the SSCP (VTAM) will echo back to you whatever you have
Chris Mason wrote:
...
Fourteen messages on the same subject within 24 minutes. This has all
the earmarks of a denial of service attack being launched against
IBM-MAIN. :-)
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
Edward Jaffe wrote:
This has all the earmarks of a denial of service attack being launched
against IBM-MAIN. :-)
Of course, that should be hallmarks not earmarks. I guess the
financial irresponsibility in Washington is getting to me...
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
Jaffe
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 2:17 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse
Chris Mason wrote:
...
Fourteen messages on the same subject within 24 minutes. This has all
the earmarks of a denial of service attack being launched against
IBM-MAIN. :-)
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix
Hallmarks--They come in sets of four--are marks that identify quality/purity,
date specified in regnal years, maker, and certifying authority that are
affixed to gold and silver objects, originally in the UK alone but now
sometimes elsewhere too.
Metaphor is fine, but the notion of a
In a message dated 8/5/2009 9:25:10 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
chrisma...@belgacom.net writes:
Once into the page, it works fine, for me anyhow. Using the Find
function for
the page helps. It's instructive to apply that approach to see what is
official
regarding the word UNIX.
Maybe
On Thursday 06 August 2009, Barbara Nitz wrote:
The hints about developers being busy with other stuff and/or laid
off make me think that IBM has stripped itself also in this area of
the necessary manpower, a story I heard quite often in the last
months!
I'm afraid you're probably right.
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 00:44:20 -0500, Barbara Nitz nitz-
i...@gmx.net wrote:
Recent experience has shown (and resulted in *a lot* of ETRs)
that TCPIP cannot exist without the OMVS address space ...
This is absolutely the case. The TCP/IP address space will hang
in initialization if Unix
What did NOT come down were the three corresponding telnet
address spaces.
This was by design. (Not just working as designed.)
But that's not true! When OMVS starts to go away, without *any* stop or
other command the telnet address spaces *do* start terminating! There must
be some sort of
David
It's a shame you didn't preserve the bracketed was in the title because now
the misguided responses have an excuse for being misguided.
It's vital that those who misuse USS appreciate that it can cause the
correct USS when it is used correctly from being misinterpreted by those
who may
Eric
I still think that IBM should have chosen another acronym for Unix than USS.
Officially, IBM did *not* choose USS for UNIX System Services. You are
invited to enter USS in the Search text box in the z/OS UNIX bookshelf on
the following page:
Ted
... and nobody in IBM should use this abbreviation to mean z/OS UNIX
System Services.
... many (highly placed SME's) do ...
I expect John was being somewhat parochial in having only IBM developers in
mind. Even those cats probably stray when talking among themselves -
where it leaks
Greg
I presume that person or persons was from IBM.
And by rights should have very sore knuckles!
Actually I wonder, the task may have been contracted out but, nevertheless,
the contractors will have had documents from an IBM developer. I can
understand that this was mistakenly composed as
Pat
In fact, USS is obviously an acronym (or abbreviation) for Unix System
Services, just not an official one.
The trouble is that USS is not always obviously a set of initials denoting
Unformatted System Services even when it should be so recognised.
I don't have much time left ...
It
Radoslaw
You miss the point - again. To some extent you have an excuse in that David
Alcock dropped a vital was in the title of this thread so you may be unaware
of the context this time. It was never about language; it's about accuracy
and, now, respect. The last time this all flared up - in
Another case which might be lack of respect but is probably just carelessness.
Chris Mason
P.S. default subsystem name (DSN) - The name of the DB2 subsystem that
can connect to the control server (the default subsystem name is DSN).
Source:
USS is always obvious from within the context it is being used.
Geesh or no geesh - wrong!
Again, as with RS, to some extent you have an excuse in that David Alcock
dropped a vital was in the title of this thread so you may be unaware of the
context. Very specifically, the USS message 10
Guy Gardoit's point might be important if it were
1. true
2. relevant
which serves to remove the foundation of the rest of this discourse.
Now applying this sort of logic to the current vogue for the word issue when
people of my generation would use the word problem would be more
relevant. I
Mary Anne
very sorry now that she didn't just say vtam screen.
As I said before, no apology is needed. John Eells has assured us that IBM
development formally approves of the way you expressed yourself and Ed
Finnell has found the relevant document for us:
, July 30, 2009 9:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse
In 4a70166c.7030...@bremultibank.com.pl, on 07/29/2009
at 11:29 AM, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl said:
Is it so hard to understand that acronym/abbreviation is not a thing
that IBM or other company could
O'Keefe
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 2:54 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:47:55 -0500, McKown, John
jmck...@healthmarkets.com wrote:
...
How are VTAM Unformatted System Services and z/OS UNIX System
Services the same context? ...
Because
Radoslaw
Fine. This is the very rare scenario, when USS meaning is not obvious from
the context.
Not fine and how do you know it is rare? Howard Rifkind was prompted into
revealing his miscomprehension because USS was used correctly but dated
when the UNIX System Services component - or its
Ed
Thanks for the reference.
I don't know what your problem with the index is - or is it a problem finding
it?
In which case double-thanks!
Once into the page, it works fine, for me anyhow. Using the Find function for
the page helps. It's instructive to apply that approach to see what is
... TCPIP is a UNIX based application.
Not really. UNIX System Services has got involved with the Communications
Server (CS) IP component over the years and, I expect, will into the future.
However, it started before UNIX System Services and its predecessors
appeared - or perhaps about the same
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 01:26:11 EDT, Ed Finnell efinnel...@aol.com wrote:
...
Not much litany, but IBM has put out Dictionary of Computing for years.
...
Online found this but it's poorly indexed.
_http://www-01.ibm.com/software/globalization/terminology/index.jsp_
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Patrick O'Keefepatrick.oke...@wamu.net wrote:
No z/... abbreviation or phrase for anything Unixy except for zFS .
Even z/Linux is omited.
Official IBM policy is that it does not use terms that include others'
trademarks. Thus the official name is Linux for System
Patrick O'Keefe pisze:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:47:55 -0500, McKown, John
jmck...@healthmarkets.com wrote:
...
How are VTAM Unformatted System Services and z/OS UNIX System
Services the same context? ...
Because it is not VTAM Unformatted System Services any more.
It is z/CS Unformatted
In a message dated 8/1/2009 1:08:44 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl writes:
BTW: Some IBMians claims USS is an *official* IBM acronym for
Unformatted SYstem Services. This is big problem for neophytes: there is
not bible with official IBM acronyms available for
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 00:30:26 -0500, Barbara Nitz nitz-...@gmx.net wrote:
Remember, ibm-main audience is NOT ONLY native English speakers! Quite a
few of us do you the curtesy of using *your* language ('you'-the native
English speakers - and no discussions about dialects, please!).
The world just
In 4a70166c.7030...@bremultibank.com.pl, on 07/29/2009
at 11:29 AM, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl said:
Is it so hard to understand that acronym/abbreviation is not a thing
that IBM or other company could establish?
Is it so hard to understand that when two concepts are relevant to the
In 52bc4b80907291420i645c64few1222546d79d1a...@mail.gmail.com, on
07/29/2009
at 02:20 PM, Guy Gardoit ggard...@gmail.com said:
I don't see what the big deal is, USS is always obvious from within the
context it is being used.
No it isn't.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
In listserv%200907281553079404.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 07/28/2009
at 03:53 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
BTW, e.g., what would it take to get IBM to abandon its
Humpty-Dumptyesque view that mega means 2^20 rather than
10^6?
I thought that it meant 2^1024 * 3^10 g, d r
--
In c58347f259ba4475a42a6c2e2d962...@ericnbpc, on 07/28/2009
at 11:14 AM, Eric Bielefeld eric-ibmm...@wi.rr.com said:
I still think that IBM should have chosen another acronym for Unix than
USS.
It's not a question of what IBM choose, it's a question of what individual
IBM employees did. USS
In
1726955963-1248800993-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-5866262...@bxe1287.bisx.prod.on.blackberry,
on 07/28/2009
at 05:09 PM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca said:
I also remember an Electronic Engineer, taking an IMS course and getting
totally confused over PCB (Printed Circuit
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 9:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse
In 4a70166c.7030...@bremultibank.com.pl, on 07/29/2009
at 11:29 AM
--snip
The world just isn't the same without the likes of Victor Borge. It's not my
language, I'm just trying to use it, he would often say. Difficult enough for
those of us that supposedly *do* speak the language (and even
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:22:18 -0500, Rick Fochtman rfocht...@ync.net wrote:
Not to mention regional terms within the US.
How's a stranger to know that a HOAGIE, HERO, WEDGE and SUB all refer to
the same sandwich on the East Coast? :-)
Rick
hmm... a stranger ? I don't know ...
but as a
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Bruno Sugliani
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 12:21 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:22:18 -0500, Rick Fochtman
rfocht...@ync.net wrote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_sandwich
And now back to your regularly scheduled ramblings...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Bruno Sugliani
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:22:18 -0500, Rick Fochtman rfocht...@ync.net
wrote:
Not to mention regional terms within the US.
How's a stranger to know that a HOAGIE, HERO, WEDGE and SUB all refer
to
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:47:55 -0500, McKown, John
jmck...@healthmarkets.com wrote:
...
How are VTAM Unformatted System Services and z/OS UNIX System
Services the same context? ...
Because it is not VTAM Unformatted System Services any more.
It is z/CS Unformatted System Services, and once the
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Patrick O'Keefe
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 2:54 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:47:55 -0500, McKown, John
jmck...@healthmarkets.com
5) A Pittsburgh Penguin Hockey player, who probably wouldn't be amused by
being misinterpreted as a female swan. :)
Mary Anne, very sorry now that she didn't just say vtam screen.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:07 PM, john gilmore john_w_gilm...@msn.comwrote:
Guy Gardoit's point is the important
Ulysses, an acquaintance of mine, left USS unexpectedly and is now working
for the county. Not long after he left, another systems programmer, Ulee,
needed to update the USS message. He searched all of the primary source
files at USS for the USS source, but didn't find it. He then tried looking
Is it so hard to understand that acronym/abbreviation is not a thing
that IBM or other company could establish?
This is simply part of language we use. USS could mean United States
Steel, United States Ship, Unix System Services, Unformatted System
Services, Upload Speed Sense, UltraSonic
On Wednesday 29 July 2009, R.S. wrote:
Is it so hard to understand that acronym/abbreviation is not a thing
that IBM or other company could establish?
Or any grammar Nazi wanna-be.
This is simply part of language we use
Like SMS: for us it's Storage Management Subsystem, but Windows
I don't see what the big deal is, USS is always obvious from within the
context it is being used. USS is not the only multiuse acronym around -
geesh.
--
Guy Gardoit
z/OS Systems Programming
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe /
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:20:46 -0700, Guy Gardoit wrote:
I don't see what the big deal is, USS is always obvious from within the
context it is being used. USS is not the only multiuse acronym around -
Always?
There was certainly confusion following Mary Anne's post.
--
Tom Marchant
Guy Gardoit's point is the important one: Acronyms and indeed words are often
overloaded.
Is, for example, the denotation of an instance of the token 'pen' in a
particular context that of
1) a writing instrument?
2) an animal enclosure or the like?
3) a truncation of
For people, on the other hand, it is seldom a problem. We are extraordinarily
good at using implicit contextual clues to resolve it. When, for example, was
the last time you were unsure of the denotation of an instance of 'pen'?
All the time. Well, maybe not 'pen' specifically, but while I
...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 4:10 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS misuse (was Re: Mainframe hacking)
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:03:34 -0500, Patrick O'Keefe
patrick.oke...@wamu.net wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:26:33 -0400, Thompson, Steve
Today when I read USS, I think Unix. 20 years ago I thought VTAM. Languages
evolve. Thou shalt evolve too. I'm not saying you have to like it.
I've also been known to drive on a parkway and park on a driveway.
--
For
I still think that IBM should have chosen another acronym for Unix than USS.
I believe VTAM USS table is still valid, and still used, so it is confusing
to me that IBM should use the same acronym for something that is still in
use.
Eric Bielefeld
Sr. Systems Programmer
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
