In 632703.89644...@web82206.mail.mud.yahoo.com, on 12/21/2009
at 12:34 PM, Lloyd Fuller leful...@sbcglobal.net said:
It was also a tank before the M1 Abrams.
Yes, but there was an M1 rifle before there was an M1 tank ;-)
I suspect that M1 and M60 are not the only numbers that the US Army
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In 632703.89644...@web82206.mail.mud.yahoo.com, on 12/21/2009
at 12:34 PM, Lloyd Fuller leful...@sbcglobal.net said:
It was also a tank before the M1 Abrams.
Yes, but there was an M1 rifle before there was an M1 tank ;-)
I suspect that M1 and M60
John, M60 is also a 60-ton tank, now considered obsolete. Mounted a
105mm Main Gun.
Rick
--
Chase, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ed Finnell
In a message dated 12/21/2009
Morten
I'm sorry this is so late. I dipped into a successor thread and have been
tracking back to whence the spotted contagion originated. A change in
subject might have helped I guess.
... and SNA didn't have real internetworking.
And the fact that it had *two* internetworking
of traffic even came close to the trailers. In fact
even foot traffic was discouraged!
Lloyd
--- On Mon, 12/7/09, Thompson, Steve
steve_thomp...@stercomm.com wrote:
From: Thompson, Steve steve_thomp...@stercomm.com
Subject: Re: Portable data centers (was RE: Small Server Mob
Advantage
Lloyd
360/30s with 256K.
The 360/30s I used to support in my trainee days, around 1968, were typically
32K. Indeed DOS/360 was often just called 16K BOS - if my memory serves
me correctly. The *really* big 360/30s had 64K - wow!
As for DASD, 4 x 2311 was typical. Tape was for the bigger
: Small Server Mob Advantage)
Lloyd
... The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early 1960s ...
That'll be the *late* '60s.
These were batch machines running DOS/VS.
... and it will have been DOS/360 not DOS/VS. VS did not burst onto
the 360 GT (370
Re: Portable data centers (was RE: Small Server Mob Advantage)
Lloyd
... The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early 1960s ...
That'll be the *late* '60s.
These were batch machines running DOS/VS.
... and it will have been DOS/360 not DOS/VS. VS did
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Chris Mason
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 9:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Portable data centers (was RE: Small Server Mob
Advantage)
Indeed I remember hearing about a 360/30
In a message dated 12/21/2009 9:28:28 A.M. Central Standard Time,
bill.bis...@tema.toyota.com writes:
The data center was actualy a set of vans connected by a wooden walkway.
We flunked a Reforger, cause an M60 ran over the bus/tags connecting the
vans. I don't know why it was there,
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ed Finnell
In a message dated 12/21/2009 9:28:28 A.M. Central Standard Time,
bill.bis...@tema.toyota.com writes:
The data center was actualy a set of vans connected by a wooden
walkway.
We flunked a
It was also a tank before the M1 Abrams.
Lloyd
--- On Mon, 12/21/09, Chase, John jch...@ussco.com wrote:
From: Chase, John jch...@ussco.com
Subject: Re: Portable data centers (was RE: Small Server Mob Advantage)
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: Monday, December 21, 2009, 3:30 PM
In a message dated 12/21/2009 2:35:46 P.M. Central Standard Time,
leful...@sbcglobal.net writes:
also a tank before .
That's the one! Weighs over 60 tons, doesn't stop for much. Have a good
one85% first round hits too.
In 4b2a9187.6050...@ync.net, on 12/17/2009
at 02:16 PM, Rick Fochtman rfocht...@ync.net said:
Are you sure that MOBIDIC isn't a social disease ??? :-)
Ask Herman. AFAIK it also wasn't a big white whale.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see
In 116095.94157...@web82208.mail.mud.yahoo.com, on 12/07/2009
at 12:56 PM, Lloyd Fuller leful...@sbcglobal.net said:
What do you mean Sun was the first?
The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early 1960s - 40 years before Sun thought of the idea. The Army even
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOBIDIC
snip
What do you mean Sun was the first?
The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early 1960s - 40 years before Sun thought of the idea. The Army even
had those in Vietnam for the division data centers.
And MOBIDIC (sp?) was
-snip--
And MOBIDIC (sp?) was earlier than that.
-unsnip-
Are you sure that MOBIDIC isn't a social disease ??? :-)
Rick
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:44:14 -0500, jmfbahciv jmfbah...@aol wrote:
I remember something which looked like an aluminum ladder being
put up in the ceiling so that all that cabling didn't fall on our
heads.
Cable trays -- standard practice now, once thought of as an extra
expense --
In a message dated 12/10/2009 9:42:45 A.M. Central Standard Time,
howard.bra...@cusys.edu writes:
I imagine because light is good - especially if the ceiling wasn't
designed to support weight.
Many fire codes prohibit aluminum conduit and trays. Varies by city...
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
Anne Lynn Wheeler l...@garlic.com writes:
this old references working on trying to turn out a product that would
simulate NCP/pu4 to host systems ... simulating
On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 13:52:39 -0500, Peter Flass
peter_fl...@yahoo.com wrote:
Probably are. We'll all be wireless before too long. I can see the
day coming when young'uns won't believe people were unable to access the
internet from the middle of the desert, or on top of a mountain.
They'll
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Howard Brazee
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 1:01 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Small Server Mob Advantage
SNIPPAGE
Before Samuel Morse, they were all wireless.
SNIP
We
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Howard Brazee
On 7 Dec 2009 13:01:33 -0800, steve_thomp...@stercomm.com (Thompson,
Steve) wrote:
What do you mean Sun was the first?
The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early
On 8 Dec 2009 05:02:00 -0800, jch...@ussco.com (Chase, John) wrote:
How big were those, compared to an iPod?
Probably like battleship::kayak.
Physical size. How about capacity?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive
Howard Brazee wrote:
On 8 Dec 2009 05:02:00 -0800, jch...@ussco.com (Chase, John) wrote:
How big were those, compared to an iPod?
Probably like battleship::kayak.
Physical size. How about capacity?
360/30s with 256K. Full 2314 = 8 x 800K. I am not sure how many tape
drives, but
The capacity of a 2314 drive is 7294 * 4000 = 29176000, or about 29MB, a full
string would be about 233MB.
Lloyd Fuller leful...@sbcglobal.net 12/08/09 8:37 PM
Howard Brazee wrote:
On 8 Dec 2009 05:02:00 -0800, jch...@ussco.com (Chase, John) wrote:
How big were those, compared to an iPod?
-snip-
How big were those, compared to an iPod?
Probably like battleship::kayak.
Physical size. How about capacity?
-unsnip-
How about CRAY-1 vs. Slide Rule?
360/30s with 256K. Full 2314 = 8 x 800K. I am not sure how many tape
drives, but they were the old 7-track probably 800 BPI.
One or two of them might have been 360/40s. But all of the ones that I saw
in trailers were mod 30s. As far as I know, they all ran DOS: the first
DOS not
Steve
Had on old Ops manager from Dallas TX who regaled me with stories of these
'portable machine rooms' in Vietnam.
How big they were is irrelevant - they did a job at the time.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Chase, John jch...@ussco.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM
to installing additional
computing power ... out in department areas (at some locations,
conference rooms became a very scarce resource ... because so many were
being taken over for 4341s).
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009q.html#82 Small Server Mob Advantage
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009q.html
product) ... before getting con'ed into going to
pok to be in charge of loosely-coupled architecture.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009q.html#83 Small Server Mob Advantage
I recently reminded my wife about the problem with adverse interaction
between jes2 networking at different release levels
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [On Behalf Of Anne Lynn Wheeler
[ snip ]
IBM thinks outside the box with containerized data centres
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/07/ibm_data_center_containers/
from above:
The idea of putting servers, storage,
:
From: Chase, John jch...@ussco.com
Subject: Portable data centers (was RE: Small Server Mob Advantage)
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: Monday, December 7, 2009, 1:56 PM
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [On Behalf Of Anne
Lynn Wheeler
[ snip ]
IBM thinks
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Lloyd Fuller
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 2:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Portable data centers (was RE: Small Server Mob
Advantage)
What do you mean Sun was the first
!
Lloyd
--- On Mon, 12/7/09, Thompson, Steve steve_thomp...@stercomm.com wrote:
From: Thompson, Steve steve_thomp...@stercomm.com
Subject: Re: Portable data centers (was RE: Small Server Mob Advantage)
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: Monday, December 7, 2009, 4:00 PM
-Original Message
On 7 Dec 2009 13:01:33 -0800, steve_thomp...@stercomm.com (Thompson,
Steve) wrote:
What do you mean Sun was the first?
The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early 1960s - 40 years before Sun thought of the idea. The Army even
had those in Vietnam for the division
Howard Brazee wrote:
On 7 Dec 2009 13:01:33 -0800, steve_thomp...@stercomm.com (Thompson,
Steve) wrote:
What do you mean Sun was the first?
The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early 1960s - 40 years before Sun thought of the idea. The Army even
had those in
centers (was RE: Small Server Mob Advantage)
Howard Brazee wrote:
On 7 Dec 2009 13:01:33 -0800, steve_thomp...@stercomm.com (Thompson,
Steve) wrote:
What do you mean Sun was the first?
The US Army used 360/30 and 360/40s in 18-wheel trailers back in the
early 1960s - 40 years before Sun
with the scalability of DNS.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009q.html#82 Small Server Mob Advantage
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009q.html#83 Small Server Mob Advantage
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009r.html#0 Small Server Mob Advantage
for other topic drift ... I've frequently pontificated on possible
catch-22
I believe that I have identified an interesting phenomenon
in the ongoing mainframe vs distributed servers debate. I
call this the 'small server mob advantage.'
.
We all know that the ratio of technical people to end users
is much higher with the smaller servers. I consider the
small servers
Warner Mach wrote:
I believe that I have identified an interesting phenomenon
in the ongoing mainframe vs distributed servers debate. I
call this the 'small server mob advantage.'
.
We all know that the ratio of technical people to end users
is much higher with the smaller servers. I consider
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Warner Mach
I believe that I have identified an interesting phenomenon
in the ongoing mainframe vs distributed servers debate. I
call this the 'small server mob advantage.'
.
We all know that the ratio
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Warner Mach wrote:
I believe that I have identified an interesting phenomenon
in the ongoing mainframe vs distributed servers debate. I
call this the 'small server mob advantage.'
.
We all
Chase, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Warner Mach wrote:
I believe that I have identified an interesting phenomenon
in the ongoing mainframe vs distributed servers debate. I
call this the 'small server mob advantage
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 11:01 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Small Server Mob Advantage
Chase, John wrote:
SNIPPAGE
Frequently the problem
In my opinion management doesn't care. Most management have a better
understanding of small servers than MF so they naturally gravitate to this.
As much as the MF people try to make a case the natural bias of management
always comes out, which affects the decision. Also, the people cost is
this the 'small server mob advantage.'
there are numerous situations (not just servers) were there can be
smaller upfront/initial costs ... but scale less well.
an earlier version of this was huge proliferation in 4341s
(actually mid-range, dec/vax experienced something similar in
the same market
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009 13:20:13 -0500, Anne Lynn Wheeler wrote:
A relatively funny joke from the period ... was that JES2 networking
tables effectively was part of large system change control. The internal
network had significantly more nodes than could be defined in JES2
... and so most MVS systems
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
paulgboul...@aim.com (Paul Gilmartin) writes:
I often wonder whether a reason TCP/IP triumphed over SNA was
that SNA didn't provide a facility with the
/~lynn/2009q.html#82 Small Server Mob Advantage
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009q.html#83 Small Server Mob Advantage
misc. old nsfnet related email
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006s.html#email860417
recently going thru some boxes found copy of the letter referenced in
the above ... dated 03apr86
50 matches
Mail list logo
