subject:"The ultimate \(another one\!\) definition of mainframe"

1984? You mean when Apple announced a system that was less open the IBM's? Are 
you sure that it isn't Apple who is "Big Brother"?

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Crawford Robert C (Contractor) <04e08f385650-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 9:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

I also have to wonder if MS-DOS would've taken off at all if IBM had kept it.  
In the 20th century I remember a lot of companies, Microsoft and Apple 
included, styling themselves as IBM "giant killers."  They were cool, 
(relatively) inexpensive and bringing computing to the masses.  IBM, on the 
other hand, was stodgy, old fashioned  and, for lack of a better term, evil.  
I'm thinking of Apple's "1984" commercial.

For those reasons, people might have rejected MS-DOS just because IBM owned it 
and glommed onto something like DR-DOS.

Robert Crawford
Abstract Evolutions LLC
(210) 913-3822

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 3:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXT] 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

--
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

> Nobody ever seems to address the crusades

Maybe not in fundie circles, but lots of people are aware of how evil they were.

> And nobody addresses the pedophile ring called the Catholic Church.

They hardly have a monopoly. Anywhere adults are in a position of authority 
over children they need to be held accountable, be they religious or secular. 
I've read disturbing stories about, e.g., coaches, doctors, NCOs, officers, 
police, teachers, troop leaders.

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Bill Johnson <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 9:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Even a book listed as fiction in the library has some elements of truth. The 
Bible is fiction. Christians are atheists when you bring up Roman, Greek, 
Aztec, Norse, or other non Christian gods. As with the aforementioned gods, 
they don’t exist either.

Nobody ever seems to address the crusades in which Christians killed hundreds 
of thousands and perhaps millions. And nobody addresses the pedophile ring 
called the Catholic Church.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023, 4:10 AM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:

Nonsense; the Bible is a lot of things, including History. The fun starts when 
people argue about which parts are what. There's lot's of allegory, metaphor 
poetry, etc., but there are also things that match archaeological data.

I have this fantasy of a biblical literalist trying to explain how every word 
of Song of Songs is literally true

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: 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:

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

2023-08-15 Thread Crawford Robert C (Contractor)

I also have to wonder if MS-DOS would've taken off at all if IBM had kept it.  
In the 20th century I remember a lot of companies, Microsoft and Apple 
included, styling themselves as IBM "giant killers."  They were cool, 
(relatively) inexpensive and bringing computing to the masses.  IBM, on the 
other hand, was stodgy, old fashioned  and, for lack of a better term, evil.  
I'm thinking of Apple's "1984" commercial.

For those reasons, people might have rejected MS-DOS just because IBM owned it 
and glommed onto something like DR-DOS. 

Robert Crawford
Abstract Evolutions LLC
(210) 913-3822

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Bob 
Bridges
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 3:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXT] 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

--
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

2023-08-15 Thread Bill Johnson

Even a book listed as fiction in the library has some elements of truth. The 
Bible is fiction. Christians are atheists when you bring up Roman, Greek, 
Aztec, Norse, or other non Christian gods. As with the aforementioned gods, 
they don’t exist either.

Nobody ever seems to address the crusades in which Christians killed hundreds 
of thousands and perhaps millions. And nobody addresses the pedophile ring 
called the Catholic Church.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Tuesday, August 15, 2023, 4:10 AM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:

Nonsense; the Bible is a lot of things, including History. The fun starts when 
people argue about which parts are what. There's lot's of allegory, metaphor 
poetry, etc., but there are also things that match archaeological data.

I have this fantasy of a biblical literalist trying to explain how every word 
of Song of Songs is literally true


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: 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
>> <https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=johnson=edit=4>]
>>
>> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
>> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/johnsons#English>*)
>>
>>      1. (slang <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary#slang>) 
>>Penis
>>      <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/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

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

Translation is a bear. I'm a native Anglophone who learned Hebrew as an adult, 
yet there were things I wrote in Hebrew that I had trouble translating into 
English.

I inadvertently pasted "teharah" twice; the word I meant to paste the second 
time was "behema".


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of Bob 
Bridges 
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 8:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

There's a Christian missionary organization called Wycliffe Bible Translators 
whose goal is to send a small team (and by "small" I mean usually husband and 
wife or two brothers, like that) to these groups that speak a language that 
only a thousand people in the whole world use, to live with them and learn 
their language, and eventually to translate the Bible into it.  A family I know 
did that with the Kogi indians in Colombia - that was a whole family, parents 
and I think three children - and when one of them came back on furlough I 
remember a discussion I had with him about the difficulties of translation.  He 
of course was uncomfortably aware of the impossibility of doing it perfectly, 
and I in my youth (I had been a serious Christian only a couple years, I think) 
tried to reässure him that God will protect His words.  I didn't convince him, 
and of course now that I'm older and can read several languages I see more 
clearly what he must have worried about constantly.

I knew of course that the story doesn't say two of everything.  I did ~not~ 
know that it used a word restricting it to mammals.  Every day something new.

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

/* Despite the Humvee's ruggedness, when it's cruising on the highway, the ride 
is surprisingly similar to that of a full-size luxury sedan being dragged 
across a boulder field on its roof.  -Dave Barry, 2001-01-07 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 04:20

ITYM טְּהוֹרָ֗ה.

Also, the sentence uses the word טְּהוֹרָ֗ה, which limits it to mammals.

"All translations are lies."


From: David Spiegel [0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:03 PM

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.)

--
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

2023-08-15 Thread Bob Bridges

There's a Christian missionary organization called Wycliffe Bible Translators 
whose goal is to send a small team (and by "small" I mean usually husband and 
wife or two brothers, like that) to these groups that speak a language that 
only a thousand people in the whole world use, to live with them and learn 
their language, and eventually to translate the Bible into it.  A family I know 
did that with the Kogi indians in Colombia - that was a whole family, parents 
and I think three children - and when one of them came back on furlough I 
remember a discussion I had with him about the difficulties of translation.  He 
of course was uncomfortably aware of the impossibility of doing it perfectly, 
and I in my youth (I had been a serious Christian only a couple years, I think) 
tried to reässure him that God will protect His words.  I didn't convince him, 
and of course now that I'm older and can read several languages I see more 
clearly what he must have worried about constantly.

I knew of course that the story doesn't say two of everything.  I did ~not~ 
know that it used a word restricting it to mammals.  Every day something new.

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

/* Despite the Humvee's ruggedness, when it's cruising on the highway, the ride 
is surprisingly similar to that of a full-size luxury sedan being dragged 
across a boulder field on its roof.  -Dave Barry, 2001-01-07 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 04:20

ITYM טְּהוֹרָ֗ה.

Also, the sentence uses the word טְּהוֹרָ֗ה, which limits it to mammals.

"All translations are lies."


From: David Spiegel [0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:03 PM

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.)

--
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

It's a bit more complicated than that, but Cutler certainly had a major role.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Wayne Bickerdike [wayn...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 7:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: 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

--
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

Not all of the programmers that I worked with in the 1960s were white.

Some of the posters here have worked on multiple platforms and are well aware 
that answer vary depending on context.

Wasn't the Hundred Years' War just a land grab? I believe that the Thirty 
Years' War is a better example of a religious war, although even there it is 
more complicated.

As for security, if I wanted to crack a system, I'd look first for 
vulnerabilities in the staff rather than in the technology.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 8:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: 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
<https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=johnson=edit=4>]

*johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/johnsons#English>*)

  1. (slang <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary#slang>) Penis
  <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/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 
>> 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

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

There were syntax changes going from CP/M to [MS|PC]-DOS, and somewhere along 
the way PIP was lost.

The editor also changed fr Mr. Ed to Mr. Edlin.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Steve Thompson [ste...@wkyr.net]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 8:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

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

--
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 scarcity of documents going back to 1000-3000 BCE makes it very difficult 
to sort out what is history and what is not. Modern scholars form a lot of 
hypotheses via textual analysis that are very difficult to verify with actual 
data. That's why discoveries like the Dead Sea Scrolls are so exciting, even 
though they don't go back far enough.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 9:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: 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
> <https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=johnson=edit=4>]
>
> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/johnsons#English>*)
>
>1. (slang <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary#slang>) Penis
><https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/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 
>>> 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 th

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

ITYM טְּהוֹרָ֗ה.

Also, the sentence uses the word טְּהוֹרָ֗ה, which limits it to mammals.

"All translations are lies."


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Spiegel [0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: 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 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
>> <https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=johnson=edit=4>]
>>
>> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
>> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/johnsons#English>*)
>>
>>  1. (slang <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary#slang>) 
>> Penis
>>  <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/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 
>>>> 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,

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

Nonsense; the Bible is a lot of things, including History. The fun starts when 
people argue about which parts are what. There's lot's of allegory, metaphor 
poetry, etc., but there are also things that match archaeological data.

I have this fantasy of a biblical literalist trying to explain how every word 
of Song of Songs is literally true


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: 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
>> <https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=johnson=edit=4>]
>>
>> *johnson* (*plural* *johnsons
>> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/johnsons#English>*)
>>
>>  1. (slang <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary#slang>) 
>> Penis
>>  <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/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
>

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

However, on that page it says "These claims have not been accepted by the 
scientific community."

Also, in a part of the world prone to flooding, do we really need a rare event 
to explain a story about a flood?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Mike Schwab [mike.a.sch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 10:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

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
> >> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/johnsons#English>*)
> >>
> >>  1. (slang <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary#slang>)
> Penis
> >>  <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/penis>. quotations ▼synonym
> ▲Synonyms:
> >>  *see* Thesaurus:penis <
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Thesaurus:penis>

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

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

2023-08-14 Thread David Spiegel

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

2023-08-14 Thread David Spiegel

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

2023-08-14 Thread David Spiegel

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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<mailto: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<https://isolate.menlosecurity.com/1/3735928037/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<mailto: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

2023-08-14 Thread Bob Bridges

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: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-14 Thread Grant Taylor


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: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-14 Thread Bob Bridges

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

2023-08-14 Thread Bob Bridges

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: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-13 Thread Jon Perryman

 > On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 05:54:10 PM PDT, Grant Taylor wrote:

>>On 8/7/23 12:26 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
>> Was it a smart decision for IBM to sell the software that became Microsoft?

> 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.

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 it's exclusive 
rights to MS-DOS for $0 during negotiations. 

On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 05:54:10 PM PDT, Grant Taylor 
<023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 On 8/7/23 12:26 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
> Was it a smart decision for IBM to sell the software that became 
> Microsoft?

Please clarify what IBM sold to Microsoft.

My understanding is that Microsoft, an existing but small company, came 
to IBM and said "here, we have an operating system for the IBM PC that 
you are developing, would you like to license copies from us for each 
unit that you sell?".

Specifically:

  - 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.

Given your following statement, I doubt that you are referring to OS/2 
in your previous statement.

> How about creating OS/2 a few years later to fill the void they sold?

My understanding was that IBM and Microsoft co-developed OS/2 ostensibly 
as a DOS successor.  One of the partners decided to end the partnership.

I'm not aware of Microsoft purchasing any rights from IBM at the time as 
Microsoft went on to develop Windows NT partially based on OS/2.  IBM 
went on to develop and enhance OS/2.

So I ask again, please clarify what did IBM sell to Microsoft in the 
context of this thread.

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

2023-08-12 Thread Mike Schwab

Actually, Microsoft, run by thr son of an IBM employee, was approached, and
was referred to Digital Research's CPM for 8080, port to 8086/8088 was not
ready.  They sold it at $200.00 a copy, which IBM was not willing to pay.
The license specified if the price was lowered, existing purchaser would
get refunded the difference.

So IBM went back to MS, who bought out QDos for 8086/8088, finished the
port to match CPM, and licensed to IBM.

On Sat, Aug 12, 2023, 19:54 Grant Taylor <
023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> On 8/7/23 12:26 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
> > Was it a smart decision for IBM to sell the software that became
> > Microsoft?
>
> Please clarify what IBM sold to Microsoft.
>
> My understanding is that Microsoft, an existing but small company, came
> to IBM and said "here, we have an operating system for the IBM PC that
> you are developing, would you like to license copies from us for each
> unit that you sell?".
>
> Specifically:
>
>   - 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.
>
> Given your following statement, I doubt that you are referring to OS/2
> in your previous statement.
>
> > How about creating OS/2 a few years later to fill the void they sold?
>
> My understanding was that IBM and Microsoft co-developed OS/2 ostensibly
> as a DOS successor.  One of the partners decided to end the partnership.
>
> I'm not aware of Microsoft purchasing any rights from IBM at the time as
> Microsoft went on to develop Windows NT partially based on OS/2.  IBM
> went on to develop and enhance OS/2.
>
> So I ask again, please clarify what did IBM sell to Microsoft in the
> context of this thread.
>
>
>
> 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

2023-08-12 Thread Grant Taylor


On 8/7/23 12:26 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
Was it a smart decision for IBM to sell the software that became 
Microsoft?


Please clarify what IBM sold to Microsoft.

My understanding is that Microsoft, an existing but small company, came 
to IBM and said "here, we have an operating system for the IBM PC that 
you are developing, would you like to license copies from us for each 
unit that you sell?".


Specifically:

 - 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.


Given your following statement, I doubt that you are referring to OS/2 
in your previous statement.



How about creating OS/2 a few years later to fill the void they sold?


My understanding was that IBM and Microsoft co-developed OS/2 ostensibly 
as a DOS successor.  One of the partners decided to end the partnership.


I'm not aware of Microsoft purchasing any rights from IBM at the time as 
Microsoft went on to develop Windows NT partially based on OS/2.  IBM 
went on to develop and enhance OS/2.


So I ask again, please clarify what did IBM sell to Microsoft in the 
context of this thread.




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

2023-08-08 Thread Attila Fogarasi

Wow $2.9 billion global mainframe market ... that's almost 3% of the US
federal government IT budget excluding Defence in 2022 ($74 billion).
Gartner forecasts global IT spend in 2023 of $4700 billion (yes, just under
$5 trillion).  Maybe mainframe will reach 0.1% of that.  Of course
mainframe is s much more cost efficient, hence the very low $ spend
needed for mainframe :)

On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 3:26 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> The growth numbers tell the story.
>
>
> One of the most attention-grabbing of the new uses in which mainframes now
> excel is blockchain. The mainframe’s advantages over x86 servers in
> response time, transaction throughput, scalability, and particularly
> security, make it the ideal blockchain host.
>
> That security advantage is decisive. The blockchain model is entirely
> dependent on transaction records being carried in a chain of data blocks
> that, once assembled, cannot be changed. Because of their superior
> processing power, mainframes can provide the protection of 100% end-to-end
> encryption without degrading performance. In fact, IBM claims that its
> mainframes encrypt data 18 times faster than x86 platforms at just 5% of
> the cost.
>
> Other areas in which the mainframe is carving out a significant spot for
> itself in the modern era of IT include DevOps, cloud computing (both public
> and private clouds), and running multiple virtual operating systems.
>
> The mainframe is here to stay!
>
> As this brief survey of the mainframe’s place in the current IT landscape
> shows, “big iron” is not going away any time soon. In fact, according
> to Allied Market Research, the global mainframe market is expected to reach
> a staggering $2.90 billion by 2025.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Monday, August 7, 2023, 1:01 PM, Phil Smith III 
> wrote:
>
> Mike Shaw wrote:
> >I have seen the 10,000 number several times in this thread...IBM does
> >not publish their count of installed mainframes AFAIK...how was that
> >number developed...anybody know?
>
> I expect that's a marketing number, and I strongly suspect it's high, and
> includes internal machines and Kyndryl. At the peak of System/370 in the
> 80s the claimed number I heard was about 20,000, including MVS, VM, VSE,
> and TPF. We know there's been a lot of erosion, plus simple consolidation
> both because of mergers and more LPARs and CPUs per CEC. So 10K CECs just
> seems.very very high to me. I'd bet on more like 2,500 if I had to put
> money on it.
>
> But of course we'll never know because IBM has no reason to tell us. Can't
> blame 'em for that.
>
>
> --
> 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

2023-08-07 Thread Mike Schwab

Exactly.  Very limited utility for punched cards as a user interface.

Various green screen terminals resulting in VT100 family and TN3270(E)
family (S3x+/AS400), now replaced by PCs, laptops, cell phones running
green screen emulators or converting to web pages or even apps.

Not to mention Internet of things, such as point of sales scanners, cash
registers, credit card readers (often mentioned as big mainframe users),
automated Weather stations, toll road pass readers, etc.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2023, 13:33 Jon Perryman  wrote:

>  > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:02:23 AM PDT, Bob Bridges <
> robhbrid...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M,
>
> IBM has the right to sell anything it owns even if its to Bill Gates. It's
> not hindsight to say IBM has a lot of software that simply exists. They
> sold software that wasn't as profitable as MVS but not a complete loss.
> They didn't see the potential of selling lots of small stuff (MS Windows &
> Office) and decided to concentrate on MVS. Microsoft net worth is now 100X
> IBM. Once IBM decided it was a mistake, they started investing into OS/2.
> How do you rate these businesses choices?
>
> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:02:23 AM PDT, Bob Bridges <
> robhbrid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M, and company M
> makes a mint on it, it doesn't ~necessarily~ follow that it was a mistake
> for me to sell it.  Could be that M was likely to make a mint on X and I
> was not.
>
> And after all, is IBM worse off because Microsoft is selling PCs to the
> world?  Seems to me you could argue that the ubiquity of PCs is ~helping~
> IBM mainframe sales.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* I will frankly admit that I'm afraid of medical care. I trace this fear
> to my childhood, when, as far as I could tell, the medical profession's
> reaction to every physical problem I developed, including nearsightedness,
> was to give me a tetanus shot.  -Dave Barry, 1996 */
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Jon Perryman
> Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 13:27
>
> On the whole, I consider IBM excellent compared to how other companies but
> it's undeniable that they have made some bonehead choices. 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
>  On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:02:23 AM PDT, Bob Bridges <
> robhbrid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M, and company M
> makes a mint on it, it doesn't ~necessarily~ follow that it was a mistake
> for me to sell it.  Could be that M was likely to make a mint on X and I
> was not.
>
> And after all, is IBM worse off because Microsoft is selling PCs to the
> world?  Seems to me you could argue that the ubiquity of PCs is ~helping~
> IBM mainframe sales.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* I will frankly admit that I'm afraid of medical care. I trace this fear
> to my childhood, when, as far as I could tell, the medical profession's
> reaction to every physical problem I developed, including nearsightedness,
> was to give me a tetanus shot.  -Dave Barry, 1996 */
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Jon Perryman
> Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 13:27
>
> On the whole, I consider IBM excellent compared to how other companies but
> it's undeniable that they have made some bonehead choices. 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
>

--
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

If you're asking present company at large, I have no very strong opinion.  If 
you're asking me particularly, 1) I know too little about OS/2 to opine very 
strongly.  But the fact that OS/2 didn't go very far says to me that 2) IBM may 
have been smart to sell to Microsoft:  IBM's strength is in MVS.  I rather 
doubt that if they'd held on to ... what was it they sold to Microsoft?  DOS, 
was it?  If they'd held on to it, I doubt that it would be worth now to IBM 
what it became to MS.  MS did better with the PC market, IBM continues to do 
well with mainframes.

And of course we all benefit from that division of labor.  I'm ~glad~ we have 
cheap and plentiful PCs, as well as top-of-the-line mainframes.

I say again, the fact that MS made zillions from their decisions doesn't mean 
IBM could have done it instead.

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

/* The liar's punishment is not in the least that he is not believed, but that 
he cannot believe anyone else.  -George Bernard Shaw */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 14:33

IBMsold software that wasn't as profitable as MVS but not a complete loss. 
They didn't see the potential of selling lots of small stuff (MS Windows & 
Office) and decided to concentrate on MVS. Microsoft net worth is now 100X IBM. 
Once IBM decided it was a mistake, they started investing into OS/2. How do you 
rate these businesses choices?

--- On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:02:23 AM PDT, Bob Bridges 
 wrote:  
Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M, and company M makes 
a mint on it, it doesn't ~necessarily~ follow that it was a mistake for me to 
sell it.  Could be that M was likely to make a mint on X and I was not.

And after all, is IBM worse off because Microsoft is selling PCs to the world?  
Seems to me you could argue that the ubiquity of PCs is ~helping~ IBM mainframe 
sales.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 13:27

On the whole, I consider IBM excellent compared to how other companies but it's 
undeniable that they have made some bonehead choices. 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: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-07 Thread Jon Perryman

 > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:02:23 AM PDT, Bob Bridges 
 >  wrote:
> Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M,

IBM has the right to sell anything it owns even if its to Bill Gates. It's not 
hindsight to say IBM has a lot of software that simply exists. They sold 
software that wasn't as profitable as MVS but not a complete loss. They didn't 
see the potential of selling lots of small stuff (MS Windows & Office) and 
decided to concentrate on MVS. Microsoft net worth is now 100X IBM. Once IBM 
decided it was a mistake, they started investing into OS/2. How do you rate 
these businesses choices?

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:02:23 AM PDT, Bob Bridges 
 wrote:  

 Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M, and company M makes 
a mint on it, it doesn't ~necessarily~ follow that it was a mistake for me to 
sell it.  Could be that M was likely to make a mint on X and I was not.

And after all, is IBM worse off because Microsoft is selling PCs to the world?  
Seems to me you could argue that the ubiquity of PCs is ~helping~ IBM mainframe 
sales.

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

/* I will frankly admit that I'm afraid of medical care. I trace this fear to 
my childhood, when, as far as I could tell, the medical profession's reaction 
to every physical problem I developed, including nearsightedness, was to give 
me a tetanus shot.  -Dave Barry, 1996 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 13:27

On the whole, I consider IBM excellent compared to how other companies but it's 
undeniable that they have made some bonehead choices. 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
 On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:02:23 AM PDT, Bob Bridges 
 wrote:  

 Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M, and company M makes 
a mint on it, it doesn't ~necessarily~ follow that it was a mistake for me to 
sell it.  Could be that M was likely to make a mint on X and I was not.

And after all, is IBM worse off because Microsoft is selling PCs to the world?  
Seems to me you could argue that the ubiquity of PCs is ~helping~ IBM mainframe 
sales.

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

/* I will frankly admit that I'm afraid of medical care. I trace this fear to 
my childhood, when, as far as I could tell, the medical profession's reaction 
to every physical problem I developed, including nearsightedness, was to give 
me a tetanus shot.  -Dave Barry, 1996 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 13:27

On the whole, I consider IBM excellent compared to how other companies but it's 
undeniable that they have made some bonehead choices. 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: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

Right.  And to be fair to the thrice-despised managers, I very often find, when 
I look into the details of obvious bad decisions, that they weren't so obvious 
at the time anyway.  I have to be careful not to match my hindsight against 
their foresight and judge them incompetent.

Of course, sometimes a decision really is boneheaded.

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

/* The genius of you Americans is that you never make clear-cut stupid moves, 
only complicated stupid moves which make us wonder at the possibility that 
there may be something to them which we are missing.  -Gamal Abdel Nasser, 
president of Egypt 1956-70 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 13:27

We shouldn't speak badly of IBM managers but we need someone to blame for the 
bad business choices and it's not the people in the trenches.

--
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

Just to keep things complicated, if I sell X to company M, and company M makes 
a mint on it, it doesn't ~necessarily~ follow that it was a mistake for me to 
sell it.  Could be that M was likely to make a mint on X and I was not.

And after all, is IBM worse off because Microsoft is selling PCs to the world?  
Seems to me you could argue that the ubiquity of PCs is ~helping~ IBM mainframe 
sales.

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

/* I will frankly admit that I'm afraid of medical care. I trace this fear to 
my childhood, when, as far as I could tell, the medical profession's reaction 
to every physical problem I developed, including nearsightedness, was to give 
me a tetanus shot.  -Dave Barry, 1996 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2023 13:27

On the whole, I consider IBM excellent compared to how other companies but it's 
undeniable that they have made some bonehead choices. 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: The ultimate (another one!) definition of mainframe

2023-08-07 Thread Jon Perryman

 On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 08:25:16 AM PDT, Bill Johnson wrote:

> The narcissism here is amazing. To claim IBM doesn’t know what they are doing 

It's a bit extreme to say its narcissism when its actually frustration at some 
of IBM business choices. On the whole, I consider IBM excellent compared to how 
other companies but it's undeniable that they have made some bonehead choices. 
Was it a smart decision for IBM to sell the software that became Microsoft? How 
about creating OS/2 a few years later to fill the void they sold?

My personal pet peeve is "cloud computing". I attended some of the 
specification meetings and noted that IBM was involved. Except for the API's, 
the specification was Sysplex concepts which excited the Unix world. 2 years 
later, many parts were removed because Unix could not implement the concepts. 
Worse yet, IBM never touted z/OS as cloud enabled from day one. Sysplex is 
fairly simple to implement. The Unix implementation requires clustering, big 
data and a few other things. IBM RHEL is popular by businesses because 
simplified setup.

> aren’t smarter than the managers at IBM. 

My experience is limited to IBM'ers in the trenches which are very sharp. We 
shouldn't speak badly of IBM managers but we need someone to blame for the bad 
business choices and it's not the people in the trenches.

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 08:25:16 AM PDT, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:  

 The narcissism here is amazing. To claim IBM doesn’t know what they are doing 
and some dudes on the internet do. There are 10,000+ mainframes. That would 
extrapolate to tens of thousands of systems programmers worldwide. I’m fairly 
certain the few hundred here, of which 20-30 dominate 90% of the banter, aren’t 
smarter than the managers at IBM. 

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 7, 2023, 11:16 AM, Steve Thompson  wrote:

Choir here. Maybe you should explain this to IBM marketing and 
"C" level management?  To bad they aren't A level managers. ;-)

Just say'n'.

Steve Thompson

On 8/6/2023 10:57 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
>  > On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 06:36:52 AM PDT, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
>> There is NO DEFINITION.Of course there is a definition otherwise it's 
>> jabberwocky. Not one person is willing to accept the actual definition as 
>> given in all dictionaries: a large computer shared by many people. My point 
>> is that today, every computer used as a server is a mainframe. System z has 
>> fallen to the ranks of a server and mainframe should not be used.
>> Everyone may use it's own imagination.
> Made up definitions are either jabberwocky or slang.
>
>> Of course some definition may be less popular than other.
> So you are saying everyone's definition is correct as long as that person 
> knows what it means.
>
>> IMHO, The most commonly used definition
>> NOWADAYS is: IBM System Z.
>
> Common use of a word doesn't mean people use it correctly. My point is that 
> everyone is using "mainframe" incorrectly. Either System z is a server or all 
> servers are mainframes. Either change the definition or people should use it 
> correctly.
>
>
> --
> 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

2023-08-07 Thread Bill Johnson

The growth numbers tell the story.

One of the most attention-grabbing of the new uses in which mainframes now 
excel is blockchain. The mainframe’s advantages over x86 servers in response 
time, transaction throughput, scalability, and particularly security, make it 
the ideal blockchain host.

That security advantage is decisive. The blockchain model is entirely dependent 
on transaction records being carried in a chain of data blocks that, once 
assembled, cannot be changed. Because of their superior processing power, 
mainframes can provide the protection of 100% end-to-end encryption without 
degrading performance. In fact, IBM claims that its mainframes encrypt data 18 
times faster than x86 platforms at just 5% of the cost.

Other areas in which the mainframe is carving out a significant spot for itself 
in the modern era of IT include DevOps, cloud computing (both public and 
private clouds), and running multiple virtual operating systems.

The mainframe is here to stay!

As this brief survey of the mainframe’s place in the current IT landscape 
shows, “big iron” is not going away any time soon. In fact, according to Allied 
Market Research, the global mainframe market is expected to reach a staggering 
$2.90 billion by 2025.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 7, 2023, 1:01 PM, Phil Smith III  wrote:

Mike Shaw wrote:
>I have seen the 10,000 number several times in this thread...IBM does
>not publish their count of installed mainframes AFAIK...how was that
>number developed...anybody know?

I expect that's a marketing number, and I strongly suspect it's high, and 
includes internal machines and Kyndryl. At the peak of System/370 in the 80s 
the claimed number I heard was about 20,000, including MVS, VM, VSE, and TPF. 
We know there's been a lot of erosion, plus simple consolidation both because 
of mergers and more LPARs and CPUs per CEC. So 10K CECs just seems.very very 
high to me. I'd bet on more like 2,500 if I had to put money on it.

But of course we'll never know because IBM has no reason to tell us. Can't 
blame 'em for that.

--
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

2023-08-07 Thread Bill Johnson

“We know there’s been a lot of erosion”! No we don’t. Prove it. Because 50 
listers have said so in the last decade or two? Plus, there are thousands of 
new MF customers throughout the world. Easily proven.
IBM has been around for over 100 years. (1911) Not many companies can say that. 
I’d bet they’ll be around for many more decades.

>From 2014. 
>https://www.wired.com/insights/2014/04/back-future-cloud-wont-replace-mainframe/

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Monday, August 7, 2023, 1:01 PM, Phil Smith III  wrote:

Mike Shaw wrote:
>I have seen the 10,000 number several times in this thread...IBM does
>not publish their count of installed mainframes AFAIK...how was that
>number developed...anybody know?

I expect that's a marketing number, and I strongly suspect it's high, and 
includes internal machines and Kyndryl. At the peak of System/370 in the 80s 
the claimed number I heard was about 20,000, including MVS, VM, VSE, and TPF. 
We know there's been a lot of erosion, plus simple consolidation both because 
of mergers and more LPARs and CPUs per CEC. So 10K CECs just seems.very very 
high to me. I'd bet on more like 2,500 if I had to put money on it.

But of course we'll never know because IBM has no reason to tell us. Can't 
blame 'em for that.

--
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