Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
Hi: I have said this before. At a IBM class (here in Chicago) The instructor told us (SERVPAC CLASS) that the goal of IBM was to eliminate the systems programmer. Now hows does that make everyone on the list feel? Ed On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/ OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
I feel fine. I was told the same thing 35 years ago. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Gould Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:52 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?) Hi: I have said this before. At a IBM class (here in Chicago) The instructor told us (SERVPAC CLASS) that the goal of IBM was to eliminate the systems programmer. Now hows does that make everyone on the list feel? Ed On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/ OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht -- 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: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
I was told that System Programming would be reduced to PARMLIB updates. Circa 1981. And.. - -teD - Original Message From: Richards, Robert B. Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 13:01 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?) I feel fine. I was told the same thing 35 years ago. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Gould Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:52 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?) Hi: I have said this before. At a IBM class (here in Chicago) The instructor told us (SERVPAC CLASS) that the goal of IBM was to eliminate the systems programmer. Now hows does that make everyone on the list feel? Ed On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/ OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht -- 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: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:25 PM I was told that System Programming would be reduced to PARMLIB updates. Circa 1981. And.. In a previous job as a CSR for an ISV, we got a new boss. In his first intro meeting, he explained that our job was, essentially, to try to work ourselves out of a job. But fear not: New releases always introduced new bugs^H^H^H^Hfeatures. :-) -jc- ** Information contained in this e-mail message and in any attachments thereto is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message, delete any copies held on your systems, notify the sender immediately, and refrain from using or disclosing all or any part of its content to any other person. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
