IBM has always had a propensity for changing nomenclature, e.g. from Data Management to Data Administration.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Phil Smith III <li...@akphs.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 3:10 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: PL/I vs. JCL Joe: Are those eight books the only use of the term in IBM doc? Still convincing-it's not like it's one isolated RedBook-but perhaps reflecting that it was perhaps viewed as a mistake (or "Open MVS" was), but one that was too hard to undo. Guessing we'll never know. It is curious that "UNIX System Services" is even a term, given that "Open MVS" and "OMVS" were already around and OMVS is more visible (e.g., you don't define a "USS segment"). In the Olden Days, I suspect IBM would have been more careful about such things. Deck chairs at this point. Also note that those docs talk about "z/OS UNIX", which is yet another slight variation on the theme! (Yes, probably UNIX System Services is a subset of z/OS UNIX, but the point is, "USS" stuck.) ...phsiii ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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