" I don't agree that all new applications should be 64 bit. That is overkill. 32-bit/4 GiB should be enough for almost all commercial applications."
"According to the analyst deck <https://www.ibm.com/investor/att/pdf/IBM-2Q18-Earnings-Charts.pdf> circulated with the latest set of quarterly financials, the IBM Z mainframe business, listed under its ‘systems segment’ has doubled year-on-year, pulling in a tidy US$2.2 billion ($2.96 billion) Overall revenue rose nearly 4 percent to US$20 billion ($26.9 billion), beating analysts’ average estimate of $19.85 billion ($26.7 billion), according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S." https://www.itnews.com.au/news/mainframe-sales-double-in-latest-ibm-profit-498679 Joe On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 7:20 AM Paul Edwards <mutazi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 13:55:30 +0300, Binyamin Dissen < > bdis...@dissensoftware.com> wrote: > > >What problem would this solve? > > It would set the long-term model for the > mainframe, instead of being stuck with > 24/31-bit software for eternity. > > >This would be of zero use for existing applications, > > I don't agree. Existing applications can be > modified to be 32-bit clean and have maximum > possible address space as per 32-bit. > > > and new applications should simply use 64 bit. > > I don't agree that all new applications should > be 64 bit. That is overkill. 32-bit/4 GiB should > be enough for almost all commercial applications. > > BFN. Paul. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
