I tend to agree with Steve M. My newbies have had pretty much the same experience I'd say. What usually trips them up is the stuff we've had forever (examples -- our stuff for processing audit, account, performance data, .. etc) and the fact that the vendor doc isn't exactly geared for newbies either (e.g. CA :). None of the software seems to be good at telling you how to get from one version to another (very few products tell you that you can use alternate minidisks and a quick edit of the directory entry to flip --- or they are even worse and mix their code and configuration stuff on the same minidisks, trusting that you'll want to do the upgrade by running some exec and hoping for the best instead of allowing you to have test copies).
>Ultimately, I'm trying to answer the question: if you have >CMS-oriented users today, where are they going to go? How are >you going to get them there? We've got plenty of evidence that >TSO certainly isn't it. What are your choices, and how do you >salvage as much of the existing already-built-and-paid-for >business logic as you can? I think that's an old question these days. Around here, it's pretty hard to find a CMS-only oriented person. Everyone's been on a server (when you've got like 10,000 of them, it's not hard :). I don't see any new CMS applications being deployed (and haven't in quite some number of years). The applications folks have to know Java now and databases, and not all that much about their operating systems clearly. Marcy Cortes "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Boyes Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 2:36 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] z/VM usability > Surely you jest!!! Well, no, actually. > Using Linux to build a TPF system was something IBM 'forced' onto the TPF > users despite their kicking and screaming to the contrary. Just ask anyone > of the TPF users how much they like using Linux to build their TPF > systems. Curious. The TPF people I come into contact with on a semi-regular basis seem to like it a lot. May be industry specific; dunno. > Why expend all the energy, money and manpower to build all of the > emulation requirements you mention in another platform when you already > have the real thing now - and they work! To be blunt: because IBM is not-so-gradually killing CMS's ability to host application workload by means of starvation. No VSAM, no updated compilers other than C, no tooling that is not absolutely necessary to maintain CP equals no capability to continue to host commercial applications. The writing is on the wall. Ultimately, I'm trying to answer the question: if you have CMS-oriented users today, where are they going to go? How are you going to get them there? We've got plenty of evidence that TSO certainly isn't it. What are your choices, and how do you salvage as much of the existing already-built-and-paid-for business logic as you can? I'd rather start working on answers to these questions *before* I have to do it in an emergency fire-drill mode. I think it's fair to ask IBM to help us find those answers if they're going to break our toys, so I'd like to tell them what we need so they can work with us to find an answer.
