The business case for CP40 was Project Mac, which IBM lost. But the engineers (and some customers) recognized the value in CP and CMS and fostered it in spite of the MIT spanking.
Serious use of VM for MVS development did not happen until a decade later when it saved their bacon by emulating XA before HW was available. Not too long after that, VM/XA SF and MA isolated early customer MVS/XA from the horrors of real hardware. (virtual machines are always less "hostile" than real HW and it took time for MVS to mature enough to survive outside its VM womb) I remember discussing MVS on VM with the MVS lead at my job circa 1985. I was stoked because I love VM. But he was anxious to get off it and run native. That is how many "Pookie people" seem to think of VM. They just don't like it. You can't make people like something. (problem with free will, I expect) In his world, there was no need for V12N and certainly no need for CMS. This thread has gone on too long. If you want tools for CMS, make a biz case or make the tools. We should leverage open source. We should take advantage of things IBM *is* developing, such as the BFS resident critters. ALL of the programs I have compiled on USS have dropped right in to OpenVM. (one man's experience; YMMV; actual mileage will probably be less) -- R; <>< On Dec 16, 2010 8:06 PM, "Dave Jones" <d...@vsoft-software.com> wrote: To this best of my knowledge, I don't believe that there was a business case made; at least it was not mentioned in any of Melinda's "History of VM" papers. DJ On 12/16/2010 6:37 PM, Schuh, Richard wrote: > > Did anyone build a legitimate business case for C...
