Re: Replacing CA products

[Vernooij, CP - SPLXM]

If you replace CA-7 by Control-M, you can/should replace CA-11 by Control-R.

Kees.

"John A Zoppetti"  wrote in message 
news:...
> We are planning to replace our CA products with similar products from other
> vendors.  Listed below are the replacements we are investigating.   Any
> recommendations for different software than what we have identified and/or
> user experiences in the following migrations would be appreciated.
> 
> We plan to migrate each of these CA products to the listed product:
> ACF2 -   IBM RACF (we have had RACF on some LPARs)
> CA-1 -   IBM DFSMS RMM
> PMO -  IBM LLA
> QFETCH -   IBM VLF
> Platinum DB2 tools -   IBM DB2 tools
> 
> We plan to investigate these candidate products as replacements:
> CA-7 -  BMC Control-M, Tivoli Workload Scheduler, ASG Zeke
> CA-11 -   Tivoli Workload Scheduler, ASG Zebb
> Easytrieve -   PSG Z-Writer, IBM Migration Utility
> Panvalet/PanAPT -   ISPW, SCLM, RDZ
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> John Zoppetti
> U. S. Steel
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [z390] Anyone want Source code listing of last VSE program product Supervisor?

[Scott Ford]

So what's a wooden paddle ?

Scott ford
www.identityforge.com

On Aug 3, 2012, at 4:57 PM, Clark Morris  wrote:

> On 3 Aug 2012 11:51:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
> 
>>> Pehaps he could send it to the Computer History Museum, on the
>>> condition that it not be used until the copyrights expire?
>> 
>> As one of Al Kossow's little minions, I say yes, please.
>> 
>> CHM works with IBM and the other computer companies, and they do get
>> commercial software out into the public, usually under some
>> non-commercial license. However, as you can guess, these things take
>> time, especially with a conservative company like IBM. But as we know
>> with software preservation, time is the enemy.
>> 
>> CHM and bitsavers can accept interesting old software, and just keep
>> it in the protected archive until some deal is worked out.
> 
> 
> I may still have a copy of the "Wooden Paddle".  I also have various
> old 1401< IBM 705 Autocoder and Honywell 800 manuals among others.
> When I pass on can I just tell my heirs and assigns to just pack them
> all up and send them to the Computer History Museum?
> 
> Clark Morris
> 
> --
> 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: [z390] Anyone want Source code listing of last VSE program product Supervisor?

[William Donzelli]

> I may still have a copy of the "Wooden Paddle".  I also have various
> old 1401< IBM 705 Autocoder and Honywell 800 manuals among others.
> When I pass on can I just tell my heirs and assigns to just pack them
> all up and send them to the Computer History Museum?

I think CHM has some sort of official way of doing this, but I think
it is more geared towards really large gifts. Let me check.

--
Will

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Is this valid COBOL syntax?

[Frank Swarbrick]

Oh!  I did not realize that you were the vendor!  Well then have fun!  :-)




>
> From: Charles Mills 
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
>Sent: Saturday, August 4, 2012 6:59 PM
>Subject: Re: Is this valid COBOL syntax?
> 
>The vendor is fixing the preprocessor. (That would be me.)
>
>
>Charles 
>
>Frank Swarbrick  wrote:
>
>>Correct.
>>Where will you go from here?
>>Frank
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> From: Charles Mills 
>>>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
>>>Sent: Friday, August 3, 2012 11:12 AM
>>>Subject: Re: Is this valid COBOL syntax?
>>> 
>>>Frank (and also now John M.) -
>>>
>>>You've got it. When John M. said his compiler was generating an error I
>>>started running some experiments. It took about twenty experiments, but here
>>>is the answer.
>>>
>>>The following program compiles cleanly (except for a sequence error), but if
>>>you remove the DATE-COMPILED line it does not. For the sample below, lines
>>>20 through 33 are part of the DATE-COMPILED paragraph. It is deceptive
>>>source code. What appears to be part of the REMARKS paragraph or something
>>>like that is in fact part of the DATE-COMPILED paragraph.
>>>
>>>2  IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.      
>>>00013  PROGRAM-ID.    FOO.          
>>>00017  DATE-COMPILED.                
>>>00020 *REMARKS.                      
>>>           now is the time for all go
>>>00021      '*
>>>00022      '* blah blah blah        
>>>00022      '* blah blah blah        
>>>00033          FOO.                  
>>>       DATA DIVISION.                
>>>       WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.      
>>>       01  TRANS-NAME    PIC X(20).  
>>>       PROCEDURE DIVISION.          
>>>       MAIN-PROCEDURE.              
>>>           STOP RUN.                
>>>Charles
>>>
>>>-Original Message-
>>>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
>>>Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
>>>Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 9:53 AM
>>>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>>Subject: Re: Is this valid COBOL syntax?
>>>
>>>Here is what happened.
>>>The program was written in pre-COBOL II (COBOL 85) syntax.  At that time the
>>>REMARKS paragraph valid (I'm guessing as an IBM extension), and everything
>>>following it (until the next valid phrase) was treated as, well, remarks
>>>(a.k.a. comments).  So it used to look something like this:
>>>
>>> IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
>>> PROGRAM-ID. MYPGM.
>>>
>>> AUTHOR. THE AUTHOR OF THIS PROGRAM.
>>> REMARKS.
>>>      '***   '
>>>      '* VARIOUS COMMENT-LIKE TEXT      *'
>>>      '* VARIOUS COMMENT-LIKE TEXT      *'
>>>
>>>When someone attempted to compile it under COBOL II they got an error on the
>>>REMARKS pargraph, as it was no longer valid.  Some the programmer put the
>>>comment indicator asterisk in front of REMARKS and tried again.  Low and
>>>behold, it worked!  
>>>
>>>
>>>Why did it work?  Because of the AUTHOR paragraph.  (Or perhaps some other
>>>paragraph; I'm just guessing AUTHOR.)  The IDENTIFICATION DIVISION is
>>>defined as follows:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>__ 
>>>  
>>>|   
>>>   |
>>>   | >>__ _IDENTIFICATION_ __DIVISION.__PROGRAM-ID__ ___
>>>__program-name_> |
>>>   | |_ID_|
>>>|_._| |
>>>  
>>>|   
>>>   |
>>>   | >__ __ __ ___
>>>_> |
>>>   |    |_  __ _RECURSIVE___ __ _ _| 
>>>|_._|   |
>>>   |  |_IS_|  |_COMMON__ _ _| 
>>>|_PROGRAM_|    |
>>>   |  | |_INITIAL_|
>>>| |
>>>   |  |_INITIAL__ 
>>>_| |
>>>   |
>>>|_COMMON_|   |
>>>  
>>>|   
>>>   |
>>>   | >__ __ __
>>> > |
>>>   |    |_AUTHOR__ ___ __ ___ _|  |_INSTALLATION__ ___ __
>>>___ _|  |
>>>   |  |_._|  | <___  |    |_._|  |
>>><___  |    |
>>>   | |___comment-entry_|_|  
>>>|___comment-entry_|_|    |
>>>  
>>>|   
>>>   |
>>>   | >__ _

Re: Auditors Don't Know Squat!

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 04:08:09 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>
>>It has been discussed, repeatedly, in these pages that the proper
>>function of an auditor is to assess conformance to standards,
>>government or corporate,
>
>But not to devise their own standards.
> ...
>>Of course, if the standards
>
>What standards? They didn't cite any.
>
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 15:21:06 +, Chicklon, Thomas wrote:
> 
> ...the auditor wrote a finding for the mainframe server not running
> the corporate _standard_ antivirus product.
> [empnasis added]

Sounds like a standard to me.  My conjecture is that in the Federal
instance the auditor was also guided by a standard, not inventing
one; at worst taking it out of context.  I guess you're allowed to
argue that Thomas informally used "standard" where "modal"
would have been more appropriate.

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:55:06 -0400, John Gilmore wrote:

>If Paul Gilmartin's contention were correct auditors would be
>dispensable, replaceable by a program.  In fact they are retained to
>exercise professional judgment, and the standard language in which
>they sign off on financial results reflects this unambiguously.
>
... with which I'm unfamiliar.  I should hope the convention is to
mention the deviation and remark that it's inconsequential.

I'd expect that in other cases the auditor reports exactly objective
facts of deviations, and the judgment of consequentiality is left to
the party to whom he reports.

In most cases, I'd hope that such inconsequential deviations should
be tolerated for only (placement of adverb?) a very few audit cycles,
after which it's expected that the standard is amended to conform
to reality.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Auditors Don't Know Squat!

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <7071703290621695.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on
08/03/2012
   at 04:37 PM, Paul Gilmartin  said:

>Don't blame the auditors.

Why not? A good auditor is a joy forever, but a bad auditor can cause
immense damage.

>And what do you find wrong with the auditor's action in either of
>these cases?

Dictating policy instead of monitoring compliance to documented
policy.

>It has been discussed, repeatedly, in these pages that the proper
>function of an auditor is to assess conformance to standards,
>government or corporate,

But not to devise their own standards.

>Would you shoot the messenger?

Not an honest messenger, but if he writes his own messages then he
isn't a messenger.

>Of course, if the standards

What standards? They didn't cite any.

-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 Atid/2
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Cloud Service

[Alvaro Guirao Lopez]

You can follow de Cloud Computing debate in Mainframe Platform in *Cloud
Mainframe Computing* group from LinkedIn here:

http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Cloud-Mainframe-Computing-4452774

Cheers,
Álvaro.

2012/8/4 Imhauser Breton - bimhau 

> I might know of one, based in the US.
>
> http://goo.gl/c7vR9
> http://www.acxiomit.com
>
> BRETON IMHAUSER
> Mainframe Network Services
> Acxiom Corporation
> EML   breton.imhau...@acxiom.com
> TEL00.1.501.342.2629
> 301 E DAVE WARD DR, CWY082-5, Conway, AR, 72033, USA
> WWW.ACXIOMIT.COM
>
> RANKED #1 IN CUSTOMER SATISFACTION FOR IT OUTSOURCING BY
> THE BLACK BOOK OF OUTSOURCING, 2010
>
>
> The information contained in this communication is confidential, is
> intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally
> privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,
> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and
> delete the original message or any copy of it from your computer system.
> Thank you
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>



-- 
Un saludo.
Álvaro Guirao

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN