Re: Are there any mainframe sites out there that don't use JCLCHECK/JCLPREP or equivalent?

[Phil Smith III]

I can't resist:

Yes, all of those who aren't running MVS, VSE, or any of their precursors or 
descendants...

...phsiii (Noting once again that "mainframe" and "MVS" are NOT synonyms)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: SMPE DDDEF DSNTYPE Query

[Paul Gilmartin]

In a recent note, ibm-main said:

> Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 05:53:34 +1000
> 
> From: "Robert A. Rosenberg"
> 
> > In changing the DSNs in the DDDEFs, I noticed the DSNTYPE field
> > (which was already filled in for a few LOADLIB datasets which were
> > shipped as PDSEs not PDSs) and was wondering. I assume that this
> > field IS important for HFS files.
> 
> Nope - no-on cares about HFSs, only what's in them.
> Go read up on "path" in the SMP/E reference.
> 
A fortiori: the section on DDDEF says that PATH is mutually
exclusive with DSNTYPE.

Unfortunately, loc. cit. continues, saying:

   * PATH is meaningful only in a target zone DDDEF entry, because
   the information is used only for processing a target zone.

... whereas, in:

4.0   Chapter 4.  SMP/E Data Sets and Files

4.23 SMPNTS
   1. The SMPNTS can be defined to SMP/E only with a DD statement
  or a DDDEF.

4.38 SMPWKDIR
   [ noncommittal ]

So, SMPNTS can be defined with a DDDEF, presumably containing a
PATH subentry.  But PATH is meaningful only in a target zone
DDDEF entry, whereas SMPNTS is used only doing a RECEIVE in the
GLOBAL zone.  Sounds like an editorial lapse.  I wonder what
Kurt Q. has to say on this.

Is DDDEF SMPWKDIR permitted?  What zone.  I've always used a
JCL DD statement in the RECEIVE step.

Now that DF/SMS permits BPAM access to HFS directories, and
they can therefore be used in HLASM SYSLIB, I wonder if SMP/E
supports use of HFS directories in SYSLIB concatenations?
Must try.

-- gil
-- 
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Squeezing defined capacity

[ibm-main]

From: "Gil Peleg"

> Question is how will IBM regard this in terms of licensing charges?

Depends on what was signed I guess - I don't get involved at that level.
One would have to think it outside the spirit of the license - especially if
the CF LPAR was being actively used.

> Another thing is im not totally convinced that this will not hurt
> performance. Not sure PR/SM was designed to handle such a workload --
> 100%cpu 24/7...

Can't see it'd be an issue - LPAR dispatcher has to determine if the guest
is busy at re-dispatch anyway.
The LPAR would generally run it's time-slice, be pre-empted, and wait to be
re-dispatched. Rinse-spin-repeat ...
Every LPAR has a guaranteed non-dispatch time, so has to be checked
regardless.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Are there any mainframe sites out there that don't use JCLCHECK/JCLPREP or equivalent?

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 09/30/2005
   at 01:23 PM, Steve Grimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>  This highly convenient program calls MVS's JCL converter
> to report JCL errors in a jobstream on your TSO tube.  It is the
> same program which checks the errors when you run a real jobstream
> with TYPRUN=SCAN.  The output has been massaged to make it more
> convenient to display on the terminal.  All syntax errors are found,
> but "DATASET NOT FOUND"-type errors, which are produced by the
> JCL interpreter,

That, of course, is incorrect.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Is a Hurricane about to hit IBM ?

[Edward E. Jaffe]

AntonMvs2005 wrote:


"Why does the investors not see what I am seeing ?"
 


[snip]


Six month a 'go, I think it's 6 to 12 months, they tried to target the
medical sector. At the same time "W" also suddenly announced that he feels
the FEDS need to put more money into the IS departments of the Medical
sector in the US. Anybody else noticed this ?
 


[snip]


"Is the FEDS keeping IBM afloat just as they do with some of the American
Airlines"
 



I don't believe T. J. Watson had anything whatsoever to do with JFK's 
assassination.


IBM-Main is hardly an appropriate place for discussing conspiracy theory.

- 
-

| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | http://www.phoenixsoftware.com |
-

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: IMBED in R8

[R.S.]

Skip Robinson wrote:


Maybe I'm overly jittery, but I'm actually more concerned about user
catalogs for CICS regions. These catalogs are shared among all members of a
sysplex. If we have to take down all regions to rebuild catalogs, that is
effectively a sysplex-wide outage whether or not we IPL.


1. As others said, it doesnt necessarily mean sysplex outage. Even CICS 
regions can be recreated in new catalogs, during rolling IPL.


2. It's been some time since, IBM dropped IMBED, hasn't it ?
Didn't you have any occasion to do it, since 1999 ?
Even 99.999% availability means some outage sometimes...

BTW: How about password protection ?
I met a sysprog who complained that it doesn't work as good as in the 
old days...


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Is a Hurricane about to hit IBM ?

[AntonMvs2005]

Hi,

What I saw this week on this list is that most of us agrees with our view of
the IBM market place "On Earth". 

Needless to say , that is why I phrased the posting with "Is a Hurricane
about to hit IBM" and I ended the posting with the question :

"Why does the investors not see what I am seeing ?"

I am aware that IBM's Consulting section is still making a few dollars for
them but it only a matter of time for the American market to mature and
realize, these people are "kids".

I am also aware that IBM's PR/marketing section is paying for full page
adverts in the Wall Street journal but it is interesting to note the
targeted "potential growth sectors". 

Six month a 'go, I think it's 6 to 12 months, they tried to target the
medical sector. At the same time "W" also suddenly announced that he feels
the FEDS need to put more money into the IS departments of the Medical
sector in the US. Anybody else noticed this ?

This week, they decided their potential growth sectors are : 

Mid-range/Servers/On Demand and one big advert for IBM Consulting.

Note: No mainframe... Zippo... zero. That is why I ended my initial posting
with the question :

"Is the FEDS keeping IBM afloat just as they do with some of the American
Airlines"

Footnote: This is not an attempt to "knock" IBM. It's an attempt to try and
understand what the Captain of Ship is thinking.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: OT The Original MF?

[Ed Gould]

On Oct 1, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Stephen M. Wiegand wrote:


At 09:47 AM 09/30/2005, you wrote:

Ed,

I remember these from highschool, now I do feel old. LOL.

Thanks,

Fletch


Hmmph, old!  These weren't even invented yet when I graduated from 
high school.




Oops sorry about that. (I am 57 now) and consider myself old. (if that 
helps out any) :)


Ed

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: (fwd) Re: Plan Now (Budget) for 2006 zSeries/z9 Summer Interns at Your Company/Gov't

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Clark Morris
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 2:28 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: (fwd) Re: Plan Now (Budget) for 2006 zSeries/z9 
> Summer Interns at Your Company/Gov't
> 
> Unfortunately, your company is like many if not most these 
> days, unwilling to train and unable to see that the most 
> valuable knowledge the staff people should have is how the 
> company and its systems work. Many somehow feel that they can 
> ship off the work - especially maintenance to some outsourcer 
> that may have the technical skills but doesn't know your 
> business and doesn't know your systems.  Of course they are 
> like Nike and Apple where the actual creation of many of the 
> products is turned over to sub-contractors.
> 

Curiously, they did try the "outsourcing" route some years ago. Sort of.
Very weird situation. They consolidated all corporate IT into a single
subsidiary. They then "sold" the subsidiary to another company for stock
in that other company (they ended with with 45% of the outside company's
stock). After about 3 years, they finally woke up to the fact that (1)
quality of service had decreased and (2) costs had increased. So they
"repatriated" the IT work back as it was before. Unless / until upper
level corporate management changes, it is unlikely that they will ever
try this again. Or they will have such strict requirements that nobody
will sign the outsourcing contract for the money that they would be
willing to pay.

What this means, in our situation, is that we mostly (not 100%) will
only hire people who have a "buzz word compliant" resume. The zSeries
doesn't much count in this area. We got a reprieve on a Windows
conversion this year. A new z890, new Shark (well new to us - 2105 which
is old), and are getting a new (truly new) IBM tape solution, but no new
software. We don't need to worry much about the COBOL programmers, they
no longer really have the opportunity to move to a new job (mostly
true). 99% of all new development is Windows based. As if it were
actually cheaper. Being contrary, I keep trying to sell a Linux (zSeries
and Intel) to management, but they don't seem to hear (or at least they
fail to respond). Using LAMP (Linux Apache MySQL PHP/Perl), I myself can
beat the feces out of a Windows IIS setup. And I'm just a "fiddler" in
the Linux arena.

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
UICI Insurance Center
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: SMPE DDDEF DSNTYPE Query

[ibm-main]

From: "Robert A. Rosenberg"

> In changing the DSNs in the DDDEFs, I noticed the DSNTYPE field 
> (which was already filled in for a few LOADLIB datasets which were 
> shipped as PDSEs not PDSs) and was wondering. I assume that this 
> field IS important for HFS files.

Nope - no-on cares about HFSs, only what's in them.
Go read up on "path" in the SMP/E reference.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Old COBOL and 64-bit ???

[Bill Klein]

Exactly what "conversion" are you doing?  (LE? COBOL? z/OS? hardware?
other?)

If the "conversion" is for COBOL, then there really is almost NO conversion
necessary (depending on your exact environment).  See:

 http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/IGY3MG30/3.2.2 

You might also want to check out:
 http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/IGY3MG30/2.1.2.3


***

Now, if you DO want to actually "upgrade" your compiler to a supported one,
then you have lots (much more than one month's) worth of work.

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Thanks, Bill.  I've got a month to finish this conversion, so any quick
> answers are greatly appreciated.
> 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

(fwd) Re: Plan Now (Budget) for 2006 zSeries/z9 Summer Interns at Your Company/Gov't

[Clark Morris]

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:57:57 -0500, in bit.listserv.ibm-main "McKown,
John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> Preceding postings snipped
>>
>
>At our installation, this is true of even on the "dark side" as well.
>Everybody here is expected to know everything, when needed. We
>__almost__ got some training on Java technologies when we acquired
>another company. But that died quickly. "We are not a training
>institution!"

Unfortunately, your company is like many if not most these days,
unwilling to train and unable to see that the most valuable knowledge
the staff people should have is how the company and its systems work.
Many somehow feel that they can ship off the work - especially
maintenance to some outsourcer that may have the technical skills but
doesn't know your business and doesn't know your systems.  Of course
they are like Nike and Apple where the actual creation of many of the
products is turned over to sub-contractors.

>
>--
>John McKown
>Senior Systems Programmer
>UICI Insurance Center
>Information Technology
>
>This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
>information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
>content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
>should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
>copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
>based on it, is strictly prohibited.
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
>Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Defining DASD-Only MVS Logging Streams

[Doug Fuerst]

Try GC34-6224, Install Manual for TS 2.3 Chapter 24, section on 
defining DASD only streams.



At 01:41 AM 10/1/2005, you wrote:
I am in the process of migrating come CICS/ESA 4.1 regions to 
CICS/TS 2.3 and have run into a GOTCHA. CICS/TS 2.3 does not support 
CICS Controlled Journals but uses MVS Logging Streams for this 
purpose. In looking at the documentation  all of the descriptions 
and JCL Examples of MVS Logging Streams talk about using the 
Coupling Facility (although the is some mention of a DASD-Only 
alternative). I can find no examples or descriptions (I might have 
missed something) of how to go the DASD-Only route (we do not have a 
CF). Can someone please point me at the correct manual with samples 
of the needed JCL (or email me examples) to define the Stream as 
well as allocate the needed Datasets (if the Logger does not 
allocate/create them on-the-fly as needed). We need this for User Journals.


Thank you.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Doug Fuerst
Consultant
BK Associates
Brooklyn, NY
(718) 921-2620 (Office)
(718) 921-0952 (Fax)
(917) 572-7364 (Cell)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: SMPE DDDEF DSNTYPE Query

[Robert A. Rosenberg]

At 18:35 +1000 on 10/01/2005, ibm-main wrote about Re: SMPE DDDEF 
DSNTYPE Query:



From: "Robert A. Rosenberg"


 In reviewing the DDDEFs for a newly created set of Zones, I noticed
 that there was a DSNTYPE parm that has LIBRARY (ie: PDSE) defined for
 some of them. What is the significance for SMPE of having this set.
 IOW: Will I get into trouble if I have DDDEFs that are PDSEs but lack
 this setting?


Related to your other post re CICS/TS perchance     


To some extent yes. This has to do with cloning a multi-product 
Global ZONE (to create a separate set for CICS and another for DB2) 
and its Target and DLIB Datasets. I Created new copies of the 
datasets (using PDSEs) and did an IEBCOPY of the old datasets the new 
ones. In changing the DSNs in the DDDEFs, I noticed the DSNTYPE field 
(which was already filled in for a few LOADLIB datasets which were 
shipped as PDSEs not PDSs) and was wondering. I assume that this 
field IS important for HFS files.




Short answer, NO.
Just another dsn attribute you can safely ignore, just like most of the
others.
I prefer to use the minimum required - dsname and disp for catalog
references, add volume and unit for indirectly catalogued targets.

Shane ...


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Squeezing defined capacity

[Gil Peleg]

Bruno,
 I heard about this from a colleague. Question is how will IBM regard this
in terms of licensing charges?
 Another thing is im not totally convinced that this will not hurt
performance. Not sure PR/SM was designed to handle such a workload --
100%cpu 24/7...
 Gil.

 On 10/1/05, Bruno Sugliani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The only common sense reaction idea i had as i faced the same problem was
> to create one extra lpar , without operating system , just put either a CF
> .. or a machine language loop inside and limit this lpar to the amount of
> MIPS/MSU you do NOT want to use ... ( hardware weight )
> and the other lpars eat the rest intelligently between them
> Crazy is it not ?
> Bruno
> Bruno(dot)sugliani(at)groupemornay(dot)asso(dot)fr

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Are there any mainframe sites out there that don't use JCLCHECK/JCLPREP or equivalent?

[Kenny Fogarty]

I worked at an IBM development lab for seven years, and we never had
anything like JCLCHECK/JCLPREP. Before then, I think I came across
JCLCHECK once, when I worked in Germany.

Most of the JCL I write is pretty generic anyway, and relies mostly on
the usual IBM utilities being present. That way, I can take my library
of jobs with me wherever I end up working.

I often wonder if JCL checkers and such like are worth the cost,
especially if your site is set up to catch JCL errors, or jobs that
break site standards, well before they hit production?

Kenny

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Squeezing defined capacity

[Bruno Sugliani]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 15:03:40 +1000, ibm-main <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>The "perfect solution" Gil mentions, is surely the only common-sense
>design - *from day 1*.
>I too have a customer that moves MSUs around - although with less
>regularity; end of month/quarter, that sort of thing.
>
>Shane ...
The only common sense reaction idea i had as i faced the same problem was
 to create one extra lpar , without operating system , just put either a CF
.. or a machine language loop inside and limit this lpar to the amount of
MIPS/MSU you do NOT want to use ... ( hardware weight )
and the other lpars eat the rest intelligently between them
Crazy is it not ?
Bruno
Bruno(dot)sugliani(at)groupemornay(dot)asso(dot)fr

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Are there any mainframe sites out there that don't use JCLCHECK/JCLPREP or equivalent?

[Stephen M. Wiegand]

At 03:39 PM 09/30/2005, you wrote:

Am I the only one who gets a lot of weird characters trying to read the two
supposed EXEC's at that link?  Both valJCL.txt and jproc.txt (links on that
page) appear not to be EXEC source at all.

Even uploaded in binary, they do not appear to be EBCDIC, nor do they look
like an XMI file, nor do they look like compiled REXX, so I am at a loss how
to run them or customize them.

Are these by any chance compressed or "tersed" files?  The author certainly
doesn't say so on that website.

Peter



Just looked at both of them and they displayed just fine.  Have you tried 
saving the .txt files to your PC and then displaying them with Notebook?


Regards,

Steve Wiegand



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 2:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Are there any mainframe sites out there that don't use
JCLCHECK/JCLPREP or equivalent?

In August 2004, Herman Stocker posted the following information about
another JCL checker:

Have you tried the FREE JCL Checker valJCL from:

G.VenkataKrishnan ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Software Engineer, IBM Global Services India

 http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/eserver/articles/valjcl.html

The price is right and you can customize it.

Don Imbriale

_
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the 
addressee and
may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the

message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in

error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any
attachments from your system.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: OT The Original MF?

[Stephen M. Wiegand]

At 09:47 AM 09/30/2005, you wrote:

Ed,

I remember these from highschool, now I do feel old. LOL.

Thanks,

Fletch


Hmmph, old!  These weren't even invented yet when I graduated from high school.




-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ed Gould
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 10:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: OT The Original MF?


http://www.bellsystemmemorial.com/belllabs_kits_cardiac.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


Steve Wiegand

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Squeezing defined capacity

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 10/1/2005 10:02:29 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Actually  it's not really IBM that's the majority of the problem price-wise,  



>>
Other vendors may be in on the conspiracy, but IBM is the 
ring leader. Same old FUD and chaotic accounting spun off to
the ISVs. Guess I'm still mad about SE's and PSRs. I have to
do their job and they want to charge me for the  privilege.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: IBM-MAIN Digest - 29 Sep 2005 to 30 Sep 2005 (#2005-273)

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 10/1/2005 7:39:46 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

If no  one is joining up the association inevitably folds.  And it's  all
local, on the local members' shoulders.

Why are we even debating  this?  Go sign up some new members!



>>
Again, horse has left the barn! Only MVS shop in 50 mile
radius and if the conversion  continues there will be none.
Where's the base? CS dept doesn't teach ALC or COBOL so best
recruiting is from visiting professor's spouses, once acclimated
off to higher paying endeavors.
 
Many, many infrastructure issues. Education, training, career
development, exposure, market penetration. Seems like IBM
completely withdrawn from the trenches, trying to lob in these
pejorative initiatives from Armonk in hopes the masses will
trickle back. Ain't gonna happen. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Squeezing defined capacity

[Robert Justice]

Actually it's not really IBM that's the majority of the problem price-wise, 
I could name a few vendors
that decided to just recently quadruple their price. Once we made it clear 
we'd look at alternatives,
and brought them in-house for a trial, all of a sudden, the "old" vendor 
"magically" decided they'd

rather have the business at the old price than no business at all.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Squeezing defined capacity

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 10/1/2005 9:33:16 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

through  all of the gyrations.  I've sat through several sessions 
explaining  how to save money at Share and MCMG.  Every time I sit 
through a  session, my overriding thought is WHY?  Why not just cut the 
price  for everyone!



>>
Guess it's sorta like the New car sales force. Detroit stamps
'em out, then the sales force haggles with the customer for
most markup per unit. They're on commission, more you sell
more you make. End of month or end of season deals are common
place. Pretty much the same with sub-capacity licensing, you
get the privilege of haggling the numbers monthly-can you
say gopher guts? Guess what we're pushing for is simplified
pricing and accounting like the online car brokers- _www.carsdirect.com_ 
(http://www.carsdirect.com)  or the new _www.vehix.com_ (http://www.vehix.com)  
maybe the
Platform solutions folks will lead the way in this area too.   

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Squeezing defined capacity

[Eric Bielefeld]

I've always thought that the restrictions IBM puts on sites and the 
hoops you have to go through to save money really suck.  I've never had 
to do any of that, as our last 2 machines were an MP2003 and our current 
MP3000, and the pricing IBM gives you is pretty good without going 
through all of the gyrations.  I've sat through several sessions 
explaining how to save money at Share and MCMG.  Every time I sit 
through a session, my overriding thought is WHY?  Why not just cut the 
price for everyone!


The first time I heard IBM talk about the 4 hour rolling average that 
pricing is based on, I though there is no way we could utilize this. 
Since pricing is based on the highest rolling 4 hour average (I hope my 
understanding of this is right - if not I'm sure someone will correct my 
thinking), I knew it wouldn't give us any relief, even if we could use 
it.  Every month we get periods of 8 hours or longer where the CPU is 
pegged out.  Why doesn't IBM just take an average for the month in 
billing, and give us a user friendly way to cap it?


Eric Bielefeld
P&H Mining Equipment

ibm-main wrote:


Capping LPARs anytime is bad - in the case of defined capacity, probably BAD
(broken as designed).
Just a monumental example of marketing apparently over-riding the techos.
The contortions customers have to perform to use the machinery they paid for
is mind-numbingly stupid.
The "perfect solution" Gil mentions, is surely the only common-sense
design - *from day 1*.
I too have a customer that moves MSUs around - although with less
regularity; end of month/quarter, that sort of thing.

Shane ...


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: IBM-MAIN Digest - 29 Sep 2005 to 30 Sep 2005 (#2005-273)

[Timothy Sipples]

Ed Gould writes:
>Yes but here IBM is laying thousands off and then you want "others" to
>train people so IBM can take advantage of the training  and hire them
>so they can outsource even more companies/ There is something wrong in
>this picture, no?

So what do you suggest?  What do you YOU plan to do about global
outsourcing trends and layoffs?

I think you've got it exactly backwards, frankly.  Employers are much more
likely to outsource IT organizations that cannot recruit and retain talent
because that's a basic business function.  (A dysfunctional organization is
one that cannot fulfill a basic business function, and dysfunctional
organizations are the ones most likely to be outsourced.)  I also suggest
that employees who are effective mentors are much more likely to stay
employed.  There are multiple reasons for that.  One organizational reason
is that that employee is much better "connected."  (There are strong
network effects to employment.)

I could see how parts of IBM might mildly prefer that you NOT hire college
interns.  However, I suspect your hiring a few college interns will have a
far bigger, positive impact on YOU.

>Do get me wrong I am all for training a person so he/she will stick
>around a company not to just be there for when IBM gets the pick of the
>"litter"

Well, that's reassuring. :-)

You seem to have a problem with outsourcing and offshoring and have great
fear for your job.  Unfortunately neither one of us is going to be able to
address that issue comprehensively on IBM-MAIN, but I'm offering you a
suggestion for how you might have a little less fear.  If you look around
and observe healthy domestic, in-house organizations you'll see they do
many things right, and one thing they do is they have college interns each
summer.  I contend that's not by accident and that the causation is in both
directions.

>One of the ideas behind training employees so they can better help the
>company he/she is working for NOT a company (like IBM) that comes in
>and takes over the processing of the same company.

Exactly.  If IBM (or EDS or Lockheed or...) is(are) the ONLY company(ies)
hiring college interns, well, that cinches the deal, doesn't it?  As a
private employer's own employees inevitably retire -- and that employer
suddenly discovers they can't run their own shop effectively -- where do
you think management turns?

>While I am sure there are a few interns out there, IBM cut their own
>throat (we have talked about this in the past on here) by doing away
>with the educational discount. *IF* they have restarted it (and I am
>not sure they have) it will take at least 4-5 years for students to
>start graduating. But between now and then (maybe) . IBM seems to have
>finally awakened but the dishwater is gone and they will have to pay
>catch up by hiring the people that IBM help put on umemployment. What
>irony.
>Ed (signed in dripping sarcasm)

I'm not sure why you're worrying about IBM and its employment abilities.
This subject has, at most, very little to do with IBM.

I can say that IBM Poughkeepsie is a wonderful place, and there are a lot
of bright college interns there working hand-in-hand with some of the best
minds in computing.  IBM just invested a reported $1.2 billion in the
System z9 development, and the lion's share of that went right into
Poughkeepsie, New York.  The products Poughkeepsie makes get shipped around
the world.

Look, any professional society -- and IBM-MAIN is nothing if not that --
needs a constant flow of new people.  It's like the Rotary Club, Lions
Club, Elks Club, Shriners, or whatever other association you care to name.
If no one is joining up the association inevitably folds.  And it's all
local, on the local members' shoulders.

Why are we even debating this?  Go sign up some new members!

- - - - -
Timothy F. Sipples
Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
IBM Americas zSeries/z9 Software
Phone: +1 312 529 1612
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Who still does not speak for IBM.  Can anybody know what ~310,000
employees are thinking?)
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: SMPE DDDEF DSNTYPE Query

[ibm-main]

From: "Robert A. Rosenberg"

> In reviewing the DDDEFs for a newly created set of Zones, I noticed
> that there was a DSNTYPE parm that has LIBRARY (ie: PDSE) defined for
> some of them. What is the significance for SMPE of having this set.
> IOW: Will I get into trouble if I have DDDEFs that are PDSEs but lack
> this setting?

Related to your other post re CICS/TS perchance     ;-)
Short answer, NO.
Just another dsn attribute you can safely ignore, just like most of the
others.
I prefer to use the minimum required - dsname and disp for catalog
references, add volume and unit for indirectly catalogued targets.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html