Re: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Bernd Oppolzer]

There is one at the IBM museum in Sindelfingen/Germany (near Boeblingen), 
and as far as I remember, it has only one arm. 

Kind regards

Bernd



Am Sonntag, 9. Dezember 2007 18:14 schrieben Sie:
>
> Superficially, but if you look closely you'll see that while the 2302 has
> the comb of R/W arms that you're used to, the RAMAC had an arm that moved
> both horizontally and vertically. I don't know whether it had three
> independent arms[1] or only one.
>
> [1] The version of the disk used on the 650 did.

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/05/2007
   at 08:34 AM, Rick Fochtman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Looks a little like the old 2302 fixed disk drive.

Superficially, but if you look closely you'll see that while the 2302 has
the comb of R/W arms that you're used to, the RAMAC had an arm that moved
both horizontally and vertically. I don't know whether it had three
independent arms[1] or only one.

[1] The version of the disk used on the 650 did.
 
-- 
 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: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/05/2007
   at 07:33 AM, Doc Farmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>One question - how many 80 column cards would equal one 305 RAMAC?

Well, the disk drive on the 650 derived from the RAMAC and could hold the
equivalent of 75000 cards.
 
-- 
 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: Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Rick Fochtman]

-


Furthermore, no one even reported the disappearance of 20 cars.
...
   

<>Maybe they were not willing to admit why they had 20 car-loads of 
cards


in the first place.  That's a LOT of cards to write notes on.
 

There was a society in the USSR where officials would not 
admit to mistakes, and their crime syndicates worked with everybody.
   



We have a similar entity here.  It's called "Government".  :-)
 


-
Maybe that's why the term "Honest Government" is so widely accepted as 
an oximoron. :-))


--
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: Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Chase, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Howard Brazee
> 
> On 5 Dec 2007 12:39:03 -0800, Patrick O'Keefe wrote:
> 
> >>Furthermore, no one even reported the disappearance of 20 cars.
> >>...
> >
> >Maybe they were not willing to admit why they had 20 
> car-loads of cards 
> >in the first place.  That's a LOT of cards to write notes on.
> 
> There was a society in the USSR where officials would not 
> admit to mistakes, and their crime syndicates worked with everybody.

We have a similar entity here.  It's called "Government".  :-)

-jc-

--
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: Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Howard Brazee]

On 5 Dec 2007 16:23:59 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Gould)
wrote:

>> Maybe they were not willing to admit why they had 20 car-loads
>> of cards in the first place.  That's a LOT of cards to write notes on.
>>
>> Paat:
>
>I was thinking that they ended up as fuel for heating. I don't think  
>you could make vodka out of them:)

Maybe the paper company was behind on pulp and paid the crime
syndicate to get them some.

--
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: Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Howard Brazee]

On 5 Dec 2007 12:39:03 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick
O'Keefe) wrote:

>>Furthermore, no one even reported the disappearance of
>>20 cars.
>>...
>
>Maybe they were not willing to admit why they had 20 car-loads
>of cards in the first place.  That's a LOT of cards to write notes on.

There was a society in the USSR where officials would not admit to
mistakes, and their crime syndicates worked with everybody.

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 04:06:58 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:

>>However, if you specify allocation in terms of blocks & blocksize, what does 
>>it matter?
>
>That's a BIG IF at a lot of locations.
>
I don't believe it was proposed that IBM end marketing of 3390 geometry;
only that an alternative be made available for customers needing
greater capacity and not afraid to change their JCL.  Customers
needing greater capacity and fearing JCL changes need psychological
help; there's no technological relief.  (Can't put 10GB of data in a
5GB sack.)

Perhaps the proposed new geometry could be made eligible for
allocation only when SPACE is specified in blocks or UNIT is
explicitly requested.  SMOP.  (Could SMS rules handle this?)

What's the greatest space allocation that might be requested
in blocks given current JCL syntax restrictions?

-- gil

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[R.S.]

Chase, John wrote:

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of John P. Baker

Using the current track size, the space on a volume can 
theoretically reach
244 TB.  If we use the full capabilities of ECKD 
architecture, a single volume can accommodate 72,055 PB.


Who would live long enough to transfer a single file that size, using
today's fastest network?  For that matter, who would live long enough to
even create a single file that size?  (There are only 31,536,000 seconds
in a year.)


Me ? (I hope) 
Depending on what you call fastest network. I assumed 100MB/s (1gbps) 
and got "only" 22 years.

Calculation:
((64k*64k*16M)/100M)/(365*24*3600)

I'm pretty sure that during the transmission new faster network will be 
introduced ...and connected on-line to a mainframe, without 
interruption. 


Is it Friday already ?

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 18
00-950 Warszawa
www.brebank.pl

Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy 
XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, 
nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237

NIP: 526-021-50-88
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2007 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci 
opacony) wynosi 118.064.140 z. W zwizku z realizacj warunkowego 
podwyszenia kapitau zakadowego, na podstawie uchwa XVI WZ z dnia 21.05.2003 
r., kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA moe ulec podwyszeniu do kwoty 118.760.528 
z. Akcje w podwyszonym kapitale zakadowym bd w caoci opacone.

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Chase, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of John P. Baker
> 
> Using the current track size, the space on a volume can 
> theoretically reach
> 244 TB.  If we use the full capabilities of ECKD 
> architecture, a single volume can accommodate 72,055 PB.

Who would live long enough to transfer a single file that size, using
today's fastest network?  For that matter, who would live long enough to
even create a single file that size?  (There are only 31,536,000 seconds
in a year.)

-jc-

--
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

3380 vs 3390 (was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:( )

[Greg Price]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:

> Ummm.  Imagine the effect on a "dusty JCL deck" which said,
> "DD  SPACE=(CYL,100)".  But perhaps not.  ISTM that SMS or DYNALLOC
> (or maybe even ISPF) sometimes adjusts my requested SPACE to
> account for the difference between 3380 and 3390.

I believe there was a panel in the ISMF dialogs where the nominal
track size was specified.  If the value there was 47047 (or whatever the
correct value for 3380 is) then when one requested an SMS-managed
data set that specified a number of tracks or cylinders, the requested
space was allocated if a 3380 was used, but a different space was
allocated if a 3390 was used.

Changing this track for 3390 made the space "correct" for 3390 but
a larger number of tracks was allocated if a 3380 was used.

Or so the story goes...

Cheers,
Greg

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Ted MacNEIL]

>However, if you specify allocation in terms of blocks & blocksize, what does 
>it matter?

That's a BIG IF at a lot of locations.

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[John P. Baker]

All too true.

However, if you specify allocation in terms of blocks & blocksize, what does it 
matter?

John P Baker

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted 
MacNEIL
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

>No of tracks- 65,535
>Track capacity  - 16,777,215

Unfortunately, those two violate IBM's promise of not changing the 3390 
architecture.

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
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: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Ted MacNEIL]

>No of tracks- 65,535
>Track capacity  - 16,777,215

Unfortunately, those two violate IBM's promise of not changing the 3390 
architecture.

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[John P. Baker]

Using the current track size, the space on a volume can theoretically reach
244 TB.  If we use the full capabilities of ECKD architecture, a single
volume can accommodate 72,055 PB.

  No of cylinders - 65,535
  No of tracks- 65,535
  Track capacity  - 16,777,215

John P Baker

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 8:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:13:00 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote:
>
>Of course, you're right! CCHHR is five *bytes* long. We currently use
>only four bits of the sixteen allocated for HH. So, that means we could
>use an additional twelve bits to extend the disk size to 4K times the
>current 54GB size! (Thanks for correcting me.)
>
I'd certainly not correct someone of your expertise without first RTFM,
and even then with some trepidation that I might have misinterpreted.

Ummm.  Imagine the effect on a "dusty JCL deck" which said,
"DD  SPACE=(CYL,100)".  But perhaps not.  ISTM that SMS or DYNALLOC
(or maybe even ISPF) sometimes adjusts my requested SPACE to
account for the difference between 3380 and 3390.

There's a powerful argument here for requesting SPACE in blocks.

-- gil

--
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: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:13:00 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote:
>
>Of course, you're right! CCHHR is five *bytes* long. We currently use
>only four bits of the sixteen allocated for HH. So, that means we could
>use an additional twelve bits to extend the disk size to 4K times the
>current 54GB size! (Thanks for correcting me.)
>
I'd certainly not correct someone of your expertise without first RTFM,
and even then with some trepidation that I might have misinterpreted.

Ummm.  Imagine the effect on a "dusty JCL deck" which said,
"DD  SPACE=(CYL,100)".  But perhaps not.  ISTM that SMS or DYNALLOC
(or maybe even ISPF) sometimes adjusts my requested SPACE to
account for the difference between 3380 and 3390.

There's a powerful argument here for requesting SPACE in blocks.

-- gil

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Edward Jaffe]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:

And that's four bits, which is a lot! Disk addresses are currently of
the form 'cc0hr' where '0' is an unused nibble for 3390 geometry. If the
current max disk size is 54GB, then 16 times that much would be ...



ITYM "bytes", not "nibbles".  I see:
  


Of course, you're right! CCHHR is five *bytes* long. We currently use 
only four bits of the sixteen allocated for HH. So, that means we could 
use an additional twelve bits to extend the disk size to 4K times the 
current 54GB size! (Thanks for correcting me.)


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Ed Gould]

On Dec 5, 2007, at 9:55 AM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:

I know the arguments about "people don't want to do another DASD  
conversion".


Having lived 3330 to 3350 to 3380 to 3390 (with emulation mode in  
there), I agree with the sentiment.

But, 3390 does not entirely limit the size of a volume.
It's the software architecture.
With virtualisation and software changes we can get to larger  
platter sizes.


The limit is how fast IBM can get us there, not the actual disk  
format.




Ted,

While I agree with you in principal, the issue is (and always has  
been) companies still insist on allocation in tracks and cylinders.  
IBM (DFP3.1?) gave us the ability to do it in records that was more  
friendly (along with SDB). Despite that management (and others)  
turned a blind eye to it and continued with their bad ways. Any  
conversion now days just get more painful by the month. They have  
brought this issue upon their selves by shortsightedness.


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: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 16:36:30 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote:

>Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> Ummm.  I think the platter size is pretty much maxed out to the
>> capacity of CC.  But the unused capacity of HH should allow for
>> thousands more platters than 15.
>>
>
>And that's four bits, which is a lot! Disk addresses are currently of
>the form 'cc0hr' where '0' is an unused nibble for 3390 geometry. If the
>current max disk size is 54GB, then 16 times that much would be ...
>
ITYM "bytes", not "nibbles".  I see:

6.7 "z/OS V1R7.0 DFSMSdfp Diagnosis"

   DESCRIPTION OF THE F7 FORWARD POINTER

135 (87) CHARACTER 5
DS7PTRDS POINTER (CCHHR) TO NEXT FORMAT 7 DSCB OR ZERO
135 (87)
*   DS7CCPTR   TWO BYTES OF CYLINDER DATA (CC)
*   DS7HHPTR   TWO BYTES OF HEAD DATA (HH)
*   DS7RPTRONE BYTE OF RECORD DATA (R)
*   DS7END END OF THE DSCB 7 MAPPING

So, not 54 GB times 16, but 54 GB times 4096.

Have I missed something?

"No one will ever need more than 640 KiB."

"No one will ever need more than 32 MiB."

"No one will ever need more than 2 GiB."

etc.

-- gil

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Edward Jaffe]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:

Ummm.  I think the platter size is pretty much maxed out to the
capacity of CC.  But the unused capacity of HH should allow for
thousands more platters than 15.
  


And that's four bits, which is a lot! Disk addresses are currently of 
the form 'cc0hr' where '0' is an unused nibble for 3390 geometry. If the 
current max disk size is 54GB, then 16 times that much would be ...


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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: Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Ed Gould]

On Dec 5, 2007, at 2:38 PM, Patrick O'Keefe wrote:


On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:16:24 -0600, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


...
Furthermore, no one even reported the disappearance of
20 cars.
...


Maybe they were not willing to admit why they had 20 car-loads
of cards in the first place.  That's a LOT of cards to write notes on.

Paat:


I was thinking that they ended up as fuel for heating. I don't think  
you could make vodka out of them:)


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: Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 14:38:53 -0600, Patrick O'Keefe wrote:

>On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:16:24 -0600, Ed Gould
>wrote:
>
>>Furthermore, no one even reported the disappearance of
>>20 cars.
>
>Maybe they were not willing to admit why they had 20 car-loads
>of cards in the first place.  That's a LOT of cards to write notes on.
>
Cf:

   Linkname: The LaSalle and Bureau County Railroad Company - Theft?
URL: http://www.trainweb.org/lsbc/theft.html

"literally plugged": the total length of the misappropriated boxcars
execeeded the LS&BC's trackage.

My father saw those cars on the UPRR in Denver.  He reported
the repaint job as amateurish.

-- gil

--
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: Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:16:24 -0600, Ed Gould 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>...
>Furthermore, no one even reported the disappearance of
>20 cars.
>...

Maybe they were not willing to admit why they had 20 car-loads
of cards in the first place.  That's a LOT of cards to write notes on.


Pat O'Keefe

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 08:34:43 -0600, Rick Fochtman 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>...
>Looks a little like the old 2302 fixed disk drive.
>...

I've never seen either in real life, but the sfuff to the left of the 
platters in the picture look to me like verticle movement stuff for 
the head.  I think the picture is of a device with a single head
(or a small number of heads).   Sounds like a RAMAC to me.

Pat O'Keefe

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 15:55:23 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
>
>But, 3390 does not entirely limit the size of a volume.
>It's the software architecture.

z/Series HW design is far in advance of z/OS software design.
The "bar" is a delusion of z/OS, not a limitation of z/Series.

>With virtualisation and software changes we can get to larger platter sizes.
>
Ummm.  I think the platter size is pretty much maxed out to the
capacity of CC.  But the unused capacity of HH should allow for
thousands more platters than 15.

>The limit is how fast IBM can get us there, not the actual disk format.
>
See above.

-- gil

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Gerhard Postpischil]

Ed Gould wrote:
http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/storage.asp 
I guess we can all feel really officially OLD.


I remember standing on Madison Avenue and watching the arm go up 
and down. Seems like a different world, almost.



Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Ted MacNEIL]

>I know the arguments about "people don't want to do another DASD conversion".

Having lived 3330 to 3350 to 3380 to 3390 (with emulation mode in there), I 
agree with the sentiment.
But, 3390 does not entirely limit the size of a volume.
It's the software architecture.
With virtualisation and software changes we can get to larger platter sizes.

The limit is how fast IBM can get us there, not the actual disk format.

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
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

Punched cards was: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Ed Gould]

On Dec 5, 2007, at 7:33 AM, Doc Farmer wrote:

Geez, what am I supposed to do with all those years of feeling  
*unofficially*

old?

What kills me (figuratively, of course) is when I look at the  
capacity of today's
IBM drives.  A 3390-3 seems like so much when you're talking tracks  
and
cyls, but it's really around 2.8 gig.  Hades tintinnabulum, I've  
got over a

TERABYTE of disk storage sitting right on my desk for a standard PC.

One question - how many 80 column cards would equal one 305 RAMAC?
Answers on an 80 column card, please...






Funny you should ask about Punched Cards:




In 1998, the largest theft of punched cards took place in
the Moscow region in 1998. Three years later it became
known that someone had stolen about 20 train cars of
punched cards. It is still a mystery who stole the cards,
what for and where such a large number of cards came from.
Furthermore, no one even reported the disappearance of
20 cars.

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 08:32:35 -0600, Rick Fochtman wrote:
>
>>Yeah?  So when can we expect IBM to recognize its blunder and abandon
>>its commitment never to provide customers anything better than a 3390?
>>
>-
>Define "better". One of the biggest complaints about IBM's DASD upgrades

Size matters.

>was the constantly changing geometry; that's why the geometry is
>"frozen" at the 3390 level. And by freezing the geometry, they're free
>to affect other improvements, like RAID technology, reliability, reduced
>power and A/C requirements, etc. without having customers ticked off by
>changes in track length, etc.and consequent changes to old JCL.
>
And a similarly big complaint is the increasing complexity of
the process of allocating and using increasingly large data sets.

It's all emulated now.  Surely a future product could have a
firmware setting either to emulate a large number of 3390
volumes for customers afflicted with "dusty decks" or a single
enormous volume of the new architecture, or any mixture of the
two.

To support increasingly large data sets, it's necessary either
to provide a new device geometry or increase the ceiling on the
number of volumes in a multivolume data set (and remove such
restrictions as the prohibition of multivolume PDSEs).  It's
not apparent to me that the former introduces more complexity
or incompatibility than the latter.

-- gil

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Howard Brazee]

On 5 Dec 2007 05:33:20 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Doc Farmer)
wrote:

>Geez, what am I supposed to do with all those years of feeling *unofficially* 
>old?
>
>What kills me (figuratively, of course) is when I look at the capacity of 
>today's 
>IBM drives.  A 3390-3 seems like so much when you're talking tracks and 
>cyls, but it's really around 2.8 gig.  Hades tintinnabulum, I've got over a 
>TERABYTE of disk storage sitting right on my desk for a standard PC.

How big would a 160GB iPod have been when we upgraded to a our 360?

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Rick Fochtman]

---


http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/storage.asp

I guess we can all feel really officially OLD.


---
Looks a little like the old 2302 fixed disk drive.

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Rick Fochtman]

--


Yeah?  So when can we expect IBM to recognize its blunder and abandon
its commitment never to provide customers anything better than a 3390?
 


-
Define "better". One of the biggest complaints about IBM's DASD upgrades 
was the constantly changing geometry; that's why the geometry is 
"frozen" at the 3390 level. And by freezing the geometry, they're free 
to affect other improvements, like RAID technology, reliability, reduced 
power and A/C requirements, etc. without having customers ticked off by 
changes in track length, etc.and consequent changes to old JCL.


--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Michael Poil]

John,

Maybe you should convert to VSE as it supports FBA. (Always thought it was 
a better OS anyway.)

He he :-) 

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Before any of you think of replying about this, try forming these words 
into a new sentence - "joking." and "Only ")

--
Mike Poil
Java z/OS Level 3 Service
IBM United Kingdom Limited, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN
Internal: 246824  External: +44 (0)1962 816824 
Java debugging: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/diagnosis/
--



"McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
05/12/2007 13:51
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List 


To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(






> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:49 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(
> 
> 
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 07:33:10 -0600, Doc Farmer wrote:
> >
> >What kills me (figuratively, of course) is when I look at 
> the capacity of today's
> >IBM drives.  A 3390-3 seems like so much when you're talking 
> tracks and
> >cyls, but it's really around 2.8 gig.  Hades tintinnabulum, 
> I've got over a
> >TERABYTE of disk storage sitting right on my desk for a standard PC.
> >
> Yeah?  So when can we expect IBM to recognize its blunder and abandon
> its commitment never to provide customers anything better than a 3390?
> 
> -- gil

When can you get the DFSMS people to get off their butts and support
some other DASD architecture? Like, maybe, FBA? And I know the arguments
about "people don't want to do another DASD conversion".

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential.  It is for intended addressee(s) only.  If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it. 

--
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







Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU






--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:49 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(
> 
> 
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 07:33:10 -0600, Doc Farmer wrote:
> >
> >What kills me (figuratively, of course) is when I look at 
> the capacity of today's
> >IBM drives.  A 3390-3 seems like so much when you're talking 
> tracks and
> >cyls, but it's really around 2.8 gig.  Hades tintinnabulum, 
> I've got over a
> >TERABYTE of disk storage sitting right on my desk for a standard PC.
> >
> Yeah?  So when can we expect IBM to recognize its blunder and abandon
> its commitment never to provide customers anything better than a 3390?
> 
> -- gil

When can you get the DFSMS people to get off their butts and support
some other DASD architecture? Like, maybe, FBA? And I know the arguments
about "people don't want to do another DASD conversion".

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential.  It is for intended addressee(s) only.  If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it. 

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 07:33:10 -0600, Doc Farmer wrote:
>
>What kills me (figuratively, of course) is when I look at the capacity of 
>today's
>IBM drives.  A 3390-3 seems like so much when you're talking tracks and
>cyls, but it's really around 2.8 gig.  Hades tintinnabulum, I've got over a
>TERABYTE of disk storage sitting right on my desk for a standard PC.
>
Yeah?  So when can we expect IBM to recognize its blunder and abandon
its commitment never to provide customers anything better than a 3390?

-- gil

--
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 RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM]

"Doc Farmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Geez, what am I supposed to do with all those years of feeling
*unofficially* 
> old?
> 
> What kills me (figuratively, of course) is when I look at the capacity
of today's 
> IBM drives.  A 3390-3 seems like so much when you're talking tracks
and 
> cyls, but it's really around 2.8 gig.  Hades tintinnabulum, I've got
over a 
> TERABYTE of disk storage sitting right on my desk for a standard PC.
> 

Yeah, how about when the top speed of cars plus the highway speedlimits
had gone up by the same ratio? I'd be home in a second!

Kees.
**
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Doc Farmer]

Geez, what am I supposed to do with all those years of feeling *unofficially* 
old?

What kills me (figuratively, of course) is when I look at the capacity of 
today's 
IBM drives.  A 3390-3 seems like so much when you're talking tracks and 
cyls, but it's really around 2.8 gig.  Hades tintinnabulum, I've got over a 
TERABYTE of disk storage sitting right on my desk for a standard PC.

One question - how many 80 column cards would equal one 305 RAMAC?  
Answers on an 80 column card, please...


On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 07:17:24 -0600, Ed Gould 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/storage.asp 
>
>I guess we can all feel really officially OLD.
>
>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

IBM RAMAC now an URBAN Legend:(

[Ed Gould]

http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/storage.asp

I guess we can all feel really officially OLD.

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