Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Charles Mills]

To me it boggles the mind that a company would charge extra for Web-based 
support as opposed to voice-based support. Most software companies, if 
anything, use the opposite approach.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 8:17 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

On 9/8/2017 12:12 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
> SoftwareXcel, and its successors, provide additional support services 
> above and beyond Program Services, notably including some "how-to" support.

It used to be that if you didn't have at least SoftwareXcel Basic Edition, you 
could not logon to IBMLink to search for fixes, you could not open PMRs 
electronically (you had L1 voice only), and you could not download PTFs 
electronically (you had tape only).

Are you saying that I can now search for fixes, open PMRs electronically, and 
download PTFs electronically without paying for SoftwareXcel Basic Edition? 
Please elaborate!

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

Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Edward Gould]

> On Sep 8, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Ed Jaffe  wrote:
> 
>> We've had the extended version for so long that I can't remember life 
>> without it. What I do remember is that several years back, our software 
>> license folks 'forgot' to pay the SoftwareXcel bill. We were suddenly unable 
>> to report problems via ServiceLink. It got straightened out in a few days, 
>> but it was jarring to go unsupported.
> 
> You weren't unsupported. (Just ask Timothy Sipples.) But, you probably had L1 
> voice support via 1-800-IBM-SERV only.
> 
> If you needed a fix, I'm not sure how they would send it to you these days. 
> Years ago it was tape only without SoftwareXcel. Yuck!

Ed,

Don’t you remember the dialup connection the systems had with Boulder?
*MANY* a time I dowloaded apars from Boulder. It wasn’t fun but more 
interesting that you had the power of the cpu’s and you were limited to 600 
baud.

Ed
> 
> -- 


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

Re: zAware?

[Donald J]

We are continuing to use the zAware LPAR and its data, but not much with the 
zAware app.
I download the zAware data to my laptop, manipulate and filter it with scripts, 
and output
it to an updated web page every 10 minutes.
 

Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 at 2:44 AM
From: "Styles, Andy (ITS zPlatform Services)" 
<00d68f765d25-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: zAware?
Classification: Public

Morning folks,

We've got a zAware partition running, but we've done almost nothing with since 
it was set up a couple of years back, so we're thinking of dropping it.

Does anyone actively use zAware?

Thanks,

Andy Styles
z/Series Systems Programmer



Lloyds Banking Group plc. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. 
Registered in Scotland no. SC95000. Telephone: 0131 225 4555. Lloyds Bank plc. 
Registered Office: 25 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7HN. Registered in England 
and Wales no. 2065. Telephone 0207626 1500. Bank of Scotland plc. Registered 
Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. Registered in Scotland no. SC327000. 
Telephone: 03457 801 801. Cheltenham & Gloucester plc. Registered Office: 
Barnett Way, Gloucester GL4 3RL. Registered in England and Wales 2299428. 
Telephone: 0345 603 1637

Lloyds Bank plc, Bank of Scotland plc are authorised by the Prudential 
Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and 
Prudential Regulation Authority.

Cheltenham & Gloucester plc is authorised and regulated by the Financial 
Conduct Authority.

Halifax is a division of Bank of Scotland plc. Cheltenham & Gloucester Savings 
is a division of Lloyds Bank plc.

HBOS plc. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. Registered in 
Scotland no. SC218813.

This e-mail (including any attachments) is private and confidential and may 
contain privileged material. If you have received this e-mail in error, please 
notify the sender and delete it (including any attachments) immediately. You 
must not copy, distribute, disclose or use any of the information in it or any 
attachments. Telephone calls may be monitored or recorded.

--
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: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Edward Gould]

> On Sep 8, 2017, at 1:01 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson  wrote:
> 
> We've had the extended version for so long that I can't remember life without 
> it. What I do remember is that several years back, our software license folks 
> 'forgot' to pay the SoftwareXcel bill. We were suddenly unable to report 
> problems via ServiceLink. It got straightened out in a few days, but it was 
> jarring to go unsupported. 
> 
> And yes, we have periodically used the Q service, though we could probably 
> get along without that. It's nice to be able to report a 'problem' without 
> knowing in advance whether it's a defect in the product or a defect in our 
> understanding. 
> 
> I don't know the boundaries between basic and extended.
Jesse,

About 25 years ago, we were in the middle of purchase an IBM system. We had 
some questions on it (mostly operational).
We asked our so called IBM-Rep to find out the answers. He told us, we would 
have to sign a $25K service contract to get the answers. I looked at him and 
said if we have to pay IBM for simple questions, we will go elsewhere. I called 
up a friend at IBM and he was happy to supply the answers and suggested some 
other issues we should look at. I told him the next time he was in town, dinner 
was on me. Total cost to the company was $73 and it was deductible. We never 
asked IBM another question. We also went to 3rd party suppliers for disk/tape 
etc. I just used my black book of friends and the total cost of the was $25 for 
a bottle of wine. I made sure our IBM rep know where we went for questions that 
IBM should have been happy to answer, we went elsewhere. I also made sure that 
we severed all ties to IBM after that except for maintenance of software. We 
turned our backs on IBM. That is what short-sightedness of IBM has brought on.

Ed
> 
> .
> .
> J.O.Skip Robinson
> Southern California Edison Company
> Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
> SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
> 323-715-0595 Mobile
> 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
> robin...@sce.com 

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

Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Ed Jaffe]

On 9/8/2017 11:01 AM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:

We've had the extended version for so long that I can't remember life without 
it. What I do remember is that several years back, our software license folks 
'forgot' to pay the SoftwareXcel bill. We were suddenly unable to report 
problems via ServiceLink. It got straightened out in a few days, but it was 
jarring to go unsupported.


You weren't unsupported. (Just ask Timothy Sipples.) But, you probably 
had L1 voice support via 1-800-IBM-SERV only.


If you needed a fix, I'm not sure how they would send it to you these 
days. Years ago it was tape only without SoftwareXcel. Yuck!


--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

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

Re: Lack of Support for Doc for COBOL

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

From the get-go (mid 90s) we created multiple sysplexes for business reasons. 
Long before sysplex, it was the practice here not to share *anything* among 
'systems', each of which had its own purpose: sandbox, development, production, 
etc. For us it was natural (and surprisingly easy) to convert each system into 
its own separate sysplex. Sharing was kept within a strict functional unit. 
Sysplex was the new unit. 

I understand that many (most?) shops did not evolve that way. When I first 
heard at SHARE about the PDSE requirement for COBOL, I was concerned that many 
shops would have to change their way of doing business. It's not an 
insurmountable problem, but it's a 'gate' to moving forward. Unfortunately a 
shop that has shared PDS forever sees little business benefit in creating and 
maintaining multiple PDSEs even though the post-conversion overhead is minimal. 

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Giliad Wilf
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2017 11:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: Lack of Support for Doc for COBOL

On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:57:53 +0800, Timothy Sipples  wrote:

>IBM first introduced PDSEs about 27 years ago. IBM first introduced 
>Java on
>OS/390 about 21 years ago.
>
>That's a long, long time ago.
>
>It's impossible to defend stubborn opposition to these and to other 
>highly mature technologies. Business (and the business of government) 
>will get done, with or without you. If that's how you choose to 
>(mis)behave, then I can't criticize managers who decide to chuck you in 
>the garbage heap of history. If you won't change, then you should 
>be/will be changed. I suppose we can quibble about how much change 
>makes business sense in particular contexts, but zero is the wrong answer.
>
>Jimmy Iovine said it well: "Never stop being of service."
>

Still, the idea that safe, regulated sharing of a PDSE can only be guaranteed 
to members of a single sysplex, seems to hint that IBM thought at time that no 
one will ever need more than one sysplex.
Doesn't it seem so?


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

Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

We've had the extended version for so long that I can't remember life without 
it. What I do remember is that several years back, our software license folks 
'forgot' to pay the SoftwareXcel bill. We were suddenly unable to report 
problems via ServiceLink. It got straightened out in a few days, but it was 
jarring to go unsupported. 

And yes, we have periodically used the Q service, though we could probably 
get along without that. It's nice to be able to report a 'problem' without 
knowing in advance whether it's a defect in the product or a defect in our 
understanding. 

I don't know the boundaries between basic and extended.

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 8:17 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

On 9/8/2017 12:12 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
> SoftwareXcel, and its successors, provide additional support services 
> above and beyond Program Services, notably including some "how-to" support.

It used to be that if you didn't have at least SoftwareXcel Basic Edition, you 
could not logon to IBMLink to search for fixes, you could not open PMRs 
electronically (you had L1 voice only), and you could not download PTFs 
electronically (you had tape only).

Are you saying that I can now search for fixes, open PMRs electronically, and 
download PTFs electronically without paying for SoftwareXcel Basic Edition? 
Please elaborate!

Haha! Never in my life have I asked anything resembling a "how to" 
question via a support channel. I don't think that's even possible with 
SoftwareXcel Basic Edition! LOL

--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/


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

Re: z/OS Data Set Encryption Now Generally Available

[Mike Baldwin]

Hi Timothy,

Thanks for this.

>BSAM, QSAM, and VSAM extended format data sets are all supported. 

The FAQ says "residing on disk", so datasets residing on tape (e.g. TS7700)
would not be supported.  (Even if accessed using BSAM/QSAM, and of course EXCP).
Is that correct, and do we expect it's a permanent restriction?

Regards,
Mike Baldwin
Cartagena Software Limited
Markham, Ontario, Canada
http://www.cartagena.com
http://www.teltape.com

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

Re: zAware?

[Karl S Huf]

I thought zAware went EOL this past June, having been replaced by IBM
Operations Analytics for z Systems (IOAZ)?



___
Karl S Huf | Senior Vice President | World Wide Technology
50 S LaSalle St, LQ-18, Chicago, IL  60603 | phone (312)630-6287 |
k...@ntrs.com
Please visit northerntrust.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is confidential, may be
privileged and is meant only for the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender ASAP and delete this
message from your system.  NTAC:3NS-20

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Styles, Andy (ITS zPlatform Services)
> Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 2:44 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: [EXT] zAware?
>
> Classification: Public
>
> Morning folks,
>
> We've got a zAware partition running, but we've done almost nothing
with
> since it was set up a couple of years back, so we're thinking of
dropping it.
>
> Does anyone actively use zAware?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andy Styles
> z/Series Systems Programmer
>
>
>
> Lloyds Banking Group plc. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1
1YZ.
> Registered in Scotland no. SC95000. Telephone: 0131 225 4555. Lloyds
Bank
> plc. Registered Office: 25 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7HN. Registered
in
> England and Wales no. 2065. Telephone 0207626 1500. Bank of Scotland
plc.
> Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. Registered in
Scotland no.
> SC327000. Telephone: 03457 801 801. Cheltenham & Gloucester plc.
> Registered Office: Barnett Way, Gloucester GL4 3RL. Registered in
England and
> Wales 2299428. Telephone: 0345 603 1637
>
> Lloyds Bank plc, Bank of Scotland plc are authorised by the Prudential
> Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority
and
> Prudential Regulation Authority.
>
> Cheltenham & Gloucester plc is authorised and regulated by the
Financial
> Conduct Authority.
>
> Halifax is a division of Bank of Scotland plc. Cheltenham & Gloucester
Savings
> is a division of Lloyds Bank plc.
>
> HBOS plc. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. Registered
in
> Scotland no. SC218813.
>
> This e-mail (including any attachments) is private and confidential
and may
> contain privileged material. If you have received this e-mail in
error, please
> notify the sender and delete it (including any attachments)
immediately. You
> must not copy, distribute, disclose or use any of the information in
it or any
> attachments. Telephone calls may be monitored or recorded.
>
> --
> 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: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Rugen, Len]

If I have to ask how-to, isn't it a DOC apar?  :-O


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 10:17 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

On 9/8/2017 12:12 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
> SoftwareXcel, and its successors, provide additional support services 
> above and beyond Program Services, notably including some "how-to" support.

It used to be that if you didn't have at least SoftwareXcel Basic Edition, you 
could not logon to IBMLink to search for fixes, you could not open PMRs 
electronically (you had L1 voice only), and you could not download PTFs 
electronically (you had tape only).

Are you saying that I can now search for fixes, open PMRs electronically, and 
download PTFs electronically without paying for SoftwareXcel Basic Edition? 
Please elaborate!

Haha! Never in my life have I asked anything resembling a "how to" 
question via a support channel. I don't think that's even possible with 
SoftwareXcel Basic Edition! LOL

--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Ed Jaffe]

On 9/8/2017 12:12 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:

SoftwareXcel, and its successors, provide additional support services above
and beyond Program Services, notably including some "how-to" support.


It used to be that if you didn't have at least SoftwareXcel Basic 
Edition, you could not logon to IBMLink to search for fixes, you could 
not open PMRs electronically (you had L1 voice only), and you could not 
download PTFs electronically (you had tape only).


Are you saying that I can now search for fixes, open PMRs 
electronically, and download PTFs electronically without paying for 
SoftwareXcel Basic Edition? Please elaborate!


Haha! Never in my life have I asked anything resembling a "how to" 
question via a support channel. I don't think that's even possible with 
SoftwareXcel Basic Edition! LOL


--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

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

Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Barry Merrill]

I did that in my three day class, initially handing a 1980 dollar bill for
each typo 
found in my foils, and after a couple of years handing a 5'er for the last
few.

And I could argue that   http://www.mxg.com/codesharks   page is "paying"
customers
who find bugs.

Merrilly yours,

Barry


Merrilly yours,

 Herbert W. Barry Merrill, PhD
 President-Programmer
 Merrill Consultants
 MXG Software
 10717 Cromwell Drive  technical questions: supp...@mxg.com
 Dallas, TX 75229
 http://www.mxg.comadmin questions: ad...@mxg.com
 tel: 214 351 1966
 fax: 214 350 3694




-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Edward Gould
Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2017 8:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

> On Sep 7, 2017, at 3:08 PM, Jim Mulder  wrote:
> 
> With regard  to only the last sentence in Gord's comments, those of us 
> in z/OS development who put the bugs into the software don't have 
> anything to do with the IBM offerings for reporting bugs and
> obtaining fixes for the bugs.   So that does not play any part in 
> our decisions about how many bugs to include in the software.   :-)
> 
> Jim Mulder z/OS Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test  IBM Corp. 
> Poughkeepsie NY

Jim,

So IBM admits to having bugs in their software? Then you should be paying
the customer to find them for IBM.

Ed


--
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

PDSERe: Lack of Support for Doc for COBOL

[Clark Morris]

[Default] On 7 Sep 2017 22:56:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sipp...@sg.ibm.com (Timothy Sipples) wrote:

>IBM first introduced PDSEs about 27 years ago. IBM first introduced Java on
>OS/390 about 21 years ago.
>
>That's a long, long time ago.
>
>It's impossible to defend stubborn opposition to these and to other highly
>mature technologies. Business (and the business of government) will get
>done, with or without you. If that's how you choose to (mis)behave, then I
>can't criticize managers who decide to chuck you in the garbage heap of
>history. If you won't change, then you should be/will be changed. I suppose
>we can quibble about how much change makes business sense in particular
>contexts, but zero is the wrong answer.
>
>Jimmy Iovine said it well: "Never stop being of service."
>
>(My views are my own.)
>
>
>Timothy Sipples
>IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA
>E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com
>
>--
>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: SSL with WebSphere and CICS - solved

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Cross-posted between RACF-L and IBM-MAIN.

The problem has been resolved. 

Solution involved many suggestions (from IBM, offlist replies, lots of googling 
and from these 2 discussion lists) and head-scratching, but here goes (partial 
list):

Both WebSphere and CICS Certificates have all be re-created mostly like what I 
posted earlier plus other suggestions given to me via private mail or on these 
two discussion lists.

WebSphere and CICS own TCP/IP settings were changed. 

We eventually got the CICS to produce a dump and soon we discovered we had to 
enlarge the REGION amongst other things we also discovered. 

Ok, after further toying with the CICS and WebSphere, we discovered old 
application programs and scripts which were written thousands years ago by 
ex-colleagues. Those programs and scripts were written to redirect traffic to a 
Non-SSL page(s). Groan ... Copies were made of these programs and scripts and 
they were corrected.

During testing we discovered that Internet Explorer, FireFox and Chrome needed 
to be setup to allow scripts (settings like enable X, allow Y, etc.), SSL, tell 
proxy-servers to shutup and stop meddling with our toys, etc...

Then our clients had to do similar tweaking on their browsers and fix their own 
proxy settings.

Thanks again to all!

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

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

zAware?

[Styles, Andy (ITS zPlatform Services)]

Classification: Public

Morning folks,

We've got a zAware partition running, but we've done almost nothing with since 
it was set up a couple of years back, so we're thinking of dropping it.

Does anyone actively use zAware?

Thanks,

Andy Styles
z/Series Systems Programmer



Lloyds Banking Group plc. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. 
Registered in Scotland no. SC95000. Telephone: 0131 225 4555. Lloyds Bank plc. 
Registered Office: 25 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7HN. Registered in England 
and Wales no. 2065. Telephone 0207626 1500. Bank of Scotland plc. Registered 
Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. Registered in Scotland no. SC327000. 
Telephone: 03457 801 801. Cheltenham & Gloucester plc. Registered Office: 
Barnett Way, Gloucester GL4 3RL. Registered in England and Wales 2299428. 
Telephone: 0345 603 1637

Lloyds Bank plc, Bank of Scotland plc are authorised by the Prudential 
Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and 
Prudential Regulation Authority.

Cheltenham & Gloucester plc is authorised and regulated by the Financial 
Conduct Authority.

Halifax is a division of Bank of Scotland plc. Cheltenham & Gloucester Savings 
is a division of Lloyds Bank plc.

HBOS plc. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. Registered in 
Scotland no. SC218813.

This e-mail (including any attachments) is private and confidential and may 
contain privileged material. If you have received this e-mail in error, please 
notify the sender and delete it (including any attachments) immediately. You 
must not copy, distribute, disclose or use any of the information in it or any 
attachments. Telephone calls may be monitored or recorded.

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

Re: SoftwareXcel Discontinued

[Timothy Sipples]

Ed Jaffe wrote:
>We're a small shop. We *really* don't want to be paying thousands every
>month just for the "privilege" of being able to report bugs with, and
>get fixes for, our non-Linux mainframe software. (IMHO such support
>ought to be included free as part of MLC and S payments, but that's a
>discussion for another day...)

I agree. So does IBM.

Your mainframe Monthly License Charges (MLC) and Subscription and Support
(S) include IBM Program Services at no additional charge. See here for
details:

https://www.ibm.com/support/customercare/sas/f/handbook/offerings.html
#section2

Quoting IBM, "Program Services is a support element of some IBM products
that allows you to report suspected IBM defects to IBM" I like how IBM
clarifies that suspected (and actual) *non-IBM* defects aren't part of the
deal. Speak with your therapist about those other defects. :-)

SoftwareXcel, and its successors, provide additional support services above
and beyond Program Services, notably including some "how-to" support.


Timothy Sipples
IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA
E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com

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

Re: Lack of Support for Doc for COBOL

[Giliad Wilf]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:57:53 +0800, Timothy Sipples  wrote:

>IBM first introduced PDSEs about 27 years ago. IBM first introduced Java on
>OS/390 about 21 years ago.
>
>That's a long, long time ago.
>
>It's impossible to defend stubborn opposition to these and to other highly
>mature technologies. Business (and the business of government) will get
>done, with or without you. If that's how you choose to (mis)behave, then I
>can't criticize managers who decide to chuck you in the garbage heap of
>history. If you won't change, then you should be/will be changed. I suppose
>we can quibble about how much change makes business sense in particular
>contexts, but zero is the wrong answer.
>
>Jimmy Iovine said it well: "Never stop being of service."
>

Still, the idea that safe, regulated sharing of a PDSE can only be guaranteed
to members of a single sysplex, seems to hint that IBM thought at time
that no one will ever need more than one sysplex.
Doesn't it seem so?

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