Re: IBM's Fall From World Dominance

2023-02-28 Thread Gene Hudders 
I wonder about the accuracy of this article saying that IBM was involved in the 
1890 census. From IBM history:

IBM, in full International Business Machines Corporation, leading American 
computer manufacturer, with a major share of the market both in the United 
States and abroad. Its headquarters are in Armonk, New York. It was 
incorporated in 1911 as the Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company in a 
consolidation of three smaller companies that made punch-card tabulators and 
other office products. The company assumed its present name in 1924 under the 
leadership of Thomas Watson, a man of considerable marketing skill who became 
general manager in 1914 and had gained complete control of the firm by 1924.  
History at your fingertips – Sign up here to see what happened On This Day, 
every day in your inbox!Enter your emailSubscribeBy signing up for this email, 
you are agreeing to news, offers, and information from Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Click here to view our Privacy Notice. Easy unsubscribe links are provided in 
every email.STAY CONNECTED
   
   - About Us & Legal Info
   - Contact Us
   - Privacy Notice
   - Terms of Use
©2023 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.   Information from your device can be used 
to personalize your ad experience.

Do not sell or share my personal information.
In a message dated 2/28/2023 4:57:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
032966e74d0f-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu writes: 
Why? As the article you posted notes : In 1982, the case was dropped by a 
judgement ruling it "without merit." See: 
https://www.nytimes.com/1981/02/15/business/us-vsibm.html which claims:

The trial began in May 1975. Before the outset, the Government estimated that 
the presentation of its case would last 60 days. Instead, it took three years. 
The Justice Department is on its third lead counsel. Robert H. Bork, a Yale law 
professor, has dubbed the case ''the antitrust division's Vietnam.''

Moreover, given the rapid pace of change in the computer industry, the case now 
centers on a market situation that existed two or three technological 
generations ago. ''It's pretty much an historical curiosity,'' an I.B.M. 
competitor concedes.

Some outside observers view the I.B.M. case as proof that the Justice 
Department cannot and should not be trying to restructure major global 
industries. Irving S. Shapiro, chairman of E.I. duPont de Nemours & Company, a 
lawyer who spent several years in Justice, says: ''All the ballplayers are 
above their heads in these cases that concern the structure of key industries. 
From the lawyer who drafted the case right on up, you're talking about people 
who have no experience in economics or industry.''


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Bill Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 3:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM's Fall From World Dominance

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

I find it disingenuous when someone doesn't mention the antitrust lawsuit filed 
against IBM in 1969 and dropped in 1982.

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcs.stanford.edu%2Fpeople%2Feroberts%2Fcs181%2Fprojects%2Fcorporate-monopolies%2Fgovernment_ibm.html=05%7C01%7Cmichael.watkins%40CPA.TEXAS.GOV%7C0c7eb32d389147a4d8d608db19d51d54%7C2055feba299d4d0daa5a73b8b42fef08%7C0%7C0%7C638132175332879927%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=1AB7x6vngOKZs4xUbWETKljQKD8miQNyYFi9fQAhb2k%3D=0





Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Tuesday, February 28, 2023, 4:15 PM, Phil Smith III  wrote:

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fspectrum.ieee.org%2Fibms-fall-from-world-dominance=05%7C01%7Cmichael.watkins%40CPA.TEXAS.GOV%7C0c7eb32d389147a4d8d608db19d51d54%7C2055feba299d4d0daa5a73b8b42fef08%7C0%7C0%7C638132175332879927%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=sLXMAqg%2FEOpsL9aVRAPRxa%2FZOBHM22g0d3L9G8VI8EA%3D=0



Not negative overall, just recognizing that things have changed, for the most 
part.






--
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

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

--
For

Re: AMODE 32

2019-04-04 Thread Gene Hudders 
Again I am sorry but at this point I believe you cannot issue a CALL for a 
program in 64 bits. I do nothing when switching back and forth with my CALLs.

In a message dated 4/4/2019 11:09:16 AM Venezuela Standard Time, 
mutazi...@gmail.com writes:

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 15:03:43 +, Gene Hudders  wrote:
> I'm sorry, but I don't have to make any changes> to my 31 bit programs using 
> CALLs and using> 64-bit addressing. We have lots of programs> doing both AM31 
> and AM64 with the only change> is the instructions to change the addressing 
> mode.
If you are changing addressing mode to31-bit, so that you can cope with 
thex'80' bit in a CALL, then you would needto do the same thing with an 
AM32program.
> Do you realize how many user programs that> have CALLs embedded in the code 
> that would> require eliminating the HO X'80' bit?
A problem that exists when trying toconvert to pure AM64 too.
BFN. Paul.
--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: AMODE 32

2019-04-04 Thread Gene Hudders 
I'm sorry, but I don't have to make any changes to my 31 bit programs using 
CALLs and using 64-bit addressing. We have lots of programs doing both AM31 and 
AM64 with the only change is the instructions to change the addressing mode. Do 
you realize how many user programs that have CALLs embedded in the code that 
would require eliminating the HO X'80' bit? Maybe that is why IBM from the 
beginning only defined 31 bits instead of 32.
Gene
In a message dated 4/4/2019 10:37:13 AM Venezuela Standard Time, 
mutazi...@gmail.com writes:

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 14:22:16 +, Gene Hudders  wrote:
> How is the system going to interpret the X'80'> used to indicate the end of a 
> CALL parameter list.
This is one of the 32-bit changes, the sameas needs to be done if using AM64.
There is a set of changes that need to bedone when going from AM24 to AM31.
There is a set of changes that need to bedone when going from AM31 to AM32.
There is a set of changes that need to bedone when going from AM32 to AM64.
BFN. Paul.
--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: AMODE 32

2019-04-04 Thread Gene Hudders 
How is the system going to interpret the X'80' used to indicate the end of a 
CALL parameter list. Today you just load it into a register and use it because 
it is interpreted as a 31 bit address. If you are using AM32, this address is 
not the one you want. and would require adding code to eliminate the X'80'.

Gene
In a message dated 4/4/2019 10:17:07 AM Venezuela Standard Time, 
bdis...@dissensoftware.com writes:

The issue is not the likeliness of it happening.

I don't really see a business case for this. If a program already needs 12.G
of data, why do special development which will have a hard cap of 3.2G
especially when the availability of much more is commonly available?

My guess is the OP is married to 4 byte pointers.

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 13:27:06 + Allan Staller  wrote:

:>Prepare a business case and submit it to IBM.
:>I don’t think this list wants to spend a lot of time on something extremely 
unlikely to happen.
:>
:>Cheers,
:>
:>-Original Message-
:>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Paul Edwards
:>Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 8:23 AM
:>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
:>Subject: Re: AMODE 32
:>
:>On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 13:19:03 +, Martin Packer  
wrote:
:>
:>>OK, I'll try...
:>>
:>>... Presumably you'd want this putative 32-bit address space to have
:>>access to all the stuff other address spaces have access to, such as
:>>Shared/Common areas above the bar.
:>
:>No, I'd like current data above the 2 GiB bar to be moved above the 4 GiB new 
bar, clearing the 2 GiB - 4 GiB region for GETMAIN LOC=ANY requests by an AM32 
program.
:>
:>BFN. Paul.

--
Binyamin Dissen 
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel


Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

--
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: DB2 & CICS Training

2017-11-27 Thread Gene Hudders 
Hi:
 
You can also get excellent CICS/DB2 trainning at Circle.
 
Regards,
Gene
 
In a message dated 11/26/2017 1:35:30 PM SA Western Standard Time, 
surecha...@gmail.com writes:

 
 Dear Venkat

You can find CICS and Db2 courses at Marist IDCP, Poughkeepsie, NY, U.S. 
You may contact Mr. Angelo Corridori in angelo.corrid...@marist.edu.

Best regards
Suresh Chacko

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 26, 2017, at 17:58, David Staudacher  wrote:
> 
> Venkat: Besides the IBM courses Timothy mentioned, there are also several 
> good providers listed here:
> http://linkd.in/2arLJqM - Mainframe Education
> ... Circle, Themis and Interskill are all very good.
> 
> 
> --
> 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

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

Re: QUESTION DEFINE CLUSTER

2015-01-21 Thread Gene Hudders 
Hi:
 
The average record size is probably one of the nonsense parameters in the  
CLUSTER definition. It is my understanding that it is used primarily when 
you  define the space requirements in RECORDS versus Cylinders and Tracks. Do 
you  really know the average record size? I am not completely sure if there 
has been  a change in this area but VSAM did not update this figure even 
after the  file is loaded. Therefore, if you set it too low and use RECORDS for 
the space  definition, you could wind up with a lot of extents. I tend to 
use the most  common record size for this figure but YMMV.
 
Regards,
Gene
 
 
In a message dated 1/21/2015 11:30:47 A.M. SA Western Standard Time,  
001409bd2345-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu writes:

Thanks  Anthony.  For my understanding you say to use the value of 77 for  
RECORDSIZE(77 4601)) 
Is the value from the KEYS parm (77 0) which is also  applied to the 
RECORDSIZE of (77 4601))  

--
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: VSAM question/problem

2014-05-20 Thread Gene Hudders 
Hi:
 
 I can't say for sure, but my guess is there's something  
'not-quite-right' in the enqueueing logic that is supposed to be protecting the 
 dataset 
from being updated by CICS and batch simultaneously.
 
ATTRIBUTES   
KEYLEN30   AVGLRECL2965  
BUFSPACE---41984 CISIZE-20480   
RKP0   MAXLRECL9156  
EXCPEXIT--(NULL) CI/CA-37   
SHROPTNS(3,3)  SPEED   UNIQUE   NOERASE   INDEXED   
NOWRITECHK  UNORDERED  REUSE
NONSPANNED
 
You defined the file with SHROPT(3 3). You are assuming the protection not  
CICS or MVS.
 
Regards,
Gene



In a message dated 5/20/2014 5:21:17 P.M. SA Western Standard Time,  
rpomm...@sfgmembers.com writes:

I can't  say for sure, but my guess is there's something 'not-quite-right' 
in the  enqueueing logic that is supposed to be protecting the dataset from 
being  updated by CICS and batch  simultaneously.


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

Re: Performance question - adding

2014-02-16 Thread Gene Hudders 
or 
ICM   Rx,B'',CURRENT
JZ SKIP
A  Rx,SUM
STRx,SUM
SKIPDS0H
 
 
In a message dated 2/16/2014 8:51:07 A.M. Atlantic Standard Time,  
mike.a.sch...@gmail.com writes:

Would  this be even faster?
CLC CURRENT,=F'0'
JZ SKIP
L Rx,CURRENT
A Rx,SUM
ST Rx,SUM
SKIPDS 0H


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 3:10 AM, Binyamin  Dissen
bdis...@dissensoftware.com wrote:
 Say I have two  words,

   CURRENT   DS F
 SUM  DS   F

  I want to add CURRENT to SUM, but most of the time CURRENT will be  zero.
 CURRENT and SUM are not adjacent (different data  lines)

 Which is best

   L  Rx,CURRENT
 A Rx,SUM
 ST Rx,SUM


 or

 L  Rx,CURRENT
 LTR   Rx,Rx
   JZSKIP
 A  Rx,SUM
   STRx,SUM
SKIP   DS0H

 --
 Binyamin Dissen  bdis...@dissensoftware.com
  http://www.dissensoftware.com

 Director, Dissen Software, Bar   Grill - Israel


 Should you use the mailblocks  package and expect a response from me,
 you should preauthorize the  dissensoftware.com domain.

 I very rarely bother responding to  challenge/response systems,
 especially those from irresponsible  companies.

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



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do  Forest Rangers go to get away from it  all?

--
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: Performance question - adding

2014-02-16 Thread Gene Hudders 
You should worry more about the CLC that has two references to  storage
 
 
In a message dated 2/16/2014 8:58:08 A.M. Atlantic Standard Time,  
allan.stal...@kbmg.com writes:

Without  testing, I believe ICM will be much slower than  LOAD

HTH

Snip
or 
ICM   Rx,B'',CURRENT
JZ SKIP
A  Rx,SUM
STRx,SUM
SKIPDS 0H


In a message dated 2/16/2014 8:51:07 A.M. Atlantic Standard  Time, 
mike.a.sch...@gmail.com writes:

Would  this be even  faster?
CLC CURRENT,=F'0'
JZ  SKIP
L Rx,CURRENT
A  Rx,SUM
ST Rx,SUM
SKIPDS   0H


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 3:10 AM, Binyamin   Dissen 
bdis...@dissensoftware.com wrote:
 Say I have two   words,

CURRENT   DS F
   SUM  DS   F

  I  want to add CURRENT to SUM, but most of the time CURRENT will be   
zero.
 CURRENT and SUM are not adjacent (different data   lines)

 Which is best

L  Rx,CURRENT
   A Rx,SUM
 ST Rx,SUM


  or

 L   Rx,CURRENT
   LTR   Rx,Rx
 JZSKIP
 A Rx,SUM
 STRx,SUM
 SKIP   DS 0H

/snip

--
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