Re: Mandatory ESMs?
Ahh !!! D i s c o u r a g e m e n t The devil's best tool. I'm just grateful z/VM is still alive and well and getting stronger and better every day especially with the advent of the z196 and that it is only a question of time before the compiler issue will be addressed. I could say life is just a bowl of jello And appear more intelligent and smart But I'm stuck like a dope With a thing called hope And I can't get it out of my heart Not this heart Oscar Hammerstein David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 12/11/2010 10:13 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Dec 10, 2010, at 23:41, George Henke/NYLIC george_he...@newyorklife.com wrote: z/VM has LE ported over from z/OS. So things cannot be all that bad in the world of CMS compilers. LE has two parts: the common libraries and the compilers that use them. The libraries have been maintained, the compilers (with the exception of C/C++) have not been made available on CMS. So, yes, it really IS that bad. I understand why: no business case to do the testing and doc, but isn't that a self-fulfilling prophecy? Sad. It's like having a dear relative on a life support machine. You almost wish the doctor would finally tell you it's hopeless, so at least you'd know. -- db
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on IBM's up front costs significantly. Have a good one, too. DJ On 12/13/2010 08:40 AM, George Henke/NYLIC wrote: Ahh !!! D i s c o u r a g e m e n t The devil's best tool. I'm just grateful z/VM is still alive and well and getting stronger and better every day especially with the advent of the z196 and that it is only a question of time before the compiler issue will be addressed. I could say life is just a bowl of jello And appear more intelligent and smart But I'm stuck like a dope With a thing called hope And I can't get it out of my heart Not this heart Oscar Hammerstein David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 12/11/2010 10:13 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Dec 10, 2010, at 23:41, George Henke/NYLIC george_he...@newyorklife.com wrote: z/VM has LE ported over from z/OS. So things cannot be all that bad in the world of CMS compilers. LE has two parts: the common libraries and the compilers that use them. The libraries have been maintained, the compilers (with the exception of C/C++) have not been made available on CMS. So, yes, it really IS that bad. I understand why: no business case to do the testing and doc, but isn't that a self-fulfilling prophecy? Sad. It's like having a dear relative on a life support machine. You almost wish the doctor would finally tell you it's hopeless, so at least you'd know. -- db -- Dave Jones V/Soft Software www.vsoft-software.com Houston, TX 281.578.7544
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 11:12 EST, Dave Jones d...@vsoft-software.com wrote: As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on IBM's up front costs significantly. Cost avoidance does not a business case make. Business cases are made based on projected sales and profitability, and that business case is weighed against others vying for the same resources. And as you know, IBM doesn't offer experimental licenses such as you describe. A product either goes out the door as a supported product, or it doesn't go at all. Occasionally IBM does offer beta programs that are similar to what you describe, but those are within the context of having intent to release a fully supported product. After all, it takes manpower to create unsupported programs, too. That's just The Way Things Are. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 09:41 EST, George Henke/NYLIC george_he...@newyorklife.com wrote: I'm just grateful z/VM is still alive and well and getting stronger and better every day especially with the advent of the z196 and that it is only a question of time before the compiler issue will be addressed. Not likely, George. The problem with CMS as an application platform isn't the compilers. As others have noted, that's easily and [relatively] cheaply solved. The problem is that application developers use compilers as a means to an end, not an end in themselves. Business application programmers want to write web-enabled apps and services for UIs and database access. They want WebSphere, WAS, DB2/UDB, Oracle, and WebLogic. They want to write RESTful applications. They want to write in Java. And, of course, they don't want just some minimal core level of function, they want the whole enchilada. And in case it's not evident, business cases for compilers are developed around *business* application development, not systems management. Firstly, companies don't *want* to write their own systems management software - they want to buy it. Secondly, the number of people wanting to write their own systems management software on CMS is vanishingly small. So to have a viable business, you have to have enough demand to drive significant revenue. I say significant because there are lots of places IBM can invest. Should it invest those resources in something that returns a small profit, or large? (Note: I'm a stockholder, so I'm biased.) Those who are in the *business* of CMS-based [systems] software development might *prefer* COBOL or PL/I, sure, but they know what languages are available to them and they have to decide whether the market conditions and the availability of development infrastructure are sufficient to meet their business goals. In IT, as in almost all walks of life, it is unfortunate yet true that that the wishes of the Few or the One are ignored in favor of the wishes of the many. You will see that z/VM continues to invest in its native back-end System Management APIs and in the CIM lowware that pushes on them in order to free the systems management software from *having* to run ON CMS. Ultimately being able to manage system configuration, virtual machine provisioning, real resource provisioning, operation, event management, accounting, security, DR and HA, all from modern front-ends UIs with their own scriptable CLIs. As you suggest, this is all part of the appeal of zEnterprise. By the way, none of the above in any way denies the acknowledged inherent coolness of CMS. It's a simple and fast operating system; it's single userness eliminating huge amounts of complexity. Of course, we make up for that by having invented SFS and BFS, reintroducing some of that complexity. :-) It is a two-edged sword! Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
I realize this isn't really a fair comment, but I'll say it anyway. It's why the z is going down the toilet so far as number of installations are concerned. There is no way for poor techies to contribute to the z ecosystem any more. Companies, such as the one I work for, don't want employees wasting time and money on the z (in my case using MSUs for non productive work. MSUs cost real money.). I definitely cannot afford a z development system of my own (and zPDT is so encumbered that it is not for poor techies like me). And people wonder why Intel is taking over the world with their less advanced architecture? The only z machine I can afford is Hercule-390. And I can't get a z/VM or any other z licensed OS on that platform. I know why, but still. So, for techie fun, I use Linux/Intel. I can afford it. Wish it were otherwise. But IBM's apparent attitude appears to be: If IBM can't make some money directly from you, then you can just go somewhere else. So I have. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 11:12 EST, Dave Jones d...@vsoft-software.com wrote: As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on IBM's up front costs significantly. Cost avoidance does not a business case make. Business cases are made based on projected sales and profitability, and that business case is weighed against others vying for the same resources. And as you know, IBM doesn't offer experimental licenses such as you describe. A product either goes out the door as a supported product, or it doesn't go at all. Occasionally IBM does offer beta programs that are similar to what you describe, but those are within the context of having intent to release a fully supported product. After all, it takes manpower to create unsupported programs, too. That's just The Way Things Are. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
Maybe we can get a Windoze version of CMS to do developement... Dear Santa ... On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:56 PM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote: I realize this isn't really a fair comment, but I'll say it anyway. It's why the z is going down the toilet so far as number of installations are concerned. There is no way for poor techies to contribute to the z ecosystem any more. Companies, such as the one I work for, don't want employees wasting time and money on the z (in my case using MSUs for non productive work. MSUs cost real money.). I definitely cannot afford a z development system of my own (and zPDT is so encumbered that it is not for poor techies like me). And people wonder why Intel is taking over the world with their less advanced architecture? The only z machine I can afford is Hercule-390. And I can't get a z/VM or any other z licensed OS on that platform. I know why, but still. So, for techie fun, I use Linux/Intel. I can afford it. Wish it were otherwise. But IBM's apparent attitude appears to be: If IBM can't make some money directly from you, then you can just go somewhere else. So I have. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.comhttp://www.healthmarkets.com/ Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 11:12 EST, Dave Jones d...@vsoft-software.com wrote: As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on IBM's up front costs significantly. Cost avoidance does not a business case make. Business cases are made based on projected sales and profitability, and that business case is weighed against others vying for the same resources. And as you know, IBM doesn't offer experimental licenses such as you describe. A product either goes out the door as a supported product, or it doesn't go at all. Occasionally IBM does offer beta programs that are similar to what you describe, but those are within the context of having intent to release a fully supported product. After all, it takes manpower to create unsupported programs, too. That's just The Way Things Are. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
-Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Huegel Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 3:27 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? Maybe we can get a Windoze version of CMS to do developement... Dear Santa ... I would rather use Linux as a base. I hate and despise MS more than I ever have IBM (and I can get upset with them at times). I wouldn't do anything to help MS in any manner, form, or fashion. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
Unfortunately, I must agree. There is so much talent out there that just needs an outlet and systems to work on. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-363-5050 ext 35050 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 3:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? I realize this isn't really a fair comment, but I'll say it anyway. It's why the z is going down the toilet so far as number of installations are concerned. There is no way for poor techies to contribute to the z ecosystem any more. Companies, such as the one I work for, don't want employees wasting time and money on the z (in my case using MSUs for non productive work. MSUs cost real money.). I definitely cannot afford a z development system of my own (and zPDT is so encumbered that it is not for poor techies like me). And people wonder why Intel is taking over the world with their less advanced architecture? The only z machine I can afford is Hercule-390. And I can't get a z/VM or any other z licensed OS on that platform. I know why, but still. So, for techie fun, I use Linux/Intel. I can afford it. Wish it were otherwise. But IBM's apparent attitude appears to be: If IBM can't make some money directly from you, then you can just go somewhere else. So I have. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 11:12 EST, Dave Jones d...@vsoft-software.com wrote: As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on IBM's up front costs significantly. Cost avoidance does not a business case make. Business cases are made based on projected sales and profitability, and that business case is weighed against others vying for the same resources. And as you know, IBM doesn't offer experimental licenses such as you describe. A product either goes out the door as a supported product, or it doesn't go at all. Occasionally IBM does offer beta programs that are similar to what you describe, but those are within the context of having intent to release a fully supported product. After all, it takes manpower to create unsupported programs, too. That's just The Way Things Are. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
In our *stuck on GUI* discussion, I though it was said that KRIS was working on some GUI for z/VM, possibly CMS GUI? If so, maybe we can resurrect the CMS pig with some lipstick. Edward M Martin emar...@aultman.com Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 12/13/2010 04:50 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Mandatory ESMs? Unfortunately, I must agree. There is so much talent out there that just needs an outlet and systems to work on. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-363-5050 ext 35050 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 3:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? I realize this isn't really a fair comment, but I'll say it anyway. It's why the z is going down the toilet so far as number of installations are concerned. There is no way for poor techies to contribute to the z ecosystem any more. Companies, such as the one I work for, don't want employees wasting time and money on the z (in my case using MSUs for non productive work. MSUs cost real money.). I definitely cannot afford a z development system of my own (and zPDT is so encumbered that it is not for poor techies like me). And people wonder why Intel is taking over the world with their less advanced architecture? The only z machine I can afford is Hercule-390. And I can't get a z/VM or any other z licensed OS on that platform. I know why, but still. So, for techie fun, I use Linux/Intel. I can afford it. Wish it were otherwise. But IBM's apparent attitude appears to be: If IBM can't make some money directly from you, then you can just go somewhere else. So I have. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 11:12 EST, Dave Jones d...@vsoft-software.com wrote: As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on IBM's up front costs significantly. Cost avoidance does not a business case make. Business cases are made based on projected sales and profitability, and that business case is weighed against others vying for the same resources. And as you know, IBM doesn't offer experimental licenses such as you describe. A product either goes out the door as a supported product, or it doesn't go at all. Occasionally IBM does offer beta programs that are similar to what you describe, but those are within the context of having intent to release a fully supported product. After all, it takes manpower to create unsupported programs, too. That's just The Way Things Are. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
What happened to IBM had a program. If you were a developer, you could sign up and have time on one of IBMs' mainframes. Kind of like the old time sharing services back in the '60s and '70s. It seems to me that it resurfaced with Linux development but I haven't heard anything about it in, at least, 5 years. It seems to me that a time sharing option would be the first rung of the ladder. zPDT would be the second rung and your own full system, would be the third rung. A lot, not everything, can be done with time sharing. Gee. I wonder if z/VM could ever evolve into a time sharing system? Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com 12/13/2010 2:56 PM I realize this isn't really a fair comment, but I'll say it anyway. It's why the z is going down the toilet so far as number of installations are concerned. There is no way for poor techies to contribute to the z ecosystem any more. Companies, such as the one I work for, don't want employees wasting time and money on the z (in my case using MSUs for non productive work. MSUs cost real money.). I definitely cannot afford a z development system of my own (and zPDT is so encumbered that it is not for poor techies like me). And people wonder why Intel is taking over the world with their less advanced architecture? The only z machine I can afford is Hercule-390. And I can't get a z/VM or any other z licensed OS on that platform. I know why, but still. So, for techie fun, I use Linux/Intel. I can afford it. Wish it were otherwise. But IBM's apparent attitude appears to be: If IBM can't make some money directly from you, then you can just go somewhere else. So I have. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 11:12 EST, Dave Jones d...@vsoft-software.com wrote: As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on IBM's up front costs significantly. Cost avoidance does not a business case make. Business cases are made based on projected sales and profitability, and that business case is weighed against others vying for the same resources. And as you know, IBM doesn't offer experimental licenses such as you describe. A product either goes out the door as a supported product, or it doesn't go at all. Occasionally IBM does offer beta programs that are similar to what you describe, but those are within the context of having intent to release a fully supported product. After all, it takes manpower to create unsupported programs, too. That's just The Way Things Are. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
I have a vague memory of this. But I was under the impression that was was for development partners who had a business plan on how to then market their application to customers. Which indirectly benefitted IBM. And IBM had to approve your plan and you had to make reports on your progress to continue to gain benefit. Again, I understand that IBM is not a charity set up to allow techie nerds to play around with z/OS. And somebody has to foot the bill. Which I would do myself, if I could. But I can't. Perhaps I could mug George Soros? GRIN So I do foot the bill for what I can afford: Linux/Intel. I can even foot the bill for z/Linux by using Hercules-390, which is legal as far as I can tell. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 4:06 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? What happened to IBM had a program. If you were a developer, you could sign up and have time on one of IBMs' mainframes. Kind of like the old time sharing services back in the '60s and '70s. It seems to me that it resurfaced with Linux development but I haven't heard anything about it in, at least, 5 years. It seems to me that a time sharing option would be the first rung of the ladder. zPDT would be the second rung and your own full system, would be the third rung. A lot, not everything, can be done with time sharing. Gee. I wonder if z/VM could ever evolve into a time sharing system? Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com 12/13/2010 2:56 PM I realize this isn't really a fair comment, but I'll say it anyway. It's why the z is going down the toilet so far as number of installations are concerned. There is no way for poor techies to contribute to the z ecosystem any more. Companies, such as the one I work for, don't want employees wasting time and money on the z (in my case using MSUs for non productive work. MSUs cost real money.). I definitely cannot afford a z development system of my own (and zPDT is so encumbered that it is not for poor techies like me). And people wonder why Intel is taking over the world with their less advanced architecture? The only z machine I can afford is Hercule-390. And I can't get a z/VM or any other z licensed OS on that platform. I know why, but still. So, for techie fun, I use Linux/Intel. I can afford it. Wish it were otherwise. But IBM's apparent attitude appears to be: If IBM can't make some money directly from you, then you can just go somewhere else. So I have. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 11:12 EST, Dave Jones d...@vsoft-software.com wrote: As far as getting the new z/OS PL/I compiler over to z/VM, I'd be happy if IBM just offered it unsupported on CMS, with only a short bit of documentation noting the differences between usage in the z/OS and CMS environments, much like what IBM now does with the z/OS C/C++ port to CMS. Any problems with the compiler would have to be recreated on z/OS before IBM would take an APAR. I think that this approach might help make a business case, as it would cut down on
Re: FTP within REXX EXEC
Thanks, Clovis. Regards, Steve From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of gclo...@br.ibm.com Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 11:13 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: FTP within REXX EXEC Hi, Steve. My question is. What can I do to retrieve the return code if this fails or is successful? The answer is: append (exit to FTP command. See this sample (that sends PERFSVM summary files to GDG file at zOS). In this case: binary, EBCDIC, variable records... // /* Send SUMMARY DATA to MVS by FTP*/ // Arg fn ft nfm lrecl . fileid = fn||.||ft||.||nfm queue quote site recfm=VB lrecl=lrecl blksize=0 queue quote site STORCLAS=VMBASE queue cd 'TDS.FROMVM.' queue passive queue MODE B queue TYPE E queue put fileid ZVM540||(+1) queue quit ftp 10.100.1.220 (exit $rc = rc Return $rc Good luck. __ Clovis From: Steve Perez sspe...@corelogic.com To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Date: 08/12/2010 20:05 Subject:FTP within REXX EXEC Sent by:The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Hello Listers, I have written an REXX exec to file transfer monitor data files from our z/VM Lpar to our z/OS Lpar using FTP. The following is an excerpt from that code: push 'quit' push put TEST.FILE.A 'my.zos.dsn' ... other ftp commands here ... 'FTP' ftpaddress My question is. What can I do to retrieve the return code if this fails or is successful? Or any other ideas or suggestions I can use to determine if the file successfully transferred? Thanks in advance for any and all replies. Steve. ** This message may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above or may contain information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing or copying this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please immediately notify us by replying to the message and delete the original message and any copies immediately thereafter. Thank you. ** CLLD
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 05:06 EST, Tom Duerbusch duerbus...@stlouiscity.com wrote: IBM had a program. If you were a developer, you could sign up and have time on one of IBMs' mainframes. Kind of like the old time sharing services back in the '60s and '70s. It seems to me that it resurfaced with Linux development but I haven't heard anything about it in, at least, 5 years. Yes, it's offered by the Dallas Systems Center as part of the IBM Innovation Center, but it is open only to PartnerWorld members. If you are in the *business* of software development, IBM has programs to help you. I'm not aware of anything within IBM to address hobbyists' needs. There is an opportunity for others to fill that niche, but I think it's telling that no one has done so in a general way. Remember that the service provider has to pay licensing costs for the software on their system, including 2nd level z/OS guests. (There's no such thing as a free z/OS.) Further, they accept responsibility for YOUR use of the software, which triggers risk management. (Gotta read those license agreements carefully!) And even a niche provider has to break even on wetware, software, hardware, and environmentals. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
I don't think I ever said it should be free As a side question, isn't Cloud ComputingTime Sharing? Aren't we paying for Cloud Computing? I don't think, we, as individuals are paying into it, much...yet, but we are. Yahoo isn't free. We a flat rate, get some email services and storage and virus protection. Cobormite (the online backup service) isn't free. Back on the CMS/hobbiest side. Have a fixed rate charging system. $10 per month. Gives you 5 minutes CPU time (perhaps charged a MIP/Seconds used). And cut off when you run out. Gives you 100 cylinders. Gives you 32 MB machine. You can pay for additional bumps in resources. But a total limit as a hobbyist. Of course it isn't us, as a general rule, but the amount of money spent on ring tones, text messaging, ATM fees, etc. makes me wonder. Last year, I bought a new desktop (Lenovo). My first Lenovo. Unlike IBM PCs, it didn't come with a free copy of Lotus. My old PCs are still running, so it isn't a problem yet. But eventually, I have to buy a Suite. Lotus is compatible with what I have, but MS is compatible with my clients. I might be willing to consider a Cloud version if the cost is small enough vs a few hundred for the standalone product. The IBM commercials are touting the Cloud version of Lotus Notes. $3 per user per month. How much for CMS? Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting Alan Altmark alan_altm...@us.ibm.com 12/13/2010 4:26 PM On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 05:06 EST, Tom Duerbusch duerbus...@stlouiscity.com wrote: IBM had a program. If you were a developer, you could sign up and have time on one of IBMs' mainframes. Kind of like the old time sharing services back in the '60s and '70s. It seems to me that it resurfaced with Linux development but I haven't heard anything about it in, at least, 5 years. Yes, it's offered by the Dallas Systems Center as part of the IBM Innovation Center, but it is open only to PartnerWorld members. If you are in the *business* of software development, IBM has programs to help you. I'm not aware of anything within IBM to address hobbyists' needs. There is an opportunity for others to fill that niche, but I think it's telling that no one has done so in a general way. Remember that the service provider has to pay licensing costs for the software on their system, including 2nd level z/OS guests. (There's no such thing as a free z/OS.) Further, they accept responsibility for YOUR use of the software, which triggers risk management. (Gotta read those license agreements carefully!) And even a niche provider has to break even on wetware, software, hardware, and environmentals. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Mandatory ESMs?
The problem with CMS as an application platform isn't the compilers. As others have noted, that's easily and [relatively] cheaply solved. The problem is that application developers use compilers as a means to an end, not an end in themselves. Business application programmers want to write web-enabled apps and services for UIs and database access. They want WebSphere, WAS, DB2/UDB, Oracle, and WebLogic. They want to write RESTful applications. They want to write in Java. And, of course, they don't want just some minimal core level of function, they want the whole enchilada. True, Alan, But every time such middleware application development goes on it directly triggers COBOL changes in the COBOL mainframe back end. I just did such COBOL mainframe application development changes for a client the first 6 months of this year. There is no reason the application developers at this client could not have used CMS instead of TSO/ISPF if COBOL had been available on it. At least, it would have saved the client, which was out-sourced to IBM Dallas, enough CPU time so that they did not have to shutdown the DEV LPARs for days at every month end to run PROD because they did not have enough CPU. Not exactly a Six Sigma process. I rode out the Wall St melt down at a large NY Investment Bank which had tons of UI's with the latest and greatest of every imaginable middleware offering available. It was all GUI, no *green screen* to be seen any where. But that was about all the middleware frontend did, GUI, no real processing. For any real processing, it all still had to go through the billions of lines of COBOL code in the back end to get to the data in the 44 CICS/DB2 applications which really ran everything, contrary to senior management's perception. Every time there was a change to the middleware software it triggered a change to the COBOL code in the back end. If this company had done its COBOL support under CMS instead of TSO/ISPF it would have saved not just millions, but billions. How much client savings does it take to justify a business case? Let's face it. COBOL is here to stay whether clients realize and want it or not. But IBM had better realize it. That the client's mainframe COBOL back end is never going away however much they delude themselves, put lipstick on the pig. So here's the business case: Optimize CPU time by moving COBOL maintenance from TSO/ISPF to CMS. Contrary to what some may say, I do not believe IBM intentionally introduces software inefficiencies to sell more hardware. But unless things change, that is exactly what is happening in the *real* world. COBOL is here to stay, like it or not, so why not optimize the process, especially when doing so is a problem easily and [relatively] cheaply solved? Alan Altmark alan_altm...@us.ibm.com Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 12/13/2010 03:38 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Mandatory ESMs? On Monday, 12/13/2010 at 09:41 EST, George Henke/NYLIC george_he...@newyorklife.com wrote: I'm just grateful z/VM is still alive and well and getting stronger and better every day especially with the advent of the z196 and that it is only a question of time before the compiler issue will be addressed. Not likely, George. The problem with CMS as an application platform isn't the compilers. As others have noted, that's easily and [relatively] cheaply solved. The problem is that application developers use compilers as a means to an end, not an end in themselves. Business application programmers want to write web-enabled apps and services for UIs and database access. They want WebSphere, WAS, DB2/UDB, Oracle, and WebLogic. They want to write RESTful applications. They want to write in Java. And, of course, they don't want just some minimal core level of function, they want the whole enchilada. And in case it's not evident, business cases for compilers are developed around *business* application development, not systems management. Firstly, companies don't *want* to write their own systems management software - they want to buy it. Secondly, the number of people wanting to write their own systems management software on CMS is vanishingly small. So to have a viable business, you have to have enough demand to drive significant revenue. I say significant because there are lots of places IBM can invest. Should it invest those resources in something that returns a small profit, or large? (Note: I'm a stockholder, so I'm biased.) Those who are in the *business* of CMS-based [systems] software development might *prefer* COBOL or PL/I, sure, but they know what languages are available to them and they have to decide whether the market conditions and the availability of development infrastructure are sufficient to meet their business
