In the past, the company i worked for used to have ControlT. Amazing product,
with a very nice user interface
Best Regards
Ituriel do Nascimento Neto
z/OS System Programmer
Em segunda-feira, 13 de junho de 2022 08:54:57 BRT, Jack Zukt
escreveu:
The tso/ispf one. I have not seen
The tso/ispf one. I have not seen the zosmf one yet.
Jack
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022, 05:21 Timothy Sipples wrote:
> Jack Zukt wrote:
> >Between those three, I would say that rmm has an unfriendly user
> interface,
> >but I suppose that is just the IBM way. I really liked Control-M ease of
> >use.
Jack Zukt wrote:
>Between those three, I would say that rmm has an unfriendly user interface,
>but I suppose that is just the IBM way. I really liked Control-M ease of
>use. CA1 was, and I am sure it still is, a great product, and the
>transition to Control-My was easy to do. The transition to rmm
Hi
We moved from CA1 to Control-M a few years ago, and then to DFSMSrmm a few
years after that move. The first move was due to CA pricing, the second one
was due to outsourcing policy.
Between those three, I would say that rmm has an unfriendly user interface,
but I suppose that is just the IBM
At my last gig we were all BMC-Control products, I've been impressed but
the ease of installation / implementation and management of tape and of
the CONTROL-T product, however - I have no experience with the CONTROL-M
Extension Pack
the migration from CA-1 to BMC CONTROL-T was done prior to
Hi list,
Does anybody have experience with BMC's "Control-M Mainframe Extension Pack"
which purports to be a tape management system? I had never heard of it and
would like to know how it stacks up against "the big 3", CA-1, TLMS, and
Dfsms/rmm.
TIA,
Rex
