Subj : IBM Developer's Toolbox
To   : Tobias Ernst
From : David Noon
Date : Thu Oct 12 2000 01:57 pm

Hi Tobias,

Replying to a message of Tobias Ernst to David Noon:

 DN>>  + Origin: My other computer is an IBM S/390 (2:257/609.5)

 TE> Speaking of legacy technology, your computer then is legacy technology
 TE> too. ;-). If you want to be current, this must be an IBM z900 now.

We are still running an IBM 9672 box. The z900 upgrade will likely be next 
year.

 TE> Well - the z900 is also new in the Microsoftish way: New cover, but
 TE> the same (well, enhanced of course) thing underneath.

Soon to be 64-bit.

 TE> I wonder what stupid guy thought up this senseless product rebranding.

An abject moron, I'm afraid. That is, I suppose, a working definition of a 
product manager in most R&D companies.

 TE> There was enough trouble in beating into the customers' heads what a
 TE> S/390 is, and once they understood and embraced the term (e.g. gcc
 TE> and Linux calls the architecture s390-ibm now), is is renamed.
 TE> Brilliant!

Several years of marketing hard work down the tubes. The heritage went:
    S/360
    S/370
    370/XA
    ESA/370
    ESA/390
    S/390

As you can see, there have been digressions in the past from a consistent 
naming convention. Indeed, consistent trains of thought are actively 
discouraged in marketing. It is called "thinking outside the box".

For my sins, I have programmed all of the above architectures as they evolved.

 TE> Or take the AS/400

I'd rather not.

 TE> - it's name stands for reliability in
 TE> middleware issues for a broad range of customers - then why change
 TE> the winning team/name? And if the name is changed, why must there
 TE> again be a meaningless leter with a meaningless number? Could one not
 TE> at least have thought of a meaningful name? Aaargh!

 TE> You don't really have a S/390, and be it only a P/390 board, do you?

It's a large, black box in central London.

 TE> I'm still looking if there is an easy way for an interested Hobbieist
 TE> to get an account on such a machine via TCP/IP (with VM/CMS, MVS or
 TE> VSE, in this order of preference).

I work for a Swiss bank. There is no way they would let a hobbyist loose on the 
big machine (or any other, for that matter).

 TE> From time to time I do
 TE> mainframe-related work for IBM  (e.g. during semester holidays), but
 TE> when I do not work there, I can't access the machines, so every year
 TE> when I get back I have forgotten so much - I'd really like to have a
 TE> way to keep my knowledge fresh also during the rest of the year. :-)

You could try getting a job in the real world. ... :-)

We offer long hours, low pay compared to your manager, and potential redundancy 
when fashions change in technology.

Anyhow, the discussion of mainframes is largely off-topic, unless you want to 
discuss programming the OS/2 box that controls the hardware configuration. 
Since that never happens outside the IBM labs., it is a most unlikely topic.

Regards

Dave
<Team PL/I>

--- FleetStreet 1.25.1
 * Origin: My other computer is an IBM S/390 (2:257/609.5)

.