Discussion:
CA-1 install - user exits?
(too old to reply)
O'Brien, David W. [C] , NIH/CIT
2007-06-11 13:15:56 UTC
Permalink
I've asked CA for clarification and since the response was less than satisfactory, I'll ask the group.

Has anyone installed CA-1 r11.5 recently?

I'm not familiar with using Iebupdte and because it is an IBM utility CA won't give an example.

My first question is why use iebupdte at all? Why not insert the required code in the appropriate source code and assemble?

Second question, Can anyone provide an example of what they did to install Usermod CL05205 Macro/Source TMSUX2E? or any other exit?

Thanks in advance,
Dave O'Brien



----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Rugen, Len
2007-06-11 13:46:49 UTC
Permalink
OK, I haven't touched this is a long time, but iebupdte commands are the
standard SMP/E way of doing source modifications. For example " ./
CHANGE NAME=TMSUX2C" then uses the line numbers in the following
statements to update or replace lines in the original TMSUX2C.

As an alternative, you can create an SMPE/E usermod that completely
replaces the source (or macro) involved. That would have the same
results and you don't have to understand IEBUPDTE.

In this case, it's not exclusively a CA-1 question, this applies to a
lot of properly organized SMP/E configurations. If this is your first
dive into this, be glad it's CA-1, there are much worse products :-)



> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:16 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: CA-1 install - user exits?
>
> I've asked CA for clarification and since the response was less than
> satisfactory, I'll ask the group.
>
> Has anyone installed CA-1 r11.5 recently?
>
> I'm not familiar with using Iebupdte and because it is an IBM utility
CA
> won't give an example.
>
> My first question is why use iebupdte at all? Why not insert the
required
> code in the appropriate source code and assemble?
>
> Second question, Can anyone provide an example of what they did to
install
> Usermod CL05205 Macro/Source TMSUX2E? or any other exit?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Dave O'Brien
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
> Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
shmuel+ (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.)
2007-06-22 10:49:35 UTC
Permalink
In
<***@UM-XMAIL06.um.umsystem.edu>,
on 06/11/2007
at 08:46 AM, "Rugen, Len" <***@MISSOURI.EDU> said:

>OK, I haven't touched this is a long time, but iebupdte commands are
>the standard SMP/E way of doing source modifications.

No. SMP/E supports only a limited subset of IEBUPDTE commands.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
McKown, John
2007-06-11 13:50:36 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of O'Brien, David W.
> (NIH/CIT) [C]
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:16 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: CA-1 install - user exits?
>
>
> I've asked CA for clarification and since the response was
> less than satisfactory, I'll ask the group.
>
> Has anyone installed CA-1 r11.5 recently?

Yes. I was not the one doing it, but I have in the past.

>
> I'm not familiar with using Iebupdte and because it is an IBM
> utility CA won't give an example.

IEBUPDTE is very stupid, uh, simplistic. Sequence numbers are assumed to
be in columns 73-80 of each record. They are assumed to be in strictly
ascending order. IEBUPDTE reads the member to be updated and the
updates. When it reads a record from the existing member which has a
sequence number equal to the update record's number, it uses the update
record to replace the existing record. When the update record's number
is less than the existing member's record number, the update record is
ADDED to the output. Some pseudo code might look like:

READ MEMBER RECORD INTO MREC AT END SET MREC-EOF
READ UPDATE RECORD INTO UREC AT END SET UREC-EOF
DO UNTIL MREC-EOF OR UREC-EOF
SELECT
WHEN MREC-KEY = UREC-KEY THEN DO
WRITE OUTPUT FROM UREC
READ MEMBER RECORD INTO MREC AT END SET MREC-EOF
READ UPDATE RECORD INTO UREC AT END SET UREC-EOF
END
WHEN MREC-KEY < UREC-KEY THEN DO
WRITE OUTPUT FROM MREC
READ MEMBER RECORD INTO MREC AT END SET MREC-EOF
END
WHEN MREC-KEY > UREC-KEY THEN DO
WRITE OUTPUT FROM UREC
READ UPDATE RECORD INTO UREC AT END SET UREC-EOF
END
END /* OF SELECT */
END /* OF DO UNTIL */
DO UNTIL MREC-EOF
WRITE OUTPUT FROM MREC
READ MEMBER RECORD AT END SET MREC-EOF
END
DO UNTIL UREC-EOF
WRITE OUTPUT FROM UREC
READ UPDATE RECORD AT END SET UREC-EOF
END

>
> My first question is why use iebupdte at all? Why not insert
> the required code in the appropriate source code and assemble?

This is possible. This methodology actually goes back to when we had
real card decks and not on line editors. So, use of IEBUPDTE is due to
historical inertia. Also, when distributing IEUBPDTE updates, the number
of data needed to be transmitted is smaller than redistributing a
20,000+ card program. Again, in the past, this was a big deal. Also, the
sequence number of records which the vendor anticipates to be replaced
tend to stay "static" so that if you do it correctly, when the vendor
distributes a fix, it will not "back out" your change as well. That's
another reason to not redistribute the entire source module, with fixes
imbedded.

>
> Second question, Can anyone provide an example of what they
> did to install Usermod CL05205 Macro/Source TMSUX2E? or any
> other exit?

We didn't install this particular exit. The smallest that I see that we
did was CL05200.


++SRCUPD (TMSKEYAB) /* SUPPLY CHANGES IN IEBUPDTE FORMAT. */ .
/ CHANGE NAME=TMSKEYAB
FN='UICI INSURANCE CENTER', CL05200
*00016000
FA='9151 GRAPEVINE HWY', CL05200
*00017000
FC='NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX. 76180' CL05200
00018000
++MACUPD (TMEYCOMP) /* SUPPLY CHANGES IN IEBUPDTE FORMAT.

CENTER YOUR COMPANY NAME BELOW

IF COMPANY NAME CONTAINS QUOTES, SUPPLY TWO FOR EACH.
*/ .
/ CHANGE NAME=TMEYCOMP
! MODIFIED BY USERMOD CL05200 CL05200
00000045
'UICI INSURANCE CENTER'
00000060
++MACUPD (TMZ$COMP) /* SUPPLY CHANGES IN IEBUPDTE FORMAT.

PROVIDE YOUR COMPANY NAME BELOW

IF COMPANY NAME CONTAINS QUOTES, SUPPLY TWO FOR EACH.
*/ .
/ CHANGE NAME=TMZ$COMP
* MODIFIED BY USERMOD CL05200 CL05200
00000095
VALUE('UICI INSURANCE CENTER')
00000102


The way to find the correct sequence numbers is to VIEW the source
member, notice the sequence number of the record you want to replace,
then replace it.

Though I do not suggest it, you could copy the entire source member into
your change member, make the changes you want and use the IEBUPDTE ./
REPL statement instead of the ./ CHANGE.

>
> Thanks in advance,
> Dave O'Brien



--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Rugen, Len
2007-06-11 14:00:13 UTC
Permalink
Merging John's and my replies, his replacement method would have SMP/E
MCS as

++SRCUPD (TMSUX2C )
/REPLACE
..source here...

Mine would be

++SRC (TMSUX2C)
.source here...

Again, from memory. There's always more than 1 way to do the same thing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
shmuel+ (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.)
2007-06-22 10:49:22 UTC
Permalink
In <***@UICNRHECHP6.uicnrh.dom>,
on 06/11/2007
at 08:49 AM, "McKown, John" <***@HEALTHMARKETS.COM> said:

>IEBUPDTE is very stupid, uh, simplistic.

The problem in this case isn't IEBUPDTE but SMP/E.

>When it reads a record from the existing member which has a sequence
>number equal to the update record's number, it uses the update
>record to replace the existing record.

If that's what you tell it to do. That's not the only way to use it.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
E***@ibm-main.lst
2007-06-11 13:56:51 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 6/11/2007 8:47:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
***@MISSOURI.EDU writes:

In this case, it's not exclusively a CA-1 question, this applies to a
lot of properly organized SMP/E configurations. If this is your first
dive into this, be glad it's CA-1, there are much worse products :-)



>>

I can't believe the OP has RTFM. CA-1 tech support is usually top-notch and
the SAMPLE exits provided have just about everything you need. 'Insert your
code here'. We had heavily modified(from previous conversions) exits and once
you get the 'sequence number' concept down they go in pretty easily if you
remember where you keep the source!



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
O'Brien, David W. [C] , NIH/CIT
2007-06-11 14:03:53 UTC
Permalink
Yes, I did RTFM.

You obviously have a higher opinion of CA than I do.

Tim, John, Len, Thank you for your responses. They were most helpful, unlike the one I'm responding to.

________________________________

From: Ed Finnell [mailto:***@ibm-main.lst
Sent: Mon 6/11/2007 9:56 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CA-1 install - user exits?




In a message dated 6/11/2007 8:47:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
***@MISSOURI.EDU writes:

In this case, it's not exclusively a CA-1 question, this applies to a
lot of properly organized SMP/E configurations. If this is your first
dive into this, be glad it's CA-1, there are much worse products :-)



>>

I can't believe the OP has RTFM. CA-1 tech support is usually top-notch and
the SAMPLE exits provided have just about everything you need. 'Insert your
code here'. We had heavily modified(from previous conversions) exits and once
you get the 'sequence number' concept down they go in pretty easily if you
remember where you keep the source!



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com <http://www.aol.com/> .

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html



----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Knutson, Sam
2007-06-11 14:22:00 UTC
Permalink
The CA-1 team including Russell Witt who participates here is generally
very good. CA like many large software companies feels to users more
like many small companies with some variations in culture and quality of
services.

We have no complaints about CA-1 (TMS) software reliability and the
support staff. I wish I could say that about every CA product but
hopefully they are progressing in the right direction.

Perhaps there is something in the air today:-(

CA Web support keeps throwing HTTP 500 and host not available errors

http://supportconnect.ca.com

Best Regards,

Sam Knutson, GEICO
Performance and Availability Management
mailto:***@geico.com
(office) 301.986.3574

"Think big, act bold, start simple, grow fast..."

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
Behalf Of O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:01 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CA-1 install - user exits?

Yes, I did RTFM.

You obviously have a higher opinion of CA than I do.

Tim, John, Len, Thank you for your responses. They were most helpful,
unlike the one I'm responding to.

________________________________

From: Ed Finnell [mailto:***@ibm-main.lst
Sent: Mon 6/11/2007 9:56 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CA-1 install - user exits?




In a message dated 6/11/2007 8:47:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
***@MISSOURI.EDU writes:

In this case, it's not exclusively a CA-1 question, this applies to a
lot of properly organized SMP/E configurations. If this is your
first
dive into this, be glad it's CA-1, there are much worse products :-)



>>

I can't believe the OP has RTFM. CA-1 tech support is usually top-notch
and
the SAMPLE exits provided have just about everything you need. 'Insert
your
code here'. We had heavily modified(from previous conversions) exits
and once
you get the 'sequence number' concept down they go in pretty easily if
you
remember where you keep the source!
====================
This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Chase, John
2007-06-11 14:27:23 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Knutson, Sam
>
> The CA-1 team including Russell Witt who participates here is
> generally
> very good. CA like many large software companies feels to users more
> like many small companies with some variations in culture and
> quality of services.
>
> We have no complaints about CA-1 (TMS) software reliability
> and the support staff. I wish I could say that about every
> CA product but hopefully they are progressing in the right direction.
>
> Perhaps there is something in the air today:-(
>
> CA Web support keeps throwing HTTP 500 and host not available errors

Could be. Some functions of Compuware's Frontline are unusually slow
today, too, but they eventually respond.

-jc-

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
O'Brien, David W. [C] , NIH/CIT
2007-06-11 14:35:40 UTC
Permalink
Hi Sam,

Generally speaking I agree that CA-1 runs as designed and Russell is helpful to users of this list. However since upgrading to Zos 1.7 we have been experiencing intermittant 0c4 errors which FDR support attributed to CA-1. Having a question about iebupdte and having CA support refuse to comment on it, despite the fact that is used in the install doc, is what I found unacceptable.

Regards,
Dave O'Brien

________________________________


Sam Knutson wrote:

The CA-1 team including Russell Witt who participates here is generally
very good. CA like many large software companies feels to users more
like many small companies with some variations in culture and quality of
services.

We have no complaints about CA-1 (TMS) software reliability and the
support staff. I wish I could say that about every CA product but
hopefully they are progressing in the right direction.

Perhaps there is something in the air today:-(



----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Russell Witt
2007-06-12 11:55:07 UTC
Permalink
Dave,

The entire question of how well should we document IBM utilities and
procedures was discussed just today regarding GDG's. We have some utilities
(such as TMSCOPY to backup the TMC) were we recommend creating GDG's to keep
some number of backup copies. It was asked if we should give examples of how
to define GDG's in our manuals for those system-programmers that have never
defined a GDG. This morning, I stood on the "NO" side but am starting to
wonder if that was correct.

To answer your question about IEBUPDTE; to apply the CL05205 USERMOD you
concatenate two members together. Barry sent the CL05205S member from our
PPOPTION PDS which is the SMP/e control statements; you also have the
CL05205 member of PPOPTION. By default, the CL05205 member contains the
following IEBUPDTE control statements;

./ CHANGE NAME=TMSUX2E
SSI=CL05205 CL05205 00038000
* PLACE USER CODE HERE CL05205 00053000 <== this will replace
the existing line

If you then look at the actual source for TMSUX2E you will see the
following.

* 00052000
* PLACE USER CODE HERE 00053000 <== this line will be replaced
* 00054000
B RETURN 00055000
SPACE 2 00056000
NEWSTYLE DS 0H 00057000


What IEBUPDTE does is to replace or insert lines based on the line sequence
numbers (column 73-80). Why do this instead of simply replacing the entire
module? Because we (CA-1 support) might be forced to make some changes to
the entry or exit logic, or some USING in the middle of the sample exit and
then you would have to re-write the exit. Using IEBUPDTE with the same
sequence numbers (and we try very hard not to modify those sequence numbers
though accidents do happen) allows an existing exit to be applied, and
re-applied over and over and over again without having to go and re-write
any code. Many clients are running with CA-1 exits that haven't been touched
in many-many years (read decades). So, if you want to insert code starting
at sequence 00053000; then simply have sequence 00053001, 00053002,
00053003, as your sequence numbers in the CL05205 member of PPOPTION. Then,
only those lines would be inserted.

Now, that being said you also need to remember that since we added the new
TMSXTEND utility with r11.0 the need to maintain exits U&E (TMSUX2U and
TMSUX2E) has been eliminated. You are still able to use them, but if you are
able to use TMSXTEND to define and add ranges these exits will be
eliminated.

Lastly, regarding your z/OS 1.7 problems. Normally I have the highest regard
for the folks at Innovation, and am very interested in this intermittant
0C4. Do you have a dump, and have you open'ed a helpdesk issue? I know of no
outstanding 0C4 abends within the product at this time. For z/OS 1.7, at
CA-1 r11.5 you only need QO73756 to be applied. This does correct a 0C4, but
only if using our TMSTPNIT to initialize a tape. No other requirements to
CA-1 r11.5 are known to support either z/OS 1.7 or z/OS 1.8. Are the 0C4
abends in TMSTPNIT?

If you haven't yet open'ed a helpdesk issue for the intermittant 0C4, please
do so. Especially if you have some dump to look at (which I assume you do,
or the folks at Innovation wouldn't be pointing fingers).

Russell Witt
CA-1 Level-2 Support Manager

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU]On
Behalf Of O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:32 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CA-1 install - user exits?


Hi Sam,

Generally speaking I agree that CA-1 runs as designed and Russell is helpful
to users of this list. However since upgrading to Zos 1.7 we have been
experiencing intermittant 0c4 errors which FDR support attributed to CA-1.
Having a question about iebupdte and having CA support refuse to comment on
it, despite the fact that is used in the install doc, is what I found
unacceptable.

Regards,
Dave O'Brien

________________________________

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
O'Brien, David W. [C] , NIH/CIT
2007-06-12 13:55:17 UTC
Permalink
Russell,

Thank you for your response. I think I understand now and can proceed.

I was pointed to CA-1 as the problem by the following from Innovation:

There probably was a previous message that looked like this:

IEC999I IFG055CA,job,step,error-text (This message was in fact present in the joblog.)

I believe that IFG055CA is CA's version of the EOV exit most likely with CA-1. I would recommend calling CA with the above info as well and look at CA-APARs QO72318 and QO73756.

end of Innovation response.

Because we are running r5.2 which I believe is not supported, I did not open an issue with CA but chose to install the current release.

Regards,
Dave O'Brien

________________________________

From: Russell Witt [mailto:***@ibm-main.lst
Sent: Tue 6/12/2007 7:55 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CA-1 install - user exits?



Dave,


Lastly, regarding your z/OS 1.7 problems. Normally I have the highest regard
for the folks at Innovation, and am very interested in this intermittant
0C4. Do you have a dump, and have you open'ed a helpdesk issue? I know of no
outstanding 0C4 abends within the product at this time. For z/OS 1.7, at
CA-1 r11.5 you only need QO73756 to be applied. This does correct a 0C4, but
only if using our TMSTPNIT to initialize a tape. No other requirements to
CA-1 r11.5 are known to support either z/OS 1.7 or z/OS 1.8. Are the 0C4
abends in TMSTPNIT?

If you haven't yet open'ed a helpdesk issue for the intermittant 0C4, please
do so. Especially if you have some dump to look at (which I assume you do,
or the folks at Innovation wouldn't be pointing fingers).

Russell Witt
CA-1 Level-2 Support Manager

-----Original Message-----



----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Russell Witt
2007-06-13 00:52:13 UTC
Permalink
Dave,

If you could send me directly the entire joblog from one of the failing
jobs; I will see if there was a r11.0 fix or even a r11.5 fix that can be
applied to your system. You indicate you are still at R5.2, but what
genlevel of R5.2?

Russell Witt
***@ca.com
CA-1 Level-2 Support Manager

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU]On
Behalf Of O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:54 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CA-1 install - user exits?


Russell,

Thank you for your response. I think I understand now and can proceed.

I was pointed to CA-1 as the problem by the following from Innovation:

There probably was a previous message that looked like this:

IEC999I IFG055CA,job,step,error-text (This message was in fact present in
the joblog.)

I believe that IFG055CA is CA's version of the EOV exit most likely with
CA-1. I would recommend calling CA with the above info as well and look at
CA-APARs QO72318 and QO73756.

end of Innovation response.

Because we are running r5.2 which I believe is not supported, I did not open
an issue with CA but chose to install the current release.

Regards,
Dave O'Brien


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
shmuel+ (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.)
2007-06-22 18:24:39 UTC
Permalink
In <000601c7ace8$93e5ce90$***@homeanwsf89s3r>, on 06/12/2007
at 06:55 AM, Russell Witt <***@VERIZON.NET> said:

>The entire question of how well should we document IBM utilities and
>procedures was discussed just today regarding GDG's. We have some
>utilities (such as TMSCOPY to backup the TMC) were we recommend
>creating GDG's to keep some number of backup copies. It was asked if
>we should give examples of how to define GDG's in our manuals for
>those system-programmers that have never defined a GDG. This morning,
>I stood on the "NO" side but am starting to wonder if that was
>correct.

I would advise caution. It's much safer to refer people to the vendor
documentation, and I've seen a lot of 3rd party documentation that was
ambiguous, incomplete or just plain wrong.

>What IEBUPDTE does

Be careful to distinguish between the general behavior of IEBUPDTE and
the restricted subset that SMP/E supports. This is a case where I
would strongly urge pointers to the DFSMS Utilities documentation and
to the SMP/E documentation.

>Why do this instead of simply replacing the entire module?

There's a third alternative that you might consider; ship both an exit
with a COPY statement and a comment-only member to be included by the
COPY. The customer could then do a usermod replacing the entire copy
file. YMMV.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Clem Clarke
2007-06-11 15:16:46 UTC
Permalink
All good ideas come from a single individual, and by constantly putting
roadblocks in their paths, progress stops. Patents and copyrights mean
that people cannot "stand on the shoulders" of those who went in front
of them When you make a judgment (that stifling the competition, for
example) is only way to operate a business, or company or country, then
all other methods (such as co-operation or even co-petition) are locked out

And so, with developers unable to get easy access to mainframes, I see
innovation in that area dying out.

It can be no other way.

It's a shame, but unless IBM does do a big rethink on this, and allows
small developers some sort of inexpensive or free access to the
mainframes, they will die. Allowing a "hobbyist" license for Z/OS, VM
and VSE on Hercules would be one way, and what does IBM really have to
lose? And the gain would be that they could have many people working at
no cost on these systems developing tools and applications to make them
better and better.

Cheers,

Clement Clarke



,-._|\ Clement V. Clarke - Author Jol, EASYJCL, EASYPANEL, 370TO486
/ Oz \ Web: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~oscarptyltd
\_,--.x/ 16/38 Kings Park Road, West Perth, AUSTRALIA, 6005.
v Tel (61)-8-9324-1119, Mob 0401-054-155.
Email: ***@ozemail.com.au

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Mark Jacobs
2007-06-11 15:27:26 UTC
Permalink
Clem Clarke wrote:
> All good ideas come from a single individual, and by constantly
> putting roadblocks in their paths, progress stops. Patents and
> copyrights mean that people cannot "stand on the shoulders" of those
> who went in front of them When you make a judgment (that stifling the
> competition, for example) is only way to operate a business, or
> company or country, then all other methods (such as co-operation or
> even co-petition) are locked out
>
> And so, with developers unable to get easy access to mainframes, I see
> innovation in that area dying out.
> It can be no other way.
>
> It's a shame, but unless IBM does do a big rethink on this, and allows
> small developers some sort of inexpensive or free access to the
> mainframes, they will die. Allowing a "hobbyist" license for Z/OS,
> VM and VSE on Hercules would be one way, and what does IBM really have
> to lose? And the gain would be that they could have many people
> working at no cost on these systems developing tools and applications
> to make them better and better.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Clement Clarke
>
>
I happen to agree with everything you said, but sadly common sense
usually isn't common anymore.

--
Mark Jacobs
Technical Services
Time Customer Service - Tampa, FL
------
Victory in defeat, there is none higher. She didn't give up, Ben;
she's still trying to lift that stone after it has crushed her.
She's a father going down to a dull office job while cancer is
painfully eating away his insides, so as to bring home one more pay
check for the kids. She's a twelve-year-old girl trying to mother her
baby brothers and sisters because Mama had to go to Heaven. She's a
switchboard operator sticking to her job while smoke is choking her
and the fire is cutting off her escape. She's all the unsung heroes
who couldn't quite cut it but never quit.*

Robert A. Heinlein - Stranger in a Strange Land

*Referring to the Auguste Rodin sculpture, Caryatid Who Has Fallen under Her Stone

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Howard Brazee
2007-06-11 15:59:27 UTC
Permalink
On 11 Jun 2007 08:27:26 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:

>I happen to agree with everything you said, but sadly common sense
>usually isn't common anymore.

You're implying it was once common.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Chase, John
2007-06-11 16:55:02 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Howard Brazee
>
> On 11 Jun 2007 08:27:26 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>
> >I happen to agree with everything you said, but sadly common sense
> >usually isn't common anymore.
>
> You're implying it was once common.

It was -- centuries ago. There was even "common law", judges could
exercise judgement, people individually were held accountable for the
consequences of their own acts or omissions, etc.

-jc-

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
McKown, John
2007-06-11 17:00:37 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Chase, John
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 11:55 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Howard Brazee
> >
> > On 11 Jun 2007 08:27:26 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
> >
> > >I happen to agree with everything you said, but sadly common sense
> > >usually isn't common anymore.
> >
> > You're implying it was once common.
>
> It was -- centuries ago. There was even "common law", judges could
> exercise judgement, people individually were held accountable for the
> consequences of their own acts or omissions, etc.
>
> -jc-

GOOD HEAVENS! How horribly primitive and damaging to a person's psyche!
Thankfully, we've evolved beyond that point.

Note that the above is sarcasm.

Are you sure it's not Friday? It just seems like Friday for some reason.

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
McKown, John
2007-06-11 15:39:37 UTC
Permalink
I must somewhat disagree with you. I am against software patents. The
reason is that they stop others from implementing "work alike" products.
Imagine if the first person who wrote a job scheduler had patented it.
No other job schedulers could have been written as they most likely
would have violated at least portions of the patent.

I am for software copyrights. That means that if I write a job
scheduler, somebody else could not acquire (somehow) the source and do
with it what they want. If software were not copyrightable, then it
would need to remain a "trade secret" if it were to be used to recoup
the author's time and effort to write it. That means "no sharing" at all
except for public domain type software.

So, IMO, without software copyrights, there would only be two types of
software: (1) public domain which anybody could use for any purpose or
(2) trade secret / proprietary which nobody other than the developing
author could see. Again, I don't mind "work alike" software. But I
really dislike thieves (those who would take and never give back).

Yes, I like the GPL. But I am not against other licenses such a BSD or
even "public domain". I just think that it would be the author's right
to say, without the necessity of locking the source away from prying
eyes due to fear of software thieves (and that is what I consider
copyright violators).

Just my personal take on it. Is it Friday already?

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Howard Brazee
2007-06-11 15:58:40 UTC
Permalink
On 11 Jun 2007 08:16:46 -0700, ***@ibm-main.lst (Clem Clarke)
wrote:

>All good ideas come from a single individual,

What's his name?

>and by constantly putting roadblocks in their paths, progress stops.

Lots of good ideas have been created by teams. And lots of patents
and copy rites are owned by companies who have created this
environment, or who have purchased them.

>Patents and copyrights mean that people cannot "stand on the shoulders"
>of those who went in front of them.

Ahh, you mean like Sir. Isaac Newton? That's a bad thing?

We need to look at the real world of today, not of yesterday. Right
now, do patents (primarily owned by big corporations - IBM is huge
here), help the innovative individual more than they hurt the
innovative individual? I suspect they hurt more - and this trend is
going to continue.

It's not obvious what is needed here though.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
t***@ibm-main.lst
2007-06-11 17:49:23 UTC
Permalink
"what does IBM really have to lose?"

I agree that licenses of some sort need to be accessible to the small
developers; however if a "hobbyist" license is granted, how do they keep
it from being abused by unscrupulous companies who then run their business
on the "hobbyist" machine rather than the "commercial" mainframe license
(that they dropped once they found they could get away from it)?

Perhaps IBM needs to be allowed to do something the other vendors are
doing - bundling all sorts of software in as part of their "OS". For
example - Microsoft Paint, Notepad, and Wordpad are all demonstrably
applications; their "drag to the CD to burn it" software is demonstrably a
backup utility. IBM unbundles all of these things now - I think because of
the consent decree way back when, correct me if I'm wrong.

What if they were allowed to sell us a single OS license that included
everything we needed to run our apps, including CICS, WebSphere, and DB2,
and they priced it for what z/OS goes for now? Would our bean counters be
happy?

Tim Hare
Senior Systems Programmer
Florida Department of Transportation
(850) 414-4209

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
McKown, John
2007-06-11 17:58:28 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tim Hare
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>

<snip>

>
> What if they were allowed to sell us a single OS license that
> included
> everything we needed to run our apps, including CICS,
> WebSphere, and DB2,
> and they priced it for what z/OS goes for now? Would our bean
> counters be
> happy?
>
> Tim Hare

And what about people who develop alternative software? If SDSF is free,
then what happens to EJES? If DB2 is free, then what happens to Oracle
and other RDMSes that run on z/OS? If RMM were free, then what about
CA-1? And so on down the line.

Comparing to what Microsoft does is not a good idea to me. I despise
Microsoft. Their software stinks. They usually only develop something
"new" when it looks like another software developer is getting market
share. They then try to destroy them by bundling something that is
inferior, but "good enough" for the average (idiot) consumer. Yes, I'm a
Linux bigot, and despise MS for their poor software and immoral business
practices. Not that IBM is lily white, mind you.

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Gerhard Postpischil
2007-06-11 19:28:08 UTC
Permalink
McKown, John wrote:
> And what about people who develop alternative software? If SDSF is free,
> then what happens to EJES? If DB2 is free, then what happens to Oracle
> and other RDMSes that run on z/OS? If RMM were free, then what about
> CA-1? And so on down the line.

For IBM this issue was settled in the mid-sixties, when Applied
Data Research sued them, claiming free copies of CRBE (and
CRJE?) impacted sales of ROSCOE. IBM was "forced" to start
charging for software, and to sell ROSCOE (although I'm not
aware that they ever sold a copy that way).

Apparently IBM's lawyers have an interesting definition of
software, as I recall getting free programs (Field Developed
Programs) in later years (e.g., VSAM Catalog fixer).


Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

new e-mail address: gerhardp (at) charter (dot) net

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Lindy Mayfield
2007-06-11 19:33:23 UTC
Permalink
You bring up an excellent point. I was thinking about this a bit when this thread first started.

Would you agree, though, that mainframe users tend much more to be legal than personal users? IBM can audit any of their mainframe machines at any time. And the large businesses that use mainframes tend to be much more honest because of self policing, with all sorts of auditors and so forth to keep things legal. They have too much to loose to get stupid and steal software.

I like you brought this up, but I think it is a somewhat weak argument. What about usage based pricing? A company could just fudge the usage reports and save tons of money, no?

I'd really like to know what IBM's stand on this really is.

Regards,
Lindy


-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:49 PM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules

"what does IBM really have to lose?"

I agree that licenses of some sort need to be accessible to the small
developers; however if a "hobbyist" license is granted, how do they keep
it from being abused by unscrupulous companies who then run their business
on the "hobbyist" machine rather than the "commercial" mainframe license
(that they dropped once they found they could get away from it)?

....

Tim Hare
Senior Systems Programmer
Florida Department of Transportation
(850) 414-4209

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Craddock, Chris
2007-06-11 20:45:30 UTC
Permalink
Lindy Mayfield asks

> Would you agree, though, that mainframe users tend much more to be
legal
> than personal users?

I would say that practically all large customers are about as legal as
they can possibly be and that there are strong external factors that
drive them to behave that way. SOX here and corporate legal/accounting
restrictions in many overseas markets make it fairly unlikely that
customers in typical "western world" jurisdictions will intentionally
stiff their providers.

Accidental discrepancies are another matter, but overall I don't see it
as a huge black hole sucking money out of the business. Of course I
don't have anything to do with how licensing is done, so my opinion is
irrelevant. I'd love to see a hobbyist license for many things, but they
are extremely unlikely to show up any time soon (if at all)

BTW> all mainframe customers are also "distributed" customers. There's
no such thing as an all-mainframe shop any more.

CC

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2007-06-11 18:04:54 UTC
Permalink
***@ibm-main.lst (Clem Clarke) writes:
> It's a shame, but unless IBM does do a big rethink on this, and allows
> small developers some sort of inexpensive or free access to the
> mainframes, they will die. Allowing a "hobbyist" license for Z/OS,
> VM and VSE on Hercules would be one way, and what does IBM really have
> to lose? And the gain would be that they could have many people
> working at no cost on these systems developing tools and applications
> to make them better and better.

some related thread drift from another n.g.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007m.html#3 nouns and adjectives

that in the 60s and much of the 70s ... lots of the innovation came out
of customer installations & datacenters ... since it was the customers
that understood the need and requirement ... things like cics, ims, etc.
later they were transferred to "development" organizations for product
support. in many cases, this is misnomer ... since those "development"
organizations are responsible for product maintenance ... not the
products "development" (maybe doing plus/minus five percent changes per
annum). I've periodically made facetious comments referencing the "term"
inflation in using the word "development" applied to organizations that
are primarily product "maintenance".

something similar happened with the introduction of the ibm/pc ... large
proportion of the "products" originated from end-users (that were faced
with the actual problems and understood what kind of solution was
needed). vendor product operations tend to have people like software
engineers that understand issues about software maintenance ... but
rarely have people with the necessary experience that they could see
what solution was originally needed.

even before ibm/pc came out ... there were some that had jump shipped
from vm/cms (that had been providing mainframe-based personal computing
environment) and were implementing some number of CMS applications on
other early personal computers. These weren't ports of CMS applications
(because the implementation details tended to be totally different), but
frequently the look&feel and the solution they provided were the same.

the "OCO-wars" were especially hard on the vm/cms community ... because
not only was full source available ... but even maintenance, fixes, etc
for customers were shipped as source updates ... based on CMS
multi-level source maintenance facilities. Some studies from their
period even claimed the number of system (source) updates done at
customer datacenters (aka aggregate lines-of-code) was actually larger
than the source lines-of-code in the base system.

the high-end of the market is where the (quarterly) revenue/profit
... but all the innovation tends to originate at the low-end & mid-range
... in part innovation requires quite a bit of experimentation,
trial&error, etc ... and the high-end is rarely made available for such
experimentation.

As a result, some of the other vendors found a need that could filled in
the entry/low-end market segment (and long term ... it is frequently the
entry/low-end that tends to feed the high-end with the applications that
keep the high-end quarterly revenue sustained).

the pre-occupation with quarterly results has been a sporadic topic for
at least the last 40 yrs. during periods when there was significant
general economic growth ... the generational issues appeared to almost
take care of themselves ... allowing the perception that executives
could solely concentrate on the quarterly issues. however, this approach
somewhat came to roost. i've mentioned before about being at a talk at
MIT in the early 70s where Amdahl was asked how he was able to convince
the money people to support his new clone computer company. His reply
was that there was already something like $200b that customers had
invested in 360 applications ... that even if IBM were to totally walk
away from 360/370 ... which might be considered a vieled reference to
the future system project
http:///www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#futuresys

... (just) that (existing) software application base could keep him in
business thru the end of the century.

starting in the early 70s, i had been heavily involved with HONE
deployment ... first its original objective to provied "hands-on"
experience to branch office SEs with operating systems running in
virtual machines ... and then the transition to being primarily an
online, interactive environment deploying applications (mostly
implemented in cms\apl) supporting sales & marketing worldwide.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hone

in the mid-70s, I got con'ed into helping with the virgil/tully
microcode assists ... including spending time off & on over a period of
a year running around the world with the product managers, meeting with
business planning & forcasting groups positioning the processors in the
market. One of the things that I saw was that the business positioning
environment in world trade was somewhat the early stages of what was
going to be happing in the domestic market a decade or so later (the
HONE tools somewhat gave me perspective of what sales & marketing was
doing world-wide ... from the mechanics bottom-up ... where-as all the
virgil/tully forcasting was perspective of sales & marketing somewhat
from top-down). lots of past posts talking about (both) 360 & 370
microcode:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#mcode
Schiradin,Roland HG-Dir itb-db/dc
2007-06-11 19:54:01 UTC
Permalink
Just to remember BS3000 (a german OS from Siemens) died because it violates
IBM patents and/or copyrights. Long time ago but no complains or even a note.

So FLEX and other "emulator" or "simulator" isn't the first or maybe the last.

Roland

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Clem Clarke
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 5:16 PM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules


All good ideas come from a single individual, and by constantly putting
roadblocks in their paths, progress stops. Patents and copyrights mean
that people cannot "stand on the shoulders" of those who went in front
of them When you make a judgment (that stifling the competition, for
example) is only way to operate a business, or company or country, then
all other methods (such as co-operation or even co-petition)
are locked out

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Schwarz, Barry A
2007-06-11 18:27:45 UTC
Permalink
For your last question (from r11.0 but I'd be surprised if anything
changed):
++USERMOD(CL05205) REWORK(...).
++VER(Z038) FMID(CL052B0)
REQ(AWMAC01) /* my usermod */.
++JCLIN.
//CL05205 JOB
//LKED EXEC PGM=IEWL,PARM='RENT,REUS,...'
//SYSUT1 DD UNIT=SYSALLDA,SPACE=(CYL,(5,1))
//CL052LLD DD DISP=SHR,DSN=CAI.CL052LLD
//SYSLMOD DD DISP=OLD,CAI=CAI.CAILIB
//SYSLIN DD *
INCLUDE CL052LLD(TMSUX2E)
ENTRY TMSUX2E
NAME TMSUX2E(R)
++SRC (TMSUX2E)
TXLLIB(BOESRC) /* my dddef */.

-----Original Message-----
From: O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] [mailto:snip]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 6:16 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: CA-1 install - user exits?

snip

Second question, Can anyone provide an example of what they did to
install Usermod CL05205 Macro/Source TMSUX2E? or any other exit?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Ted MacNEIL
2007-06-11 19:41:18 UTC
Permalink
>Would you agree, though, that mainframe users tend much more to be legal than personal users?

No, I would disagree.
Regardless of the platform, I believe that the larger (and medium-2-large) companies (also known as customers) are totally honest!

But, there are many independent vendors who do not treat them that way.
And, we end up with obscure and hard to maintain key-based solutions that just tick us off!
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
R.S.
2007-06-12 07:07:02 UTC
Permalink
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
>> Would you agree, though, that mainframe users tend much more to be legal than personal users?
>
> No, I would disagree.
> Regardless of the platform, I believe that the larger (and medium-2-large) companies (also known as customers) are totally honest!
>
> But, there are many independent vendors who do not treat them that way.
> And, we end up with obscure and hard to maintain key-based solutions that just tick us off!


Key-based solutions exist on mianframe as well as on other systems.

I think it is rather technical, not ethical or organisational issue: It is *easy* to have illegal software on PC, sometimes you are even unaware of it. I mean a lot of small but usefull tools like Windows Commander, archivizers, DVD-burning software etc. etc.
Even if you have some "tools" for z/OS it is simply not so easy to install it on the host - usually several persons are involed, usually someone could ask - "Did we buy it ? How did you get it ?".

From the other hand, people are interested in having some bells & whistles on *their* PC (even company owned), while mainframe is not *their*. It is not *personal*. It's "common".

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 18
00-950 Warszawa
www.brebank.pl

Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy
XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego,
nr rejestru przedsiębiorców KRS 0000025237
NIP: 526-021-50-88
Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2007 r. kapitał zakładowy BRE Banku SA (w całości opłacony) wynosi 118.064.140 zł. W związku z realizacją warunkowego podwyższenia kapitału zakładowego, na podstawie uchwał XVI WZ z dnia 21.05.2003 r., kapitał zakładowy BRE Banku SA może ulec podwyższeniu do kwoty 118.760.528 zł. Akcje w podwyższonym kapitale zakładowym będą w całości opłacone.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Ed Gould
2007-06-12 10:24:35 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 12, 2007, at 2:04 AM, R.S. wrote:

>
> ------------------SNIP----------------------------------
>
> I think it is rather technical, not ethical or organisational
> issue: It is *easy* to have illegal software on PC, sometimes you
> are even unaware of it. I mean a lot of small but usefull tools
> like Windows Commander, archivizers, DVD-burning software etc. etc.
> Even if you have some "tools" for z/OS it is simply not so easy to
> install it on the host - usually several persons are involed,
> usually someone could ask - "Did we buy it ? How did you get it ?".
>
> From the other hand, people are interested in having some bells &
> whistles on *their* PC (even company owned), while mainframe is not
> *their*. It is not *personal*. It's "common".
>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> Lodz, Poland
>
Radoslaw:

I worked in a place where it was semi common to have questionable
software. I suspect that one of the reasons why was that management
was so tight with the $$ that the sysprogs would install software and
never follow through with has it been purchased. They also had a
penchant for firing sysprogs almost every 6 months so no one could
keep track of what was what. Was it done on purpose? Probably not as
management was too damn stupid (sorry about the language). For some
reason upper management like to promote only from outside the
department. That meant a meter reading manager was the sysprog boss.
Talk about screw loose types. They may have done it on purpose I gave
up guessing. They would choose equipment based on cost NOT if it was
going to be useful after 6 months. I went toe to toe with an "upper"
manager over a choice of a CPU that was already obsolete when they
made their choice. To my utter disbelief they picked a cpu that had
cob webs on it (literally) over another cpu that would support
current software. They had no concept of support, just that it was
cheap. I guess meter reading supervisors worked for that company.

Ed

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2007-06-12 15:45:05 UTC
Permalink
***@ibm-main.lst (R.S.) writes:
> Key-based solutions exist on mianframe as well as on other systems.
>
> I think it is rather technical, not ethical or organisational issue:
> It is *easy* to have illegal software on PC, sometimes you are even
> unaware of it. I mean a lot of small but usefull tools like Windows
> Commander, archivizers, DVD-burning software etc. etc.
>
> Even if you have some "tools" for z/OS it is simply not so easy to
> install it on the host - usually several persons are involed, usually
> someone could ask - "Did we buy it ? How did you get it ?".
>
> From the other hand, people are interested in having some bells &
> whistles on *their* PC (even company owned), while mainframe is not
> *their*. It is not *personal*. It's "common".

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007m.html#15 Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules

slightly related recent posts about looking at software piracy (DRM) in
the mainframe and PC market space
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007b.html#59 Peter Gutmann Rips Windows Vista Content Protection
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm27.htm#9 Enterprise Right Management vs. Traditional Encryption Tools

old email about "new" apple lisa announcement and conjecture about the
processor serial number being used for software licensing (and
piracy countermeasure).
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007b.html#email830213
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007b.html#email830213b
in this recent post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007b.html#56 old lisa info

part of the mainframe was being able to show in court that something out
of the ordinary had to have been done to subvert the licensing
provisions (value was worth taking to court). in the PC case, the value
of individual copy makes it difficult to justify investigation and
bringing to court every individual case.

TPM is the one of the latest in pirarcy countermeasure (as well as
suppose to be countermeasure to software compromises). misc. past
posts mentioning giving an assurance talk in trusted computing
track at intel developers conference
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm5.htm#asrn1 Assurance, e-commerce, and some x9.59
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm21.htm#3 Is there any future for smartcards?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm23.htm#56 UK Detects Chip-And-PIN Security Flaw
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm24.htm#23 Use of TPM chip for RNG?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm24.htm#52 Crypto to defend chip IP: snake oil or good idea?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005g.html#36 Maximum RAM and ROM for smartcards
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#3 The Chinese MD5 attack
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006p.html#48 Device Authentication - The answer to attacks lauched using stolen passwords?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006w.html#37 What does a patent do that copyright does not?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007g.html#61 The Perfect Computer - 36 bits?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007g.html#63 The Perfect Computer - 36 bits?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007l.html#42 My Dream PC -- Chip-Based
Patrick O'Keefe
2007-06-11 19:56:13 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:16:16 +0800, Clem Clarke
<***@OZEMAIL.COM.AU> wrote:

>...
>It's a shame, but unless IBM does do a big rethink on this, and allows
>small developers some sort of inexpensive or free access to the
>mainframes, they will die. ...

Ah. A new slogon for IBM comes to mind. "ReTHINK". Maybe even
glossy periodical with that name.

But I suspect we will not see that.

Pat O'Keefe

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Ted MacNEIL
2007-06-11 20:00:33 UTC
Permalink
>"ReTHINK".

Or, "ReTHWIM".

I think, as a 50-year-old mainfraimer, sinking is going to be the main stream!
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Dave Kopischke
2007-06-11 20:30:43 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:49:07 -0400, Tim Hare wrote:

>What if they were allowed to sell us a single OS license that included
>everything we needed to run our apps, including CICS, WebSphere, and DB2,
>and they priced it for what z/OS goes for now? Would our bean counters be
>happy?
>

Your bean counters might appreciate that, but it does little to address the
long term problem or need. In my opinion, the hobbiest license or training
subsidies are intended to address the long term viability of the platform. Not
satisfy some revenue plan. And yes, I know this is an important piece of the
puzzle, but how much revenue do you book from a product you can't sell ???

The number one priority of IBM in this area should be to ensure as many
people as possible have cheap and easy access to training and educational
material on the z Server. Nothing less will suffice.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Steve Comstock
2007-06-11 20:33:15 UTC
Permalink
Dave Kopischke wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:49:07 -0400, Tim Hare wrote:
>
>
>>What if they were allowed to sell us a single OS license that included
>>everything we needed to run our apps, including CICS, WebSphere, and DB2,
>>and they priced it for what z/OS goes for now? Would our bean counters be
>>happy?
>>
>
>
> Your bean counters might appreciate that, but it does little to address the
> long term problem or need. In my opinion, the hobbiest license or training
> subsidies are intended to address the long term viability of the platform. Not
> satisfy some revenue plan. And yes, I know this is an important piece of the
> puzzle, but how much revenue do you book from a product you can't sell ???
>
> The number one priority of IBM in this area should be to ensure as many
> people as possible have cheap and easy access to training and educational
> material on the z Server. Nothing less will suffice.

I'm with you. Except for the "cheap" part, of course.<g>


Kind regards,

-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.

303-393-8716
http://www.trainersfriend.com

z/OS Application development made easier
* Our classes include
+ How things work
+ Programming examples with realistic applications
+ Starter / skeleton code
+ Complete working programs
+ Useful utilities and subroutines
+ Tips and techniques

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Paul Gilmartin
2007-06-11 21:40:39 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:45:13 -0400, Craddock, Chris <***@CA.COM> wrote:

>Lindy Mayfield asks
>
>I would say that practically all large customers are about as legal as
>they can possibly be and that there are strong external factors that
>drive them to behave that way. SOX here and corporate legal/accounting
>restrictions in many overseas markets make it fairly unlikely that
>customers in typical "western world" jurisdictions will intentionally
>stiff their providers.
>
I once asked a certain employer, "Is it our policy to pay requested
shareware license fees?"

"No, because there is no legal commitment for the supplier to provide
support."

I refrained from asking the parallel question, "Is it our policy
when employees expense restaurant meals to pay a customary gratuity?
If there's a difference, what is the social or ethical rationale
for it?"

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Dave Kopischke
2007-06-11 21:51:34 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 14:32:11 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote:
>
>I'm with you. Except for the "cheap" part, of course.<g>
>

Maybe a more precise word to use would be "affordable" ??? ;) But what I
think is affordable is probably not what others think is affordable.

If it were up to me, I'd do more to keep you busy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Steve Thompson
2007-06-12 13:36:54 UTC
Permalink
Lindy Mayfield asks

> Would you agree, though, that mainframe users tend much more to be
legal
> than personal users?

I would say that practically all large customers are about as legal as they
can possibly be and that there are strong external factors that drive them
to behave that way. SOX here and corporate legal/accounting restrictions in
many overseas markets make it fairly unlikely that customers in typical
"western world" jurisdictions will intentionally stiff their providers.

Accidental discrepancies are another matter, but overall I don't see it as a
huge black hole sucking money out of the business. Of course I don't have
anything to do with how licensing is done, so my opinion is irrelevant. I'd
love to see a hobbyist license for many things, but they are extremely
unlikely to show up any time soon (if at all)
<SNIP>
Interesting, it has been found that companies, publicly held, that have done
things to defeat the usage limitations of a product. Specifically, a usage
based license is offered. So these entities obtained a usage based license
and then they figure out a way to violate the license. It was only by an
audit that they were caught. They found a way to interfere with the product
so they were able to run as many copies as they wanted. They didn't prevent
SMF records from being written, they actually intefered with the product.

Mind you, they wanted a usage based license, then they found a way to
violate the terms of the license.

There are other companies that I've worked for as a sysprog under contract.
They are not as fastidious about mainframe software licenses as you might
think. They are actually more afraid of a Microsoft software audit than any
other platform. So if I, as a contractor, will not violate the contract,
they will have one of their people take over the install...

What this means is, SOX, and all the others (USofA or outside) can all be
explained away -- you actually have a contract, but the terms are being
violated.

So please, complain all you want about keys and the like. The problems
caused by some few cause a PIA for everyone (including developers who have
to figure out how to put that "asset protection" code into a product).

To the patent issue: Patents are OK as long as they are for new technical
development and not business processes. Again, not for new implementation of
an old idea -- things done with CICS or IMS DB/DC now done using IE. That
just kinda fails the obviousness test from where I sit. But having been in a
court on an IP case opened my eyes to the amount of abuse of the patent
process, and I think in many cases because it is known that the US PTO won't
even know how to challenge them.

Regards,
Steve Thompson

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
shmuel+ (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.)
2007-06-18 19:40:27 UTC
Permalink
In <LISTSERV%***@BAMA.UA.EDU>, on 06/12/2007
at 08:36 AM, Steve Thompson <***@STERCOMM.COM> said:

>To the patent issue: Patents are OK as long as they are for new
>technical development and not business processes.

IMHO, patents are desirable only to the extent that USPTO is familiar
with prior art and able to recognize what is obvious to practitioners.
As soon as the USPTO grants patents that don't satisfy the legal
requirements and relies on the courts to resolve issues that they
should have dealt with, then the patents cause more harm than good.
That's true whether the patents are for business processes, hardware
or software.

>But having been in a court on an IP case opened my eyes to the
>amount of abuse of the patent process,

The supremes are starting to notice as well.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Howard Brazee
2007-06-18 20:08:58 UTC
Permalink
On 18 Jun 2007 12:40:27 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:

>>To the patent issue: Patents are OK as long as they are for new
>>technical development and not business processes.
>
>IMHO, patents are desirable only to the extent that USPTO is familiar
>with prior art and able to recognize what is obvious to practitioners.

Patents are desirable when they contribute to the welfare of the
people. This happens when innovation is nurtured, wealth is created,
and/or problems reduced - to a greater extent than their expenses.

There have always been some occasions when patents have been used to
get rid of competition or to make free money. But our environment is
changing, when you need a team of lawyers to tell you how many clicks
someone needs to buy a product on your web page, the costs are greater
than the benefit to society.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Kenneth E Tomiak
2007-06-12 17:11:15 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:58:06 -0500, McKown, John
<***@HEALTHMARKETS.COM> wrote:

>
><snip>
>
>
>And what about people who develop alternative software? If SDSF is free,
>then what happens to EJES? If DB2 is free, then what happens to Oracle
>and other RDMSes that run on z/OS? If RMM were free, then what about
>CA-1? And so on down the line.
>

If the for-a-fee product is head and shoulders better than the free software,
someone will buy it. And sometimes, like Windows versus Linux, having the
stigma of supported is enough for people to pay for it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Alan Altmark
2007-06-12 17:14:06 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:32:57 +0200, Lindy Mayfield
<***@SSF.SAS.COM> wrote:
>
>I'd really like to know what IBM's stand on this really is.

People who want to develop commercial software for z/OS, z/VM, and z/VSE
need to become members of PartnerWorld for Development (PWD). The
whole purpose of PWD is to promote the development of products on our
platforms. PWD is the "channel" that provides goods and services for
developers, including highly-discounted software (up to 100%) and advance
copies of new software.

If PWD doesn't provide you with what you need, then you have someone to
hear your concerns. Someone who is tasked with addressing your concerns,
even if the answer is "No" or "Not at this time."

Unlike some other parts of IBM, PWD understands that ISV concerns are not
really about technology, they're about business. PWD knows that ISVs need a
cost-effective way to develop software for the mainframe or else you don't
have a viable business model. And if *anyone* in IBM is going to provide
software developers with that, it will be PWD.

While it would be great if PWD were represented here on IBM-MAIN, it isn't.
They have their own communications channels with members.

Finally, I'm sorry, but and we (IBM) aren't going to get drawn into a debate
about licenses , terms & conditions, or what IBM will or won't, should or
shouldn't do to protect its business interests. As you might imagine, that's an
incredibly dangerous minefield. It all comes under the heading of "legal
stuff", where one unintentional wrong word could cost the company a ton of
money. It just not worth losing our jobs over. Really.

Alan Altmark
IBM

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
David Andrews
2007-06-12 18:00:39 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 12:13 -0500, Alan Altmark wrote:
> Finally, I'm sorry, but and we (IBM) aren't going to get drawn into a debate
> about licenses , terms & conditions, or what IBM will or won't, should or
> shouldn't do to protect its business interests. As you might imagine, that's an
> incredibly dangerous minefield. It all comes under the heading of "legal
> stuff", where one unintentional wrong word could cost the company a ton of
> money. It just not worth losing our jobs over. Really.

Chuckie's never around when we need him...

--
David Andrews
A. Duda and Sons, Inc.
***@duda.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Lindy Mayfield
2007-06-12 18:29:28 UTC
Permalink
That makes total sense to me, Alan.

Do you know, then, if Flex (or any equivalent) with the ADCD set is still available for PWD members?

Lindy

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:14 PM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:32:57 +0200, Lindy Mayfield
<***@SSF.SAS.COM> wrote:
>
>I'd really like to know what IBM's stand on this really is.

People who want to develop commercial software for z/OS, z/VM, and z/VSE
need to become members of PartnerWorld for Development (PWD). The
whole purpose of PWD is to promote the development of products on our
platforms. PWD is the "channel" that provides goods and services for
developers, including highly-discounted software (up to 100%) and advance
copies of new software.

If PWD doesn't provide you with what you need, then you have someone to
hear your concerns. Someone who is tasked with addressing your concerns,
even if the answer is "No" or "Not at this time."

Unlike some other parts of IBM, PWD understands that ISV concerns are not
really about technology, they're about business. PWD knows that ISVs need a
cost-effective way to develop software for the mainframe or else you don't
have a viable business model. And if *anyone* in IBM is going to provide
software developers with that, it will be PWD.

While it would be great if PWD were represented here on IBM-MAIN, it isn't.
They have their own communications channels with members.

Finally, I'm sorry, but and we (IBM) aren't going to get drawn into a debate
about licenses , terms & conditions, or what IBM will or won't, should or
shouldn't do to protect its business interests. As you might imagine, that's an
incredibly dangerous minefield. It all comes under the heading of "legal
stuff", where one unintentional wrong word could cost the company a ton of
money. It just not worth losing our jobs over. Really.

Alan Altmark
IBM

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Kirk Wolf
2007-06-12 19:23:04 UTC
Permalink
My $0.02:

1) The fully z instruction set should be fully documented in the POP,
and OEM vendors or emulators should be free to implement it. IBM
should provide a "reference implementation" in the form of contributing
to the open source Hercules project. IMO, it is no coincidence that
IBM's mainframe business was strongest when there was a competitive PCM
market. No more.

2) PWD should license z Series operating systems to members at no cost
with the current restrictions, but allow them to be executed on any
machine or emulator up to a certain MSU rating. The program should be
extended to allow Universities and students access to the program.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Craddock, Chris
2007-06-12 19:39:15 UTC
Permalink
Kirk said

> 1) The fully z instruction set should be fully documented in the POP,
> and OEM vendors or emulators should be free to implement it.

Most of the instructions are documented in PoPs, but some very
significant ones are NOT. Obvious missing examples include DIAGNOSE and
SIE, but there are several others and there's also a larger set of I/O
related functionality that goes well beyond just the instruction set
architecture.

These were previously made available under license to 3rd parties and
even then, the licensed materials were not and are not complete
descriptions and in some cases not even accurate!

Availability of those materials has been tightened significantly in
recent years and in some cases they have license charges attached. If
you had the information already you might get a break on the updates,
but getting your hands on them from scratch is like pulling teeth (I
know from first hand experience)

As an editorial comment, I and a couple of other ISV folks proposed the
idea to IBM that they should provide a software interface for vendor use
and that -IF- we had such an interface we would no longer require access
to the licensed materials and IBM could withdraw them. After an initial
blush of interest that idea also appears to have disappeared into the
IBM black hole because it would have required (a little) development
effort which was not in anyone's plans. "Oh well".

> IBM should provide a "reference implementation" in the form of
contributing
> to the open source Hercules project.

Yeah that'll happen in our lifetimes...

:-(

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
shmuel+ (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.)
2007-06-18 19:40:38 UTC
Permalink
In <***@USILMS11.ca.com>, on
06/12/2007
at 03:39 PM, "Craddock, Chris" <***@CA.COM> said:

>Most of the instructions are documented in PoPs, but some very
>significant ones are NOT. Obvious missing examples include DIAGNOSE
>and SIE,

At one time there was an unlicensed manual for SIE. It may still
exist, but it does not include the latest features.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Lindy Mayfield
2007-06-12 21:22:40 UTC
Permalink
I agree with you wholeheartedly.

I think a "machine" that runs z/OS software, uses emulation on x86 machines for cost savings, and intended for developers and such is a wonderful idea.

It never felt right for me to think of running z/OS software and "production business applications" on an x86 box instead of on IBM hardware.

I would love to see IBM create their own Hercules-like emulator and make it available to PWM members for PWM purposes: education, development, etc.

I've really no problem with Funsoft, just their exclusive deal in this matter with PWM members. 30+ large can be a lot of lettuce. (-:

Lindy

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Kirk Wolf
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:23 PM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules

My $0.02:

2) PWD should license z Series operating systems to members at no cost
with the current restrictions, but allow them to be executed on any
machine or emulator up to a certain MSU rating. The program should be
extended to allow Universities and students access to the program.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Dean Kent
2007-06-12 19:56:02 UTC
Permalink
"Alan Altmark" <***@US.IBM.COM> wrote in message
news:LISTSERV%***@BAMA.UA.EDU...
> People who want to develop commercial software for z/OS, z/VM, and z/VSE
> need to become members of PartnerWorld for Development (PWD). The
> whole purpose of PWD is to promote the development of products on our
> platforms. PWD is the "channel" that provides goods and services for
> developers, including highly-discounted software (up to 100%) and advance
> copies of new software.
>

PWD is for businesses, not hobbyists or students, or people who just want to
tinker. Inventors are not always business people (and vice-versa).
Therefore, PWD is really not the answer to the question that was posed.

I think the attempted point is - how does one go from being a
hobbyist/student/individual inventor to a commercial developer (ISV) in the
mainframe world? There is no avenue for this, at present. The *only*
route is to work for an established business. This takes us back to the
question about hobbyists and inventors - who are not the best candidates for
existing commercial development companies that want 'efficient coders', not
inventors.

Just my two cents...

Regards,
Dean

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Ray Mullins
2007-06-12 21:06:56 UTC
Permalink
I have to second Dean's question. I've got a couple of ideas, one of which
I'm prototyping on Windows to get the architecture and design down
(eventually to move on to other OSes), and the other I'm using Don Higgins'
z390 product for basic testing. But when I want to write I/O routines for
z/VSE (one of the eventual targets - z/OS is not a target because the
capability already exists there), I'm screwed. I'd actually like access to
z/OS for research purposes, but I can't afford $10K/month.

Possible alternatives would be companies like MacKinney and Rocket, but (and
rightly so) they'd like an actual product to exist before marketing, etc.
And I don't think I could find a company that would allow me to use their
software for cheap (or free), even in exchange for a no-license charge.

And z/VSE (and z/VM) seem to be completely off the PWD radar.

Later,
Ray

--
M. Ray Mullins
Roseville, CA, USA
http://www.catherdersoftware.com/
http://www.mrmullins.big-bear-city.ca.us/


> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of Dean Kent
> Sent: Tuesday 12 June 2007 12:51
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
> "Alan Altmark" <***@US.IBM.COM> wrote in message
> news:LISTSERV%***@BAMA.UA.EDU...
> > People who want to develop commercial software for z/OS, z/VM, and z/VSE
> > need to become members of PartnerWorld for Development (PWD). The
> > whole purpose of PWD is to promote the development of products on our
> > platforms. PWD is the "channel" that provides goods and services for
> > developers, including highly-discounted software (up to 100%) and
> advance
> > copies of new software.
> >
>
> PWD is for businesses, not hobbyists or students, or people who just want
> to
> tinker. Inventors are not always business people (and vice-versa).
> Therefore, PWD is really not the answer to the question that was posed.
>
> I think the attempted point is - how does one go from being a
> hobbyist/student/individual inventor to a commercial developer (ISV) in
> the
> mainframe world? There is no avenue for this, at present. The *only*
> route is to work for an established business. This takes us back to the
> question about hobbyists and inventors - who are not the best candidates
> for
> existing commercial development companies that want 'efficient coders',
> not
> inventors.
>
> Just my two cents...
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Ray Mullins
2007-06-12 21:10:54 UTC
Permalink
Oops, correction...

> z/OS for research purposes, but I can't afford -> $1K <- /month.

Was thinking $12K/year.

--
M. Ray Mullins
Roseville, CA, USA
http://www.catherdersoftware.com/
http://www.mrmullins.big-bear-city.ca.us/


> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of Ray Mullins
> Sent: Tuesday 12 June 2007 14:06
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
> I have to second Dean's question. I've got a couple of ideas, one of
> which
> I'm prototyping on Windows to get the architecture and design down
> (eventually to move on to other OSes), and the other I'm using Don
> Higgins'
> z390 product for basic testing. But when I want to write I/O routines for
> z/VSE (one of the eventual targets - z/OS is not a target because the
> capability already exists there), I'm screwed. I'd actually like access
> to
>
> Possible alternatives would be companies like MacKinney and Rocket, but
> (and
> rightly so) they'd like an actual product to exist before marketing, etc.
> And I don't think I could find a company that would allow me to use their
> software for cheap (or free), even in exchange for a no-license charge.
>
> And z/VSE (and z/VM) seem to be completely off the PWD radar.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Farley, Peter x23353
2007-06-12 18:28:08 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of Alan Altmark
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 1:14 PM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
<Snipped>
> If PWD doesn't provide you with what you need, then you have someone to
> hear your concerns. Someone who is tasked with addressing your concerns,
> even if the answer is "No" or "Not at this time."

And this is the problem at this time. A friend who *had* a licensed PWD
Thinkpad/Flex system found that her license expired and now she can't even
IPL the system. And the least expensive "remote" option is many more
dollars than she can afford, and many, many more dollars than the FLEX
solution.

IBM is shutting out the small ISV community entirely, and PWD *will not*
address it. That's why there is so much noise about it, no one can get a
reasonable answer from PWD.

> It just not worth losing our jobs over. Really.

Understood. You should not be asked to risk your job when it is PWD and the
lawyers and Armonk-think that are the problem-causers.

Thanks for chiming in nonetheless.

Peter

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and
may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the
message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any
attachments from your system.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Chase, John
2007-06-12 20:16:01 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Alan Altmark
> <Snipped>
> > If PWD doesn't provide you with what you need, then you have someone
to
> > hear your concerns. Someone who is tasked with addressing your
concerns,
> > even if the answer is "No" or "Not at this time."
>
> And this is the problem at this time. A friend who *had* a
> licensed PWD Thinkpad/Flex system found that her license
> expired and now she can't even IPL the system. And the least
> expensive "remote" option is many more dollars than she can
> afford, and many, many more dollars than the FLEX solution.
>
> IBM is shutting out the small ISV community entirely, and PWD
> *will not* address it. That's why there is so much noise
> about it, no one can get a reasonable answer from PWD.

Indeed, some recent TV commercials for a US bank touting small-business
loans appears to depict the situation rather succinctly.........

-jc-

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Timothy Sipples
2007-06-13 05:58:51 UTC
Permalink
Kirk Wolf writes:
>IMO, it is no coincidence that IBM's mainframe business
>was strongest when there was a competitive PCM market.

Is this true ("...strongest when...")? What about most of the 1990s? Just
asking. There's certainly a hyper-competitive business server market
today. I think that's been wonderful for mainframe technology progress and
for consumers.

I agree with Alan that IBM PWD is the go-to team for ISV support and
cultivation. However, let's be crystal clear: there's zero impediment that
I can see for basement tinkerers/inventors to create wonderful products for
the IBM mainframe.... when it's running Linux. At the risk of crossing
Alan's recommended line -- coming up to the edge with a personal
opinion/question here -- is Linux an appropriate "bootstrap" business
strategy for cash-poor but idea-rich BT/Is who ultimately want to expand to
the z/OS, z/VSE, z/VM, and/or z/TPF markets? Does Linux entry get them the
$1,000 U.S. per month (if that's what it is) from a venture capitalist,
from regular cash flow, or from other revenue sources to expand?

If there's a cogent argument why not, PWD needs to know and consider it.
Alan's right: it won't be solved in this forum.

Back indirectly to Kirk's point: in the fondly remembered yesteryear --
let's pick the 1970s as an example -- how much did BT/Is pay for MVS time
(in 1970s inflation-adjusted dollars)? As another data point (just for
fun), according to press reports the Sony Playstation 3 development kit has
a price tag somewhere between $30,000 and $50,000 U.S., and that does not
include the royalties Sony collects on every game disc you sell. That's
for a game that might have a sales life of a few months (if you're lucky),
not for access to, say, the world financial industry's data processing
software market for years or decades.

But if PWD needs to do better -- entirely possible -- is everyone sending
their good arguments to PWD?

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: ***@us.ibm.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Steve Comstock
2007-06-13 11:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Timothy Sipples wrote:
> Kirk Wolf writes:
>
>>IMO, it is no coincidence that IBM's mainframe business
>>was strongest when there was a competitive PCM market.
>
>
> Is this true ("...strongest when...")? What about most of the 1990s? Just
> asking. There's certainly a hyper-competitive business server market
> today. I think that's been wonderful for mainframe technology progress and
> for consumers.
>
> I agree with Alan that IBM PWD is the go-to team for ISV support and
> cultivation. However, let's be crystal clear: there's zero impediment that
> I can see for basement tinkerers/inventors to create wonderful products for
> the IBM mainframe.... when it's running Linux. At the risk of crossing
> Alan's recommended line -- coming up to the edge with a personal
> opinion/question here -- is Linux an appropriate "bootstrap" business
> strategy for cash-poor but idea-rich BT/Is who ultimately want to expand to
> the z/OS, z/VSE, z/VM, and/or z/TPF markets? Does Linux entry get them the
> $1,000 U.S. per month (if that's what it is) from a venture capitalist,
> from regular cash flow, or from other revenue sources to expand?

And your Linux products port to z/OS how? Oh, they don't. They
port to Linux on z. [BTW, I learned that the term "zLinux" is
actually copyrighted by some non-IBM company, and they are
pretty agressive in maintaining that copyright.]

It seems to me that IBM has pretty clearly shown their only long
term interest in z is to run Linux there. It's easier to sell than
z/OS, seems more modern and open source-y. The danger here is that
z becomes a commodity. How is z differentiated when its running
Linux? And where does that leave z/OS, the so-called "flagship
operating system"?

>
> If there's a cogent argument why not, PWD needs to know and consider it..
> Alan's right: it won't be solved in this forum.
>
> Back indirectly to Kirk's point: in the fondly remembered yesteryear --
> let's pick the 1970s as an example -- how much did BT/Is pay for MVS time
> (in 1970s inflation-adjusted dollars)? As another data point (just for
> fun), according to press reports the Sony Playstation 3 development kit has
> a price tag somewhere between $30,000 and $50,000 U.S., and that does not
> include the royalties Sony collects on every game disc you sell. That's
> for a game that might have a sales life of a few months (if you're lucky),
> not for access to, say, the world financial industry's data processing
> software market for years or decades.

It's gaming. It's not business. [Well, actually, gaming _is_ big
business these days. A Colorado University recently changed its
IS program to allow for a master's in game design.]

>
> But if PWD needs to do better -- entirely possible -- is everyone sending
> their good arguments to PWD?
>
> - - - - -
> Timothy Sipples
> IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
> Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
> Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
> E-Mail: ***@us.ibm.com


Kind regards,

-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.

303-393-8716
http://www.trainersfriend.com

z/OS Application development made easier
* Our classes include
+ How things work
+ Programming examples with realistic applications
+ Starter / skeleton code
+ Complete working programs
+ Useful utilities and subroutines
+ Tips and techniques

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Alan Altmark
2007-06-13 06:06:56 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:51:12 -0700, Dean Kent
<***@REALWORLDTECH.COM> wrote:

>PWD is for businesses, not hobbyists or students, or people who just want to
>tinker. Inventors are not always business people (and vice-versa).
>Therefore, PWD is really not the answer to the question that was posed.

Sorry if I misinterpreted the thread. IBM has never (IMO) been particularly
interested in courting hobbyists. I know this is disappointing, but there is a
certain amount of risk and a certain amount of benefit. TPTB have
determined that there is insufficient benefit, so no go.

>I think the attempted point is - how does one go from being a
>hobbyist/student/individual inventor to a commercial developer (ISV) in the
>mainframe world? There is no avenue for this, at present. The *only*
>route is to work for an established business. This takes us back to the
>question about hobbyists and inventors - who are not the best candidates for
>existing commercial development companies that want 'efficient coders', not
>inventors.

No avenue in what way? PWD allows for "Developing Products" in addition
to "Current Products". As long as you're actually in *business* to make and
sell a product (even if your seller is a business partner), PWD is the right
choice.

Alan Altmark
IBM

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Jeffrey D. Smith
2007-06-13 13:58:45 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of Alan Altmark
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 12:07 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:51:12 -0700, Dean Kent
> <***@REALWORLDTECH.COM> wrote:
>
/snip/
>
> No avenue in what way? PWD allows for "Developing Products" in addition
> to "Current Products". As long as you're actually in *business* to make
> and
> sell a product (even if your seller is a business partner), PWD is the
> right
> choice.
>
> Alan Altmark
> IBM

With all due respect, PWD has not and will not resolve FLEX-ES issue. There
are many *BUSINESSES* that are dependent on FLEX-ES for their SURVIVAL.

Therefore, we are STILL WAITING for you to say something SUBSTANTIVE about
PWD delivering a cost-effective solution in the ABSENCE of FLEX-ES.

*expletive deleted*

Jeffrey D. Smith
Principal Product Architect
Farsight Systems Corporation
700 KEN PRATT BLVD. #204-159
LONGMONT, CO 80501-6452
303-774-9381 direct
303-484-6170 FAX
http://www.farsight-systems.com/
see my résumé at my website (yes, I am looking for employment)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Dean Kent
2007-06-13 15:05:42 UTC
Permalink
"Alan Altmark" <***@US.IBM.COM> wrote in message
news:LISTSERV%***@BAMA.UA.EDU...
>
> Sorry if I misinterpreted the thread. IBM has never (IMO) been
particularly
> interested in courting hobbyists. I know this is disappointing, but there
is a
> certain amount of risk and a certain amount of benefit. TPTB have
> determined that there is insufficient benefit, so no go.

It sounds to me like the wording that is causing a barrier to communication.
My definition of 'hobbyist' seems a bit looser than yours (or IBMs).

What do you call people who are interested in learning (more) about
technology with an eye towards making money at it, but have no immediate
means to gain access to it? What do you call someone who has a certain
expertise, but can't use company knowledge/resources if he/she wants to
*attempt* to start up a business? Traditionally, this would be schools.
When I went to school, the local community college had a mainframe so for a
relatively minor cost I could get access. My perception is that today, one
must have the ability to spend tens of thousands per year at a University,
from a private training company or to lease time. This is to enter a job
market that is perceived to be shrinking and in danger of dying out
completely, so the incentive/ability to spend a lot of money is not there
fore *new* entrants (I don't believe VCs are hot on the mainframe business,
are they?). Is this an incorrect perception?

I also recall a time when an independent developer would exchange a promise
of future access to a product for time on the mainframe. Does that happen
anymore? Perhaps the entire mainframe mentality has changed over the past
40 years? Maybe IBM is not the only entity that has limited the access to
the resources, and it has happened so gradually that we haven't noticed how
tight and 'businesslike' the mainframe mentality has become?

>
> No avenue in what way? PWD allows for "Developing Products" in addition
> to "Current Products". As long as you're actually in *business* to make
and
> sell a product (even if your seller is a business partner), PWD is the
right
> choice.

IIRC, to be eligible for the FLEX-ES system (or whatever may replace it) one
has to have a business plan and a product to be delivered in 12 months.
This means that one already has to have:

1) A design
2) Technical expertise to implement the design
3) A marketing study
4) Several tens of thousands of dollars that can be invested

While this is not unreasonable for an existing business, it makes things
difficult for an individual either just entering the workforce (read: young
entrepreneurs), just leaving the traditional workforce (read: retiring
professionals), or working on the side in the garage (read: startup ventures
in not-so-hot areas of technology). If PWD is the proper channel for these
people, then I stand corrected.

I am thinking that easy access to the technology is the key to technology
booms, such as the microcomputer and Linux (amongst others). I'm curious -
are there any readers of this list who are members of PWD, but not
associated with the company they work for (or are part of)? IOW, are
there any 'independent' developers in PWD that don't already have a product
on the market? Are there any people here who joined PWD with only a
business plan, and no existing product, and used that as the avenue to
develop a product?

Regards,
Dean

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Sebastian Welton
2007-06-13 13:02:16 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:13:50 -0500, Alan Altmark <***@US.IBM.COM>
wrote:

>People who want to develop commercial software for z/OS, z/VM, and z/VSE
>need to become members of PartnerWorld for Development (PWD). The
>whole purpose of PWD is to promote the development of products on our
>platforms. PWD is the "channel" that provides goods and services for
>developers, including highly-discounted software (up to 100%) and advance
>copies of new software.
>
>If PWD doesn't provide you with what you need, then you have someone to
>hear your concerns. Someone who is tasked with addressing your concerns,
>even if the answer is "No" or "Not at this time."
>
>Unlike some other parts of IBM, PWD understands that ISV concerns are not
>really about technology, they're about business. PWD knows that ISVs need a
>cost-effective way to develop software for the mainframe or else you don't
>have a viable business model. And if *anyone* in IBM is going to provide
>software developers with that, it will be PWD.

Not really cost effective anymore when you see the following on the website:

<quote>
Please note: The FLEX-ES systems are not currently available.
</quote>

As it stands it seems you've either got to buy yourself a z9 with all the
associated hardware, etc. or use the remote development program (which for
some reason doesn't support zVSE or zTPF but does support zVM, zOS and
zLinux) which still costs a pretty packet and could, in certain
circumstances, be pretty restrictive.

Seb.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Tony Harminc
2007-06-13 14:56:21 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:58:19 +0900, Timothy Sipples
<***@US.IBM.COM> wrote:

>Back indirectly to Kirk's point: in the fondly remembered yesteryear --
>let's pick the 1970s as an example -- how much did BT/Is pay for MVS time
>(in 1970s inflation-adjusted dollars)?

Mostly $0. The common practice in the 1970s was to trade product and/or
consulting for mainframe access. I knew lots of people who spent many happy
nights in various datacentres running their compiles, and testing their
products.

As a customer for several of these tiny ISVs, I well remember the product
tapes would often enough come from a different place each time - wherever
the developer could scrounge cycles. At least a couple of these efforts are
now very well known, products owned by the likes of CA and other mainstream
vendors.

Even into the late 1980s it was possible for the proverbial "two guys in a
garage" to design and build mainframe software using this model, and sell it
to Fortune 500 companies.

Tony H.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Tom Moulder
2007-06-13 15:16:44 UTC
Permalink
Tony Harminc wrote:
>
>
> Even into the late 1980s it was possible for the proverbial "two guys in a
> garage" to design and build mainframe software using this model, and sell it
> to Fortune 500 companies.
>
> Tony H.
>
BMC Software, Inc. is a large ISV today, but did not have its own
mainframe until August of 1982. I know because I installed it for them.

You are absolutely correct Tony, this is just one example. Before that,
computer time and access were bartered for use of the software at no
cost prior to installing a CPU.

By the way, the first machine was a 4341 Model Group 2 with 2MB of
memory. It supported an average of 75 logged on TSO users, 6 CICS
subsystems (pre-MRO, etc.), and 5 IMS Control Regions. Of course the
production work in all of those subsystems was the development of
software. It was not like a corporate production system since all of
the data was contained on 8 3350 volumes.

By the way, there were not 75 developers at BMC in this time frame, but
every developer had multiple TSO ID's that were almost all logged on all
the time since this was before session managers.

Tom Moulder

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Craddock, Chris
2007-06-13 16:32:16 UTC
Permalink
Tom Moulder reminiscing...
> By the way, there were not 75 developers at BMC in this time frame,
but
> every developer had multiple TSO ID's that were almost all logged on
all
> the time since this was before session managers.

Ah the good old days! Oddly enough even with session managers, this is
still the way most people work. Only today the number of sessions per
user is probably up to 4 or more. I routinely had 5 or 6 going a lot of
the time - a couple of windows looking at source and listings, at least
one in XDC, a couple more pointing at bookmangler... it is pretty easy
to rack up big numbers of sessions and also pretty easy to step on your
own toes.

CC

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Ed Gould
2007-06-14 02:42:11 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 13, 2007, at 9:56 AM, Tony Harminc wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:58:19 +0900, Timothy Sipples
> <***@US.IBM.COM> wrote:
>
>> Back indirectly to Kirk's point: in the fondly remembered
>> yesteryear --
>> let's pick the 1970s as an example -- how much did BT/Is pay for
>> MVS time
>> (in 1970s inflation-adjusted dollars)?
>
> Mostly $0. The common practice in the 1970s was to trade product
> and/or
> consulting for mainframe access. I knew lots of people who spent
> many happy
> nights in various datacentres running their compiles, and testing
> their
> products.
>
> As a customer for several of these tiny ISVs, I well remember the
> product
> tapes would often enough come from a different place each time -
> wherever
> the developer could scrounge cycles. At least a couple of these
> efforts are
> now very well known, products owned by the likes of CA and other
> mainstream
> vendors.
>
> Even into the late 1980s it was possible for the proverbial "two
> guys in a
> garage" to design and build mainframe software using this model,
> and sell it
> to Fortune 500 companies.
>
Tony:

Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all
I know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM (at that time it was
just HSM). We were in Chicago and he used to fly into here from the
west coast to test on our MVS system (this was in the 70's). He was
able to get his product to work under MVS and then presented our
management with a bill. I had no idea what was going on as we had no
plan on purchasing the product (asm2???) and I took him and the bill
to my management and introduced them to each other and explained what
was going on (not that I knew). I left the meeting as I hadn't a clue
to who agreed with what. The vendor was shown the door in short
fashion and we never heard from the vendor again.

Ed

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Lester, Bob
2007-06-14 15:03:55 UTC
Permalink
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Bruce Black
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 8:38 AM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules

> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all I

> know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then Brightstore
CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think there was an
intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.

Before it was bought by CA, it was DMS from Sterling Software which
(used to be) the same Company (now Sterling Commerce) that markets NDM
(now Connect:Direct). Whew!

BobL
Rusty
2007-06-14 15:19:47 UTC
Permalink
Um, ASM2 and DMS/OS were distinctively different products.

--
Rusty

"Lester, Bob" <***@OPPENHEIMERFUNDS.COM> wrote in message
news:***@DEN-XMAIL01.den.ofi.com...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Bruce Black
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 8:38 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
>> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all I
>
>> know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
> ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then Brightstore
> CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think there was an
> intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.
>
> Before it was bought by CA, it was DMS from Sterling Software which
> (used to be) the same Company (now Sterling Commerce) that markets NDM
> (now Connect:Direct). Whew!
>
> BobL
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This e-mail transmission may contain information that is proprietary,
> privileged and/or confidential and is intended exclusively for the
> person(s) to whom it is addressed. Any use, copying, retention or
> disclosure by any person other than the intended recipient or the intended
> recipient's designees is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient or their designee, please notify the sender immediately by
> return e-mail and delete all copies. OppenheimerFunds may, at its sole
> discretion, monitor, review, retain and/or disclose the content of all
> email communications.
> ==============================================================================
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
> Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Ed Gould
2007-06-15 02:07:10 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 14, 2007, at 10:03 AM, Lester, Bob wrote:
---------------SNIP--------------------

>
>> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for
>> all I
>
>> know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
> ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then
> Brightstore
> CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think there was an
> intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.
>
> Before it was bought by CA, it was DMS from Sterling Software which
> (used to be) the same Company (now Sterling Commerce) that markets NDM
> (now Connect:Direct). Whew!
>
----------------SNIP-------------

From what I remember (subject to bit droppings) ASM2 used IEHMOVE
under the covers to move the data set. I couldn't believe anyone
would stake their product life on IEHMOVE.

Ed

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Mark Jacobs
2007-06-14 15:04:43 UTC
Permalink
Bruce Black wrote:
>> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all
>> I know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
> ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then
> Brightstore CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think
> there was an intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.
>
ASM2 was owned by SKK (The authors of ACF2) and became CA property when
CA bought SKK.

--
Mark Jacobs
Technical Services
Time Customer Service - Tampa, FL
------
Victory in defeat, there is none higher. She didn't give up, Ben;
she's still trying to lift that stone after it has crushed her.
She's a father going down to a dull office job while cancer is
painfully eating away his insides, so as to bring home one more pay
check for the kids. She's a twelve-year-old girl trying to mother her
baby brothers and sisters because Mama had to go to Heaven. She's a
switchboard operator sticking to her job while smoke is choking her
and the fire is cutting off her escape. She's all the unsung heroes
who couldn't quite cut it but never quit.*

Robert A. Heinlein - Stranger in a Strange Land

*Referring to the Auguste Rodin sculpture, Caryatid Who Has Fallen under Her Stone

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Binyamin Dissen
2007-06-14 15:14:44 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:04:28 -0400 Mark Jacobs <***@CUSTSERV.COM>
wrote:

:>Bruce Black wrote:
:>>> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all
:>>> I know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
:>> ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then
:>> Brightstore CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think
:>> there was an intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.

:>ASM2 was owned by SKK (The authors of ACF2) and became CA property when
:>CA bought SKK.

Not that I know of (and I worked for SKK at the time).

Cambridge marketed both products.

--
Binyamin Dissen <***@dissensoftware.com>
http://www.dissensoftware.com

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 ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Mark Jacobs
2007-06-14 15:31:11 UTC
Permalink
Binyamin Dissen wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:04:28 -0400 Mark Jacobs <***@CUSTSERV.COM>
> wrote:
>
> :>Bruce Black wrote:
> :>>> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all
> :>>> I know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
> :>> ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then
> :>> Brightstore CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think
> :>> there was an intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.
>
> :>ASM2 was owned by SKK (The authors of ACF2) and became CA property when
> :>CA bought SKK.
>
> Not that I know of (and I worked for SKK at the time).
>
> Cambridge marketed both products.
>
>
You are correct, my memory must be going but I do seem to remember an
ASM2 and SKK relationship of some sort.

--
Mark Jacobs
Technical Services
Time Customer Service - Tampa, FL
------
Victory in defeat, there is none higher. She didn't give up, Ben;
she's still trying to lift that stone after it has crushed her.
She's a father going down to a dull office job while cancer is
painfully eating away his insides, so as to bring home one more pay
check for the kids. She's a twelve-year-old girl trying to mother her
baby brothers and sisters because Mama had to go to Heaven. She's a
switchboard operator sticking to her job while smoke is choking her
and the fire is cutting off her escape. She's all the unsung heroes
who couldn't quite cut it but never quit.*

Robert A. Heinlein - Stranger in a Strange Land

*Referring to the Auguste Rodin sculpture, Caryatid Who Has Fallen under Her Stone

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Jeffrey D. Smith
2007-06-14 15:36:26 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of Binyamin Dissen
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 9:15 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:04:28 -0400 Mark Jacobs <***@CUSTSERV.COM>
> wrote:
>
> :>Bruce Black wrote:
> :>>> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all
> :>>> I know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
> :>> ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then
> :>> Brightstore CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think
> :>> there was an intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.
>
> :>ASM2 was owned by SKK (The authors of ACF2) and became CA property when
> :>CA bought SKK.
>
> Not that I know of (and I worked for SKK at the time).
>
> Cambridge marketed both products.
>
> --
> Binyamin Dissen <***@dissensoftware.com>

I was employed by Cambridge Systems Group at the time of the takeover by
UCCEL. As it was explained to me by folks there who seemed to know what
was happening, UCCEL wanted to buy only ACF2, but CSG had (semi-)exclusive
marketing rights to ACF2, ASM2, and ADC2. Due to contractual obligations,
if SKK wanted to sell ACF2, then the buyer also had to buy-out the CSG
products (ASM2 and ADC2).

IIRC, some suits showed up on Monday and huddled in a very small room
for most of the week. On Friday, they came out and fired most of the
CSG personnel. The dismissed personnel had to leave immediately; they
could return for their personal items after they attended a meeting
at a local hotel (I think it was called an "out-placement" meeting). A
local company was hired to handle the dispatching of the fired personnel.

What goes around, comes around. Just about 3 months later CA bought-out
UCCEL, and many UCCEL folks received their pink slips. It seems that CA
was already in private talks with UCCEL for a takeover, but CA had to
wait until the CSG/SKK takeover was complete before CA could proceed
with taking over UCCEL.

I survived the UCCEL takeover, but I quickly went across the street to
Boole & Babbage and got a job there. (Those were the days when MVS
product development jobs were plentiful....sigh...)


Jeffrey D. Smith
Principal Product Architect
Farsight Systems Corporation
700 KEN PRATT BLVD. #204-159
LONGMONT, CO 80501-6452
303-774-9381 direct
303-484-6170 FAX
http://www.farsight-systems.com/
see my résumé at my website (yes, I am looking for employment)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Gregory, Gary G
2007-06-14 18:45:10 UTC
Permalink
If you remember -- shortly after UCCEL acquired ASM2 they killed UCC3.

<< snip >>


I was employed by Cambridge Systems Group at the time of the takeover by
UCCEL. As it was explained to me by folks there who seemed to know what
was happening, UCCEL wanted to buy only ACF2, but CSG had (semi-)exclusive
marketing rights to ACF2, ASM2, and ADC2. Due to contractual obligations,
if SKK wanted to sell ACF2, then the buyer also had to buy-out the CSG
products (ASM2 and ADC2).

IIRC, some suits showed up on Monday and huddled in a very small room
for most of the week. On Friday, they came out and fired most of the
CSG personnel. The dismissed personnel had to leave immediately; they
could return for their personal items after they attended a meeting
at a local hotel (I think it was called an "out-placement" meeting). A
local company was hired to handle the dispatching of the fired personnel.

What goes around, comes around. Just about 3 months later CA bought-out
UCCEL, and many UCCEL folks received their pink slips. It seems that CA
was already in private talks with UCCEL for a takeover, but CA had to
wait until the CSG/SKK takeover was complete before CA could proceed
with taking over UCCEL.

I survived the UCCEL takeover, but I quickly went across the street to
Boole & Babbage and got a job there. (Those were the days when MVS
product development jobs were plentiful....sigh...)


Jeffrey D. Smith
Principal Product Architect
Farsight Systems Corporation
700 KEN PRATT BLVD. #204-159
LONGMONT, CO 80501-6452
303-774-9381 direct
303-484-6170 FAX
http://www.farsight-systems.com/
see my résumé at my website (yes, I am looking for employment)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
2007-06-14 19:23:31 UTC
Permalink
***@ibm-main.lst (Bruce Black) writes:
> ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then
> Brightstore CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think
> there was an intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.

for other folklore ... a couple people that worked on AIX system
management left and formed a company called tivoli. eventually tivoli
was bought up ... and when adstar was sold off ... some of the adstar
software packages (as well as other software products) were moved over
to tivoli ... for instance ADSM (adstar storage management) became TSM
(tivoli storage management).

i had done the original backup/archive implementation in the late 70s
which was deployed at some number of internal datacenters ... and went
thru a number of versions with various other people helping with the
work.

one of the people involved left ... and worked on a number of
backup/archive implementations for other companies ... some of these
other implementations may currently be sold by sterling(?).

my original backup/archive internal implementation first saw product
release as workstation datasave facility which then morphed into ADSM
(before being renamed TSM). some old email on the subject
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#cmsback
and numerous posts mentioning backup/archive
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#backup
Farley, Peter x23353
2007-06-13 15:08:56 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of Alan Altmark
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 2:07 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:51:12 -0700, Dean Kent
> <***@REALWORLDTECH.COM> wrote:
>
> >PWD is for businesses, not hobbyists or students, or people who just want
> >to tinker. Inventors are not always business people (and vice-versa).
> >Therefore, PWD is really not the answer to the question that was posed.
>
> Sorry if I misinterpreted the thread. IBM has never (IMO) been
> particularly interested in courting hobbyists. I know this is
> disappointing, but there is a certain amount of risk and a certain amount
> of benefit. TPTB have determined that there is insufficient benefit, so
> no go.

The OP *did* ask about hobbyist and student licensing, not business, but see
my other comments below for more on *business*.

I do wonder if IBM ever considered that even if *they* did not want the
headache/risk of serving individual hobbyists and students that there just
might be people out in the wide world who would *gladly* set up and run
service and support *businesses* (subscription or fee-for-service) to serve
an active hobbyist/student mainframe community? See RedHat for example.
They don't sell linux, they sell packaging and support of linux.

<rant, which you may ignore completely>
But then again IBM would not think like that, would they -- such a set of
*businesses* are way too small to make anything like *real* money, so they
aren't worth even thinking about.
</rant>

> >I think the attempted point is - how does one go from being a
> >hobbyist/student/individual inventor to a commercial developer (ISV) in
> >the mainframe world? There is no avenue for this, at present. The
> >*only* route is to work for an established business. This takes us back
> >to the question about hobbyists and inventors - who are not the best
> >candidates for existing commercial development companies that want
> >'efficient coders', not inventors.
>
> No avenue in what way? PWD allows for "Developing Products" in addition
> to "Current Products". As long as you're actually in *business* to make
> and sell a product (even if your seller is a business partner), PWD is the
> right choice.

Yes Alan, but PWD is no longer offering AFFORDABLE *business* pricing for
the smaller ISV *businesses*. Check out the price of the rental offerings
(there are NDA's involved) through your internal contacts -- then compare it
to the pricing for a FLEX/ES Thinkpad setup. There is at least an order of
magnitude increase in cost. Small *businesses* cannot afford that kind of
price increase, but there aren't any other alternatives for non-linux
mainframe development.

<rant, which you may ignore completely>
It seems that IBM has once again chosen to abandon small *businesses* (see
abandonment of small VM/VSE shops in the 90's for prior examples), which
IMHO will ultimately lead to its collapse, or at least to the complete
demise of this mainframe business as we have known it all of our
professional lives.
</rant>

Your prior comment about noise in this forum not being the right place to
achieve changes is still correct. That has never stopped IBM-MAIN denizens
from talking/ranting/etc. before, has it? :)

Peter

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and
may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the
message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any
attachments from your system.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Tom Marchant
2007-06-14 15:23:13 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 10:38:04 -0400, Bruce Black wrote:

>> Vary true ... There used to be a product (it may still exist for all I
>> know) that was a competitor to IBM's DFHSM
>ASM2 was eventually acquired by CA and become CA-DISK, then Brightstore
>CA-DISK, and now CA Disk Backup and Restore. I think there was an
>intermediate acquisition that I have forgotten about.


At a previous job, we once used ASM2 to defrag a pack. I don't know what
the error was, but we ended up with a pack with nothing left on it but the
VTOC. We had to restore it from the FDR full volume backup taken before
running the defrag, then we stopped running ASM2. Soon we acquired
FDR/CPK.

--
Tom Marchant

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
shmuel+ (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.)
2007-06-18 19:42:01 UTC
Permalink
In <LISTSERV%***@BAMA.UA.EDU>, on 06/14/2007
at 10:23 AM, Tom Marchant <m42tom-***@YAHOO.COM> said:

>At a previous job, we once used ASM2 to defrag a pack. I don't know
>what the error was, but we ended up with a pack with nothing left on
>it but the VTOC.

Thank you for helping to recover memories that I had hitherto
successfully suppressed. I don't recall the particular symptom that
you had, but the VTOC smash problems were nonetheless painful.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Farley, Peter x23353
2007-06-14 15:41:14 UTC
Permalink
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
> Behalf Of John Eells
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 11:01 AM
> To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
>
> No!
>
> It is far from correct to conclude that, and I'm sure that's not
> at all what Timothy meant. We have a really substantial
> investment in z/OS development spread across several sites
> worldwide. Much of that development has been and continues to be
> for the MVS part of z/OS.

That may not be what Timothy meant, but notice the distinct lack of a path
for BT/I's (to use Timothy's acronym) to develop z/OS programs (i.e., not
java, not web, not unix). That's what the OP was really asking for and
which IBM hasn't and probably won't ever provide (and yes, Alan's comment
that this forum isn't the right place to advocate change in this area is
still true, but...).

IMHO it isn't market expansion that is the issue, it is z/OS developer pool
expansion. IBM's past short-sightedness in allowing universities to abandon
the mainframe reduced the availability of new talent for the developer pool
for years to come. Their further shortsightedness in failing to provide
low- or no-cost options for independent BT/I's to develop on and for z/OS
further reduces the developer pool to only those who already work for
"large" hardware clients, many of whom will retire very soon. And any
development you do on an employer's machine belongs to them unless you get a
specific legal waiver (quite unlikely in this litigious age).

Peter

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and
may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the
message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any
attachments from your system.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Thompson, Steve
2007-06-14 19:28:40 UTC
Permalink
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 1:32 PM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules

>now Sterling Commerce) that markets NDM (now Connect:Direct).

NDM, Connect/Direct & Connect/Enterprise are separate products.
At least, they are keyed separately.
<SNIP>

System Center (or was it Systems Center) had NDM. System Center was
acquired by "Sterling" and renamed Connect:Direct. Sterling Software and
Sterling Commerce became two different entities (I wasn't here at the
time and so don't know all the ins-outs, reasons).

So certain of the products were handled by the Software side and certain
by the Commerce side (or entity). Sterling Commerce is now an AT&T
company.

And now to my STD disclaimer -- The opinions expressed by the poster are
not necessarily those of poster's employer.

Regards,
Steve Thompson

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Gregory, Gary G
2007-06-14 21:53:53 UTC
Permalink
Steve, I started at Sterling Commerce a few weeks after it was spun off
from Sterling Software. I was told the motivating factor was divide out
the financial (Vector: xxx banking software) and commerce software
(Connect:Direct, Connect:Enterprise, GENTRAN, etc) from the systems
software (VM:BACKUP, DMS, etc).

Each company had its own stock and for quite a while they seemed to move
in parallel. Guess Sterling Williams and the Wyly brothers thought the
commerce side would move one way and the systems software another.

I think this was the hierarchy - Systems Center developed and marketed
NDM. Shortly thereafter they merged with VM Software and created System
Center.


Gary Garland Gregory, MS
CA
Senior Software Engineer
Tel: +1-214-473-1863
Fax: +1-214-473-1050
***@ca.com


<snip>

System Center (or was it Systems Center) had NDM. System Center was
acquired by "Sterling" and renamed Connect:Direct. Sterling Software and
Sterling Commerce became two different entities (I wasn't here at the
time and so don't know all the ins-outs, reasons).

So certain of the products were handled by the Software side and certain
by the Commerce side (or entity). Sterling Commerce is now an AT&T
company.

And now to my STD disclaimer -- The opinions expressed by the poster are
not necessarily those of poster's employer.

Regards,
Steve Thompson

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Lester, Bob
2007-06-14 22:06:47 UTC
Permalink
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-***@ibm-main.lst
Behalf Of Gregory, Gary G
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:54 PM
To: IBM-***@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules

Steve, I started at Sterling Commerce a few weeks after it was spun off
from Sterling Software. I was told the motivating factor was divide out
the financial (Vector: xxx banking software) and commerce software
(Connect:Direct, Connect:Enterprise, GENTRAN, etc) from the systems
software (VM:BACKUP, DMS, etc).

Gary,

Thanks for the additional info. I've been using
DMS/VAM/TRACS/SUPERTRACS/MAILBOX/NDM (er..Connect:Direct) for many
years. It's interesting to hear the evolution of the products re:
companies involved.

BobL
Tony Harminc
2007-06-14 19:54:13 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:40:40 EDT, IBM Mainframe Discussion List
<***@AOL.COM> wrote:

>UCCEL acquired ASM2 on DEC 1985 from Cambridge Systems, which was
> somewhere in the San Fran bay area.

CSG was for a while subtitled The Stanford Center for Software Development,
until someone connected to the university that pretty much defines that same
small town took an interest, after which it became just The Center for
Software Development. Evidently just having a P.O. box in Stanford, Cal.
doesn't quite cut it.

>UCCEL also acquired my employer in that same deal, which is how I remember
> the date so precisely. CA acquired UCCEL ca. AUG 1987.

And they all sued each other, and the lawyers lived happily ever after.
Actually remarkably few lawyers seem to have been involved in a number of
cases concerning many of the same people and companies. Aging historians
with time on their hands may find use of a search engine with various
combinations of "Cambridge Systems Group", SKK, UCCEL, ACF2, ASM2, McLaren,
and Stanford to be interesting, as well as the edgar.sec.gov site.

Tony H.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Rick Fochtman
2007-06-14 22:22:11 UTC
Permalink
--------------------<snip>--------------------------:

><snip>
>CA acquired ASM2 so long ago that I forgot where they got it from - but
>I don't think CA was the original developer.
></snip>
>
>I can think of very few products *EVER* developed by CA. Including their
>very 1st product CA-SORT.
>
>Their old motto "Software Superior by Design" should have read "Software
>Superior by Acquisition"
>
>
---------------------<unsnip>------------------------
I still have a letter from Whitlow that was sent to all SyncSort
customers about a blowup between Whitlow, CA and ComputerWorld
concerning "false and misleading statements" in CA advertisements in
ComputerWorld. Distinctly bad karma.

And I've always refered to CA as "Competition by Acquisition". My worst
experience was shortly after CA acquired Pansophics and took over PANVALET.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
D***@ibm-main.lst
2007-06-15 02:09:08 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 6/14/2007 8:19:07 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
***@COMCAST.NET writes:
>The person I dealt with was Shawn Mcclaren (sp?)
and I am pretty sure he was on the west coast as seemed to take the
red eyes quite a bit.

I remembered the name CSG earlier but had forgotten Shawn's name until your
post. That was his name. He was in the corporate HQ in the S-F bay area.

Bill Fairchild
Plainfield, IL





************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Rick Fochtman
2007-06-18 20:14:09 UTC
Permalink
----------------------<snip>-----------------------
Didn't CAPEX also market TLMS?
----------------------<unsnip>---------------------
IIRC, TLMS came from Gulf Computer Services, a division of Gulf Oil Co.
They also had something UCANDU, if I remember correctly.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to ***@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...