On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:49:47, Timothy Sipples <[email protected]> wrote:
>[much of Timothy's Book of Mainframes, Chapter 4 deleted] >It's *not* IBM's or HOD's fault if your administrator(s) choose to disable >functions you need! Apparently, I touched a nerve. Point well taken. You are right, this is out of the vendor's hands as well as it is out of ours (though we're stuck with it). For their part, our Admins think they are trying to provide what we ask (as you suggest we do). However, I'm not sure they can/will. Keep in mind, many of these folks don't know what a mainframe is or why anyone would want to communicate with one. >[more of Timothy's Book of Mainframes, Chapter 4, Verses 10-12, removed] >In that case, my best advice is to go get Personal Communications or Host >On-Demand, install it locally (or on your own private Web server, >preferably and hopefully also z/OS-based), and allow yourself and your >similarly situated colleagues to do anything in terms of setting >preferences. Oh that we could. We tried - hard. I apologize that part of my rant was misdirected at the product instead of the admins, as from my perspective, I can't readily distinguish product inadeqacy from internal knee-breaking. >That said, if you think most users (internal and external) are like you, >well, look around. :-) The Web is not exactly new. If *your* mainframe is >not Web-savvy, that's a problem. (*The* mainframe has been Web-savvy >longer than anything else in Silicon Valley. Check the Web's history on that.) >HOD and HATS are extremely well suited to not only keeping pace with the >exceptional "power users" but also quickly and easily making your mainframe >Web-savvy. (There are many other ways also.) That's why they exist, that's >why they've been so successful, and that's why HOD (for example) is now on >its 11th major version -- just like IMS! :-) Although maybe IMS isn't quite >ready for prime time yet.... :-) :-) Tim, I worked for your fine employer for 5+ years, too. I know. I advocate new uses for z/OS. I've tried to get more web serving on the mainframe, but the Standards League in the infinite wisdom even forced our internal (departmental) site onto a SharePoint server. "Extermely" is a bit overstated, at least in my experience. Perhaps more successful than Domino/390... <G> (I worked on a few ESPs.) I saw HoD in its realtive infancy, too. F'ugly. It has improved, perhaps, but IMHO, PComm still beats it hands-down. And I'm told, there are even better emulators out there :-) >This whole thread reminds me of the debate 25+ years ago when certain >people complained that the newfangled PCs didn't make great 3270 terminals. >Actually they did (if you wanted/bothered, such as ordering the right >keyboard with the real PF keys), but I think that debate has been well >settled by now. :-) Yeah, well I'm not 100% convinced of that, either! Actually, I'm reasonably content with PComm 5.9 and my ability to customize it how I see fit. It's our OSA/ICC consoles that are giving me fits at the moment. "But, that's another story." FWIW, I was one of those guys that refused to let go of his coax- attached 3270 "dumb" terminal because Windows kept crashing prompting me to call down to the command center to have my ID canceled so I could logon again once my PC rebooted! (LOGON RECONNECT didn't always work, depending on how the connection terminated.) Oh, and I did I miss a retort for my assertion that Java is a pig? Though I understand, that too, is out of HoD's control (except that it's written in Java). I can't wait for my 8GB laptop so I can run all the sessions I need to concurrently (with Outlook and IE no less). Ah, great... knocked over my Kool- Aid... Regards, Art Gutowski Ford Motor Company ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
