Rob > Are we ready to let this thread die?
Since the OP has already said "thank you" and moved on, there is no real need still to continue with this thread. If you mean "Are we ready to let the topic which emerged from this thread and which has spawned other threads die?", very probably not while the recalcitrants and recusants persist. > We go round and round with this without any meaningful movement from our relatively entrenched positions. I don't recognise what you say here as being related to "Ported Tools" any more. Again, if you mean the topic, there are now two threads from which to choose, one properly attached to the stimulating thread and one regrettably not - thereby occasioning the need to repeat some references. > VTAM USS or zOS USS context is clear ... Won't work! The trouble with this superficially attractive idea has been exposed elsewhere but explain again: Those who are unfamiliar with proper use - or who have been so bombarded with the misuse that they have forgotten the correct use - see my cases - need to have a proper example set for long enough that they will not misuse even when they don't know (much about) the correct use. Only then will the ambiguity that Don Grinsell didn't appreciate existed be definitely avoided. > ... and google searches return the correct information. When the subject concerns IBM products, an IBM search is so obviously to be preferred it really goes without saying - but - *! - I've said it already! > Where is Amy Farrah Fowler when we need her? I have absolutely no idea who this excellent lady might be! Well, although I don't have much time for this sort of insular nonsense, I did a quick Wikipedia check and I see 1. She is fictional! 2. She is associated with a title "Pumpkinhead" which does not engender confidence that anything useful has been offered here! > ... Sheldon ... Whoever he or she might happen to be. > I am sure Sheldon would agree that USS would only have one use determined by him. Which is just one probably fictional character's position worth nothing whatsoever at all! Perhaps a little more long-windedness is needed when you have a global audience! > I expect that this argument will go on for the next 20 or 30 years. It is possible that IBM will steer all users away from hacker-proof SNA to hacker-ridden - you can't open a news web page without learing that Sony has screwed up again - IP because that's what the glossy coffee table rubbish pontificates is the "smart" thing to do. When SNA is no more, the VTAM API will be no more and actually the 3270 data stream will be no more. Then, after a decent interval, those who inhabit the IBM-MAIN universe of the day can petition to use the dread three letters - except that all will by then have got into the habit of using some variation of z/OS UNIX System Services, or z/OS UNIX or z/UNIX or zUNIX - assuming those brilliant marketing "suits" in IBM haven't decided that they're tired of z/OS UNIX System Services and come up with something else like zOpenUNIX as a swipe at traditional non-open UNIXes which is what my IBM MVS colleagues crowed about when this POSIX- compliant function was stuck onto MVS. Chris Mason On Tue, 3 May 2011 09:33:51 -0400, Rob Schramm <[email protected]> wrote: >Are we ready to let this thread die? We go round and round with this >without any meaningful movement from our relatively entrenched positions. > Apart from some fairly humorous quips and some looooooooong winded prose >there is little progress made. > >I did have an idea for helping the context (and google searches) that forces >all to suffer (all suffering is the core of compromise? <VBG>) VTAM USS or >zOS USS context is clear and google searches return the correct >information. viva la evolution! <VBG> > >Where is Amy Farrah Fowler when we need her? I am sure Sheldon would agree >that USS would only have one use determined by him. > >I expect that this argument will go on for the next 20 or 30 years. After >which USS will be ceded to Unix System Services as a "no-prize" (marvel >reference) due to lack of opposition and the fact that no one will care >anymore. > >Rob Schramm > >On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) < >[email protected]> wrote: > >> In <[email protected]>, on 05/02/2011 >> at 07:49 PM, Itschak Mugzach <[email protected]> said: >> >> >Everybodu uses USS for Unix System Services, >> >> No. >> >> >including IBM. >> >> John Eels is from IBM. >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT >-- >Rob Schramm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
