I agree, why not zUnix? Or z/Unix? However, since Lynn Wheeler has reminded us that z/OS Unix is (to some degree) POSIX compliant/compatible, why not adopt a catchy contraction of "POSIX"?
I'd like to suggest z/POX, which also connotes the blight it has become on z/OS. ;-) ... > Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:16:32 -0700 > From: [email protected] > Subject: Re: A z/OS Redbook Corrected - just about! > To: [email protected] > > I agree with Chris Mason. IBM should have never started called it USS - > how about a simple definitive abbreviation, like "zUnix". IBM adores > putting a "z" in front of everything (for some clueless reason) so why > should their version of Unix be any different? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
