Hi:
I have said this before. At a IBM class (here in Chicago) The
instructor told us (SERVPAC CLASS) that the goal of IBM was to
eliminate the systems programmer.
Now hows does that make everyone on the list feel?
Ed
On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next
year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-)
Cheryl Walker wrote:
But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap
labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1).
John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting
cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own.
If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do
my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with
a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/
OSMF is one of its strengths.
Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept?
Just curious.
Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need
experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance
indicators, and much more.
Agreed. And experience too.
I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let
you concentrate on more important matters.
If you say so. Thanks.
Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
