Slashdot Mirror
Fifty Years Ago IBM 'Bet the Company' On the 360 Series Mainframe
Hugh Pickens DOT Com (2995471) writes "Those of us of a certain age remember well the breakthrough that the IBM 360 series mainframes represented when it was unveiled fifty years ago on 7 April 1964. Now Mark Ward reports at BBC that the first System 360 mainframe marked a break with all general purpose computers that came before because it was possible to upgrade the processors but still keep using the same code and peripherals from earlier models. "Before System 360 arrived, businesses bought a computer, wrote programs for it and then when it got too old or slow they threw it away and started again from scratch," says Barry Heptonstall. IBM bet the company when they developed the 360 series. At the time IBM had a huge array of conflicting and incompatible lines of computers, and this was the case with the computer industry in general at the time, it was largely a custom or small scale design and production industry, but IBM was such a large company and the problems of this was getting obvious: When upgrading from one of the smaller series of IBM computers to a larger one, the effort in doing that transition was so big so you might as well go for a competing product from the "BUNCH" (Burroughs, Univac, NCR, CDC and Honeywell). Fred Brooks managed the development of IBM's System/360 family of computers and the OS/360 software support package and based his software classic "The Mythical Man-Month" on his observation that "adding manpower to a late software project makes it later." The S/360 was also the first computer to use microcode to implement many of its machine instructions, as opposed to having all of its machine instructions hard-wired into its circuitry. Despite their age, mainframes are still in wide use today and are behind many of the big information systems that keep the modern world humming handling such things as airline reservations, cash machine withdrawals and credit card payments. "We don't see mainframes as legacy technology," says Charlie Ewen. "They are resilient, robust and are very cost-effective for some of the work we do.""
You can say a lot of bad things about Java, but the JVM really neatly solves this problem.
It solves the problem so neatly that we keep several VMs around with different Java versions, just to maintain older systems that were developed with Java 1.3 or 1.4 and break as soon as you install Java6 oder Java7.
We struggle trying to get someone new motivated to learn the technology.
I wonder how the banks end up getting people working in banking. After all, it's dull (yeah, the maths in the software is generally not that interesting), high stress and ultimately pointless. I guess they find *some* way of motivating those people.
Agreed. Adding my own anecdote.
(modesty filter off for a moment)
I'm a talented programmer. Yes, I'm in my 40's, but I'm also well-versed in tech both new and old. I keep up with the kiddies and their frameworks-of-the-month for web, mobile, and other development platforms. I grok my systems from the applications down to the network protocols on the wire and the byte arrangement on the disks. I can train, have written books, deal with management well, and mange people adequately. I can work where I want to, command good salaries, and have turned down good offers recently.
(modesty filter back on)
I'm currently working in the Payroll industry in the midwest. Not quite banking, but well, it's close. The core application here is from the 1980's. Legacy shit abounds in this place. Our vendors are using tech even older, judging by how file exchange and their API's look. Government and regulatory agencies are terrible partners. Progress is slow, cumbersome, and painful.
Why the hell would I work here? Employers take note:
* They pay me very well.
* I have a short commute. I don't waste a lot of time in my car or on a train.
* They don't work me very hard. Honestly I can come and go as I need. My time off is mine.
* Regulatory deadlines are distant, well-known, rock solid, and usually easily achieved. Congress notwithstanding.
* There's money here. If I need equipment, it shows up. If I need software, it gets bought.
* My software is quietly useful. Millions of people look at their paychecks (or bank statements) and most of the time it's just right.
* I am not technologically micromanaged. I can use the tools I want, the way I want.
* My employers are good at weeding out poisonous co-workers. I don't work with assholes, ever.
* The challenges are of my own devising. I have enough time to experiment, throw away, re-work, and try new things.
All of that is how dull industries like banking (and payroll) wind up with talented people.
Get off my lawn.