Take whatever degree gives you the most options. Can you do a Phd in IT, I doubt it.
My advice take the CS as it opens doors to other fields. IT is a pretty hard way to make a steady living, it's all boom and bust. Can be good fun if you have some savings but hell if you acquire any debt. You need to be able to quit when you want to survive.
If you wanted to share info between those jobs, MRT works a treat. Yes you can use file/MSGQ/DTAQ etc but that means you have to build in a marshaling framework.
For example say you wanted to implement a game server, not a typical AS/400 app, MRT would allow for very easy logic for game play. e.g. FICS
Most AS/400 apps have very little direct communication between users and so SRT is easier to use.
Hey I was an Op on B3955, that became the UNISYS B-Series. Then I jumped to the IBM Midrange. Loved the B3900 machines, much more efficient than the IBM midrange. Shame Unisys could match IBM marketing.
I've had to use those manuals and I swear you deliberately obscured how to do things, the code examples sucked and the explanation of the op codes never actually explained what they did.
The only good thing about the AS/400 manuals is that it has some!
Re:In a mid-sized manufacturing or distribution...
on
The Mainframe Still Lives!
·
· Score: 4, Informative
RAIS is great idea call me when they have invisible failover. The only company I know of doing this with PC hardware is Stratus. I'm talking about not losing any processing due to a machine or OS borking. I'm serious if you have this then the problem is solved.
Last time I looked the Linux/HA and all other projects had some serious issues with failover, there always seemed to be a single machine at some stage that could take the cluster away from the user.
The AS/400 like the mainframes has been built to be reliable. Hardware costs because it's specced not to fail, redundancy on everything is available. Not to sure about a processor failure on the As/400 though, might still be able to take the machine down. But everything else failsover cleanly.
First question how much does unplanned downtime cost your company?
For most companies the 400 is not running some small irrelevant task like email, it's running the business. We currently have approx 1000 users using our ERP package in numerous time zones. No ERP package, no business transactions!
$250,000 for a decent sized server is the cost of two staff for a year.
Yes IBM charges us high rates, but the stuff doesn't go down unplanned. I never have to worry about my 400.
In the past some AS/400 sites switched to MS for the server OS, I have yet to hear of one that went well. Switching to Unix has always been an option, but the software lock in makes it unlikely also it's a different mindset.
The only thing the AS/400 is missing is a decent GUI. The number of crap ideas IBM has tried to implement is huge. The simple solution is to put XWindows functionality on the 400, build it with DDS and let the app pgmrs take over. Won't happen of course, far to sensible an idea and Rochester has a terrible NIH syndrome.
Are you trying to use CICS on the AS/400, I heard it was available but never seen it used?
Do tell more, I like a good laugh:-)
Many years ago I did a CICS/COBOL to AS/400 COBOL conversion. The database came across real easy, almost no changes. The batch programs were pretty easy as well, All the JCL was re-written by hand. Reports were not to bad, once we convinced the grey beards to use PRTF with more than one format. Screens were a pig. We had to re-write most of them as they were used to serving multiple users from one program, whereas the 400 has one program per user. I cut my teeth on conversion pgms on that project, saved us a ton of time. Although, we burnt through two project leaders who tried to do everything manually before we got it through the third ones head.
Will you stop bring meaningful facts into a/. discussion. There are folks here that just know what this topic is all about and they don't need your DOE facts to cloud the issue.
Next you'll be pointing out problems with the global warming lobby and then where will we be.
No, I like my/. full of ill reasoned arguments and plenty of shouting, we have to have more shouting round here.
The Rovers, MKII Jaguar and Mini were not expensive. How can you call the mini expensive.
What very expensive cars does America have? Any with good design? I'd list them if I could find them. I like the idea of the Viper but think the execution was poor. The nearest UK company to the Viper is probably TVR and I don't rate them for the same reasons, the cars scream at you rather than suggest.
I'm a Brit so it's natural that my knowledge is strongest there. But I also think the best car design is European. Porsche/Ferrari/Bugatti in sports cars and Mercedes/BMW in saloons. Jaguar/Bentley are the British equivalent, although not quite the same. Citron used to do some outlandish cars but were let down by their mechanicals, but the body work was beautiful.
The US design has always been cheap and when they have spent money they've spent it in the wrong areas look at Cadillacs. Bigger is not always better. The US has never gotten over the V8, cast iron, pushrod lumps of junk. The problem is that the US is not going to change, currently the truck is all that's keeping Ford and GM afloat, when they go what happens to the US motor industry.
I strongly believe that the US is ready for small well designed cars for city driving e.g. Peugot and Renault. It is ready for a small 2 seat sports car e.g. Mazda MX5. It is ready for a high performance executive saloons e.g. BMW. But the US car companies seem unable to deliver, they want to sell large ugly saloons, crap small cars and ludicrous sports cars e.g. prowler/viper. I had hopes for saturn but they've fallen under GM management dictates.
In Europe each car company has a look. You can instantly tell a BMW for a Mercedes or a Porsche from a Lotus. the reason for this is the design house works on the models, it's not farmed out to the lowest bidder. Design and style are big things in European car design. There's also the extensive use of wind tunnels looking for lower drag figures, computer generated designs. You tend to notice big changes every ten years or so. Usually some new tech has come in and the designers can expand their horizons.
Take a look at US and European concept vehicles, which look like re-hashes of the current model.
What do you think will happen when electric cars come in, if they do. I predict the US will just heave out the cast iron V8 and shove in the cheapest motor they can find along with cheap cells. Europe will totally redesign he car from the ground up. motors in each well, radical aero and cells formed to protect the occupants.
You're right I forgot the 55/56 models:-( I'm used to seeing 57s de-chromed and in original two tone, very nice.
MUSCLE CARS as design icons! Maybe the original Cobra MkIII 427 S/C, which I like very much and had a replica of in the UK, but not those Detroit bricks.
The original T Bird was a great sports car except it didn't, go, didn't stop and didn't turn. It was just another US land yacht.
Never liked Dussenbergs, first time I've looked at Cord Cars.
It's obvious that when I say design you're thinking of something else, like may be novel?
Take a look at a Rover P4 or P5, Jaguar Mk II, any 911, original mini. For me it comes no better than Jaguar XKD or Ferrari P3/P4. The point is that for some reason the US has and has always had some the of the fugliest cars around.
Other US cars I like GT 40, although Lola did the original. Now it's really hard to name any more. Whereas European the lists keeps going and going. I haven't even started on Bentley or Rolls Royce, Mercedes, Lamboguini, Buggati et al.
I will admit that the whole world went to pot in the 70s, it was truly an awful time for beautiful cars.
But for money spent the US got very little in return.
Please, please do not hold up US car design as being any good.
I can think of two models that were world class '32 Ford and '57 Chevy. that's it. Both of these were understated and then in subsequent revisions ruined by the US attitude of more is better.
Take a look at European design if you want some class, even the small cars of recent years have very good design.
I find the idea of public funded science research heart warming. No need for the government or the science establishment to get involved. If an individual wants to contribute good for him and the researcher.
I care not if I think the researcher is not all there, it's not my money.
For instance Robert Bussard is trying to raise funds to continue his fusion research. Now I don't think he spent money wisely in the past, I don't think he was too smart in his dealings with the DoD, I do not think he has solved all the problem. But I do think he is the closest to cheap fusion. Should I fund him?
My only stipulation is that everything must be published, not only the research but also the money trail. I want to see where the dork spent $10k on software.
If the terms are just remote X-Terms there is no swap problems, config problems.
I would advise you to re-read your comments and apply them to any network architecture. Lack of network or power is usually an end to user productivity.
20+ years ago I worked on system that had 1,000 concurrent users, downtime never happened in my tenure, 5 years, the users treated the system like the phone system, it was always there for them, always. The IT staff totaled 9 in operations and 4 in development plus 2 managers and a IT director.
Today I work on many systems that support a total of 800 users, downtime is a weekly occurance. The users treat the system like a mortally wounded rhino, the longer the thing stays down the happier they are. IT staff is over 25. The quality of the staff is less, the quality of the machines is less, the quality of the systems is less. I wish I could say that this is an isolated example.
I have worked on both terminal and tiered systems, terminal based services are far easier on every level.
In short, I am firmly convinced that IT made a huge mistake investing in PCs and tiered architecture. I see Linux as slowly changing this balance. I long for the day when at work I have a fully fault tolerant server and thousands of terminals. Where control of the data is the hands of IT and access to the data is wide open to any employee.
25% is a start NASA needs its budget cut 100%, it's all pork and no benefit.
The shuttle is a disgrace, by now NASA should have a daily scheduled launch system, capable of hauling 40 tonnes to LEO. No fuss, drama or excitement just like a bus service. I think old fashioned non-reusable rockets were the answer.
Commercial services should have begun in the early 80s. But guess who tied up all the suppliers with one way contracts.
Instead the US displays it's crumbling empire every time they wheel out the shuttle, rather like Ford and the Edsel. China, India & Pakistan are going be getting the job done while the US decides who to invade next.
The only good thing in the last 20 years was the X-Prize, pitiful.
Race car sponsorship is not that easy. It's all about product visibility. I'm a big F1 fan but I have a had time remembering who sponsors who. But I can tell you who the sponsors are, just from repeated exposure. For instance Mclaren just had a 1/2 at Monaco who sponsors Mclaren? But I can tell you who sponsored Lotus in the late 70s and williams in the mid 90s, JPS and Sega respectively.
The Indy 500 is a huge media event, nobody is going to make a big deal about the Linux car. Same as nobody made a big deal about CA, SAP etc etc when they sponsored cars.
At the other end of the performance spectrum, brands have left F1 due to the cars being too successful. There was a time when Williams won everything in site and the only time they were reported on in the mainstream media was when they didn't win. Some of their sponsors didn't like this negative only reporting and left Williams for other teams.
So with sponsorship it seems to be that you need to be in certain sports if you have a certain product image. Be it F1, MotoGP, Americas Cup Sailing etc etc. Winning is nice but a lack of it is not seen as a marketing failure.
Now the one big market where the above fails completely is car companies supporting race teams. Toyota, Honda are spending billions of dollars in F1 and are not even in the top ten! Like Jaguar before them they need to succeed and it's hard decision to make when they're not. Do they stay until they do win or do they leave as losers? Personally, I look forward to Honda and Toyota spending many more billions before they learn how to win.
The phone with the crappy camera, oh yeah I really need that.
In fact most multi use items are crap.
Non open connections, if in doubt just use USB.
Battery life measured in minutes not weeks, totally useless.
California portable fuel cans, total crap.
American car designers, another ugly car with no style and they try and sell you it based on an engine with push rod tech. Give me a nice well engineered Japanese or German car thanks.
McMansions with 6 bathrooms and no space for a yard. No class at all.
In fact most anything with an American designer sucks. Or is it anything that needs a designer sucks.
Keyboards with ever more useless keys. Same for mice.
As you descend the air is forced into your blood stream under pressure. And you have all this extra oxygen, which you use. As you ascend the air is withdrawn and you can end up with less oxygen than you need. Not good, it's why a lot of free divers black out on the ascent.
Slashdot Mirror
I've 20+ years in IT and a CS degree.
Take whatever degree gives you the most options. Can you do a Phd in IT, I doubt it.
My advice take the CS as it opens doors to other fields. IT is a pretty hard way to make a steady living, it's all boom and bust. Can be good fun if you have some savings but hell if you acquire any debt. You need to be able to quit when you want to survive.
If you wanted to share info between those jobs, MRT works a treat. Yes you can use file/MSGQ/DTAQ etc but that means you have to build in a marshaling framework.
For example say you wanted to implement a game server, not a typical AS/400 app, MRT would allow for very easy logic for game play. e.g. FICS
Most AS/400 apps have very little direct communication between users and so SRT is easier to use.
So what...
Go look what an xterm can do, you think the 400 is going to track every mouse movement?
I'm using the x protocol as a well known example there are now other lighter protocols. But x is so sweet, let the xterm run the wm no problem.
In short gui over network is solved for most speeds of network and weights of gui.
Was supported under all languages, but it was a real pain to setup and get stable. It's just not the 400 way.
Hey I was an Op on B3955, that became the UNISYS B-Series. Then I jumped to the IBM Midrange. Loved the B3900 machines, much more efficient than the IBM midrange. Shame Unisys could match IBM marketing.
Well you didn't do a very good job did you?
I've had to use those manuals and I swear you deliberately obscured how to do things, the code examples sucked and the explanation of the op codes never actually explained what they did.
The only good thing about the AS/400 manuals is that it has some!
RAIS is great idea call me when they have invisible failover. The only company I know of doing this with PC hardware is Stratus. I'm talking about not losing any processing due to a machine or OS borking. I'm serious if you have this then the problem is solved.
Last time I looked the Linux/HA and all other projects had some serious issues with failover, there always seemed to be a single machine at some stage that could take the cluster away from the user.
The AS/400 like the mainframes has been built to be reliable. Hardware costs because it's specced not to fail, redundancy on everything is available. Not to sure about a processor failure on the As/400 though, might still be able to take the machine down. But everything else failsover cleanly.
So what have you?
First question how much does unplanned downtime cost your company?
For most companies the 400 is not running some small irrelevant task like email, it's running the business. We currently have approx 1000 users using our ERP package in numerous time zones. No ERP package, no business transactions!
$250,000 for a decent sized server is the cost of two staff for a year.
Yes IBM charges us high rates, but the stuff doesn't go down unplanned. I never have to worry about my 400.
In the past some AS/400 sites switched to MS for the server OS, I have yet to hear of one that went well. Switching to Unix has always been an option, but the software lock in makes it unlikely also it's a different mindset.
The only thing the AS/400 is missing is a decent GUI. The number of crap ideas IBM has tried to implement is huge. The simple solution is to put XWindows functionality on the 400, build it with DDS and let the app pgmrs take over. Won't happen of course, far to sensible an idea and Rochester has a terrible NIH syndrome.
Oh boy,
:-)
:-)
do you have lots and lots of things to learn
Are you trying to use CICS on the AS/400, I heard it was available but never seen it used?
Do tell more, I like a good laugh
Many years ago I did a CICS/COBOL to AS/400 COBOL conversion. The database came across real easy, almost no changes. The batch programs were pretty easy as well, All the JCL was re-written by hand. Reports were not to bad, once we convinced the grey beards to use PRTF with more than one format. Screens were a pig. We had to re-write most of them as they were used to serving multiple users from one program, whereas the 400 has one program per user. I cut my teeth on conversion pgms on that project, saved us a ton of time. Although, we burnt through two project leaders who tried to do everything manually before we got it through the third ones head.
Will you stop bring meaningful facts into a /. discussion. There are folks here that just know what this topic is all about and they don't need your DOE facts to cloud the issue.
/. full of ill reasoned arguments and plenty of shouting, we have to have more shouting round here.
Next you'll be pointing out problems with the global warming lobby and then where will we be.
No, I like my
Under which DoD grant did CalTech write it?
The Rovers, MKII Jaguar and Mini were not expensive. How can you call the mini expensive.
What very expensive cars does America have? Any with good design? I'd list them if I could find them. I like the idea of the Viper but think the execution was poor. The nearest UK company to the Viper is probably TVR and I don't rate them for the same reasons, the cars scream at you rather than suggest.
I'm a Brit so it's natural that my knowledge is strongest there. But I also think the best car design is European. Porsche/Ferrari/Bugatti in sports cars and Mercedes/BMW in saloons. Jaguar/Bentley are the British equivalent, although not quite the same. Citron used to do some outlandish cars but were let down by their mechanicals, but the body work was beautiful.
The US design has always been cheap and when they have spent money they've spent it in the wrong areas look at Cadillacs. Bigger is not always better. The US has never gotten over the V8, cast iron, pushrod lumps of junk. The problem is that the US is not going to change, currently the truck is all that's keeping Ford and GM afloat, when they go what happens to the US motor industry.
I strongly believe that the US is ready for small well designed cars for city driving e.g. Peugot and Renault. It is ready for a small 2 seat sports car e.g. Mazda MX5. It is ready for a high performance executive saloons e.g. BMW. But the US car companies seem unable to deliver, they want to sell large ugly saloons, crap small cars and ludicrous sports cars e.g. prowler/viper. I had hopes for saturn but they've fallen under GM management dictates.
In Europe each car company has a look. You can instantly tell a BMW for a Mercedes or a Porsche from a Lotus. the reason for this is the design house works on the models, it's not farmed out to the lowest bidder. Design and style are big things in European car design. There's also the extensive use of wind tunnels looking for lower drag figures, computer generated designs. You tend to notice big changes every ten years or so. Usually some new tech has come in and the designers can expand their horizons.
Take a look at US and European concept vehicles, which look like re-hashes of the current model.
What do you think will happen when electric cars come in, if they do. I predict the US will just heave out the cast iron V8 and shove in the cheapest motor they can find along with cheap cells. Europe will totally redesign he car from the ground up. motors in each well, radical aero and cells formed to protect the occupants.
You're right I forgot the 55/56 models :-( I'm used to seeing 57s de-chromed and in original two tone, very nice.
MUSCLE CARS as design icons! Maybe the original Cobra MkIII 427 S/C, which I like very much and had a replica of in the UK, but not those Detroit bricks.
The original T Bird was a great sports car except it didn't, go, didn't stop and didn't turn. It was just another US land yacht.
Never liked Dussenbergs, first time I've looked at Cord Cars.
It's obvious that when I say design you're thinking of something else, like may be novel?
Take a look at a Rover P4 or P5, Jaguar Mk II, any 911, original mini. For me it comes no better than Jaguar XKD or Ferrari P3/P4. The point is that for some reason the US has and has always had some the of the fugliest cars around.
Other US cars I like GT 40, although Lola did the original. Now it's really hard to name any more. Whereas European the lists keeps going and going. I haven't even started on Bentley or Rolls Royce, Mercedes, Lamboguini, Buggati et al.
I will admit that the whole world went to pot in the 70s, it was truly an awful time for beautiful cars.
But for money spent the US got very little in return.
Please, please do not hold up US car design as being any good.
I can think of two models that were world class '32 Ford and '57 Chevy. that's it. Both of these were understated and then in subsequent revisions ruined by the US attitude of more is better.
Take a look at European design if you want some class, even the small cars of recent years have very good design.
CIA is the usual translation for KGB in latin america
My bad.
I meant private thou like a moron I wrote public.
I find the idea of public funded science research heart warming. No need for the government or the science establishment to get involved. If an individual wants to contribute good for him and the researcher.
I care not if I think the researcher is not all there, it's not my money.
For instance Robert Bussard is trying to raise funds to continue his fusion research. Now I don't think he spent money wisely in the past, I don't think he was too smart in his dealings with the DoD, I do not think he has solved all the problem. But I do think he is the closest to cheap fusion. Should I fund him?
My only stipulation is that everything must be published, not only the research but also the money trail. I want to see where the dork spent $10k on software.
It would seem the article dis agrees with you?
If the terms are just remote X-Terms there is no swap problems, config problems.
I would advise you to re-read your comments and apply them to any network architecture. Lack of network or power is usually an end to user productivity.
20+ years ago I worked on system that had 1,000 concurrent users, downtime never happened in my tenure, 5 years, the users treated the system like the phone system, it was always there for them, always. The IT staff totaled 9 in operations and 4 in development plus 2 managers and a IT director.
Today I work on many systems that support a total of 800 users, downtime is a weekly occurance. The users treat the system like a mortally wounded rhino, the longer the thing stays down the happier they are. IT staff is over 25. The quality of the staff is less, the quality of the machines is less, the quality of the systems is less. I wish I could say that this is an isolated example.
I have worked on both terminal and tiered systems, terminal based services are far easier on every level.
In short, I am firmly convinced that IT made a huge mistake investing in PCs and tiered architecture. I see Linux as slowly changing this balance. I long for the day when at work I have a fully fault tolerant server and thousands of terminals. Where control of the data is the hands of IT and access to the data is wide open to any employee.
25% is a start NASA needs its budget cut 100%, it's all pork and no benefit.
The shuttle is a disgrace, by now NASA should have a daily scheduled launch system, capable of hauling 40 tonnes to LEO. No fuss, drama or excitement just like a bus service. I think old fashioned non-reusable rockets were the answer.
Commercial services should have begun in the early 80s. But guess who tied up all the suppliers with one way contracts.
Instead the US displays it's crumbling empire every time they wheel out the shuttle, rather like Ford and the Edsel. China, India & Pakistan are going be getting the job done while the US decides who to invade next.
The only good thing in the last 20 years was the X-Prize, pitiful.
OK we'll let her drive
I'm not in marketing but here's my take on it:-
Race car sponsorship is not that easy. It's all about product visibility. I'm a big F1 fan but I have a had time remembering who sponsors who. But I can tell you who the sponsors are, just from repeated exposure. For instance Mclaren just had a 1/2 at Monaco who sponsors Mclaren? But I can tell you who sponsored Lotus in the late 70s and williams in the mid 90s, JPS and Sega respectively.
The Indy 500 is a huge media event, nobody is going to make a big deal about the Linux car. Same as nobody made a big deal about CA, SAP etc etc when they sponsored cars.
At the other end of the performance spectrum, brands have left F1 due to the cars being too successful. There was a time when Williams won everything in site and the only time they were reported on in the mainstream media was when they didn't win. Some of their sponsors didn't like this negative only reporting and left Williams for other teams.
So with sponsorship it seems to be that you need to be in certain sports if you have a certain product image. Be it F1, MotoGP, Americas Cup Sailing etc etc. Winning is nice but a lack of it is not seen as a marketing failure.
Now the one big market where the above fails completely is car companies supporting race teams. Toyota, Honda are spending billions of dollars in F1 and are not even in the top ten! Like Jaguar before them they need to succeed and it's hard decision to make when they're not. Do they stay until they do win or do they leave as losers? Personally, I look forward to Honda and Toyota spending many more billions before they learn how to win.
The phone with the crappy camera, oh yeah I really need that.
In fact most multi use items are crap.
Non open connections, if in doubt just use USB.
Battery life measured in minutes not weeks, totally useless.
California portable fuel cans, total crap.
American car designers, another ugly car with no style and they try and sell you it based on an engine with push rod tech. Give me a nice well engineered Japanese or German car thanks.
McMansions with 6 bathrooms and no space for a yard. No class at all.
In fact most anything with an American designer sucks. Or is it anything that needs a designer sucks.
Keyboards with ever more useless keys. Same for mice.
Nuclear reactors that aren't pebble based.
one size fits all
etc etc
Thats right, wearing tight fitting, heavy clothes in high temperatures makes me feel or sorta cool and refreshed.
No but you have another problem.
As you descend the air is forced into your blood stream under pressure. And you have all this extra oxygen, which you use. As you ascend the air is withdrawn and you can end up with less oxygen than you need. Not good, it's why a lot of free divers black out on the ascent.
that would take R&D
Guess what Nortel cut not so long ago.