I can't comment on the effectiveness of the various 'IT management methodologies' as it always seems that (around here) these methodologies are used as an excuse for managers to continue doing what they are doing.
If management bought into the methodology as a tool to change the enviroment (preferrably for the better), then I'd bet some of those methodologies would be of benefit to the organization. However, management ususally buys into these methodologies as a tool of excuse for the (currently bad) management practices, and (other than a name change) the environment remains the same. The only difference is that the manager now has an official piece of paper that codifies the bad management practice, and makes it 'OK'.
The Toronto Dominion Bank Financial Group's website (www.tdbank.ca) will be available for our customers' convenience. That's why I (and several hundered other employees) am working tonight - to make sure that our customers have the best banking support available.
Happy new year everyone, and rest assured that we will be working through the new year, and even into the new millennium (2001).
IBM supports TCP/IP on OS/390, and I have used a Linux system running X as an X-terminal to the "Unix System Services" facilities of such a machine.
Yes, IBM's 'native' networking doesn't support the usual cast of Unix remote devices, _but_ the newer IBM networking hardware _does_ support both SNA _and_ TCP/IP, making it easy to attach TCP/IP-enabled devices (terminals, printers, PCs, etc.) to the system. If they've moved any further ahead with Linux on S/390, I don't see any reason why you couldn't access the system from an xterm. You certainly can do so now.
"A cat has three names..." goes a poem/song from Cats, and so do nodes on a network. A node has a proper name such as NTOABYM05 or MVSQA100, and a common name, such as nancy or sluggo. Finally, a node has a secret name, like 05:09:3f:57:60:22 or 198.162.27.33.
The problem with proper names is that once a node is named with a proper name, it cannot be unnamed or renamed without disturbing the cosmic whole. This means that proper names must be chosen with care so that they do not reveal too much about the node, in case that aspect of the node changes. MVSQA100 might signify that the node uses the MVS Operating System, is used for Quality Assurance work, and is the 100'th system in the network, but if that system is given over to the VM operating system, or is used for Development work, or is moved to a smaller network where it is the 15'th system, it's proper name now misnames it. However, since the proper name is the name that it's owners know it by, it must remain MVSQA100 even though it now should be VMDVLP15.
A node's common name is much friendlier, conveying nothing more than the individuality of the node. Should sluggo serve as a BSD webserver today and a Windows NT workstation tomorrow, sluggo still identifies the node properly. Still, great caution is necessary in selecting a common name for a node as the name must not conflict with either the spirit of it's surroundings or with the other participants in the network. Naming two nodes sluggo and sluggow would cause an imbalance in the ether, and perhaps overload one or both of the nodes with misrouted work. Similarly, naming a node sandra might cause unnecessary disturbances in the force if problems caused someone to say "sandra went down on me today" or "sandra's taking a dump". Verily, common names must be well thought out as well.
Lastly, we have secret names. These are names conferred on a node as an integral part of it's birthing, and for which the value is dictated by a higher power. We can say no more about secret names.
The 1st century started on January 1, 1 AD, and completed one hundred years later, ending at the end of December 31, 100. The 2nd century started on January 1, 101 AD, and ended one hundred years later at the end of December 31, 201.
Taken to it's logical conclusion, The 20th century started on Jan 1, 1901, and will end one hundred years later at the end of December 31, 2001.
As for "The Millennium", my dictionary defines millennium as a period of one thousand years (Mod. L, fr L. 'mille' thousand + 'annus' year), but does not define a starting point for any millennium. I'd take it as legal (but suspect) to say that January 1, 2000 starts *a* new millennium.
I'm sure that there are a multitude of uses that XML can be put to on a GNU/Linux system. However, I don't think that XML is the panacea it's touted to be. Like Java before it, and C++ before that, and C before that, and Pascal before that, and Basic before that, XML is just another tool that's been the target of a lot of hype.
Certainly, you could implement a 'registry' in XML. The question is not "can you", but "what benefit does it provide and what are the drawbacks". The question of a "Windows registry" for Linux has often been discussed in the newsgroups and the usual response is: "What happens if your registry gets corrupted?".
By all means, develop an XML 'registry' tool, and/or enhance X to include XML attributes, and/or develop a new filesystem that uses XML as it's structure, but please don't expect that your development is going to replace the existing tools and features of the system. Like the ever growing variety of scripting languages, the only thing your development will accomplish is to add another choice to the mix.
I can just see it now... * A BSOD every other day, requiring me to reboot my TV * Having to add 256 MB ram and a 6G HD to my TV in order to watch CBC Newsworld.If it had been MSNBC (not available in Canada), it would only have been 128 Mb ram and 4G hd. * My cable bill now expressed in USD (GST included, Washington State tax included) * Being forced to take @Home internet service, just to download Microsoft fixpacks for my cable TV service
But, I can look on the bright side... * Now, my TV will be able to call the Home Shopping network automatically (through the Gates PC phone), and order all that MS software that I don't want or need. * I'll be greeted by BillG at every commercial break * When not in use, the TV screensaver will remind me to register *all* my Microsoft products (and take a quick survey of the rest of my household for future upgrades and marketting opportunities).
I think not.
If it comes down to Microsoft on my Cable, I'll switch to sattelite.
Slashdot Mirror
If management bought into the methodology as a tool to change the enviroment (preferrably for the better), then I'd bet some of those methodologies would be of benefit to the organization. However, management ususally buys into these methodologies as a tool of excuse for the (currently bad) management practices, and (other than a name change) the environment remains the same. The only difference is that the manager now has an official piece of paper that codifies the bad management practice, and makes it 'OK'.
Happy new year everyone, and rest assured that we will be working through the new year, and even into the new millennium (2001).
IBM supports TCP/IP on OS/390, and I have used a Linux system running X as an X-terminal to the "Unix System Services" facilities of such a machine.
Yes, IBM's 'native' networking doesn't support the usual cast of Unix remote devices, _but_ the newer IBM networking hardware _does_ support both SNA _and_ TCP/IP, making it easy to attach TCP/IP-enabled devices (terminals, printers, PCs, etc.) to the system. If they've moved any further ahead with Linux on S/390, I don't see any reason why you couldn't access the system from an xterm.
You certainly can do so now.
Let's combine the current trends of Internet IPOs, and Software patents on prior art, and make lots of money.
Here's what we do...
This will guarantee us lots of money, fame and power (not to mention that it will guarantee to annoy everyone).
"A cat has three names ..." goes a poem/song from Cats, and so do nodes on a network. A node has a proper name such as NTOABYM05 or MVSQA100, and a common name, such as nancy or sluggo. Finally, a node has a secret name, like 05:09:3f:57:60:22 or 198.162.27.33.
The problem with proper names is that once a node is named with a proper name, it cannot be unnamed or renamed without disturbing the cosmic whole. This means that proper names must be chosen with care so that they do not reveal too much about the node, in case that aspect of the node changes. MVSQA100 might signify that the node uses the MVS Operating System, is used for Quality Assurance work, and is the 100'th system in the network, but if that system is given over to the VM operating system, or is used for Development work, or is moved to a smaller network where it is the 15'th system, it's proper name now misnames it. However, since the proper name is the name that it's owners know it by, it must remain MVSQA100 even though it now should be VMDVLP15.
A node's common name is much friendlier, conveying nothing more than the individuality of the node. Should sluggo serve as a BSD webserver today and a Windows NT workstation tomorrow, sluggo still identifies the node properly. Still, great caution is necessary in selecting a common name for a node as the name must not conflict with either the spirit of it's surroundings or with the other participants in the network. Naming two nodes sluggo and sluggow would cause an imbalance in the ether, and perhaps overload one or both of the nodes with misrouted work. Similarly, naming a node sandra might cause unnecessary disturbances in the force if problems caused someone to say "sandra went down on me today" or "sandra's taking a dump". Verily, common names must be well thought out as well.
Lastly, we have secret names. These are names conferred on a node as an integral part of it's birthing, and for which the value is dictated by a higher power. We can say no more about secret names.
Lessee...
The 1st century started on January 1, 1 AD, and completed one hundred years later, ending at the end of December 31, 100.
The 2nd century started on January 1, 101 AD, and ended one hundred years later at the end of December 31, 201.
Taken to it's logical conclusion, The 20th century started on Jan 1, 1901, and will end one hundred years later at the end of December 31, 2001.
As for "The Millennium", my dictionary defines millennium as a period of one thousand years (Mod. L, fr L. 'mille' thousand + 'annus' year), but does not define a starting point for any millennium. I'd take it as legal (but suspect) to say that January 1, 2000 starts *a* new millennium.
I'm sure that there are a multitude of uses that XML can be put to on a GNU/Linux system. However, I don't think that XML is the panacea it's touted to be. Like Java before it, and C++ before that, and C before that, and Pascal before that, and Basic before that, XML is just another tool that's been the target of a lot of hype.
Certainly, you could implement a 'registry' in XML. The question is not "can you", but "what benefit does it provide and what are the drawbacks". The question of a "Windows registry" for Linux has often been discussed in the newsgroups and the usual response is: "What happens if your registry gets corrupted?".
By all means, develop an XML 'registry' tool, and/or enhance X to include XML attributes, and/or develop a new filesystem that uses XML as it's structure, but please don't expect that your development is going to replace the existing tools and features of the system. Like the ever growing variety of scripting languages, the only thing your development will accomplish is to add another choice to the mix.
Good Luck.
I can just see it now...
* A BSOD every other day, requiring me to reboot
my TV
* Having to add 256 MB ram and a 6G HD to my TV
in order to watch CBC Newsworld.If it had been
MSNBC (not available in Canada), it would only
have been 128 Mb ram and 4G hd.
* My cable bill now expressed in USD
(GST included, Washington State tax included)
* Being forced to take @Home internet service,
just to download Microsoft fixpacks for my
cable TV service
But, I can look on the bright side...
* Now, my TV will be able to call the Home
Shopping network automatically (through the
Gates PC phone), and order all that MS software
that I don't want or need.
* I'll be greeted by BillG at every commercial
break
* When not in use, the TV screensaver will remind
me to register *all* my Microsoft products
(and take a quick survey of the rest of my
household for future upgrades and marketting
opportunities).
I think not.
If it comes down to Microsoft on my Cable, I'll
switch to sattelite.