CompuServe Thread

#IBM 3270 TERMINAL

9 messages in this thread
#99719From: George BricknerDec 23, 1987 8:53 PM
Nope, Larry, CICS is pretty much the best thing since sliced bread as far as providing a transaction environment. Hey, IBM announced quietly last month that CICS and IMS will support the C language, but didn't specify when. Geo
#99743From: Bob RakoskyDec 23, 1987 10:26 PM
Wait until you see IBM's mainframe implementation of C! <grin> [note: like other IBM software, it's main advantage is to sell more hardware] ..Bob
#99749From: Steve WalshDec 23, 1987 11:00 PM
Geo, I have to agree with you on that one – CICS is very good at providing a transaction based environment. That C language announcement is part of the SAA (systems application architecture) stuff I believe. Steve
#99925From: George BricknerDec 24, 1987 8:44 PM
Steve, IBM's announced C Compiler for the S/370 is not SAA (IBM said so in their announcment) but they will announce an SAA C sometime in the future. The funny thing – IBM's SAA C specification is based upon the PC OS/2 C compiler developed by Microsoft. No mention of ANSI standards in SAA! Geo
#99753From: John DraperDec 23, 1987 11:50 PM
George, A transaction environment? And here all this time I thought its sole purpose in life was to make sure that there was no way short of an IPL to get a terminal back on line after it was dropped. 🙂 Depends entirely on how you have to deal with it I guess. Regards, Larry.
#99926From: George BricknerDec 24, 1987 8:46 PM
Gee, Larry, we rarely have to IPL our mainframes anymore. I remember the "old" days when the system would go down once or twice a day (usually around our break time). Now if they IPL about once a week. We use VTAM so its a simple matter to vary a terminal off then on. Geo
#99948From: John DraperDec 24, 1987 11:01 PM
George, All I know is that whenever a customer would want us to come out and figure out why one line wasn't working, and after we had led him through the tests on the 1270 and it looked good, we would ask them to IPL. Of course there was a lot of resistance to this, but it really was the only way. Kinda glad to be out of the IBM world. 🙂 Regards, Larry.
#100011From: George BricknerDec 25, 1987 10:52 AM
Ah, the 1270! I bet they were running CICS BTAM. BTAM is pretty sleazy, we'd lose BSC lines for no reason and they wouldn'd IPL for us because there were only a handfull of programmers using the BTAM lines for downloading programs to the Series/1 minis. Sometimes just pulling the 3725 cable out of the modem induced enough error recovery to fix it. Everywhere else we use VTAM for telecommunications with a little TCAM on the side. Geo
#100013From: John DraperDec 25, 1987 11:26 AM
George, That was it all right! So BTAM was the culprit? I always thought it was CICS. and still shudder when I hear the it mentioned. Have a Merry Christmas George! Regards, Larry.