Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Digital Archaeology » Computer Arcana » Computer Folklore » Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #352963] Wed, 20 September 2017 12:44 Go to next message
Louis Krupp is currently offline  Louis Krupp
Messages: 92
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 20 Sep 2017 13:03:56 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> On 2017-09-20, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> John Levine wrote:
>>> In article <PM000559628D9137D2@aca40e5d.ipt.aol.com>,
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> And how are people supposed to learn? I've found no "getting started"
>>>> books.
>>>
>>> Must not have looked very hard. Unix for Dummies has been in print
>>> for a long time. Best book I ever wrote.
>>
>> That one was written for general users, not system administrators. One
>> has to know system administration before using when one owns the system.
>
> Wrong.
>
>> It's TOPS-10's
>
> No-one gives a shit. TOPS-10 is *gone*. DEC is *gone*. Minicomputers
> are *gone*. Get over it.

This is alt.folklore.computers. The more "gone" it is, the more we
(for some definition of "we") care about it.

Louis
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #352975 is a reply to message #352963] Wed, 20 September 2017 15:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
pechter is currently offline  pechter
Messages: 452
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <vi65sct6irvf3ggp2ehqbllhtj7e64gd1m@4ax.com>,
Louis Krupp <lkrupp@nospam.pssw.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 20 Sep 2017 13:03:56 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-09-20, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>> John Levine wrote:
>>>> In article <PM000559628D9137D2@aca40e5d.ipt.aol.com>,
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >And how are people supposed to learn? I've found no "getting started"
>>>> >books.
>>>>
>>>> Must not have looked very hard. Unix for Dummies has been in print
>>>> for a long time. Best book I ever wrote.
>>>
>>> That one was written for general users, not system administrators. One
>>> has to know system administration before using when one owns the system.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>>> It's TOPS-10's
>>
>> No-one gives a shit. TOPS-10 is *gone*. DEC is *gone*. Minicomputers
>> are *gone*. Get over it.

Sounds exactly like a Charles McCord rant on Imus in the Morning...

Instead of TOPS-10 and DEC it was Whittaker Chambers and Alger Hiss and
Richard Nixon and the Woodstock Typewriter.



>
> This is alt.folklore.computers. The more "gone" it is, the more we
> (for some definition of "we") care about it.
>
> Louis

Just heard some discussion of Sun Microsystems on TWIT... Amazing how they
didn't see what was going to kill them. Sun seems like the next generation
of DEC.

IBM seems like a walking corpse. Kept alive by unusual financial means.
Stock repurchases are only good for so long.


Bill
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353060 is a reply to message #352975] Thu, 21 September 2017 16:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
William Pechter <pechter@t61.pechter.dyndns.org> wrote:
> In article <vi65sct6irvf3ggp2ehqbllhtj7e64gd1m@4ax.com>,
> Louis Krupp <lkrupp@nospam.pssw.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 20 Sep 2017 13:03:56 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-09-20, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> John Levine wrote:
>>>> > In article <PM000559628D9137D2@aca40e5d.ipt.aol.com>,
>>>> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >> And how are people supposed to learn? I've found no "getting started"
>>>> >> books.
>>>> >
>>>> > Must not have looked very hard. Unix for Dummies has been in print
>>>> > for a long time. Best book I ever wrote.
>>>>
>>>> That one was written for general users, not system administrators. One
>>>> has to know system administration before using when one owns the system.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>>> It's TOPS-10's
>>>
>>> No-one gives a shit. TOPS-10 is *gone*. DEC is *gone*. Minicomputers
>>> are *gone*. Get over it.
>
> Sounds exactly like a Charles McCord rant on Imus in the Morning...
>
> Instead of TOPS-10 and DEC it was Whittaker Chambers and Alger Hiss and
> Richard Nixon and the Woodstock Typewriter.
>
>
>
>>
>> This is alt.folklore.computers. The more "gone" it is, the more we
>> (for some definition of "we") care about it.
>>
>> Louis
>
> Just heard some discussion of Sun Microsystems on TWIT... Amazing how they
> didn't see what was going to kill them. Sun seems like the next generation
> of DEC.
>
> IBM seems like a walking corpse. Kept alive by unusual financial means.
> Stock repurchases are only good for so long.
>

That's the impression I'm getting. They have a few forward-looking thins,
like Watson, but it looks like they're following the other mainframe
companies into becoming consulting outfits with a little hardware on the
side to keep existing mainframe customers happy.

--
Pete
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353112 is a reply to message #353060] Fri, 22 September 2017 09:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Peter Flass wrote:
> William Pechter <pechter@t61.pechter.dyndns.org> wrote:
>> In article <vi65sct6irvf3ggp2ehqbllhtj7e64gd1m@4ax.com>,
>> Louis Krupp <lkrupp@nospam.pssw.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 20 Sep 2017 13:03:56 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-09-20, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> > John Levine wrote:
>>>> >> In article <PM000559628D9137D2@aca40e5d.ipt.aol.com>,
>>>> >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> And how are people supposed to learn? I've found no "getting started"
>>>> >>> books.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Must not have looked very hard. Unix for Dummies has been in print
>>>> >> for a long time. Best book I ever wrote.
>>>> >
>>>> > That one was written for general users, not system administrators. One
>>>> > has to know system administration before using when one owns the system.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>>
>>>> > It's TOPS-10's
>>>>
>>>> No-one gives a shit. TOPS-10 is *gone*. DEC is *gone*. Minicomputers
>>>> are *gone*. Get over it.
>>
>> Sounds exactly like a Charles McCord rant on Imus in the Morning...
>>
>> Instead of TOPS-10 and DEC it was Whittaker Chambers and Alger Hiss and
>> Richard Nixon and the Woodstock Typewriter.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> This is alt.folklore.computers. The more "gone" it is, the more we
>>> (for some definition of "we") care about it.
>>>
>>> Louis
>>
>> Just heard some discussion of Sun Microsystems on TWIT... Amazing how they
>> didn't see what was going to kill them. Sun seems like the next generation
>> of DEC.
>>
>> IBM seems like a walking corpse. Kept alive by unusual financial means.
>> Stock repurchases are only good for so long.
>>
>
> That's the impression I'm getting. They have a few forward-looking thins,
> like Watson, but it looks like they're following the other mainframe
> companies into becoming consulting outfits with a little hardware on the
> side to keep existing mainframe customers happy.

At least half of their BoD are ex-Citi Bank people. They don't know
butkis about the computing business.

/BAH
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353145 is a reply to message #352975] Fri, 22 September 2017 15:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 3:01:28 PM UTC-4, William Pechter wrote:

> Sounds exactly like a Charles McCord rant on Imus in the Morning...

Is Imus still on? If so, where?
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353146 is a reply to message #353060] Fri, 22 September 2017 15:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 4:54:14 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:

>> IBM seems like a walking corpse. Kept alive by unusual financial means.
>> Stock repurchases are only good for so long.
>>
>
> That's the impression I'm getting. They have a few forward-looking thins,
> like Watson, but it looks like they're following the other mainframe
> companies into becoming consulting outfits with a little hardware on the
> side to keep existing mainframe customers happy.

I think they make some money leasing software, like CICS, MVS, etc.

While the hardware business is down, I think the Z series machines
still bring in some change.

However, I remain at a loss why IBM sold off its disk drive unit
(they invented disks), and cut back on other products and research.

FWIW, here is the product website. Got a lot of stuff on it.
https://www.ibm.com/products?lnk=fdi
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353179 is a reply to message #353146] Fri, 22 September 2017 22:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel is currently offline  Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> I think they make some money leasing software, like CICS, MVS, etc.
>
> While the hardware business is down, I think the Z series machines
> still bring in some change.
>
> However, I remain at a loss why IBM sold off its disk drive unit
> (they invented disks), and cut back on other products and research.
>
> FWIW, here is the product website. Got a lot of stuff on it.
> https://www.ibm.com/products?lnk=fdi

a few years ago, Z mainframe hardware was couple percent of total
revenue (and falling), but the total mainframe division (software,
consulting, etc) was 1/4 of total revenue and 40% of profit.

it is getting harder to derive mainframe hardware revenue from IBM
reports.

I periodically mention by the late 80s, PCs had became much more
powerful and the communication group was fiercely fighting off
client/server and distributed computing. A senior disk engineer got a
talked scheduled at annual, worldwide, internal communication group
conference supposedly on 3174 performance but started out with statement
that the communication group was going to be responsible for the demise
of the disk division. The issue was the communication group had
stranglehold on datacenters with corporate responsibility for everything
that crossed the datacenter walls and trying to preserve their dumb
terminal paradigm and install base. The disk division was seeing data
fleeing the datacenter to more distributed computing friendly platforms
with drop in disk sales. The disk division had come up with a number of
solutions but they were constantly vetoed by the communication group. It
turns out to affect the whole mainframe datacenter business and few
short years later, IBM goes into the red.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#terminal

as an aside, Z/OS still requires CKD disks even tho real CKD disks
haven't been made in decades, instead CKD disks are simulated on
industry standard fixed block disks. past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd

Similarly, IBM bus&tag half-duplex channels are also emulated with a
heavy weight protocol layer running over industry standard fibre-channel
.... branded as FICON ... i've mentioned that about the time of z10 peak
I/O benchmark that got 2M IOPS used 104 FICON (running over 104 fibre
channel) about the same time, a single native fibre channel was
announced for e5-2600 blade claiming over a million IOPS (two such fibre
channel having greater throughput than 104 FICON ... running over fibre
channel). past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#ficon

BTW, in the re-org of IBM into the 13 "baby blues" in preparation
for breaking up the company ... the disk division was the furthest
along having been rebranded "adstar". When a new CEO was brought that
reversed the breakup and resurrected the company ... it was only a
temporary reprieve for "adstar".

past posts mentioning 1/4th revenue and 40% profit
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012g.html#7 Adult Supervision
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#67 How do you feel about the fact that today India has more IBM employees than any of the other countries in the world including the USA.?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012n.html#13 System/360--50 years--the future?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012n.html#25 System/360--50 years--the future?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#24 New HD
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#4 Oracle To IBM: Your 'Customers Are Being Wildly Overcharged'
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#35 Reports: IBM may sell x86 server business to Lenovo
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#37 Where Does the Cloud Cover the Mainframe?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#64 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#7 SAS Deserting the MF?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013n.html#61 Bet Cloud Computing to Win
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014f.html#80 IBM Sales Fall Again, Pressuring Rometty's Profit Goal
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014f.html#84 Is end of mainframe near ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014j.html#90 Demonstrating Moore's law
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014l.html#95 weird apple trivia
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#71 Decimation of the valuation of IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#155 IBM Continues To Crumble
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#170 IBM Continues To Crumble
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#30 Why on Earth Is IBM Still Making Mainframes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#85 a bit of hope? What was old is new again
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#19 Linux Foundation Launches Open Mainframe Project
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#20 the legacy of Seymour Cray
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016b.html#52 MVS Posix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016g.html#69 "I used a real computer at home...and so will you" (Popular Science May 1967)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016h.html#56 Why Can't You Buy z Mainframe Services from Amazon Cloud Services?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017.html#62 Big Shrink to "Hire" 25,000 in the US, as Layoffs Pile Up
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017g.html#86 IBM Train Wreck Continues Ahead of Earnings
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017g.html#103 SEX
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017h.html#61 computer component reliability, 1951
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017h.html#95 PDP-11 question


recent post mentioning ibm reorg into "baby blues"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017.html#62 Big Shrink to "Hire" 25,000 in the US, as Layoffs Pile Up
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017.html#69 How Private Equity Firms are Designed to Earn Big While Risking Little of Their Own
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017.html#82 The ICL 2900
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017c.html#34 CBS News: WikiLeaks claims to release thousands of CIA documents of computer activity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017c.html#58 The ICL 2900
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017c.html#63 The ICL 2900
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017c.html#85 Great mainframe history(?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017d.html#6 ComputerWorld Says: Cobol plays major role in U.S. government breaches
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017d.html#9 Which States Account for Our Trade Deficit with Mexico?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017d.html#18 IBM Pension
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017d.html#19 Mainframes are used increasingly by major banks and financial institutions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017e.html#10 WD ships 'world's largest' 12TB HGST Ultrastar He12 Helium 7200 RPM Enterprise HDDs
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017e.html#24 [CM] What was your first home computer?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017f.html#11 The Mainframe vs. the Server Farm: A Comparison
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017f.html#51 [CM] What was your first home computer?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017f.html#96 IBM downfall
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017f.html#101 Nice article about MF and Government
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017f.html#109 IBM downfall
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017h.html#67 IBM: A History Of Progress, 1890s to 2001

past posts mentioning adstar:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#3 IBM's "old" boss speaks (was "new")
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#29 Computers in Science Fiction
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002q.html#25 Beyond 8+3
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#9 IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#52 HSM Functionality for Microsoft, using the Mainframe as the
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#47 Slashdot: O'Reilly On The Importance Of The Mainframe Heritage
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003n.html#39 DASD history
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#48 incremental cms file backup
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#30 z/OS UNIX
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#1 Hercules 3.04 announcement
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#3 Hercules 3.04 announcement
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006n.html#29 CRAM, DataCell, and 3850
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006o.html#64 The Fate of VM - was: Re: Baby MVS???
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007m.html#32 Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and Hercules
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008r.html#28 What if the computers went back to the '70s too?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009f.html#59 Backup and Restore Manager for z/VM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#67 Adventure - Or Colossal Cave Adventure
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010l.html#43 PROP instead of POPS, PoO, et al
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010o.html#35 Tivoli Storage Manager for z/OS (Functionally Stablized & Impending Demise)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011l.html#28 computer bootlaces
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012g.html#4 Hard drives: A bit of progress
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#12 How do you feel about the fact that today India has more IBM employees than US?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#17 Hierarchy
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#65 What are your experiences with Amdahl Computers and Plug-Compatibles?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012k.html#46 Slackware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012k.html#70 END OF FILE
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#61 What is holding back cloud adoption?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#63 Today in TIME Tech History: Piston-less Power (1959), IBM's Decline (1992), TiVo (1998) and More
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013d.html#11 relative mainframe speeds, was What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#17 The Big, Bad Bit Stuffers of IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#15 Quixotically on-topic post, still on topic
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#92 write rings
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014d.html#55 Difference between MVS and z / OS systems
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014d.html#70 Last Gasp For Hard Disk Drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014d.html#72 Last Gasp For Hard Disk Drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014e.html#7 Last Gasp for Hard Disk Drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014h.html#68 Over in the Mainframe Experts Network LinkedIn group
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014i.html#58 How Comp-Sci went from passing fad to must have major
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014i.html#79 IBM Programmer Aptitude Test
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014j.html#16 The SDS 92, its place in history?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014l.html#57 How Comp-Sci went from passing fad to must have major
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014l.html#65 Could this be the wrongest prediction of all time?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#5 Can you have a robust IT system that needs experts to run it?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016.html#2 History question - In what year did IBM first release its DF/DSS backup & restore product?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016b.html#52 MVS Posix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016e.html#88 E.R. Burroughs
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016g.html#20 How to Fix IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017g.html#37 CMSBACK

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353190 is a reply to message #353145] Sat, 23 September 2017 00:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
pechter is currently offline  pechter
Messages: 452
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <6bd4e2b7-c492-404f-9765-0413114903db@googlegroups.com>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 3:01:28 PM UTC-4, William Pechter wrote:
>
>> Sounds exactly like a Charles McCord rant on Imus in the Morning...
>
> Is Imus still on? If so, where?

WABC 77 AM New York...

Been listening since high school in 72...

bill
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353216 is a reply to message #353179] Sat, 23 September 2017 16:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 10:43:19 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:

> as an aside, Z/OS still requires CKD disks even tho real CKD disks
> haven't been made in decades, instead CKD disks are simulated on
> industry standard fixed block disks. past posts
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd

Many years application programmers knew what specific disk pack(s) their
application would be stored on, and carefully estimated the number
of cylinders the files would require. Backups were kept on tape.
Only files needed on-line would be stored on disk, everything else
was kept on cheaper tape. In 3330/2314 days, some disks were stored
offline and mounted only when needed.

Today, disk file management is all transparent to application
programmers. Want a 100 cylinders? Just code it in your JCL
and you got it, no problem. Back then, 100 cylinders would require
a formal meeting. I don't think they even use tape (cartridges)
anymore. They finally got around to using compression, and I would
dare say a mainframe application file could be heavily compressed.

Also, today, entire data files are read once from disk, then kept
in cache storage, so subsequent jobs read from memory, not disk,
and really fly.

I remained amazed that one Z machine replaced five 3033 machines
yet runs much faster.
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353226 is a reply to message #353146] Sat, 23 September 2017 17:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 4:54:14 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>>> IBM seems like a walking corpse. Kept alive by unusual financial means.
>>> Stock repurchases are only good for so long.
>>>
>>
>> That's the impression I'm getting. They have a few forward-looking thins,
>> like Watson, but it looks like they're following the other mainframe
>> companies into becoming consulting outfits with a little hardware on the
>> side to keep existing mainframe customers happy.
>
> I think they make some money leasing software, like CICS, MVS, etc.
>
> While the hardware business is down, I think the Z series machines
> still bring in some change.
>
> However, I remain at a loss why IBM sold off its disk drive unit
> (they invented disks), and cut back on other products and research.

Just like anything else - when it becomes a commodity market the low-cost
producer wins. IBM has never been the low-cost producer of anything. that's
why they (supposedly) got out of PCs, terminals, printers, and chips too.

--
Pete
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353227 is a reply to message #353216] Sat, 23 September 2017 17:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 10:43:19 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>
>> as an aside, Z/OS still requires CKD disks even tho real CKD disks
>> haven't been made in decades, instead CKD disks are simulated on
>> industry standard fixed block disks. past posts
>> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd
>
> Many years application programmers knew what specific disk pack(s) their
> application would be stored on, and carefully estimated the number
> of cylinders the files would require. Backups were kept on tape.
> Only files needed on-line would be stored on disk, everything else
> was kept on cheaper tape. In 3330/2314 days, some disks were stored
> offline and mounted only when needed.
>
> Today, disk file management is all transparent to application
> programmers. Want a 100 cylinders? Just code it in your JCL
> and you got it, no problem. Back then, 100 cylinders would require
> a formal meeting. I don't think they even use tape (cartridges)
> anymore. They finally got around to using compression, and I would
> dare say a mainframe application file could be heavily compressed.

I think tape is still heavily used, but my direct knowledge is now five
years out of date and counting.

>
> Also, today, entire data files are read once from disk, then kept
> in cache storage, so subsequent jobs read from memory, not disk,
> and really fly.
>
> I remained amazed that one Z machine replaced five 3033 machines
> yet runs much faster.
>

--
Pete
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353235 is a reply to message #353216] Sat, 23 September 2017 19:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:35:40 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 10:43:19 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>
>> as an aside, Z/OS still requires CKD disks even tho real CKD disks
>> haven't been made in decades, instead CKD disks are simulated on
>> industry standard fixed block disks. past posts
>> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd
>
> Many years application programmers knew what specific disk pack(s) their
> application would be stored on, and carefully estimated the number
> of cylinders the files would require. Backups were kept on tape.
> Only files needed on-line would be stored on disk, everything else
> was kept on cheaper tape. In 3330/2314 days, some disks were stored
> offline and mounted only when needed.
>
> Today, disk file management is all transparent to application
> programmers. Want a 100 cylinders? Just code it in your JCL
> and you got it, no problem. Back then, 100 cylinders would require
> a formal meeting. I don't think they even use tape (cartridges)
> anymore.

There's a device that pretends to be a tape (as in you allocate,
write, and read it as if it was a tape) but internally it's all disk.
Mostly exists to allow applications written with the assumption of
tape to continue to function unmodified I believe.

> They finally got around to using compression, and I would
> dare say a mainframe application file could be heavily compressed.
>
> Also, today, entire data files are read once from disk, then kept
> in cache storage, so subsequent jobs read from memory, not disk,
> and really fly.
>
> I remained amazed that one Z machine replaced five 3033 machines
> yet runs much faster.
>
>
>
>
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353244 is a reply to message #353216] Sat, 23 September 2017 22:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel is currently offline  Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> Many years application programmers knew what specific disk pack(s) their
> application would be stored on, and carefully estimated the number
> of cylinders the files would require. Backups were kept on tape.
> Only files needed on-line would be stored on disk, everything else
> was kept on cheaper tape. In 3330/2314 days, some disks were stored
> offline and mounted only when needed.
>
> Today, disk file management is all transparent to application
> programmers. Want a 100 cylinders? Just code it in your JCL
> and you got it, no problem. Back then, 100 cylinders would require
> a formal meeting. I don't think they even use tape (cartridges)
> anymore. They finally got around to using compression, and I would
> dare say a mainframe application file could be heavily compressed.
>
> Also, today, entire data files are read once from disk, then kept
> in cache storage, so subsequent jobs read from memory, not disk,
> and really fly.
>
> I remained amazed that one Z machine replaced five 3033 machines
> yet runs much faster.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017i.html#33 learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL

3033 were 370, 16mbytes max real storage, 4.5MIPS ... five would be
22.5mips ... a single Dec2000 z900 processor is 3-4 times aggregate
processing of five 3033.

Z machines:

z900, 16 processors, 2.5BIPS (156MIPS/proc), Dec2000
z990, 32 processors, 9BIPS, (281MIPS/proc), 2003
z9, 54 processors, 18BIPS (333MIPS/proc), July2005
z10, 64 processors, 30BIPS (469MIPS/proc), Feb2008
z196, 80 processors, 50BIPS (625MIPS/proc), Jul2010
EC12, 101 processors, 75BIPS (743MIPS/proc), Aug2012
z13, 141 processors, 100BIPS (710MIPS/proc), Jan2015
z14, 170 processor, 150 BIPS, (882MIPS/proc), Aug2017

....

processor performance increase 5.6 times (156->882), max number of
processor increase 10.6 times (16->170), max. configuration thruput
increase 60 times (2.5bips->150bips).

I've commented periodically that current latency to real memory (cache
miss) when measure in processor cycles is about the same as latency to
late 60s disk when measured in late 60s processor cycles (i.e. memory is
the new disk).

As a result there is increasing processor technology attempting to mask
cache misses ... out-of-order execution, branch prediction, speculative
execution, hyperthreading, etc ... given processor something to do while
waiting on cache miss. Note that z196 documentation claims that
something like half the throughput increase going from z10 to z196 is
the introduction of some of these features (that have been in other
platforms for decades).

lots of z/OS disk configuration is still expressed as 3390-54 disks
(even tho they haven't existed for ages, or smaller 3390-1, 3390-3,
3390-9, etc)
https://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/storage/storage_ 3390.html

aka 54gbyte capacity, i.e. 65520 data cylinders, 56,664 bytes per track,
849,960 bytes/cylinder ... all simulated on industry standard
fixed-block disks. Issue was standard seek CCWs with two byte cylinder
number and read/write CCWs with two byte r/w length.

More recently EAV creates fictional 3390s with increased number of
cylinders (more than 64k) but keeps the 3390 57kbyte track length and 15
tracks/cylinder (all simulated on industry standard fixed-block disks).

They had convention of two byte cylinder number and two byte head number
(CCHH). Since they now only use fictional 3390s with 15tracks/cylinder
.... they've concocted a 28-bit cylinder number (up to 4096 times
3390-54) and a four-bit head number ... which all fits in four byte
field (aka 8-hex digits from CCCCHHHH to CCCCCCCH). Since it is all pure
simulation, they've have some latitude specifying fictional 3390
conventions ... aka how to interpret the 4-byte CCHH field.

past posts mentioning CKD, multi-track search, FBA, etc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd

some still have tapes for backup/archive/DR (although some have used
replacable disks from RAID configuration)
https://www.ibm.com/storage/tape
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_Tape-Open
latest
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/ibm-a nd-sony-cram-up-to-330tb-into-tiny-tape-cartridge/

recent posts mentioning cache-miss, memory access latency
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017.html#13 follow up to dense code definition
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017.html#74 The ICL 2900
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017c.html#26 Multitasking, together with OS operations
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017c.html#86 GREAT presentation on the history of the mainframe
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017e.html#94 Migration off Mainframe to other platform
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017f.html#28 MVS vs HASP vs JES (was 2821)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017g.html#87 IBM z14 High-lights
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017g.html#88 IBM Mainframe Ushers in New Era of Data Protection
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017h.html#61 computer component reliability, 1951

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353248 is a reply to message #353244] Sun, 24 September 2017 00:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charles Richmond is currently offline  Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 9/23/2017 9:27 PM, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
> 3033 were 370, 16mbytes max real storage, 4.5MIPS ... five would be
> 22.5mips ... a single Dec2000 z900 processor is 3-4 times aggregate
> processing of five 3033.
>
> Z machines:
>
> z900, 16 processors, 2.5BIPS (156MIPS/proc), Dec2000
> z990, 32 processors, 9BIPS, (281MIPS/proc), 2003
> z9, 54 processors, 18BIPS (333MIPS/proc), July2005
> z10, 64 processors, 30BIPS (469MIPS/proc), Feb2008
> z196, 80 processors, 50BIPS (625MIPS/proc), Jul2010
> EC12, 101 processors, 75BIPS (743MIPS/proc), Aug2012
> z13, 141 processors, 100BIPS (710MIPS/proc), Jan2015
> z14, 170 processor, 150 BIPS, (882MIPS/proc), Aug2017
>

All the "Z" machines fit nicely into the Zombie Apocalypse!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_apocalypse


--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353253 is a reply to message #353216] Sun, 24 September 2017 02:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike Spencer is currently offline  Mike Spencer
Messages: 997
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:

> Many years application programmers knew what specific disk pack(s) their
> application would be stored on, and carefully estimated the number
> of cylinders the files would require. Backups were kept on tape.
> Only files needed on-line would be stored on disk, everything else
> was kept on cheaper tape. In 3330/2314 days, some disks were stored
> offline and mounted only when needed.

Topic drift warning...

Just watched Westworld last night. Goofy 1973 movie about a holiday
village populated with robots indistinguishable from humans. Their
rendition of a futuristic, very advanced computer control center
included many big reel to reel tape drives spinning continuously.
They even kept going when power to everything else failed. (Their
notion of big-data visualization was kinda amusing, too.)

"Nothing can go wrong!"

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353255 is a reply to message #353235] Sun, 24 September 2017 05:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mausg is currently offline  mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2017-09-23, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:35:40 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 10:43:19 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>>
>>> as an aside, Z/OS still requires CKD disks even tho real CKD disks
>>> haven't been made in decades, instead CKD disks are simulated on
>>> industry standard fixed block disks. past posts
>>> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd
>>
>> Many years application programmers knew what specific disk pack(s) their
>> application would be stored on, and carefully estimated the number
>> of cylinders the files would require. Backups were kept on tape.
>> Only files needed on-line would be stored on disk, everything else
>> was kept on cheaper tape. In 3330/2314 days, some disks were stored
>> offline and mounted only when needed.
>>
>> Today, disk file management is all transparent to application
>> programmers. Want a 100 cylinders? Just code it in your JCL
>> and you got it, no problem. Back then, 100 cylinders would require
>> a formal meeting. I don't think they even use tape (cartridges)
>> anymore.
>
> There's a device that pretends to be a tape (as in you allocate,
> write, and read it as if it was a tape) but internally it's all disk.
> Mostly exists to allow applications written with the assumption of
> tape to continue to function unmodified I believe.
>

Tar is from TapeArchive, no?



>> They finally got around to using compression, and I would
>> dare say a mainframe application file could be heavily compressed.
>>
>> Also, today, entire data files are read once from disk, then kept
>> in cache storage, so subsequent jobs read from memory, not disk,
>> and really fly.
>>
>> I remained amazed that one Z machine replaced five 3033 machines
>> yet runs much faster.
>>
>>
>>
>>


--
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353260 is a reply to message #353255] Sun, 24 September 2017 06:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Bob Eager

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:45:24 +0000, mausg wrote:


>> There's a device that pretends to be a tape (as in you allocate, write,
>> and read it as if it was a tape) but internally it's all disk. Mostly
>> exists to allow applications written with the assumption of tape to
>> continue to function unmodified I believe.
>>
> Tar is from TapeArchive, no?

Well, yes, but that's UNIX (initially), and even in the early days it was
mostly used on files - no real difference as tape is treated as a file by
UNIX. It wasn't the first tape program for UNIX, though - I remember
'tp', and I wrote a version of that in PDP-11 assembly language so I
could move DECtapes around.

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353265 is a reply to message #353253] Sun, 24 September 2017 07:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2017-09-24, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:

> Just watched Westworld last night. Goofy 1973 movie about a holiday
> village populated with robots indistinguishable from humans. Their
> rendition of a futuristic, very advanced computer control center
> included many big reel to reel tape drives spinning continuously.
> They even kept going when power to everything else failed. (Their
> notion of big-data visualization was kinda amusing, too.)

In those days, spinning tape drives were a computing icon. The shop
where I worked at the time had a tape reel as part of their logo,
even though they made the jump from cards directly to disk and didn't
have a single drive.

> "Nothing can go wrong!"

At my first place of work, several of Murphy's Laws were posted on the
wall of the programmers' room (in large letters generated by the computer,
of course). Memorizing them was an initiation rite.

--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353290 is a reply to message #353260] Sun, 24 September 2017 11:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charles Richmond is currently offline  Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 9/24/2017 5:51 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:45:24 +0000, mausg wrote:
>
>
>>> There's a device that pretends to be a tape (as in you allocate, write,
>>> and read it as if it was a tape) but internally it's all disk. Mostly
>>> exists to allow applications written with the assumption of tape to
>>> continue to function unmodified I believe.
>>>
>> Tar is from TapeArchive, no?
>
> Well, yes, but that's UNIX (initially), and even in the early days it was
> mostly used on files - no real difference as tape is treated as a file by
> UNIX. It wasn't the first tape program for UNIX, though - I remember
> 'tp', and I wrote a version of that in PDP-11 assembly language so I
> could move DECtapes around.
>

Although "tar" was my choice, some folks used "cpio" (not to be confused
with "cp3o") to do archives and to back up files to tape.

--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353293 is a reply to message #353265] Sun, 24 September 2017 11:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charles Richmond is currently offline  Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 9/24/2017 6:06 AM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2017-09-24, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
>> Just watched Westworld last night. Goofy 1973 movie about a holiday
>> village populated with robots indistinguishable from humans. Their
>> rendition of a futuristic, very advanced computer control center
>> included many big reel to reel tape drives spinning continuously.
>> They even kept going when power to everything else failed. (Their
>> notion of big-data visualization was kinda amusing, too.)
>
> In those days, spinning tape drives were a computing icon. The shop
> where I worked at the time had a tape reel as part of their logo,
> even though they made the jump from cards directly to disk and didn't
> have a single drive.
>

Somehow, the QIC tape cartridges were *never* quite as iconic.

--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353309 is a reply to message #353290] Sun, 24 September 2017 13:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Bob Eager

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 10:43:47 -0500, Charles Richmond wrote:

> On 9/24/2017 5:51 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:45:24 +0000, mausg wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> There's a device that pretends to be a tape (as in you allocate,
>>>> write,
>>>> and read it as if it was a tape) but internally it's all disk. Mostly
>>>> exists to allow applications written with the assumption of tape to
>>>> continue to function unmodified I believe.
>>>>
>>> Tar is from TapeArchive, no?
>>
>> Well, yes, but that's UNIX (initially), and even in the early days it
>> was mostly used on files - no real difference as tape is treated as a
>> file by UNIX. It wasn't the first tape program for UNIX, though - I
>> remember 'tp', and I wrote a version of that in PDP-11 assembly
>> language so I could move DECtapes around.
>>
>>
> Although "tar" was my choice, some folks used "cpio" (not to be confused
> with "cp3o") to do archives and to back up files to tape.

Yes, 'cpio' came later. tar was of course an outgrowth of 'ar', which was
used for packing up multiple files into one, especially to make libraries
- that is still used.

cpio is still used, too - sometimes it is better for a particular task.



--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353316 is a reply to message #353309] Sun, 24 September 2017 13:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 10:43:47 -0500, Charles Richmond wrote:
>
>> On 9/24/2017 5:51 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:45:24 +0000, mausg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> > There's a device that pretends to be a tape (as in you allocate,
>>>> > write,
>>>> > and read it as if it was a tape) but internally it's all disk. Mostly
>>>> > exists to allow applications written with the assumption of tape to
>>>> > continue to function unmodified I believe.
>>>> >
>>>> Tar is from TapeArchive, no?
>>>
>>> Well, yes, but that's UNIX (initially), and even in the early days it
>>> was mostly used on files - no real difference as tape is treated as a
>>> file by UNIX. It wasn't the first tape program for UNIX, though - I
>>> remember 'tp', and I wrote a version of that in PDP-11 assembly
>>> language so I could move DECtapes around.
>>>
>>>
>> Although "tar" was my choice, some folks used "cpio" (not to be confused
>> with "cp3o") to do archives and to back up files to tape.
>
> Yes, 'cpio' came later. tar was of course an outgrowth of 'ar', which was
> used for packing up multiple files into one, especially to make libraries
> - that is still used.

Which came from the Multicx "ar" (archive) command.

>
> cpio is still used, too - sometimes it is better for a particular task.
>
>
>



--
Pete
Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL [message #353432 is a reply to message #353309] Tue, 26 September 2017 00:27 Go to previous message
Charles Richmond is currently offline  Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 9/24/2017 12:13 PM, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 10:43:47 -0500, Charles Richmond wrote:
>
>> On 9/24/2017 5:51 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:45:24 +0000, mausg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> > There's a device that pretends to be a tape (as in you allocate,
>>>> > write,
>>>> > and read it as if it was a tape) but internally it's all disk. Mostly
>>>> > exists to allow applications written with the assumption of tape to
>>>> > continue to function unmodified I believe.
>>>> >
>>>> Tar is from TapeArchive, no?
>>>
>>> Well, yes, but that's UNIX (initially), and even in the early days it
>>> was mostly used on files - no real difference as tape is treated as a
>>> file by UNIX. It wasn't the first tape program for UNIX, though - I
>>> remember 'tp', and I wrote a version of that in PDP-11 assembly
>>> language so I could move DECtapes around.
>>>
>>>
>> Although "tar" was my choice, some folks used "cpio" (not to be confused
>> with "cp3o") to do archives and to back up files to tape.
>
> Yes, 'cpio' came later. tar was of course an outgrowth of 'ar', which was
> used for packing up multiple files into one, especially to make libraries
> - that is still used.
>

At a PPoE, our application was the work of five programmers. The
processes communicated using the SVR4 inter-process communications
provided. I maintained a library of common useful functions we wrote...
using "ar"... that everyone could use in their task if needed.


--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL
Next Topic: Re: learning Unix, was progress in e-mail, such as AOL
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Thu Mar 28 06:34:09 EDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05536 seconds