Re: text file from Linux to windows.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 05/31/08 19:16, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 01:01:15PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On 05/30/08 21:17, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> However, I'm of the opinion firmly that the lessons and skills learned
>>> in those times which became the mainframe culture gives rise to a
>>> different type of sysadmin than unix does. Even in the same company.
>>> I've known IBM people and the AIX types are fundamentally different than
>>> the (now) Z/OS types. Unfortunaly, I haven't collected enough quarters
>>> [1] from them to join the ranks.
>> My opinion on that is that Unix as always been predominately
>> weighted towards interactive and daemon processes, whereas
>> mainframes were/are weighted towards batch jobs (even CICS is a
>> batch job), batch queues and job schedulers. Cron really is a poor
>> substitute for batch queues and a job scheduler.
>>
>
> But you confuse an OS (e.g. UNIX) on the one hand with hardware
> (e.g. mainframe) on the other. Sure, that used to be the case but now
> you have zVM with hundreds (thousands?) of VMs each running the OS most
My remembrance of the mainframe *is* pretty old school: a 4381
running a couple of DOS/VSE/SP instances, and a few of us logging
into VM/CMS running REXX scripts connecting async modems to virtual
card readers. And teaching me what an amazingly productive language
that COBOL is when used by experts.
> appropriate for the job, e.g. AIX, or Debian, zOS. I agree that the OSs
> have their focus and e.g. people would rather sit down to a bash prompt
> than a whatever-it-is in VMS, MVS, zOS, etc.
DCL rocks!!! But editing in VM/CMS on a 3278 was aggravating.
Doing the same on a PC with emulator software and a communications
card was downright painful.
That's probably why greenbar printouts were so popular...
> Perhaps mainframe types are the people who can think in acronyms and the
> Unix types are the people who can think in conjoined words and
> shortforms (e.g. umount, rm, mv).
>
> Perhaps its the virtuality of services since the virtual machine is
> implemented largely in hardware. The mainframe types provide virtual
> machines for the individual vm administrators to administrate remotely.
> A hardware change can be transparent to the vm admin and service users.
> It may also breed a more cautious approach; crashing a mainframe can be
> like hitting the emergency power cutoff in a data center full of
> thousands of unix rackmount hosts.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"I must acknowledge, once and for all, that the purpose of
diplomacy is to prolong a crisis.", Mr. Spock
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFIQfEqS9HxQb37XmcRAoZiAJsGV+FWgZSHbboB+/+EQfUtUt3cmgCgkdRc
feWrBsRnk/myiqbVIRdCJ3M=
=kzCP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: