Re: mainframe career advice

In article <ziE_e.109279$4i6.86064@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Defaultuser <Defaultuser@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
><docdwarf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dhcqo5$fbr$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> In article <11jjjhv3mtulq26@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> HeyBub <heybubNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>Mirlitone wrote:
>>>> I confess i know nothing about mainframes.
>>>>
>>>> I shouldn't have said "dying", let me say that again :
>>>> "by working with these rather old and innatractive technologies"
>>>
>>>I understand. You can't put flames on a 80x24 monitor.
>>
>> In a system evaluation, years ago, I wrote 'Anyone who states 'you can do
>> anything on a mainframe that you can do on a PC' has not pondered why it
>> is that one never sees a flying-toaster screen-saver on a 3278 terminal;
>> each architecture has functions that would be inappropriate to attempt to
>> implement on the other.'
>
>That's not architecture, that's just based on the usage.

Ummmm... I thought that things like bus-width were matters of
architecture.

>'You can do anything in a bungalow exactly as you can in a house' - doesn't
>mean I ponder why I've never seen one with an stair lift.

According to http://www.m-w.com a bungalow *is* a house, usually.

>I do recall someone taking a partition on a mainframe installing Linux, and
>then a dos emulator in order to play an ancient version of pong once...but I
>doubt anyone would have admitted to that somewhere where google could find
>it.

This might have been done after my statement was made... Mr Torvalds did
not begin his kernel, I believe, until 1991.

>
>>>And a paycheck is so, so YESTERDAY!
>> Even for those who make use of direct deposit?
>>
>> DD
>I would say especially for those who make use of DD....

Well, glad *that's* cleared up, then.

DD

.