Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)


"Richard" <riplin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1166837413.635751.150290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

P. Raulerson wrote:

To be fair though, I did sound arrogant, and that was not intended. I
apologize for that. It is just that I tend to solve these kinds of
issues
several times per quarter, and, if this case is what I think it is, using
a
centralized VM to deal with this is probably a very good idea.

Given that they probably have Windows PCs everywhere they need them,
then taking the programs off those machines and loading them onto
sufficient new central machines with VMs may be just additional cost.


I think you are not aware of how incompatible the different versions of
Windows are. Just because there is a 'Windows' machine sitting on someone's
desk, it does not by any strech of the imagination guarantee that an old
program like this is described to be will run.

Running the thing on VM does.


I think that it would be a very good idea to actually find out what the
application does, how it works, how many use it and where, before
thinking up pre-packaged 'solutions' that may be totally inappropriate.


Well - you might think that - but then again, you might also realize the
application apparently already works in the environment it is in, and
changing the environment is not a snap your fingers just make a change
thing.

On the other hand, to me, you sound like a PC person who has little
experience on other platforms.

I have done a decade with mainframes and nearly three decades with
departmental (Unix and other) servers, and with networked small
machines, and (overlapping) a decade of web server based systems.


Then we are about equal in time, though we obviously have experiences. I
tend to find solutions for clients that are right and work the first time,
and make economic sense. I'm not really wedded to any particular technology.


Bet you would argue that running Microsoft
Office on standalone machines is faster than running it under Citrix.
(Hint: it is much faster under Citrix. :) Where are you coming from, and
am
I anywhere close to right? :)

I wouldn't argue anything at all about Windows stuff, I try to avoid it
as much as possible having started developing for Windows 2 and getting
more disenchanted with each new version.


Pre 1990 Windows development (i.e. Windows 3.0 or above) was not a lot of
fun. I used Mac's back then for clients in the publishing industry who
needed graphics. They just worked, and in fact, I have one client who still
runs Mac II's today for some software he is unwilling to pay to upgrade. I
keep a couple of them in the garage just in case one of his breaks. And a
copy of the old AWP loaded on them JIC.

Still - developing on Windows today is nothing at all like that, and it is a
miracle anytime older software will run. Windows XP SP2 especially seemed to
break the world.

Whether MS Office is faster on a standalone or on a central server a)
depends entirely on the level or resources of each and on such things
as the speed of the connection and utilization and b) is not
partcularly interesting.


Well - not to be intentionally insulting, but you are simply wrong here. A
slow DSL connection connected to a Citrix Server will usually outperform a
fast machine loading off a local disk or a network share. The network share,
will almost always be faster. And your statement that it depends entirely on
the relative resources shows that you do not have a sufficient or working
knowledge of the subject.

As to interesting or not - well your whole point seems to be that you think
VM would be a bad choice, and you don't like having your opinion challenged.

As I said, depending on the details, it might not be a viable choice.

But it is probably a good choice and one that will save money, effort, time,
and please the client. Those things that tend to keep
consultants employed and solvent.

That usually is interesting to me.

YMMV, etc. etc. etc.






.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "Do not have access to logon to this session"
    ... different machines and ended up with the same results. ... EventLog on these clients? ... Windows XP, Windows 2000, and Windows NT ... home to Remote Desktop on their Windows XP Pro SP2 machines here ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)
  • RE: Windows XP Fax Printing
    ... I understand that three of five Windows XP clients cannot send fax through ... Make sure the Fax service is started in your Windows XP computer. ... Microsoft CSS Online Newsgroup Support ... On 1 of the machines, I uninstalled and re-installed the Fax Services ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: "Do not have access to logon to this session"
    ... EventLog on these clients? ... Windows XP, Windows 2000, and Windows NT ... something over 100 client machines as members. ... home to Remote Desktop on their Windows XP Pro SP2 machines here ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)
  • Re: Sharing with workgroup
    ... Your clients should be able to get to [tmp]. ... There is a slight change in the way the Windows machines fail to connect..... ... the Windows clients can't access the tmp directory. ...
    (linux.redhat)
  • [opensuse] KDE4 Remoting: Fantastic!
    ... commercial Windows software developers. ... used a rather clumsy KVM switch to change from my Linux hardware to my ... I set up a connection to my XP-Pro machine in an ... much easier to work with both machines at the same time - which I often do. ...
    (SuSE)