Re: Cobol for Visual sutdio

William M. Klein wrote:
Concerning the interchange between Michael Wojcik and Pete Dashwood (snipped in this note)

As someone with an historical bias toward both COBOL and Micro Focus (<G> not MicroFocus), here is what I come away with from the exchange:

I'm not going to repeat the whole of your message, but as usual I think you summarized it neatly.

The cost factor, and we tend to forget this. Us loners or cottage industry types just have to do it ALL - the recent exchange between Pete and myself about virus checking. Not only do we have to get to grips with languages but reluctantly, certainly in my case, have to become our own tech support on the O/S and putting things to right.

Compare that to my son and future daughter-in-law. He works marketing natural gas to the States, and is required to be on stand-by about every fourth weekend. There might be a glitch in pipeline delivery, and he has to interject to re-route the gas (via e-mail, telephone ), so it reaches the customer in a timely fashion.

She went to University for catering and her career has been looking after old folks, and as a manager, providing them with meals to the best of her abilities. Initially challenged and becoming knowledgeable, she gets bored with a job, then she likes to switch. So currently for those same old folks she arranges/negotiates housing for them - she's been at it two years but already has itchy feet to move on.

Both use computers. But neither knows the first thing about machine setup, virus checking, what is an ISP or God knows what else, which certainly includes computer direct cable connection. They have a problem - whistle the laptop into the corporate tecchies, and they waltz out the door with a brand new machine loaded with all the necessaries, plus of course the 'Latest' O/S and updated 'goodies' - and neither of them expends any personal energy nor do they spend a damned penny of their own money!

Same for software - be it e-mail MS Word or Excel - just ask the tecchies what they need do to use a misunderstood feature in the software.

For the cotage industry - regrettably COBOL is expensive. A small successful shop, say 6 programmers, although they don't like it, can absorb compiler costs by holding their noses because they know their organization is making a comfortable income.

Jimmy
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Committee, youre fired!
    ... > bettre-than sliced bread replacement for COBOL. ... I don't use them much but I understand why many folks ... interfaces solve the real horror story of separate compilation ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Cobol coders: Going, going, gone?
    ... COBOL applications which have been wrapped as services and integrate well ... One might think, Mr Dashwood, that Management ... if a company was Truly Daring they'd replace their indexed files ... that's what folks were used to. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Cobol coders: Going, going, gone?
    ... Pete Dashwood wrote: ... Your COBOL ... Focusing on bad management is only valuable if it can be improved ... files because that's what folks were used to. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Using Delphi 2006 to target .NET 2.0
    ... Probably 90+% of the folks here don't even know of it's existence. ... Because it's a crappy language. ... it is no worse than Cobol or Jovial... ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)