8 Apr
2013
8 Apr
'13
3:19 p.m.
On 04/07/2013 05:40 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 04/07/2013 03:55 PM, MG wrote:
For the record, you have been spouting off for two days about how dead the
mainframe is. You've been doing a lot more than just quoting an article
written by a journalist who knows even less about this stuff than you do.
YOU have been railing on and on, including your dreaded ad hominem attacks,
as if it's your personal mission in life to CAUSE the mainframe industry to
die. You started this pointless drivel by mentioning (not even quoting, that
I recall, just MENTIONING, but I could be wrong about that) an article
published in a good but notoriously "oooh shiny" publication. An article, I
might add, that was very poorly-researched.
Actually, I posted the link to the article; just was something
interesting to read. While, yes, the deatils in it may be/ are a bit
fuzzy; the overall idea of how to best archive computer data (programs,
documents, etc...) is an interesting never-ending issue.
--
--- Dave Woyciesjes
--- ICQ# 905818
--- AIM - woyciesjes
--- CompTIA A+ Certified IT Tech - http://certification.comptia.org/
--- HDI Certified Support Center Analyst - http://www.ThinkHDI.com/
Registered Linux user number 464583
"Computers have lots of memory but no imagination."
"The problem with troubleshooting is that trouble shoots back."
- from some guy on the internet.
For those
that say the mainframe (specifically IBM 360/370/390/z-series
architecture) is dead, I would say not.
For the record, /I/ didn't say it was dead; I was mostly quoting
others and also referenced an article.