Re: Newbie question on table design.

"David Cressey" <cressey73_at_verizon.net> writes:
> Fair enough. IBM culture was big enough, at the time, so it could
> accommodate a large number of internal subcultures. The part of IBM culture
> that was visible to me was definitely not into interactive development.
>
> Even though they had interactive terminals, on line editing, etc. etc.
> compiling a source program was a batch job. And that affected the workflow.

re:

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#2 Newbie question on table design
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#7 Newbie question on table design
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#8 Newbie question on table design
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#9 Newbie question on table design

no, the comment was the "customer" market size for interactive computing was compareable to other vendor's interactive computing market size.

that is separate from the comment that the internal interactive use was extensive.

however, the observation was that the batch market size was so much larger (than either) ... that it skewed a lot of perception.

there were several internal battles over feature/function of 3270 terminals ... with product managers frequently claiming the 3270 major market was for "data entry" (related to batch environments) as opposed to interactive computing (in part ... again ... because the "data entry" market size was so much larger than the interactive computing market size).

for some topic drift ... part of it was resolved with the introduction of ibm/pc. i've frequently commented that a big part of the uptake for ibm/pc was that there was large business volume in 3270 desktop terminals. ibm/pc cost about the same as 3270 terminal ... and it could emulate a 3270 terminal with some local application software capability ... in a single desktop footprint. it would be an easy business justification no-brainer to switch the 3270 terminal allocated budget from real 3270s to ibm/pc. lots of past posts related to terminal emulation and market uptake for ibm/pc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#emulation

the ("original") virtual machine system was cp40 developed at the science center
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech

on a specially modified 360/40 with virtual memory hardware ... and "CMS" (cambridge monitor system) for interactive computing. When standard 360/67 with virtual memory became available, cp40 was ported and renamed cp67. later with the introduction of virtual memory standard on all 370s, cp67 morphed into vm370 (and cms was renamed to the conversational monitor system).

the really big volumes in vm370 started to appear with 4341s ... with the explosion in the mid-range market segment (also seen by DEC with vax/vms). subsequently in the mid-80s, this market segment started moving to workstations and large PCs. Received on Fri May 04 2007 - 14:57:10 CEST