Another nasty holiday season on RBT

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:38:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

I don't know whether Cobol is still the most prevalent language in the
financial services but a few years ago my boat was parked next to a
guy's who worked for IBM on a project to replace the computers and
design a totally new software system for a major bank here.

The testing of each portion of the new system took in the neighborhood
of 6 months and IBM was committed to have several of their people
assigned at the bank for a number of years after the system was
completed in case of any problems.

Given the time lost and problems that might be encountered I would
think that changing an operational Cobol system over to a different
language might not be exactly what a bank or large financial house
might want to do.


Cheers,
John B.

On 1/24/2019 6:30 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:38:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

I don't know whether Cobol is still the most prevalent language in the
financial services but a few years ago my boat was parked next to a
guy's who worked for IBM on a project to replace the computers and
design a totally new software system for a major bank here.

The testing of each portion of the new system took in the neighborhood
of 6 months and IBM was committed to have several of their people
assigned at the bank for a number of years after the system was
completed in case of any problems.

Given the time lost and problems that might be encountered I would
think that changing an operational Cobol system over to a different
language might not be exactly what a bank or large financial house
might want to do.

Like so many things, it probably comes down to benefits vs. detriments.
You've described some detriments of migrating from a working COBOL
system to something more modern. What would be the benefits of investing
that time?

Or flipping the coin: What are the detriments of continuing to run a
COBOL system that's performing well?

In case anyone takes this wrong (hey, it's Usenet), I'm asking serious
questions. I really want to know.

(I do know one guy who, after retiring from his normal job, got several
years of good freelance work because he was good at COBOL.)

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 2:38:43 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

--
- Frank Krygowski

Tell us where these Cobol Programs are still being used. You seem to give up your own responsibility to what you consider to be a higher authority without the slightest whim if you are trying to make a point.

Can you explain what the Wall Street Journal would know about common programming languages simply by saying that one guy has been working for 70 years at it?

If YOU have no knowledge why do you comment?

On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 3:30:15 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:38:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

I don't know whether Cobol is still the most prevalent language in the
financial services but a few years ago my boat was parked next to a
guy's who worked for IBM on a project to replace the computers and
design a totally new software system for a major bank here.

The testing of each portion of the new system took in the neighborhood
of 6 months and IBM was committed to have several of their people
assigned at the bank for a number of years after the system was
completed in case of any problems.

Given the time lost and problems that might be encountered I would
think that changing an operational Cobol system over to a different
language might not be exactly what a bank or large financial house
might want to do.


Cheers,
John B.

They aren't changed over. They upgrade to entirely new computer system with a know good software package. There are about five companies that manufacture these systems on the large base computers of people like IBM.

On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 5:00:50 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/24/2019 6:30 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:38:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

I don't know whether Cobol is still the most prevalent language in the
financial services but a few years ago my boat was parked next to a
guy's who worked for IBM on a project to replace the computers and
design a totally new software system for a major bank here.

The testing of each portion of the new system took in the neighborhood
of 6 months and IBM was committed to have several of their people
assigned at the bank for a number of years after the system was
completed in case of any problems.

Given the time lost and problems that might be encountered I would
think that changing an operational Cobol system over to a different
language might not be exactly what a bank or large financial house
might want to do.

Like so many things, it probably comes down to benefits vs. detriments.
You've described some detriments of migrating from a working COBOL
system to something more modern. What would be the benefits of investing
that time?

Or flipping the coin: What are the detriments of continuing to run a
COBOL system that's performing well?

In case anyone takes this wrong (hey, it's Usenet), I'm asking serious
questions. I really want to know.

(I do know one guy who, after retiring from his normal job, got several
years of good freelance work because he was good at COBOL.)

--
- Frank Krygowski

I bought a new 64 bit 4 core HP desktop. I got a light line instead of a phone connection. I went from being in the bottom 5% of computer speed to the top 10% in the entire world. My system boots so fast you don't even notice it. The screen takes more time to come up than the computer to boot and stabilize.

With large scale systems this is a relatively minor upgrade. Do you suppose a large banking system would worry about changing from an old system if they could get a performance upgrade that substantial?

On 1/24/2019 7:32 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 5:00:50 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/24/2019 6:30 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:38:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

I don't know whether Cobol is still the most prevalent language in the
financial services but a few years ago my boat was parked next to a
guy's who worked for IBM on a project to replace the computers and
design a totally new software system for a major bank here.

The testing of each portion of the new system took in the neighborhood
of 6 months and IBM was committed to have several of their people
assigned at the bank for a number of years after the system was
completed in case of any problems.

Given the time lost and problems that might be encountered I would
think that changing an operational Cobol system over to a different
language might not be exactly what a bank or large financial house
might want to do.

Like so many things, it probably comes down to benefits vs. detriments.
You've described some detriments of migrating from a working COBOL
system to something more modern. What would be the benefits of investing
that time?

Or flipping the coin: What are the detriments of continuing to run a
COBOL system that's performing well?

In case anyone takes this wrong (hey, it's Usenet), I'm asking serious
questions. I really want to know.

(I do know one guy who, after retiring from his normal job, got several
years of good freelance work because he was good at COBOL.)

--
- Frank Krygowski

I bought a new 64 bit 4 core HP desktop. I got a light line instead of a phone connection. I went from being in the bottom 5% of computer speed to the top 10% in the entire world. My system boots so fast you don't even notice it. The screen takes more time to come up than the computer to boot and stabilize.

With large scale systems this is a relatively minor upgrade. Do you suppose a large banking system would worry about changing from an old system if they could get a performance upgrade that substantial?


Large firms generally, especially banks and financial firms,
still do, in fact, run vintage mainframes with Cobol.

http://cobolcowboys.com/cobol-today/

Being 'old' is not a critical factor for things which work
well, for example my Corvair or the meat motor on my 1953
bicycle.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:00:47 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 6:30 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:38:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

I don't know whether Cobol is still the most prevalent language in the
financial services but a few years ago my boat was parked next to a
guy's who worked for IBM on a project to replace the computers and
design a totally new software system for a major bank here.

The testing of each portion of the new system took in the neighborhood
of 6 months and IBM was committed to have several of their people
assigned at the bank for a number of years after the system was
completed in case of any problems.

Given the time lost and problems that might be encountered I would
think that changing an operational Cobol system over to a different
language might not be exactly what a bank or large financial house
might want to do.

Like so many things, it probably comes down to benefits vs. detriments.
You've described some detriments of migrating from a working COBOL
system to something more modern. What would be the benefits of investing
that time?

Or flipping the coin: What are the detriments of continuing to run a
COBOL system that's performing well?

None. If you don't want any new functions.

The Bank Project I mentioned was to install new, thus better,
computers and to add functions, which seems to be the coming thing
here. I now see people paying the bill in the grocery store using
their hand phone.

In case anyone takes this wrong (hey, it's Usenet), I'm asking serious
questions. I really want to know.

I suspect that it is largely because busyness methods change and this
requires new functions in the computer. My bank, for example, has been
talking about doing away with "pass books" and making identification
solely a function of your hand phone which will require a change in
the central computer software.

(I do know one guy who, after retiring from his normal job, got several
years of good freelance work because he was good at COBOL.)

I've mentioned the chap that was apparently a permanent employee of a
major international oil company simply because he was the only guy
that could still use the esoteric language that they originally used
to write their computer system.



Cheers,
John B.

news18 wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 08:33:51 -0800, Zen Cycle wrote:


Removable media in an embedded system IDed you as accurately as a
resume.

Clueless asswipe, the question I asked was whether your projects
OS/applications were embedded _or_ used removable media, but since you
laughingly now seem to be claiming that embedded systems _don't _ use
removable media.....

https://www.delkin.com/blog/understa...emory-systems/
"In embedded systems, space is at a premium, and low power usage is
essential. For these systems, non-volatile or persistent storage can be
achieved using a removable media source, such as a USB drive, SD card,
or CF card, "

Going back, there were plenty variations of memory chips. At one stage,
that was how hardware received "code" updates. Using such shouldn't have
been an issue for Tommies Million dollar plus project.


Although classifying PROMs or EPROMs is theoretically correct, it's
certainly not common usage.

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:38:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/24/2019 5:13 PM, wrote:


You with your Cobol who doesn't seem to know that all of those cobol
systems were replaced by full systems written by Oracle and the like, ...
Cobol was used to write business systems and those were almost entirely
replaced with large company systems written by major corporations.

I'm not an expert on computer languages, but I remember reading this not
long ago in some liberal rag or another: "Indeed, despite its advanced
age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the
financial-services industry world-wide."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-you-...you-1537550913

What does WSJ stand for again?

I don't know whether Cobol is still the most prevalent language in the
financial services but a few years ago my boat was parked next to a
guy's who worked for IBM on a project to replace the computers and
design a totally new software system for a major bank here.

The testing of each portion of the new system took in the neighborhood
of 6 months and IBM was committed to have several of their people
assigned at the bank for a number of years after the system was
completed in case of any problems.

Given the time lost and problems that might be encountered I would
think that changing an operational Cobol system over to a different
language might not be exactly what a bank or large financial house
might want to do.


Cheers,
John B.

It's like road disc brakes or 12 speed cassettes. You know that eventually
you're going to have to convert, but it may be a good business decision to
postpone the conversion as long as possible.