Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Mansfield who wrote (1783)	5/13/1998 2:55:00 PM
From: John Mansfield	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 9818

[HAMASAKI] 'can it be done at all, at any price, by anyone' 'At this stage of the game, it's not about cost. It's about can it be done at all, at any price, by anyone. I know what I can do. I've seen some amazing feats of coding performed. There are tasks that I would walk away from, they can't be done. Five thousand dollars an hour and you want a guarentee? Forget it... not interested.' __________ 'On Wed, 13 May 1998 00:57:02, "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <nospam@osg.eds.com> wrote: > fedinfo@halifax.com wrote: > > > Please explain what is involved in the elimination of TCAM in favor of > > something else? > > If the something else is anything other than a Y2k release of TCAM, > you're talking a total rewrite. If Cory didn't make up the part about > putting message processing code into the MCP, it would get truly > ghastly. Make it up? I was screaming in terror on the inside when I saw it. 80% screaming, the other 20% was crying from embarrassment because they (How can we forgive them?) were proud of the system. For the non-S/370 code-heads out there, a TCAM MCP is written in S/370 assembly language using macros that most assembler programmers haven't seen. STARTMH, FORWARD, SCAN, come to mind. It looks vaguely like an SGML formatted document. The language standards are not OS/VS2 (remember this name?) They're TCAM standards. TCAM has its own CVT, its own protection key, its own user side macros for queue management. Some of the standard macros have TCAM specific extensions. When you slam application specific logic in, it becomes a huge mess > > The obvious candidate for a rewrite is IBM's MQseries, but there isn't > enough time left. Yes, but that gets us back to the discussion from a few months ago... is MQseries the new TCAM? I thought yes, someone told me no. > > > This appears to be analogous to the FAA IBM 3083 problem. IBM has said that > > the 3083 can not be fixed. > > Not at all analogous; a fix is available but the FAA doesn't want to > spend the money. IBM sells processors that are compatible with the 3083 > and Y2k compliant. Let's all sing like the biridies do, cheap, cheap, > cheap, cheap, cheap. I think the 3083s used by the FAA have microcode and hardware changes. I don't know what they are. At this stage of the game, it's not about cost. It's about can it be done at all, at any price, by anyone. I know what I can do. I've seen some amazing feats of coding performed. There are tasks that I would walk away from, they can't be done. Five thousand dollars an hour and you want a guarentee? Forget it... not interested. cory hamasaki pick your battles. ______ Subject: Re: Why The US IS Sunk Date: 13 May 1998 01:28:33 GMT From: kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net (cory hamasaki) Organization: IBM.NET Newsgroups: comp.software.year-2000 References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7