Re: Cost of tools (was: Migrating from OPS/MVS to AF/OPERATOR)
- From: edjaffe@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Edward Jaffe)
- Date: 16 May 2006 07:57:22 -0700
Bruce Hewson wrote:
I continue to be astonished/annoyed/aggravated etc by how many sysprogs/developers/operators insist on using basic Mod-2 (24x80) format 3270 emulator screens.
Amen to that, Bro!
Funny story. During last month's beta testing of an upcoming software release, it was discovered (by a participating early tester at a *large* government installation) that the software no longer worked _at all_ with a 24x80 screen. Nobody here ever noticed!
<FYI>
When logging on natively to TSO/E (not going through our Session Manager), I use 51x80 primary size and 62x132 alternate size.
When logging on via our Session Manager, I use 62x80 primary size and 62x132 alternate size.
In both cases, I set the ISPF Screen Format to "1. Data"
</FYI>
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
edjaffe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to listserv@xxxxxxxxxxx with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
.
- References:
- Re: Cost of tools (was: Migrating from OPS/MVS to AF/OPERATOR)
- From: Bruce Hewson
- Re: Cost of tools (was: Migrating from OPS/MVS to AF/OPERATOR)
- Prev by Date: RE: Valid TSO Users
- Next by Date: RE: Valid TSO Users
- Previous by thread: Re: Cost of tools (was: Migrating from OPS/MVS to AF/OPERATOR)
- Next by thread: Re: Cost of tools (was: Migrating from OPS/MVS to AF/OPERATOR)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|