Predictions? 
Author Message
 Predictions?

When is ASCII going to replace EBCDIC on IBM mainframes?

I say do it now and be done with it.  Personally I like EBCDIC better
because I have lots of stuff memorized therein, but hey, the writing is on
the wall.



Thu, 05 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?

Quote:

>When is ASCII going to replace EBCDIC on IBM mainframes?

Why should it?

with kind regards

Volker Bandke
(BSP GmbH)



Fri, 06 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?

Quote:
>When is ASCII going to replace EBCDIC on IBM mainframes?

>I say do it now and be done with it.  Personally I like EBCDIC better
>because I have lots of stuff memorized therein, but hey, the writing is on
>the wall.

I seem to remember that the IBM S/360 'supported' a version of ASCII
via a bit in the PSW.  I also remember it being removed in the S/370.
It appears that it wasn't a very popular option since it's no longer
around.

Dave

P.S. Standard Disclaimer: I work for them, but I definitely don't
speak for them (especially in this post).



Fri, 06 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?
The only function that the S/360 ASCII  bit performed was
to determine the coding for the packed decimal sign.

Judy Anderson
Product Development
Advanced Software Technologies Company, Ltd.

Quote:

>I seem to remember that the IBM S/360 'supported' a version of ASCII
>via a bit in the PSW.  I also remember it being removed in the S/370.
>It appears that it wasn't a very popular option since it's no longer
>around.

>Dave



Fri, 06 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?

Quote:

>Why should it?

Because in connecting all these vast machines to the internet etc, it would
be nice if they all had the same character set.


Fri, 06 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?

Quote:
> Because in connecting all these vast machines to the internet etc, it would
> be nice if they all had the same character set.

My employer's mainframes, as I suppose many others, are now connected to
the Internet.

But the volume of Internet transactions handled by our mainframes is
miniscule as compared to internal network transactions.



Fri, 06 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?
<FlameBait>
Forget ASCII, unless you only want English, or Latin-based languages. All
systems need to convert to UNICODE, if we truly want to be "global".
</FlameBait>


Fri, 06 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?

Quote:


>>Why should it?

>Because in connecting all these vast machines to the internet etc, it would
>be nice if they all had the same character set.

What should be the problem connecting an (EBCDIC) mainframe machine to an ASCII Internet?
It is being done already all over the place

with kind regards

Volker Bandke
(BSP GmbH)



Sat, 07 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?


Quote:
>When is ASCII going to replace EBCDIC on IBM mainframes?
>I say do it now and be done with it.  Personally I like EBCDIC better
>because I have lots of stuff memorized therein, but hey, the writing is
>on the wall.

70% of the data of the world is in mainframe computers (or so they say)
and that's all EBCDIC.  If mainframes were to change as you suggest, all
of these data would have to be converted to ASCII and I can tell you with
certainty: this is NOT going to happen (take it from someone who's been in
the conversion business for almost 20 years).  

If you're interested in this subject, do some reading on S/360 computers
and why IBM insisted on an architecture that didn't require customers to
convert their applications (and data) each time they upgrade to a bigger
machine.  This, ironically, lead to the biggest flop in IBM's history: the
failure of the "Future System" (FS) project in the 1970s.




Sat, 07 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?
If I recall from my reading, the promoters of ASCII wanted something that
would stuff all the good stuff in 7 bits.  EBCDIC needs 8.  IBM had a chance
to veto the project but chose not too.

the rest is disaster.


Quote:


>>When is ASCII going to replace EBCDIC on IBM mainframes?

>>I say do it now and be done with it.  Personally I like EBCDIC better
>>because I have lots of stuff memorized therein, but hey, the writing is
>>on the wall.

>70% of the data of the world is in mainframe computers (or so they say)
>and that's all EBCDIC.  If mainframes were to change as you suggest, all
>of these data would have to be converted to ASCII and I can tell you with
>certainty: this is NOT going to happen (take it from someone who's been in
>the conversion business for almost 20 years).

>If you're interested in this subject, do some reading on S/360 computers
>and why IBM insisted on an architecture that didn't require customers to
>convert their applications (and data) each time they upgrade to a bigger
>machine.  This, ironically, lead to the biggest flop in IBM's history: the
>failure of the "Future System" (FS) project in the 1970s.





Sat, 07 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?
translating letters and numbers is a snap, but seems to me with other values
you are inviting disaster.  Plus you will always have to have a table to
refer to to know when to translate and when not to.

I just think it's a mess that should be vanquished.


Quote:
>On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 07:49:22 -0800, "Bill Bershinger"


>>>Why should it?

>>Because in connecting all these vast machines to the internet etc, it
would
>>be nice if they all had the same character set.

>What should be the problem connecting an (EBCDIC) mainframe machine to an
ASCII Internet?
>It is being done already all over the place

>with kind regards

>Volker Bandke
>(BSP GmbH)



Sat, 07 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?

(regarding ASCII encoding on S/3x0)

Quote:
>If I remember correctly, the original 360 was dual mode (ASCII or EBCDIC) but
>IBM did not document the fact that it could be brought up in ASCII mode, thus,
>it was never used....it may still be there, I dont know.

It is the bit that got used for BC/EC mode.  It only changes the sign
nibbles for packed and/or zoned decimal instructions.  It was never used,
since it could only be changed in supervisor mode, and no OS (as far as
IBM knew) ever used it.  

-- glen



Sat, 07 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?
Weeeeeeeeeeeel maybe and maybe not.

Quote:

>If I remember correctly, the original 360 was dual mode (ASCII or EBCDIC)
but
>IBM did not document the fact that it could be brought up in ASCII mode,
thus,
>it was never used....it may still be there, I dont know.

No. The "ASCII" mode had nothing to do with using ascii characters. I don't
recall the specifics, but I'm sure Seymour or one of the other tribal elders
will know.

Quote:
>With the TRT instruction a simple 1 line program can fix all your network
>endpoints with little problem, why bother altering the entire machine char
>set?

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Depends on the codepage dunnit? The correct translation is
quite unobvious, since you have to know what codepages the "ends" are using
in order to correctly translate them.

Quote:
>2ASCII AMODE 31
>2ASCII RMODE 24
>2ASCII RSECT  - expects parm of a(area_to_xlat) in p-string form
(llll,data)
>       STM   14,12,12(13)
>       USING 2ASCII,15
>       L     10,0(1)
>       L     11,0(10)
>       BCTR  11,0
>       EX    10,TR2ASC
>       DROP  15
>       LM    14,12,12(13)
>       BSM   0,14
>TR2ASC TR    4(0,11),ASCII
>ASCII  DS    0XL256
>       your mapping or use that IBM macro thing...whatever...here
>       END   2ASCII

Scuse me, but what assembler do you know of that will accept a section name
beginning with anything other than an alphabetic or national character?

Quote:
>I'll leave the obvious enhancements (len > 256, 2EBCDIC, etc) as an
exercise
>in repetive repetition....

Yup.

Chris.



Sat, 07 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Predictions?
 >
 > When is ASCII going to replace EBCDIC on IBM mainframes?
 >
 > I say do it now and be done with it.  Personally I like EBCDIC better
 > because I have lots of stuff memorized therein, but hey, the writing
is on
 > the wall.

I'm against it!  I was introduced to ASCII way back when, using
teletypes and paper tape readers.  I learned to hate ASCII then and I
still hate it now.

================================

================================



Sat, 07 Jul 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 31 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3]

 Relevant Pages 

1. Predictions?

2. Prediction of the ST market ???

3. Time capsule predictions

4. PREDICTION COMPETITION

5. PC Week prediction?

6. Time capsule predictions

7. How accurate are the branch-prediction numbers?

8. Branch prediction

9. MVSGET file name prediction

10. MVSGET file name prediction

11. branch prediction counters

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software