Re: mainframe OS term needed

Subject: Re: mainframe OS term needed
From: Melvin Klassen <KLASSEN -at- UVVM -dot- BITNET>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 1994 11:11:11 PST

On Mon, 3 Jan 1994 09:16:55 MST, Kathleen Nosbisch <kat -at- NETWISE -dot- COM> wrote:
> From: Gotlieb Carl R1478C <r1478c -at- TEMPECCPB -dot- SPS -dot- MOT -dot- COM>
> > Are there any mainframe experts in the house?
> > I'm in the closing stages of writing a mainframe data security manual. I've
> > been holding off on this but I need to come up with a generic term for the
> > so-called "operating systems" that run under the MVS and VM operating
> > systems, such as TSO, IMS, and CMS. My client says TSO, IMS, and CMS
> > are not true operating systems and not to call them that, but they can't
> > come up with another term. I've been using "user interface systems."
> > Can anybody supply me with a better term? (BTW: TSO is to MVS like
> > Windows is to DOS. I think.
> > So what do you call Windows?).
>We call TSO, IMS, DB/2, and CICS "subsystems" that run under the MVS
>"operating system."

It was accurate to omit CMS from the above list.

and on Mon, 27 Dec 1993 11:02 MEZ, "JACK P. SHAW" <jsh -at- SOFTWARE-AG -dot- DE> wrote:

> CMS is to VM what TSO is/was to MVS: a Conversational Monitor System,
> and hence a TP monitor. However, in the VM world, there is the possibility to
> run other operating systems such as MVS and VSE in CMS--so it's viewed as
> more than just an interactive monitor. Therefore, it is itself usually
> referred to as an operating system--VM/CMS. But if it's being used pure and
> not as a platform for other operating systems, I'd call it, too, an
> interactive monitor system or TP monitor.

I find many faults with the above description,
because it confuses the role of 'VM' with the role of 'CMS'.

The VM environment builds a "virtual-reality" :-) environment,
so that IBM's operating systems, namely MVS/ESA, DOS/VSE, and CMS,
can function under its control.

The MVS/ESA and DOS/VSE and CMS operating systems are exactly that --
*true* operating systems. Admittedly, CMS "cuts some corners";
it is not possible to run CMS on the "bare" hardware,
unlike MVS/ESA and DOS/VSE, which were designed to run on the "bare" hardware.

One cannot load the CMS (Conversational Monitor System) into a virtual machine,
and then load the MVS or VSE systems under the control of CMS,
i.e., one can run MVS-under-VM, but cannot run MVS-under-CMS-under-VM.

Note that many MVS and VSE applications can be copied to a CMS disk,
and the CMS system will support many of the supervisor-functions
which that application will request, e.g., read-a-card, print-a-line,
get-the-time-of-day, etc.

It is a mistake to classify CMS as a "TP monitor".

It is a complete operating system, with a console, a card-reader,
a line-printer, various disks, a file-system, and such.

Previous by Author: Re: warning: possible Internet scam
Next by Author: Re: homophones
Previous by Thread: Re: mainframe OS term needed
Next by Thread: Re: Xerox Docutech

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads