TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
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
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,
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.