Re: sys/36 to 236

At 08:19 PM 3/26/98 -0500, Roy H Schnauss wrote:
>I am trying to convert from a sys/36 to a 236.  I am trying to do this so
>that I can avoid the year 2000 problems with the operating system.  I also
>need a 236 for any year 2000 update sofware to run to fix the application
>software.  Neil wrote me and said that he didn't think that those machines
>supported the year 2000.  Does anyone know if this is the case?  should I
>go with a 436 over the 236?
>
>Roy Schnauss
>+---
PART 1
Have not  met an AS/400  the did not support the Yr2000- It is more of an
operating system  problem.

One  of the  differences besides cost between the 236 & 436 models is the
dual  environment of the 436  [36 & 400 native].  I  like the 436  but that
does not mean it is the right choice unless you plan to  live in  both
worlds. FYI  any of the  latest 400 models allow 36applications to run in
an easy  way -  nicer than 36EE of the past.

As for the S/36  at SSP 7.1 or better  yet 7.5 [ with VASP is the important
 part] many of  your basic concerns go away. ( see IBM web site for  what
VASP does &  does not do  for you). One of the  elementary  functions of
VASP is to  overcome the file expirations at 12/31/99  and  keep it
permanent as you intended, when that was a life time &  a half away..

If  you  want a supported release of OS400 thru 2000 the minimum level you
should consider is V3R2 for CISC  systems[until 5/2000] or  V4R[current] -
All others are scheduled to have support expire before 2000.  Think  that
is your  concern.

PART 2
>AFAIK there are no S/36 applications for Y2K correction process.  You may
be able
>to find a company in your area which is willing to let you put your source
code
>on their machine and let you run it through their impact/upgrade product.
Don't
>know, but there may be companies that provide this kind of service.  You
may want
>to check with the vendors for Y2K analysis applications, but I think they
charge
>by line of code and it could be pretty spendy.
>
1. Well -  there are tools to do those corrections for the 36 but few good
ones  as the market is limited. If the  tool will find the  date references
and you  correct them  - that  might be the fine for many 36  folks from a
cost  view.\\ Not  going to address the specifics on the list to avoid
violations//

2. The idea of using a  friends system to  pass through the tool  could be
problematic not  to mention  the legal concerns.  Most tools are licensed
as is your other software with all that implies.  Enuff  said !!

3. If  the suggestion  is to go to a company that  does this as a service -
yes most charge  by the LoC.  This can run form  what appears to be pennies
per LoC to  much larger costs.  It should be  relative to the services and
deliverables you receive in return.  Those services you do not receive [nor
pay for]  you can expect to come from your staff or department or yourself.
It is a time value call.

FWIW- I cannot see anyone doing  a Y2K  conversion manually without some
good reason such as
- LT 100K LoC & the staff  time to complete, test &  educate
- the application &  system are going to be retired
        and the  1/1/2000  date will not  enter into the system
       until  well after all testing & Training  happen  
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---