|
Philip, >Absolutely true, but it's all software - and if the people at TigerTools >have already gotten a handle on how to do it surely they would try an keep >one step ahead of the game ? It will be interesting to see if/how they cope >with this scenario. "Try to keep one step ahead of the game" is the operative phrase. So do you want to have to check with them before applying PTF's? And what if you otherwise need a PTF but TigerTools has not figured out how to circumvent it yet? After all, it has taken some time for anyone to come out with this method. Running a system where performance relies on an undocumented hack and which is clearly against IBM's intentions is walking on thin ice in my book. In fact, I'm surprised that they even have the guts to market this. I would hope they have a law firm on retainer -- one would surmise IBM will not put this in the same category as a product which eliminates 5250 data streams by using client server. Doug
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.