• Subject: RE: An odd thing
  • From: John Cirocco <jcirocco@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:53:37 -0500


>>I wonder if someone told them that COBOL was better for solving the Y2K
>>issue? You never can tell what those consulting firms will say.

First and foremost I want it understood that I am NOT sticking up for the
consulting firms out there
when it comes to Cobol but...

I don't think that most are pushing Cobol down anyones necks.

I my past life at CTG, they noticed quite a while ago that most major companies
are still running legacy apps
whipped up for 20+ years and written in Cobol.  I really believe the thinking
here is fix first, for Y2K, and
re-engineer later.  They (CTG) continue to train Cobal programmers on an
assembly line but are
racking in the big bucks because of it.  Internally they talk the eBusiness
talk, but with much of
their $$$ coming from mainframes, they walk the Cobol walk.

My $.02

John Cirocco
| 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

This thread ...

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 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].