RE: PTF for viewing open files (WRKJOB/DSPJOB) for V5R1 -- MIDRANGE-L

Neil,

Do you use Ops Nav, exclusively...?

EITHER WAY, I think the issue isn't just whether it's available at the
console..  I think the issue is whether it's available at the stroke of a
key...

In far less time than it took to type this reply, I created WRKJOBOPNF =
WRKJOB OPTION(*OPNF).  I then added an OUTPUT keyword  and parm so I could
CHGMSGSD CPX2313 and have <SysReq> 7 display my open files.  With the PTF on
V4R5, I can display the file I/O details, WHICH IS WHAT I NORMALLY LOOK AT,
with <SysReq> 7...

Now I put this together in about the time it would take Ops Nav TO LOAD...!
(Granted, it may be faster in V5R1.)

Point is, the functionality of the PTF has always been provided, and now
it's being TAKEN AWAY...  Having it in Ops Nav is a pretty lame excuse, to
me anyway, to TAKE AWAY functionality that ***someone representing the
iNation*** has asked to be continued...

REAL LAME excuse.. as if this REASONABLE request is just being made on some
whim...


I have NO problem with folks that prefer to see display scoping data first,
although I really believe they're a very SMALL minority.  I have a problem
with someone who presupposes that the (IMV) over-whelming majority both:
a) don't know what they're doing on a 400
b) can use Ops Nav

Once again, the statement made is that we can like it or lump it...  Instead
of putting it as a JOB option (as many have previously suggested), or at the
very least a SYSVAL, we can like it or lump it...  Hmmmph....


You wrote "I would need to be some kind of post-nuclear holocaust mutant to
be able to do the same for problems with a PC."

I think I've been quite charitable up to this point...  RANT(*ON)

If you find the person who made this decision...  I think you'll have found
your man...

IMHO, s/he most likely just transferred from a) the InfoCenter crew and/or
b) M$...

RANT(*OFF)


JMNSHO.

jt

| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Neil Palmer
| Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 10:13 PM
| To: midrange-l@midrange.com
| Subject: RE: PTF for viewing open files (WRKJOB/DSPJOB) for V5R1
|
|
| Excuse me if I wasn't clear in stating what I meant - I think it was
| around 4am here in the UK when I typed that.
| The PTF is to allow the Display Open Files option to default to showing
| file detail, like record #, # of file I/O's, etc., instead of showing
| Activation Group info by default.  There has been a PTF for this for every
| release going back to V2R3 I think.  IBM are now suggesting they don't
| have to provide a V5R1 PTF for this because they made some change to Ops
| Nav to let you see the view you want.  I'm saying that, because I won't
| use a PC as a console (I want the reliability and stability of a good old
| not-so-dumb Twinax terminal for a system console) that if I happen to be
| working at the system console (twinax) and have a need to display open
| file details, I am STILL going to be annoyed because they haven't provided
| a V5R1 PTF for this.  If they provided this PTF on past releases to avoid
| the necessity of pressing F10 to see the view you want by default, thereby
| implying pressing F10 was unnecessary work on the user's part and they
| would provide a fix, are they now suggesting that it's OK for someone
| working in a computer room on a twinax console  to have to press F10 on
| V5R1 (whereas it wasn't deemed OK on prior releases), or maybe they are
| suggesting you should now get up, go find a PC in some other room, and use
| OpsNav on that ?  It wasn't OK to spend a second to press F10 but it's OK
| to wait a minute (or more) that it will take to get OpsNav to get down to
| the same info ?  It's inconsistent reasoning, and I hate inconsistency !
| ;-)
|
| And to clarify what I thought I said, I think OpsNav is great, but I still
| want a twinax console (at least until a PC console can run with no Windows
| !).
| I don't like being forced to use a cruise missile when a .22 can do the
| job.  I know there are only so many development staff & dollars, but I
| still don't agree with adding enhancements and features in Ops Nav only
| that could and should be made available in CL or for green screen. I would
| argue that one of the things (small though it may be) that makes the
| 400/iSeries so reliable is a simple twinax console you can rely on.  I can
| count the times I've had problems with a twinax screen (apart for the tube
| eventually wearing out) over the last 22 years on the fingers of one hand.
|  I would need to be some kind of post-nuclear holocaust mutant to be able
| to do the same for problems with a PC.
|
|
| ==================================
|
| Stop Press !
|
| I guess IBM though I was clear enough.  Here's their reply !
| It looks like we'll finally get that user controlled switch (via a data
| area) soon !  ;-)
| (PS - I said mid Jan 2002 was fine - for me anyway !).
| ------------------------------------------------------------------
| ------------------------
|
|
| I like Neil's response. Really to the point with plenty of rational.  I
| spoke with the developer and read him the response.  He has agreed to
| put out a r510 ptf for this - the same as for prior releases and will
| put something in next release such that just creating a data area (or
| something similar) will enable the altered function.
| He is rather involved and committed  in getting other stuff out in
| December so he would like to target for mid Janurary 2002 as
| availability date for the ptf.  Will you/customer accept that?
| Let me know. THx.
|
|
|
| ...Neil
|
|
|
|
|
| "Andy Nolen-Parkhouse" <aparkhouse@mediaone.net>
| Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| 2001/11/30 06:44
| Please respond to midrange-l
|
|
|         To:     <midrange-l@midrange.com>
|         cc:
|         Subject:        RE: PTF for viewing open files
| (WRKJOB/DSPJOB) for V5R1
|
|
| Neil,
|
| I'm not sure I see the link between using Operations Navigator to work
| with jobs and your statement that you don't want a PC console.  I agree
| with the wariness to control a production system with a PC, but I have
| used Operations Navigator successfully on twinax-console systems.  Am I
| making a mistake here or has something changed?  I don't see where 'this
| feature is required there.'
|
| Regards,
| Andy Nolen-Parkhouse
|
| > Well, that's nice to know, but the consensus from many AS400/iSeries
| > professionals on Midrange-L (and elsewhere) is that there's no way in
| > h**l they are going to use a PC as a system console, and this feature
| is
| > required there.
|
|
|
|
| _______________________________________________
| This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
| mailing list
| To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
| To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
| visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
| or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
| Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
| at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
|