Mainframes requirement

Hi,
A top CMM-Level5 company requires candidates who have 2+ yrs of
experience in Mainframes MVS System programmer-

Administrator/Security.
Key skills: COBOL, ENDEVOUR, CA-VIEW, Certified DB2

Interested candidates can forward the resumes to
vprosper@yahoo.co.in    with Subject as Mainframe requirement.

In article <1193994831.584788.16520@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
vprosper  <vprosper2007@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>A top CMM-Level5 company requires candidates

When posting to comp.lang.cobol please include a rate, or range of rates,
associated with the position(s) offered; doing otherwise leads many to
conclude that you are either trolling for resumes or running a blind ad to
determine rates.

DD

On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:13:51 -0700, vprosper <vprosper2007@gmail.com> wrote:

>A top CMM-Level5 company requires candidates who have 2+ yrs of
>experience in Mainframes MVS System programmer-

CMM Level 5 tells us it's an Indian contracting company. They are *all* CMM 
Level 5
certified, which is irrelevant because the worker will follow the client's p
rocess.

>Administrator/Security.
>Key skills: COBOL, ENDEVOUR, CA-VIEW, Certified DB2

Translation: production support. It they wanted Administrator/Security, they
'd ask for
z/OS internals, LPAR setup and RACF.

Production support is the domain of failed programmers.

>Interested candidates can forward the resumes to
>vprosper@yahoo.co.in    with Subject as Mainframe requirement.

Yep, India.

"Robert" <no@e.mail> wrote in message
 news:qdhni3dfnud1jv4qr40rlgi6t3pp391jmn@
4ax.com...
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:13:51 -0700, vprosper <vprosper2007@gmail.com>
> wrote: 
>
> Translation: production support. It they wanted Administrator/Security,
> they'd ask for
> z/OS internals, LPAR setup and RACF.
>
> Production support is the domain of failed programmers.

Ahem, ahem.

z/OS internals, LPAR and RACF, Utilities, JCL and DB administration are the
domain of those who can't cut it in *applications* programming.


MCM
Real Applications Programmer

In article <46_Wi.5$RR6.3@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net>,
Michael Mattias <mmattias@talsystems.com> wrote:
>"Robert" <no@e.mail> wrote in message
> news:qdhni3dfnud1jv4qr40rlgi6t3pp391jmn@
4ax.com... 
>
>Ahem, ahem.
>
>z/OS internals, LPAR and RACF, Utilities, JCL and DB administration are the
>domain of those who can't cut it in *applications* programming.

Hmmmmm... sounds like the classic difference in fundamental assumptions
used by stereotypical Applications Programmers and Systems Programmers.

The stereotypical Systems Programmer is most highly pleased by a computer
system that runs infinitely efficiently and infinitely fast on an
infinitely small load.

The stereotypical Applications Programmer wants the machine to do actual
work for people.

DD

<docdwarf@panix.com> wrote in message news:fgi02t$8qs$1@reader1.panix.com...
> In article <46_Wi.5$RR6.3@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net>,
> Michael Mattias <mmattias@talsystems.com> wrote: 

> Hmmmmm... sounds like the classic difference in fundamental assumptions
> used by stereotypical Applications Programmers and Systems Programmers.
>
> The stereotypical Systems Programmer is most highly pleased by a computer
> system that runs infinitely efficiently and infinitely fast on an
> infinitely small load.
>
> The stereotypical Applications Programmer wants the machine to do actual
> work for people.

True, it was -and was intended to be - a stereotype.   However, it is in my
experience quite true that there are these Two Different Worlds of
Programming.  And far too often, an "applications guy" is asked to do
something more suited to a "systems guy" and vice versa.  This is one of my
'hot button' things.. the total misapplication of programming resources,
that is.

Unfortunately, it starts at the top. Management - and even worse,  "the
Human Resources Department" - does not seem to grasp this concept when
sing employees and/or contractors.

Strangely enough, the best "Applications Programmers" are those *who
actually understand the applications* - that is, the have Real Experience
creating software *in the same industry or type of business*.  Shop-specific
"tools" and "language products" can be easily learned .. but there is no
fast track to understanding the business needs of Real Users.

Those who claim to be both an 'applications programmer' and a 'systems
programmer' are advised to remember that the Jack (Jill) of all trades is
the master of none.


--
Michael C. Mattias
Tal Systems Inc.
Racine WI
mmattias@talsystems.com

"Michael Mattias" <mmattias@talsystems.com> wrote:
>
> Those who claim to be both an 'applications programmer' and a 'systems pro
grammer' are advised to remember that the Jack (Jill) of
> all trades is the master of none.

That depends on the talents of the particular person (e.g. Isaac Newton). :-
)
--
Judson McClendon      judmc@sunvaley0.com (remove zero)
Sun Valley Systems     http://sunvaley.com
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that
whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 10:29:08 -0500, "Judson McClendon"
<judmc@sunvaley0.com> wrote:

>"Michael Mattias" <mmattias@talsystems.com> wrote: 
>
>That depends on the talents of the particular person (e.g. Isaac Newton). :-)[/colo
r]

Aye!  I started out as an applications programmer (IBM Assembler and
COBOL), went to VM/VSE systems programming, took on CICS systems
programming, gravitated back to development, conversion and
application support programming.  Now I do whatever they throw at me
so long as they sign the check.

Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"Always be yourself. Otherwise, who are you?"
-- Patrick Bryson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve

"Judson McClendon" <judmc@sunvaley0.com> wrote in message
news:9t0Xi.48928$b9.17629@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> "Michael Mattias" <mmattias@talsystems.com> wrote: 
>
> That depends on the talents of the particular person (e.g. Isaac Newton).
> :-)

Were Mr. Newton engaged to create a nice, clean simple application for Susie
User, do you really think it would come out the can easy to use?

Sure. But only if Susie were a rocket scientist in her spare time.

MCM

Michael Mattias <mmattias@talsystems.com> wrote in message news:yl1Xi.24> >>
 
is 
Newton). 
>
> Were Mr. Newton engaged to create a nice, clean simple application for
Susie
> User, do you really think it would come out the can easy to use?
>
> Sure. But only if Susie were a rocket scientist in her spare time.
>
> MCM
>

I don't know if that's strictly accurate.  The "Principia", remember,
explained a bunch of concepts which no-one else had formulated, and did so
using a new branch of mathematics - the calculus; worse, he did it using
methods and notations which were his own and which didn't last.  At the time
very few people could understand him.  Nowadays, all his principles are
pretty straightforward, as long as one understands calculus (which I agree
isn't everyone).  But everyone understands his laws of gravitation, inertia,
and equal&opposite reactions.

PL