Talk:History of IBM mainframe operating systems

message: See Talk:MVS for a verbose discussion leading to the creation of this article and to restructuring most IBM mainframe OS articles. --Kubanczyk 14:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion leading to creation of the article 

message: An important point is: there is Wikipedia:Summary style guideline, which I find to be the best in such cases. It builds a hierarchy of articles: Summary->Subordinates. Second important point: articles should be long and interesting per WP:NOT#DICT (presently there are too many short ones). Now, in the first stage let's focus exclusively on moves, merges, splits, and having precise article names. Second phase is writing any new text, creating new stubs or redirects. 
Anyone, please feel free to improve this hierarchy in place, Wiki saves historical versions of page. Please discuss your improvements above, not here, to keep the picture clear.
*Absolute top of article hierarchy is IBM mainframe operating systems a summary introducing those subordinate articles -- A text to write
**Memory management in IBM mainframe OSes -- Text to write, focus on: DOS/360+MFT, SVS, MVS
**IBSYS, if pre-S/360 era is to be covered
**BOS/360 and TOS/360
**DOS/VSE line a summary introducing some subordinate articles -- First start discussion on talk pages there. Move DOS/VSE here and upgrade to Summary Style
***about JCL
***about utilities
***DOS/360
***z/VSE
**OS/360 line a summary introducing those subordinate articles -- Move OS/360 here and upgrade to Summary Style
***Data set (OS/360 line) -- Move Data set (IBM mainframe) here
****about catalogs and DSNs -- Text to write
***Access methods 
****VSAM, ISAM, VTAM, etc.
***Job Entry Subsystem 2/3
****Job control language
***Utilities in OS/360 line -- Move IBM mainframe utility programs here
***MFT (operating system)
****OS/VS1
***Evolution from MVT to MVS, covering also SVS line (aka OS/VS2 Release 1). Stopping at the point where MVS became the only surviving OS variant. -- Move MVT here
****Single Virtual Storage,  -- Text to write
***MVS line-- Move MVS here and upgrade to Summary Style
****OS/390
****z/OS
**VM line -- Start disussion on talk page there, as the topic is complicated.
***Some harsh merging needed for overlapping History of CP/CMS, CP-67, CP/CMS, VM (operating system)
***VP/CSS
***CTSS
***z/VM
**TPF
**Michigan Terminal System, despite it is non-IBM
**MUSIC/SP, despite it is non-IBM
**Linux on zSeries, despite it is non-IBM
**OpenSolaris for System z, despite it is non-IBM
**(dropped other Unix operating systems - out of topic here)
Again, discussion for the plan is in the section above.
::The living version of the articles' hierarchy plan is now in the Template:History of IBM mainframe operating systems. --Kubanczyk (talk) 10:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The plan 

message: *Mealy, G.H., et al. The functional structure of OS/360. IBMSJ, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1966
*[http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd43-56.html 
*
*Session O441 - The History of HASP and JES2 part of collection of SHARE (IBM user group) papers.
Philcha 15:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs for use when appropriate

message: User:BBCWatcher recently edited the intro - see .
I'm happy with the word "arguably" but not the rest, and particularly not with ".. in many innovative ways". What do others think? Philcha (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've rephrased bits of the intro. Philcha (talk) 11:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro: Recent edit by User:BBCWatcher

message: In section "OS/360", "data communications" was changed to "telecommunications". I have changed it back to "data communications" because this is more accurate: "telecommunications" includes voice, fax, etc. as well as data; "telecommunications" means "long-distance communications", but BTAM could support locally-attached terminals. Philcha (talk) 11:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: BTAM

message: I've made some changes in the descriptions of OS/360, OS/VS1, OS/VS2 Release 1 (SVS) and MVS. These are all summary sections linked to main articles that have more detail. Is it appropriate to include references here to justify those changes, or do they belong only in the main articles? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 21:42, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References for summary sections? 

message: Wasn't there a specialized OS for the 360/44?  The "Model 44 Programming System" comes to mind.  Would this be listed under "specialized systems?"
Peter Flass (talk) 12:44, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and History of IBM mainframe operating systems#System/360 Model 44 mentions it. Catalog of Programs for IBM System/360 Models 25 and Above has a brief description; the program number is 360F. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 22:44, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  360/44 

message: I see TSS gets a brief mention, I believe it deserves a separate section. Peter Flass (talk) 12:18, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  TSS 

message: Section: Early time-sharing and virtual machine systems - "learned how to make the thrashing problem negligible."  Is it really "negligible", or did it learn "how to reduce the problem of thrashing" (or "minimize")? Peter Flass (talk) 12:26, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In my personal experience, it could be minimized but never to the point of being negligible, especially with a large (and unpredictable) interactive user load on, say, CMS. I'm certainly not a reliable source, but you made a good catch here. — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 14:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

text: Not in early time-sharing systems; it was only with the drastic drop in RAM prices that thrashing became negligibile rather than merely manageable. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

text: OK, "manageable" it is. Peter Flass (talk) 16:31, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thrashing 

message: No, the term server was not used for CICS in the early days. CICS and IMS are still in use, so is it relevant whether the term was originally used or only whether it is used now? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:31, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's relevant only to the question of whether to use a pipe in the link to transaction processing system to have the link say "transaction server" or not.  My inclination is not to use "server", even if CICS has been re-branded a "transaction server", as calling it a "transaction server" in a sentence discussing its introduction is a bit of a recentism, and not calling it a "server" might encourage people who have never heard of Big Datacenter Machines called anything other than "servers" to follow the link and learn a bit of history. Guy Harris (talk) 00:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of term ''server'' for CICS et al 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of IBM mainframe operating systems. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060906134129/http://cs.gmu.edu/cne/pjd/PUBS/ecs.pdf to http://cs.gmu.edu/cne/pjd/PUBS/ecs.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090304014628/http://www.zjournal.com/index.cfm?section=article&aid=293 to http://www.zjournal.com/index.cfm?section=article&aid=293
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090304014628/http://www.zjournal.com/index.cfm?section=article&aid=293 to http://www.zjournal.com/index.cfm?section=article&aid=293
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:45, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I found an alternative site (the Denning Institute) for the Denning paper, and redid that reference to use {[cite journal}}.  The other link works, although they're two references to the same article, so I combined them. Guy Harris (talk) 19:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on History of IBM mainframe operating systems. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071118140717/http://www.bozemanlug.org/talks/linux_history.html to http://www.bozemanlug.org/talks/linux_history.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071118140717/http://www.bozemanlug.org/talks/linux_history.html to http://www.bozemanlug.org/talks/linux_history.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071017025752/http://www.prenhall.com/divisions/esm/app/author_tanenbaum/custom/mos2e/ to http://www.prenhall.com/divisions/esm/app/author_tanenbaum/custom/mos2e/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080512004709/http://www.plex86.org/Computer_Folklore/The-midseventies-SHARE-survey.html to http://www.plex86.org/Computer_Folklore/The-midseventies-SHARE-survey.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20070504082038/http://www-05.ibm.com/de/entwicklung/history/menues_en/menue_60.html to http://www-05.ibm.com/de/entwicklung/history/menues_en/menue_60.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:11, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I vaguely recall that somewhere between DOS/360 and DOS/VS, IBM briefly changed the name to DOS/370, although Bitsavers has some transitional DOS manuals with neither 360 nor 370 in the title. Does anybody have a timeline for the various names?
Between DOS/VSE and VSE/SP theree were several addons for DOS/VSE, e.g., VSE/AF. Does anybody have a timeline for those? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOS nomenclature 

message: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/28/ibm-is-reportedly-nearing-deal-to-acquire-red-hat.html
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-red-hat-m-a-ibm/ibm-nears-deal-to-acquire-cyber-security-company-red-hat-sources-idUKKCN1N20N5
https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/ibm-acquire-red-hat-completely-changing-cloud-landscape-and-becoming-world%E2%80%99s-1-hybrid-cloud-provider
As of October 2018 theres talks that the owners of Fedora (Red Hat Inc) is merging with IBM.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:C600:8270:A563:D5B6:732C:339A (talk) 
:It's called "Linux"; the article says "Both IBM-supplied operating systems and those supplied by others are discussed here, if notably used on IBM mainframes." in the third paragraph, so is there any reason to mention Linux distributions from IBM (if they buy Red Hat) but not Linux distributions from others, or just mentioning Linux as a whole?
:Furthermore, IBM may be supplying Red Hat Enterprise Linux, rather than Fedora, as their "standard Linux".
:And the article should mention other UNIX-like systems as well, if it's to be a full history.  Guy Harris (talk) 21:10, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any reason to believe that IBM is backing off from SUSE Linux Enterprise (SLE)? Nor are Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and SLES the only Linux distributions that run on z. OTOH, I believe that OpenSolaris for System z is defunct. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:10, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Fedora OS Should Be considered as part of the IBM Operating Systems list

message: While it is true that almost all of the IBM operating systems for machines prior to the S/360 were intended for scientific and commercial workloads, the 1410/7010 Operating System (1410-PR-155) was intended for commercial workloads. --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 00:43, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  There was an operating system for commercial work on the 1410/7010