I started a new position about 4 months ago. When I interviewed I was told I would be working with Sybase, Powerbuilder, Actuate, Crystal Reports, C++, and some other web-based technologies. Since I began I have exclusively worked with Easytrieve and JCL with no apparent end in sight. The lead is 62 years old, a mainframe guru, and has decided that the mainframe environment is much more "stable". I began actively seeking other employment last week. I saw yesterday that Computer Associates stopped supporting Easytrieve in 1996. On top of that, the Powerbuilder we are using is 5.0.03! Any comments?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Chriss Miller on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Has anyone else had this experience? 2
- Thread starter Sombat
- Start date
Karl Blessing
Programmer
you could just write up a proposed plan, on how they can upgrade, what it may cost, and the benefits over a mainframe enviroment. And if they want to continue to squeeze a penny by sticking with obselete material (I've seen this many times) then thats their call.
Karl
kb244@kb244.com
Experienced in : C++(both VC++ and Borland),VB1(dos) thru VB6, Delphi 3 pro, HTML, Visual InterDev 6(ASP(WebProgramming/Vbscript)
Karl
kb244@kb244.com
Experienced in : C++(both VC++ and Borland),VB1(dos) thru VB6, Delphi 3 pro, HTML, Visual InterDev 6(ASP(WebProgramming/Vbscript)
-
1
- #3
MasterRacker
Active member
Sombat,
Sticking with 'old reliable' is all to common. The common rationale is "It does the job, why change?"
Unfortunately, this reasoning does not take into account that all this hardware and software was put into place in the first place to assist business processes. In other words, if an ancient system still does the job, the company's business processes are also ancient. Ignoring the fact that any modern company needs (or very soon will need) to connect to the outside world and the software in use there, the sad fact is that any company whose processes are not constantly evolving is stagnating (therefore slowly dying.)
Improving processes implies changing processes which means new software and hardware to handle the new requirements.
If there's absolutely no chance of them changing, it's probably better to move on. If there's a chance, do a risk/benefit analysis of where they can go vs. where they are. Present it to the mainframe guy and the business managers. (I'll leave it to you to work out the political issues.)
If you're already experienced witht he products and they're willing to upgrade, you could end up being the man. It's worth a shot.
Jeff
masterracker@hotmail.com
If everything seems to be going well: you don't have enough information.......
Sticking with 'old reliable' is all to common. The common rationale is "It does the job, why change?"
Unfortunately, this reasoning does not take into account that all this hardware and software was put into place in the first place to assist business processes. In other words, if an ancient system still does the job, the company's business processes are also ancient. Ignoring the fact that any modern company needs (or very soon will need) to connect to the outside world and the software in use there, the sad fact is that any company whose processes are not constantly evolving is stagnating (therefore slowly dying.)
Improving processes implies changing processes which means new software and hardware to handle the new requirements.
If there's absolutely no chance of them changing, it's probably better to move on. If there's a chance, do a risk/benefit analysis of where they can go vs. where they are. Present it to the mainframe guy and the business managers. (I'll leave it to you to work out the political issues.)
If you're already experienced witht he products and they're willing to upgrade, you could end up being the man. It's worth a shot.
Jeff
masterracker@hotmail.com
If everything seems to be going well: you don't have enough information.......
- Thread starter
- #4
Thanks to Karl and Jeff for some input. As for new technologies, some of them, such as Actuate, have been studied and partially implemented only to be rolled back. Before I started here I had not heard of Actuate before. Did a search on Amazon and came up with zero books on this tool. Kind of scary.... And yes, Jeff, the business processes here are ancient. Some of the updating in technologies that have been done such as switching over from input via green screens to a GUI interface in Powerbuilder, have been done just by cloning exactly what the green screen did only in PB. You also hit the nail right on the head as to the justification for not moving to newer technologies: the mainframe is "stable". Input from other colleagues elsewhere has helped push me to look for new employment. To a person they think that if I stay in this job for even a year, much less more than that, I will be seen in one of two lights by potential employers: 1) a person with outdated skills or 2) attractive to companies still using obsolete technologies because their present IT help with those skills are retiring. Neither of those seam terribly appealing.
-
1
- #5
Sombat,
Actuate is an object orientated reporting tool. It is plugged by Progress Software Corporation.
It is not an ancient (or dying) product, although I must say, I use Crystal Reports 'cos Actuate is too expensive.
For info check out:
Actuate is an object orientated reporting tool. It is plugged by Progress Software Corporation.
It is not an ancient (or dying) product, although I must say, I use Crystal Reports 'cos Actuate is too expensive.
For info check out:
- Thread starter
- #6
Hi Phirst,
Thanks for the input. I am wondering, though, why there are no books whatsoever out there written on Actuate. Is is because it is such a new tool? Just because I had not heard of it obviously does not mean the product itself is not good. It appears, though, that there is a very, very, limited number of people/companies/institutions that are using Actuate. A programmer in our group has been responsible for rolling out (and rolling back, I might add), Actuate. At the point where he was having the most problems with server crashes Actuate (or Progress, as the case may be) was of very little help. They basically said he was on his own. Together with the lack of books/documentation this lack of responsiveness by Progress seems to be discouraging.
Thanks for the input. I am wondering, though, why there are no books whatsoever out there written on Actuate. Is is because it is such a new tool? Just because I had not heard of it obviously does not mean the product itself is not good. It appears, though, that there is a very, very, limited number of people/companies/institutions that are using Actuate. A programmer in our group has been responsible for rolling out (and rolling back, I might add), Actuate. At the point where he was having the most problems with server crashes Actuate (or Progress, as the case may be) was of very little help. They basically said he was on his own. Together with the lack of books/documentation this lack of responsiveness by Progress seems to be discouraging.
Have you considered talking to the person that hired you to determine why they mislead you? Perhaps they are waiting for budgeting and some natural attrition to implement the software you are considering.
Eric Searing
eric.searing@wcom.com
Eric Searing
eric.searing@wcom.com
- Thread starter
- #8
Hi Eric,
Thanks for the input. Frankly, I think that what they told me was what they had hoped would happen, at least the 3 people in the group who are under 45 years old. As one of my former professors told me in a recent e-mail, generally speaking, the 62 year-old person who does not want to change/adopt to new things is not the person who is making decisions for the group. In our case, the manager is the last person you ever want to ask a technical question. The lead (who is the person who apparently does not want to change) is the one who makes virtually all the technical decisions. Since the manager has not actually done any programming since the 80s, he does not feel secure questioning the lead's judgement in technical matters.
Thanks for the input. Frankly, I think that what they told me was what they had hoped would happen, at least the 3 people in the group who are under 45 years old. As one of my former professors told me in a recent e-mail, generally speaking, the 62 year-old person who does not want to change/adopt to new things is not the person who is making decisions for the group. In our case, the manager is the last person you ever want to ask a technical question. The lead (who is the person who apparently does not want to change) is the one who makes virtually all the technical decisions. Since the manager has not actually done any programming since the 80s, he does not feel secure questioning the lead's judgement in technical matters.
Speaking as a manager, I recommend that you create some of the work in one of your preferred languages. See if there is a production improvement. Other ways to attack the situation is to estimate the Future Costs of maintaining vs upgrading. How much will the current skill set cost vs labor using the new tools. Provide articles showing reasons to swith to the new tools. A little research on your part may go along way and assure you of a quality job life for several years to come.
Also there is no reason that a myriad of tools can not be used for different applications (unless cost of software is the issue). I am betting that if things begin to change, the older gentleman will consider his retirement and thus will open the door for more change. It may be what management is waiting for.
I recently moved from Mainframe processes to web based information and server based processes. It didn't cost much and greatly improved the efficiency of my department. I now have code that I do not understand fully, but my people do, and I have been rewarded for thier efforts.
From Think and Grow Rich: Every business, large or small, has need for someone who has imagination and dares to withstand the criticism and doubt of those who discourage him from using it.
Eric Searing
eric.searing@wcom.com
Also there is no reason that a myriad of tools can not be used for different applications (unless cost of software is the issue). I am betting that if things begin to change, the older gentleman will consider his retirement and thus will open the door for more change. It may be what management is waiting for.
I recently moved from Mainframe processes to web based information and server based processes. It didn't cost much and greatly improved the efficiency of my department. I now have code that I do not understand fully, but my people do, and I have been rewarded for thier efforts.
From Think and Grow Rich: Every business, large or small, has need for someone who has imagination and dares to withstand the criticism and doubt of those who discourage him from using it.
Eric Searing
eric.searing@wcom.com
CA-Easytrieve is not dead.
The current release 6.2 is actively supported.
That release first came out in 1996--when support for release 6.1 would have been dropped.
Release 6.2 is scheduled for 2001.
CA-Easytrieve will be around as long as COBOL will be, which is probably forever.
The current release 6.2 is actively supported.
That release first came out in 1996--when support for release 6.1 would have been dropped.
Release 6.2 is scheduled for 2001.
CA-Easytrieve will be around as long as COBOL will be, which is probably forever.
- Thread starter
- #11
Thanks, Triad.
I read on the Rochester Institute of Technology's website that Easytrieve was dead. It was actually on one of their technology bulletins and suggested that any of their users switch to SAS. I guess there is a difference between Easytrieve and Easytrieve Plus. Easytrieve Plus is obviously not dead based on your current support of it.
But, the question remains: suppose I do Easytrieve for a year with no opportunities to do other more current stuff and then apply for another job? Unless I am applying at a big insurance company, hospital, or some other company with a lot of old code and systems I will be out or luck. Please correct me if I am wrong. I have done searches on Monster Board and found hits for Easytrieve, but they are all the kinds of companies I noted above. On top of that, Easytrieve is not a whole heck of a lot of fun. I can code retrievals for weeks (that's just setting 10,000 lines of flags) and then spend a day or two doing the fun stuff like making that program work. It's driving me nuts!
Sombat
I read on the Rochester Institute of Technology's website that Easytrieve was dead. It was actually on one of their technology bulletins and suggested that any of their users switch to SAS. I guess there is a difference between Easytrieve and Easytrieve Plus. Easytrieve Plus is obviously not dead based on your current support of it.
But, the question remains: suppose I do Easytrieve for a year with no opportunities to do other more current stuff and then apply for another job? Unless I am applying at a big insurance company, hospital, or some other company with a lot of old code and systems I will be out or luck. Please correct me if I am wrong. I have done searches on Monster Board and found hits for Easytrieve, but they are all the kinds of companies I noted above. On top of that, Easytrieve is not a whole heck of a lot of fun. I can code retrievals for weeks (that's just setting 10,000 lines of flags) and then spend a day or two doing the fun stuff like making that program work. It's driving me nuts!
Sombat
You're right, I didn't distinguish between CA-Easytrieve Plus release 6.2(the current product) and Easytrieve release 9.0 (the predescessor product). The later is often called "Easytrieve Classic."
I really hope you aren't using Classic. While you can call CA support for help, they probably can't answer questions as it was discontinued circa 1984 (when this was still Pansophic). Classic isn't Y2K compliant (the only ommission is the century feature, so 00 sorts before 99) and has many limitations. Not to mention a perceived lack of documentation (the Classic manual *can* be ordered), no available training, and a shrinking user base.
To verify which product you're on, check the copyright info or simply look at the code. A packed field with 2 decimal places in classic is 4 P2; in Plus it would be 4 P 2. And Classic uses the '9999' to indicate the end of working storage. Switching to Plus isn't too hard, though one has to remember that 'Success' and 'Flunk' don't do anything...since 'Print rpt-name' and 'Go to Job' are the correct lines of code. And you no longer have to code junk like IF A = A to get a universal truth. (Note, many companies are blissfully unaware that these are two different products. So too their employees... )
As for your career.... I think Classic is a dead-end, especially if you are bored by it. Plus will always be useful--there are more sites with Plus than Cobol--but not earth-shaking on a resume. Salaries should be solid, but probably no higher than straight COBOL.
And, any site that is still using Classic to code new programs strikes me as a) cheap and b) lazy.
I really hope you aren't using Classic. While you can call CA support for help, they probably can't answer questions as it was discontinued circa 1984 (when this was still Pansophic). Classic isn't Y2K compliant (the only ommission is the century feature, so 00 sorts before 99) and has many limitations. Not to mention a perceived lack of documentation (the Classic manual *can* be ordered), no available training, and a shrinking user base.
To verify which product you're on, check the copyright info or simply look at the code. A packed field with 2 decimal places in classic is 4 P2; in Plus it would be 4 P 2. And Classic uses the '9999' to indicate the end of working storage. Switching to Plus isn't too hard, though one has to remember that 'Success' and 'Flunk' don't do anything...since 'Print rpt-name' and 'Go to Job' are the correct lines of code. And you no longer have to code junk like IF A = A to get a universal truth. (Note, many companies are blissfully unaware that these are two different products. So too their employees... )
As for your career.... I think Classic is a dead-end, especially if you are bored by it. Plus will always be useful--there are more sites with Plus than Cobol--but not earth-shaking on a resume. Salaries should be solid, but probably no higher than straight COBOL.
And, any site that is still using Classic to code new programs strikes me as a) cheap and b) lazy.
- Thread starter
- #13
Thanks again, Triad,
My group is using Easytrieve Plus 6.2. Thanks for the input regarding value of Easytrieve skills on a resume. Other than the fact that Easytrieve is not particularly interesting on a resume, the way we use it is mind-numbing. We are a huge hospital and most of the stuff I have been writing have been reports for board accredidations. For example, I just completed one for general thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. The requirements ran to nearly 100 pages of single spaced diagnosis, procedure codes, and exceptions. For example, if procedure 33.44/5, 33.44/6/09, or 33.44/7 and diagnosis code 345.877.55 set a flag unless it has already been counted unded another flag. We have programs that run to tens of thousands of lines of this crap. It obviously has to be done, but my beef is that no one told me I would be doing this mind-numbing stuff day after day (had I known.....). Every time I finish a report two more come in. On top of that, we have 10 people in my group and I am the only one who does this since I am the new guy. I and two of my former professors (I graduated last May) think that if I do this for even a year I will pretty much be labeled as "The Easytrieve guy" wherever I might apply in the future.
I have seen job satisfaction surveys for IT people and they hit the nail right on the head when they said younger employees value the opportunity to learn new stuff and develop their skills. I am doing neither here.
My group is using Easytrieve Plus 6.2. Thanks for the input regarding value of Easytrieve skills on a resume. Other than the fact that Easytrieve is not particularly interesting on a resume, the way we use it is mind-numbing. We are a huge hospital and most of the stuff I have been writing have been reports for board accredidations. For example, I just completed one for general thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. The requirements ran to nearly 100 pages of single spaced diagnosis, procedure codes, and exceptions. For example, if procedure 33.44/5, 33.44/6/09, or 33.44/7 and diagnosis code 345.877.55 set a flag unless it has already been counted unded another flag. We have programs that run to tens of thousands of lines of this crap. It obviously has to be done, but my beef is that no one told me I would be doing this mind-numbing stuff day after day (had I known.....). Every time I finish a report two more come in. On top of that, we have 10 people in my group and I am the only one who does this since I am the new guy. I and two of my former professors (I graduated last May) think that if I do this for even a year I will pretty much be labeled as "The Easytrieve guy" wherever I might apply in the future.
I have seen job satisfaction surveys for IT people and they hit the nail right on the head when they said younger employees value the opportunity to learn new stuff and develop their skills. I am doing neither here.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question