COBOL Compiler for Windows - cobol

In article <681mmmF2qlbguU1@mid.individual.net>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood@removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote:

[snip]

>Thanks for that Richard. Your post prompted me to survey some other friends.

An actual survey? How novel! Perhaps The Reverend Dodgson might have put
it as 'First conclusions, *then* data!'

>I talked to 6. 2 of them are under thirty and would not even consider using
>cheques, seeing them as "quaint" :-) The three over 50 all have cheque books
>(I don't myself), but only one of them uses it regularly.
>
>The remaining one reckoned she never pays bills anyway and if she needs
>anything she steals it from the Warehouse... :-) (She had had a few drinks
>and I saw no point in pursuing a serious discussion :-))
>
>I think my perception may have been wrong and more people actually use
>cheques and cash than I thought.

Well, since you're asking... I still write checks/cheques; every Tuesday I
sit down with the previous weeks' bills (and the steady payment-books for
things like housing) and fill out Pay To The Order Of lines. (I gave up
using a goose-quill but I still, at times, will use a fountain/cartridge
pen.)

My reasons for this are sentimental and aphoristic. The sentiment comes
from my own Oldene Dayse, when it was not as easy to get from one payday
to the next... I'd sit down and decide what *had* to be paid, one month
I'd pay the electric and skip the telephone, the next I'd pay the
telephone and skip the electric... barely keeping up with the game, as it
were.

Now I remember those days and with every signature there comes to mind a
firmly-spoken 'You ain't shutting me off *this* month!'... along with
'Living well is the best revenge'.

DD

"Graham Hobbs" <ghobbs@cdpwise.net> wrote in message
news:tbvm141kff7pivak67ptuf728ohtbqfmc8@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 2 May 2008 12:42:46 -0700 (PDT), Alistair
> <alistair@ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
>>To save opening up another thread, VSAM can be emulated on the pc
>>(albeit with z/390 Assembler by Don Higgins).
> Alistair,
> I started with IBM Cobol and CICS in the early nineties and the
> whatevers for DB2 and VSAM and it's starting to look as though there
> I'll have to stay. Not sure Fujies even had a product.
> Anyway, my project is entirely DB2 and VSAM KSDS so noted your
> comments posted elsewhere about ESDS and ISAM for knowledge sake.
> Thanks.
> Graham

Graham,
Be VERY careful about developing IBM mainframe tools with OLD versions of VA
COBOL. Remember that BOTH COBOL and CICS have had many releases/versions since
that product was introduced. In MOST cases, this will just mean that "new"
features of the mainframe product won't be available to you for developing with
VA COBOL. However, in some cases, VA COBOL will be incompatible with current
CICS and COBOL (for example, new reserved words with recent releases of
Enterprise COBOL on the mainframe).

As I stated before, I would really look at the "partnerworld" program as a
better solution.


--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
>

Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Fri, 02 May 2008 19:04:30 GMT, "James J. Gavan"
> <jgavandeletethis@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>>What does the Egyptian five look like?
>>
>>I have no idea :-). It was '54 when I left Egypt so I think I can plead
>>the onset of Alzheimer's. Our only view of 'Egypt' was in our RAF bus
>>taking us swimming in the afternoon, and en route we passed through the
>>outskirts of Ismalia to get to our Lagoon, an offshoot of the Suez
>>C****. Saw the odd civilian vehicle with Arabic number plates, but the
>>numbers were unintelligible. The best I can remember was that zero was
>>written at a slant as a sort of four-sided character.
>
>
> I like the story that our number system is based upon how many angles
> each digit has. That requires a closed 4 and a 7 with a bar that
> drops, plus only zero has rounded shape.
>
> One would think that the Arabic speaking countries would use Arabic
> numerals.

There you go Howard, Google shows up all sorts of trivia such as
"Egyptian License Plates". These two have samples :-

http://www.worldlicenseplates.com/world/AF_EGYP.html
http://www.pl8s.com/e/egyp.htm

The pictures don't ring any bells for me, but my reference to the 'zero'
- looks like it was/is written at a slant, as a rectangle, (the
equivalent of an Egyptian period/full stop, perhaps ?), but with no
dough nut hole in the middle.

Jimmy, Calgary AB

On Fri, 2 May 2008 12:55:59 -0700 (PDT), Richard <riplin@azonic.co.nz>
wrote:

>I use cash and cheques. I have never once used EFTPOS and have used my
>credit card locally perhaps 4 times in the last 10 years. I do use it
>for overseas stuff. The wife does use credit cards but it is always
>paid off every month. When clients ask for my bank details to do
>direct credit I 'lose' the paperwork and then eventually send a
>cheque.

For those with discipline, credit cards are the cheapest way to go.
Cash in one's pocket earns nothing, and if you lose it or have it
stolen from you, isn't automatically insured.

>One complains that the have to keep a cheque printer around just for
>me, having now given up on trying to do it another way.
>
>I do use ATMs, however, but distrust them.

Why do you distrust ATMs? Have you come across anybody who has had
his trust in them betrayed?

Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net> wrote in message
news:404u14pht2csng06qoraqhbqd9n2d2qv36@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 2 May 2008 12:55:59 -0700 (PDT), Richard <riplin@azonic.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >I use cash and cheques. I have never once used EFTPOS and have used my
> >credit card locally perhaps 4 times in the last 10 years. I do use it
> >for overseas stuff. The wife does use credit cards but it is always
> >paid off every month. When clients ask for my bank details to do
> >direct credit I 'lose' the paperwork and then eventually send a
> >cheque.
>
> For those with discipline, credit cards are the cheapest way to go.
> Cash in one's pocket earns nothing, and if you lose it or have it
> stolen from you, isn't automatically insured.
>


I'll tell you why I stick to paper wherever I can - which mostly means
cheques - the banks take enormous profits from "service charges" for any
conceivable transaction, and pay truly derisory interest; since I must deal
with banks I'm going to make them work for the service charge they get from
me.

My credit cards can be hacked without my knowledge; whereas money can't be
stolen from me without my knowing. As (again) I must use credit cards
willy-nilly, it has a limit of $1500: at least that makes it more difficult
for someone to bankrupt me!

It's true that if you pay off your credit card each month it may be the
cheapest way to go (annual charge notwithstanding?) but to state that that
it's a matter of discpline is to grossly oversimplify the matter.

PL

On Mon, 5 May 2008 12:04:50 -0500, "tlmfru" <lacey@mts.net> wrote:

>I'll tell you why I stick to paper wherever I can - which mostly means
>cheques - the banks take enormous profits from "service charges" for any
>conceivable transaction, and pay truly derisory interest; since I must deal
>with banks I'm going to make them work for the service charge they get from
>me.

Tiny amounts of interest beat no interest at all - if I benefit, why
should I cut off my nose to spite the banker's face?

>My credit cards can be hacked without my knowledge; whereas money can't be
>stolen from me without my knowing.

I've had my cash stolen without my immediate knowledge. My wife
checks our account just about daily, so these are similar. I don't
carry much cash - I'm not nearly as optimistic as you are about the
world I live in, so I prefer transactions that have audit trails.

>As (again) I must use credit cards
>>willy-nilly, it has a limit of $1500: at least that makes it more difficult
>>for someone to bankrupt me!

I suppose the safest thing here is to buy pre-paid cards, but they
cost.

>It's true that if you pay off your credit card each month it may be the
>cheapest way to go (annual charge notwithstanding?) but to state that that
>it's a matter of discpline is to grossly oversimplify the matter.

I don't pay annual charges. Since the comparison is between using
cash & a charge card (which I treat as checks, putting the amount in
my checkbook), how does this statement "grossly oversimplify the
matter"?

What information would I need to add to oversimplify it ungrossly?

In article <Z8HTj.112091$Ft5.54731@newsfe15.lga>, tlmfru <lacey@mts.net> wrote:

[snip]

>My credit cards can be hacked without my knowledge; whereas money can't be
>stolen from me without my knowing.

If a credit card is used without your consent you are (in the USA) liable
for a maximum of US$50; I believe that Mr Trembley can give the Insider's
View on this.

Cash is cash... so if you carry more than US$50 you stand to lose more
were you to lose the cash (by overt theft ('This is a gun, give me your
money') or covert theft (pick-pocket) or accident ('I must have left my
wallet on the table.').

DD

In article <o1ku14dqqkshaa5noklv3bi69l6ibp7nrr@4ax.com>,
Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 5 May 2008 12:04:50 -0500, "tlmfru" <lacey@mts.net> wrote:
>
>>I'll tell you why I stick to paper wherever I can - which mostly means
>>cheques - the banks take enormous profits from "service charges" for any
>>conceivable transaction, and pay truly derisory interest; since I must deal
>>with banks I'm going to make them work for the service charge they get from
>>me.
>
>Tiny amounts of interest beat no interest at all - if I benefit, why
>should I cut off my nose to spite the banker's face?

Diminishing returns, Mr Brazee... were one to spend ($2n)-worth of
time/money in order to realise $(n) benefit (where n is a positive number)
then, in the words of economists, 'it just ain't worth it'.

On the other hand... for some folks the principle of not-spending money
is, I've been told, not a matter of money but a matter of principle... the
principle being, of course, 'unless you have to, don't spend any money'...
which, of course, makes the principle a matter of money... so, perhaps,
more a matter of principal... I'll stop, now, at least temporarily.

DD
k

docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
> In article <Z8HTj.112091$Ft5.54731@newsfe15.lga>, tlmfru <lacey@mts.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> My credit cards can be hacked without my knowledge; whereas money can't be
>> stolen from me without my knowing.
>
> If a credit card is used without your consent you are (in the USA) liable
> for a maximum of US$50; I believe that Mr Trembley can give the Insider's
> View on this.
>
> Cash is cash... so if you carry more than US$50 you stand to lose more
> were you to lose the cash (by overt theft ('This is a gun, give me your
> money') or covert theft (pick-pocket) or accident ('I must have left my
> wallet on the table.').
>
> DD
>

Well, I don't claim to be an expert just because I work for a credit
card company. I've been fortunate enough never to have had one of my
credit cards lost or stolen in the last 35 years. But my
understanding is that as long as you promptly report your major credit
card as missing, for whatever reason, you cannot be liable for more
than $50, and most banks will not require you to pay anything.

I may be old-school, but I prefer not to use a debit card, at least
not one that can reach into my checking account. I have used ATM
cards and pre-paid debit cards (sometimes called stored-value cards).

--
http://arnold.trembley.home.att.net/