>
>
>"Robert" wrote in message
>news:cpn05418j72uo9rqrk355cdb8mg040q3ef@4ax.com...

>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 10:33:19 +1200, "Pete Dashwood"
>> removethis.enternet.co.nz>
>> wrote:
>>

>>> (Client/Server development in COBOL (apart
>>>from sites already committed to mainframe COBOL), is almost a twitching
>>>corpse...)

>>
>> If you received a phone bill, there is a 60-70%% probability it was
>> produced by Amdocs
>> Ensamble written in Cobol and running on Unix. The system was rewritten in
>> C++ seven years
>> ago and called Enabler. Enabler has not replaced Ensamble anywhere
>> Ensamble was already
>> installed, AFIK.
>>
>> The US federal student loan system is Cobol on Unix. Most US state child
>> welfare systems
>> are Cobol on Unix.
>>
>> Tens of thousands of organizations, including Air New Zealand, run
>> Peoplesoft ERP and/or
>> HRMS on Unix. It is written in Cobol and Peoplecode. About 4,000 run
>> Lawson ERP, written
>> entirely in Cobol, on Unix.
>>
>> None of this runs on mainframe. Most of the sites don't have a mainframe.
>>
>> Cobol is dead on the client side, but not on the server. And there is more
>> batch
>> processing than people realize. There is a batch process involved every
>> time you hear
>> 'three to five business days.'

>
>I accept there is a large COBOL/Unix base. However, I believe that the next
>few years will bring some fundamental changes in what is expected from
>computer systems and how we interact with them.
>
>As for packages written in COBOL, that is NOT the same as in house COBOL
>development. 4000 clients running a COBOL application that they didn't write
>and don't maintain, is not gainful employment for COBOL programmers.
>

>Nevertheless, I take your point re COBOL/Unix.
>
>Pete.