What's not being said is that many Cobol programmers, while very capable,
are not interested in Java or any other new language.

If you took a UNIX admin and told him/her that starting tomorrow, they would
be training for NT administration - they would most likely start looking for
a job. If your company decided to replace all it's HP3000s with NT boxes,
would you start looking for a job? Is this any different for a Cobol
programmer who was given the "opportunity" to learn Java?

So I think you have also consider that many Cobol programmers just want to
coast in to the finish line without starting over with a radical new
language. In a way I think it's a shame and in another way I understand. At
some point in our careers, I think a lot of us will decide to pass on the
new language. For me personally, I hope that day is a long way off.

Brad Feazell

"Joseph Rosenblatt" <[log in to unmask]> wrote in message
news:96bi6c02rjb@enews4.newsguy.com...
> We have been hearing for years how COBOL/FORTRAN programmers could not
learn
> the new languages. "OOP is different," has been the rallying cry of the
new
> technologists. I believe and I think many of you would agree, that a coder
> is a coder. People that can write good code in one language can learn to
> write good code in another. Thought process may vary slightly and syntax
> greatly but coding is coding.
>
> The main thrust of the Gartner piece is that it is not cost effective to
> train a Cobol programmer. Let us keep in mind that Gartner is paid by and
> caters to executives not cubicle dwellers. I saw the article saying that
it
> is cheaper to get a JAVA kid out of school than to train long time
workers.
> This totally discounts the years of experience the older employee may
have.
>
> If salary is the only criteria then definitely hire the non-experienced.
If
> value is the issue then you may need to rethink that position. It's an old
> argument couched in a new paradigm.
>
> Just one old Cobol programmer's opinion.
>
> Joseph Rosenblatt
>