Brad,

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

True, and sometimes the interest in learning the new trick may exist, but
may be less of a driving force than your enjoyment of what you do, or the
desire not to change what you do for a living.  Sometimes the tool you use
to do a task is as much a part of your work, as the tasks themselves, and it
may be the tool that really attracts you to the task.

> If your company decided to replace all it's HP3000s with NT boxes,
> would you start looking for a job?

Yep.  I had a client who used his firm's migration to a new platform (a
3000) as a training opportunity and stayed around for about 6 months after
the shift, then left for another position.  His new position was offered to
him at the time his old firm was *planning* the migration, almost a year
before he left (to replace the retiring manager of a firm using his old
system).  He was happy to help make the migration a success and have his
(soon to be ex-) firm pay to broaden his experience and improve the look of
his resume.  I thought at the time that the firm he was leaving was a lousy
place to work, and didn't begrudge his "taking advantage of them".  After
all, he gave a month's notice and worked to train his replacment; leaving
under the best circumstances he could.  His case is not unique.

The article really got my mind going.  This last few years (decade?) of
great employment opportunities in the IT world have somewhat overshadowed
the preceding fiften years, but not by much.  During the late seventies and
eighties, corporate America made it clear to its workforce that the humans
were the expendable portion of the equation, that twenty years loyalty
didn't matter if the firm decided a person's salary was needed elsewhere
(like the shareholders' pockets).  While this was more often in
manufacturing than in "data processing", the idea that all humans were
replacable and expendable stuck.

That translated into a shift towards short term employment, with little firm
loyalty and the attitude that a person should never spend more than two
years in a job (e.g., if you don't get promoted, leave).  I've heard this
more and more over the years, from employers, fellow employees, recruiters,
professors, friends, etc.  During the nineties, everyone started to realize
that the businesses were flat out wrong: people *make* the company.  But if
you're 23, and grew up in the two-year market, what would change your
opinion now?  And if you came up through the ranks or survived the battles
during that period, why change your mindset unless you're with a firm that
really has taken the people idea to heart?

So what if your position changes, and you're expected to learn a new
skill/task/language?  Do you want to learn it?  If so, great: here's your
opportunity.  If not, great, too: there are other jobs out there.  Do you
want to learn the new skill, but don't want to change what you do for
living, great, too: get the training, THEN go find another job.  The
relationship you have with your firm will decide whether or not you want to
stay anyway.

Two thoughts rang soundly while I read that article: (1) in the current
employement market, it's the employee's choice, not the company's; and (2) I
doubt migrations from an All COBOL environment, to an All JAVA environment
are very prevalent.

Nobody has mentioned item 3 in the 'Bottom Line' section of the article:
"considering non-Java technology where appropriate".  When I read that line,
I had to laugh.  Just this past weekend I was talking to a friend of mine
who heads software development for a financial services firm in San
Francisco.  His comment: " 'JAVA' means 'behind schedule'."  He has
programmers working for him on a range of platforms, working in various
languages.  The Java programmers working for him know both the language and
the environment and still have trouble getting things done as quickly or
with the same level of quality as his other programmers can in the 3GL's and
4GL's he supports.

I have some OO background, can and do use the languages, and generally think
that good design and flexibility in a 3GL or 4GL product will outperform and
be easier to maintain than any large product written in OO.  It's only my
opinion and I have been brought to task for it (often).  And yes, I say that
with the reservation that the platform and application should be able to
define their best forms.  If server side applications are your aim, then
Java might be easier to code than some other language.

I guess I just don't get this "need" to migrate anyway.  Yes, there are
always reasons to change languages or platforms, but that article was not
written for the system manager or technicians who will have to put the
models into play.  For whom do you think it was written?  Maybe those VP's
and CEO's on the planes we talk about all the time?  My pointing that out
serves to note that while techies will have opinions about the languages,
they at least tend to come from some knowledge of them, not from marketing
hype.  When you hear stories about firms going through millions of dollars
to have applications written on a specific platform or in a specific
language because it was the "choice" of whomever, and it never lives us to
its sales pitch, you have a choice: chuckle or shake your head.  I prefer to
chuckle, since I know it isn't my firm doing it.  If I saw that happening I
would either stop it or leave.  It's not in my nature to follow that path.

But hey, maybe I'm just getting old and don't want to use the new trick I
can still learn. :)

Rs~
Russ Smith, Systems Consultant
Problem Solved, Vacaville, CA
r s m i t h @ c u - h e l p . c o m
h p 3 k - l @ e - 3 0 0 0 . n e t

I think these are just my opinions, but I could be wrong.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brad Feazell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Cost of migrating COBOL Programmers to Java


> 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