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 >