Comments on: Wikipedia on Cullinet and my comments on same http://www.softwarememories.com/2008/05/27/wikipedia-cullinet/ History of software, by somebody who lived it Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:22:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Historical notes on analytics — terminology | Software Memories http://www.softwarememories.com/2008/05/27/wikipedia-cullinet/#comment-64257 Historical notes on analytics — terminology | Software Memories Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:04:52 +0000 http://www.softwarememories.com/?p=33#comment-64257 [...] writers were around in various forms for decades; consider for example the early 1970s history of Cullinane/Cullinet. By the time I became an analyst in the early 1980s, these were mainframe tools that let you [...] [...] writers were around in various forms for decades; consider for example the early 1970s history of Cullinane/Cullinet. By the time I became an analyst in the early 1980s, these were mainframe tools that let you [...]

]]> By: Gopi Nathan http://www.softwarememories.com/2008/05/27/wikipedia-cullinet/#comment-48892 Gopi Nathan Mon, 27 Dec 2010 13:47:14 +0000 http://www.softwarememories.com/?p=33#comment-48892 Just when most ex-Cullinet people are quiet on the product, one comes across new comments on IDMS in connection with NOSQL databases! This is a new front!! (google on NOSQL and IDMS) ... The failure of relational dbs to properly support java objects (domain model) and the emergence of yet another layer of 'database type' coding in ORM products like hibernate to mimic an E-R model(!) have also given rise to a new breed of products - NOSQL databases. A sort of re-inventing the wheel!! And in one of the discussions, someone who learned IDMS only in the late 90s has praised the product! Also Microsoft's own documentation on Entity FrameWork uses the terminology E-R Model. Incidentally it is in the Microsoft product, one sees a proper database diagram comparable to the IDMS's Bachman Diagram. All the well known relational products use an incomplete or non-standard diagram. Either too much info or too little, never standardized! New databases talk about supporting BLOBs (Binary Large objects). Nothing new if one recall that IDMS dictionary load area already stored load modules in binary form and used them in OLTP live applications. The old product ICMS/IDB also could store unstructured data. Finnish Firm Vegasoft stores pictures (JPG, GIF) etc in the IDD dictionary in their Webserver for IDMS. As for character data, XMLS have been stored in IDMS record fields defined as, for example, PIC X(10000). Compression will also optimize the storing. That's all for this year! Just when most ex-Cullinet people are quiet on the product, one comes across new comments on IDMS in connection with NOSQL databases! This is a new front!! (google on NOSQL and IDMS) …

The failure of relational dbs to properly support java objects (domain model) and the emergence of yet another layer of ‘database type’ coding in ORM products like hibernate to mimic an E-R model(!) have also given rise to a new breed of products – NOSQL databases. A sort of re-inventing the wheel!! And in one of the discussions, someone who learned IDMS only in the late 90s has praised the product!

Also Microsoft’s own documentation on Entity FrameWork uses the terminology E-R Model. Incidentally it is in the Microsoft product, one sees a proper database diagram comparable to the IDMS’s Bachman Diagram. All the well known relational products use an incomplete or non-standard diagram. Either too much info or too little, never standardized!

New databases talk about supporting BLOBs (Binary Large objects). Nothing new if one recall that IDMS dictionary load area already stored load modules in binary form and used them in OLTP live applications. The old product ICMS/IDB also could store unstructured data. Finnish Firm Vegasoft stores pictures (JPG, GIF) etc in the IDD dictionary in their Webserver for IDMS. As for character data, XMLS have been stored in IDMS record fields defined as, for example, PIC X(10000). Compression will also optimize the storing.

That’s all for this year!

]]> By: Gopi Nathan http://www.softwarememories.com/2008/05/27/wikipedia-cullinet/#comment-41815 Gopi Nathan Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:16:22 +0000 http://www.softwarememories.com/?p=33#comment-41815 I worked for Cullinet until 1989 in Scandinavia. Today in 2009 I can positively and firmly say that IDMS was the best database ever, if one compares the database features. IDMS was more than a database ie IDMS-DC, IDD and ADS shipped with that making it an almost complete development and runtime environment on IBM/370. IDMS DB/DC ran clean on MVS, DOS/VSE and native VM/CMS. IDMS-DC ran under VM (Even IBM doesn't have CICS running under VM native). Application code was portable across all the three. ie COBOL, ADS code and data definitions basically needed no change. I have never seen such compatibility anywhere else even in the modern era! One can write a lot on why Cullinet failed in 1989. It was wrong poisitioning, market switch to relational db and euphoria on client/server computing. Cullinet itself could have easily saved te company if they had introduced the SQL in 1989, which was needed for marketing reasons. But that time the management at Cullinet were wrongly focussing on VAX products. In fact, IDMS Release 11 was announced in 1987 but shelved in 1988. CA brought out this as Release 12.0 in 1992 with sql support. IDD - the data dictionary was an underestimated product. Even today there is no such complete dictionary on any platform! Active at development (100% ADS and database source is stored here) and active at run time (for ADS load modules). One can go on... IDMS and Cullinet were victims of pseudo market perceptions. The company leaders gave up too early. CA made more money from the product than Cullinet. Applications made in the mid eigthties are still running at a variety of sites even now... see the site for more stories ! I worked for Cullinet until 1989 in Scandinavia. Today in 2009 I can positively and firmly say that IDMS was the best database ever, if one compares the database features. IDMS was more than a database ie IDMS-DC, IDD and ADS shipped with that making it an almost complete development and runtime environment on IBM/370. IDMS DB/DC ran clean on MVS, DOS/VSE and native VM/CMS. IDMS-DC ran under VM (Even IBM doesn’t have CICS running under VM native). Application code was portable across all the three. ie COBOL, ADS code and data definitions basically needed no change. I have never seen such compatibility anywhere else even in the modern era!

One can write a lot on why Cullinet failed in 1989. It was wrong poisitioning, market switch to relational db and euphoria on client/server computing. Cullinet itself could have easily saved te company if they had introduced the SQL in 1989, which was needed for marketing reasons. But that time the management at Cullinet were wrongly focussing on VAX products. In fact, IDMS Release 11 was announced in 1987 but shelved in 1988. CA brought out this as Release 12.0 in 1992 with sql support.

IDD – the data dictionary was an underestimated product. Even today there is no such complete dictionary on any platform! Active at development (100% ADS and database source is stored here) and active at run time (for ADS load modules).

One can go on… IDMS and Cullinet were victims of pseudo market perceptions. The company leaders gave up too early. CA made more money from the product than Cullinet. Applications made in the mid eigthties are still running at a variety of sites even now…

see the site for more stories !

]]> By: Don Casey http://www.softwarememories.com/2008/05/27/wikipedia-cullinet/#comment-37970 Don Casey Tue, 21 Apr 2009 21:07:08 +0000 http://www.softwarememories.com/?p=33#comment-37970 I worked for Culcorp from 1979 thru 1989; but out in California. A few notes: 1) both Nakerud and (the other) Casey returned to Culcorp at one point in the 1980s, 2) IDD was an extension of the original "directory", 3) It would be nice if some mention of IDMS-DC (tp monitor) is included. IDMS-DC had features way beyond CICS when it was introduced, and even today it is hard to pick which is technically superior. The ability to run ordinary application logic WITHIN a combined TP monitor/database engine was revolutionary. I worked for Culcorp from 1979 thru 1989; but out in California. A few notes: 1) both Nakerud and (the other) Casey returned to Culcorp at one point in the 1980s, 2) IDD was an extension of the original “directory”, 3) It would be nice if some mention of IDMS-DC (tp monitor) is included. IDMS-DC had features way beyond CICS when it was introduced, and even today it is hard to pick which is technically superior. The ability to run ordinary application logic WITHIN a combined TP monitor/database engine was revolutionary.

]]> By: Dan Lynch http://www.softwarememories.com/2008/05/27/wikipedia-cullinet/#comment-31334 Dan Lynch Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:50:34 +0000 http://www.softwarememories.com/?p=33#comment-31334 I always enjoy reading details about the history of Cullinet Software. I spent the first 5 years of my career working at the headquarters building on Blue Hill Drive in Westwood. One can hardly blame Cullinet or claim it to be a "flaw" that they developed GOLDENGATE before Windows. Let's remember that it was May 22, 1990 before version 3.0 of Windows shipped - the first version that offered even the slightest real hint of multi-tasking. And Excel (version 2.1d) was the only GUI app that Microsoft themselves had available for their Windows offering. Oh well - no matter - GOLDENGATE was an awesome product. And Cullinet was a great company to work for. I learned a LOT during those years. I always enjoy reading details about the history of Cullinet Software. I spent the first 5 years of my career working at the headquarters building on Blue Hill Drive in Westwood. One can hardly blame Cullinet or claim it to be a “flaw” that they developed GOLDENGATE before Windows. Let’s remember that it was May 22, 1990 before version 3.0 of Windows shipped – the first version that offered even the slightest real hint of multi-tasking. And Excel (version 2.1d) was the only GUI app that Microsoft themselves had available for their Windows offering. Oh well – no matter – GOLDENGATE was an awesome product. And Cullinet was a great company to work for. I learned a LOT during those years.

]]>