Talk:Conversational Monitor System

Comparisons to Unix?

I have no idea why Unix is mentioned here. The definition of computing, much less operating systems, is so different between mainframes, minis, and PCs, there's no use in comparing them. The article sounds like Unix users should switch to CMS!

Since I haven't used CMS (although I've used other mainframe JCLs), I'll wait for someone else to clean this up first. If no one does, I'll chop it out myself after a couple of days. -- A D Monroe III 18:17, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The comparison to UNIX is perfectly reasonable, IMHO. The original CMS was developed to provide a terminal shell for the underlying kernel (CP-40, CP-67, VM/370-CP). The fact that CMS could also run as a single-user standalone operating system, on a real IBM S/360, was convenient but not really the goal. Dave Tuttle 21:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

messaging/chat?

I'm trying to remember the mechanism by which users could talk with each other on CMS, back in the '70's. I used it, but forget what it was called or how it worked. Some sort of messaging or mail system? Early social networks? :) ★NealMcB★ (talk) 21:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

• There were (and still are) several options : To talk to local users one can use the CP "MESSAGE" command which sends an immediate message to that local user - provided that user hasn't elected to not receive such messages (CP SET MSG ON/OFF). To send "mail", one can send a virtual deck of cards containing the message to another user's virtual card reader spool queue. For connected systems (through RSCS), both of these can be achieved by relaying these options through RSCS - allowing communicating with users on another VM system or to another NJE connected system (MVS, VSE, etc..). Ivan Scott Warren (talk) 10:04, 19 May 2011 (UTC)