Il y a peut-être des programmeurs Cobol pour MainFrame et RPG pour AS/400.

Présent! Je programme en ILE RPG 5.2 à la job.

Je n'ai jamais programmer sur du Mainframe et je me demandais , à ceux qui on déjà pratiqué la chose , si vous avez aimé votre expérience ?

La mentalité mainframe est très différente de celle PC. Tout est restreint, tout est contrôlé et les programmes sont parfois limités parce qu'ils doivent être achetés.

Pour avoir fait un peu de Cobol au cégep, après avoir fait du Java ou C, c'est loin d'être le langage que je préfère. Malgré que pour traiter des fichiers, c'est ce qu'il y a de plus idéal, c'est pour cette raison qu'il est beaucoup utilisé sur les mainframes, parce que tout fonctionne en mode batch avec des fichiers.

Z-80
It got its biggest break when a small sub-division of IBM couldn't afford to pay cash for their first choice CPU, the Motorola 68000, and used the 8088 for the IBM PC. This made the 8088 respectable and the rest, as they say, was history. It sold in countless millions and, as an all time success story, is second only to the Z-80. (Those who claim the reverse order are showing their youth.)

Unfortunately, Intel made some very bad design decisions with this chip. First, it used a segmented architecture (see 286 below). Secondly, for some incomprehensible reason, Intel chose to organise its memory access in such a way that IBM felt constrained to limit the theoretical maximum RAM of the original PC to 640k. Even in those early days, these were short-sighted decisions, and we have all suffered from them ever since. If you've ever had an 'out of memory' error message, then you have met this design fault yourself. DOS, Windows, and even Windows 98 all have base-memory problems which are directly caused by the 640k barrier. Only true 32-bit operating systems like Linux, OS/2 and Windows 2000 escape this problem, and for these we had to wait seven more years for the 386.

x86
Like the 8086, the 286 had a segmented architecture — you couldn't just nominate a place in memory you wanted to go to, you had to separately set a segment register and an offset, so there were many ways to get to the same place. This created significant extra work and complication for programmers and had a lot to do with the unpopularity of the world's most popular CPU family. Bill Gates is most famous for saying it, but nearly all programmers called the 286 'brain damaged'.

Gates was actually referring to another less than ideal aspect of the 286 when he said this, but the point remains: we all run variations of the X86 family because they run all our old programs, but even Intel would be hard-pressed to describe the X86 architecture as efficient. The 286 was particularly ugly because although it could access more than 1MB of RAM, to do so it had to switch into 'protected mode', and it can't get back into the normal 'real mode' without a complete reset. In short, it was a terrible kludge.

68000
The 68000 powered almost everything that didn't have an 8086 or 8088: Apple Lisa, Apple Mac, Commodore Amiga, Atari ST, and many others. The simple, practical design lasted well, and was updated with the 68020, 68030 and 68040. Programmers loved the 68000 (no-one ever loved an 8088) and 68000 code tends to be small, fast and efficient. Notice how 68000 powered Amigas and Macs used to do things in 1MB or 2MB of RAM that you needed 16MB and a 486 to do on a PC.

Car le code assembleur et la gestion de registre sur les processeurs motorolla était un charme comparativement a l'architechture intel du 8080(le grand décendant de nos cpu x86).