Which components or facilities were the biggest obstacle to porting typical COBOL applications?
Simply that there were not many applications that made sense to be ported to (desktop) micros. If at all, downward migration of whole applications was toward /3x systems and ultimately AS400. Which was well supported and rather painless.
COBOL applications have not typically been ported from mainframes to micros because they rely on two features that micros typically lack.
Throughput COBOL applications often need to process large amounts of data in a fixed amount of time (e.g. processing a day's sales data for all stores in a chain). These tasks are typically I/O bound and mainframes have ...
Commodore 128 / 128D was capable of outupting 80 columns through RGBi, therefore it could compete with other business machines of the time, but was this the case?
Not really. The C128 was introduced in 1985 - a new business machine of that time was x86 based, most likely using a 286 of 6-10 MHz, 512 or more KiB of RAM and a 20 MiB HD. Nothing an 8 bit ...
Commodore released the CBM 8032 in 1980 with an 80 column screen aimed at business users so they would already be using that (or successor models) and accompanying business software well before 1985. There would have been no particular reason for Commodore business users to swap to a C128 and non-Commodore users would be eyeing up an IBM PC or AT by then.
If you can get to a library or institution with JSTOR access, this link will take you to a story that probably will give you your answer. (I don't have such access myself.)
The linked article is an overview of Mac music software circa 1985. It calls out MusicWorks, along with ConcertWare, MacMusic, MusPrint, Professional Composer, Song Painter, and Music ...
Different things happened.
One, when mainframes were replaced, their applications were replaced with new applications written in modern languages for the new platforms. Many a IBM mainframe have been replaced by modern Unix machines with completely new software applications.
Two, for those that didn't want rewrite their applications, but change platforms, ...
The help file is still available elsewhere on Microsoft’s site. The macrofun.exe file there is a self-extracting cabinet file containing macrofun.hlp, the table of contents (macrofun.cnt) and a README file with usage and installation instructions.
Hayden Software 600 Suffolk St.
Lowell, Massachusetts 01853 USA
The disk opens with an icon of a "ghetto-blaster" and a files icon of a cassette; we sense we are in a fun time. If today is like practically every day since MusicWorks' release, then at this very moment someone is probably uploading yet another MusicWorks tune to ...
What was the most critical supporting software for COBOL on IBM mainframes?
I'd venture to say that it was neither of the things you mention; I think it was what IBM termed "access methods" -- data structures and low level system libraries allowing programmatic access to files, first sequential (on tapes), later random (on DASDs). COBOL evolved to ...
Not sure what you really asked.
I was an IBM SE back then.
Cobol is a compiled language.
So you need a compiler for it.
The compiler needs an operating system.
The operating system needs a mainframe computer.
The mainframe computer needs FEs to maintain it and electricity to run it and it needs to be cooled in a special room with a raised floor to permit ...
IMS is more of an runtime environment and transaction system than a
I'll have to disagree on that one. IMS is/was a non-relational database (hierachical, if I correctly recall my grad school course in it). It's almost unused today, everyone having gone over to relational databases (SQL style).
Perhaps you were thinking of CMS (Conversational/...