Re: Learning curve from R/3 to R/2

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Message Board ]

Posted by [IP Address: 192.83.224.17] 'martin' on September 13, 2001 at 00:18:14 EST:

In Reply to: Learning curve from R/3 to R/2 posted by [IP Address: 192.83.224.17] 'Timothy Clo' on September 12, 2001 at 17:22:52 EST:

: What kind of learning curve would an R/3 developer experience if asked to work in R/2?

I'm part of a team that supports R2 on an MVS mainframe, CICS/DB2. We also support multiple R/3 customers and sites (2.2E up to 4.6D)

First off, - a bit of history :- I've been told that R3 1.x was a port from MVS to UNIX (rather than a rewrite).

A gross generalisation is that the more recent the R3 system, the more tasks are done via the SAPGUI, rather than requiring someone (usually BASIS) to logon to the Operating System. Examples include transports and parameters (whats now RZ10).

By comparison, under R2 a lot of what you're used to using the GUI for (even in R3 2.2 systems) is back in the operating system. The background tasks run in MVS batch jobs, so creating running and monitoring background jobs etc requires basic knowledge of (at our installation) MVS/TSO. The BASIS people tend to be ex mainframe sysprogs / mainframe dbas; Its not so important for developers.

And of course, most (if not all) R/2 sits access the online system via dumb-terminal emulators; there is no 'SAPGUI' equivalent used. Its available, but I've never seen or heard of its regular use.

Functionally, the high-level concepts are similar. For example, Authorisations, SQL, logical databases etc all exist, but in a rudimentary fashion compared to what you're used to. ABAP is a bit more restictive (no push-buttons etc). You need to be running a spcific 3270-emulator that enables PC-Connect to download from within an ABAP. Even many of the field names and table names are the same; There's just names that DONT match to confuse you.

In short, our ABAPers don't like working on R/2, because the interface is clunky, and ugly, but they cope with swapping beteen the two quite easily.

BTW, a good tip.... I'm not au-fait with the functional side of things, but from the basis view-point, transactions map quite simply....
R3 SE08 --> R2 TM08
R3 SE38 --> R2 TM38
etc

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:
Subject:
Message: : : What kind of learning curve would an R/3 developer experience if asked to work in R/2? : I'm part of a team that supports R2 on an MVS mainframe, CICS/DB2. We also support multiple R/3 customers and sites (2.2E up to 4.6D) : First off, - a bit of history :- I've been told that R3 1.x was a port from MVS to UNIX (rather than a rewrite). : A gross generalisation is that the more recent the R3 system, the more tasks are done via the SAPGUI, rather than requiring someone (usually BASIS) to logon to the Operating System. Examples include transports and parameters (whats now RZ10). : By comparison, under R2 a lot of what you're used to using the GUI for (even in R3 2.2 systems) is back in the operating system. The background tasks run in MVS batch jobs, so creating running and monitoring background jobs etc requires basic knowledge of (at our installation) MVS/TSO. The BASIS people tend to be ex mainframe sysprogs / mainframe dbas; Its not so important for developers. : And of course, most (if not all) R/2 sits access the online system via dumb-terminal emulators; there is no 'SAPGUI' equivalent used. Its available, but I've never seen or heard of its regular use. : Functionally, the high-level concepts are similar. For example, Authorisations, SQL, logical databases etc all exist, but in a rudimentary fashion compared to what you're used to. ABAP is a bit more restictive (no push-buttons etc). You need to be running a spcific 3270-emulator that enables PC-Connect to download from within an ABAP. Even many of the field names and table names are the same; There's just names that DONT match to confuse you. : In short, our ABAPers don't like working on R/2, because the interface is clunky, and ugly, but they cope with swapping beteen the two quite easily. : BTW, a good tip.... I'm not au-fait with the functional side of things, but from the basis view-point, transactions map quite simply.... : R3 SE08 --> R2 TM08 : R3 SE38 --> R2 TM38 : etc

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Message Board ]