Why should I tell them that, I never sad its not ok to make money of people that still use this stuff! Why should IBM not do it if there are still lots of people with old code that they can make money off? All I said is that there are languages way better then PL/I.
I am also a non-native speaker. It's funny how you prefer modern software, yet you don't make use of a spellchecker, something which, to my knowledge, was not available on OS/360, but which is easily available today. Spellcheckers are the non-native speaker's best friend. I know that they may not catch certain things, like the difference between "their" and "there", but they would prevent most of your simple mistakes. You can make use of today's software to appear more professional, instead of just talking about how much better it is than the 1960's technologies that I prefer.
You should tell IBM, what I said, because their compiler upgrades and certification programs are not just for people with old code. PL/I is being used for new code, mostly by companies who are not persuaded by the shininess of the latest fads. PL/S, a proprietary dialect of PL/I, was used internally, by IBM, to create much of z/OS. XPL, another dialect of PL/I, was used to create the compiler for HAL/S, the language in which the programs that controlled the Space Shuttle were written. Incidentally, I note that HAL/S supported GOTO, which is amazing, considering that mission-critical aerospace applications could use GOTO, when written in a good language, whereas Javascript and its modern, GOTO-less brethren, regardless of speed, are not, as far as I know, worthy of such important applications.
I submit that there are no languages intrinsically "better" than PL/I, or, at least, that there isn't much else, that's been created since 1970, which is better than the latest PL/I (which is likely to be IBM's Enterprise PL/I for z/OS). Pretty much anything important, that you can code, in one of today's hip languages, I can also code, in my ancient PL/I "F" compiler, on OS/360, and those things which I can't do there, I probably could, by upgrading to MVS, under S/370, again on Hercules, where I can use the PL/I "Optimizing" compiler, but even that additional capability still puts me in the 1970's.
My original, fundamental point, which is correct, and which you cannot successfully argue against, is: Since the end of the OS/360 era, there has been a definite trend towards a tremendous waste of resources in rediscovering old programming truths, with some of the worst waste being in permanently forgetting about some very cool advances which we thus have to do without, today. A great deal of expensive, expert domain knowledge has been lost in old, abandoned codebases, and usually for no more reason than merely a glimmer of hope that some new way of doing things will be "better". One small example is Multics, an amazing operating system, written mostly in EPL, yet another dialect of PL/I.
Why should I tell them that, I never sad its not ok to make money of people that still use this stuff! Why should IBM not do it if there are still lots of people with old code that they can make money off? All I said is that there are languages way better then PL/I.