1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 23 Jun 2000	Volume 2000 : Issue 348       Contents: Re: %ERF-E-READERR A question on PATHWORKS  Re: A question on PATHWORKS 2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)2 Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)9 Re: Alpha DEC 2000-300 (Jensen?) - Serial port as console 9 Re: Alpha DEC 2000-300 (Jensen?) - Serial port as console  amazing!  Re: Besides Pathworks for Mac...! Can I boot VAX6600 from DSSI disk % Re: Can I boot VAX6600 from DSSI disk ' Re: Cisco Has DECNet Ping - VMS Doesn't  Re: Common Alpha Executable  RE: Common Alpha Executable  Re: Common Alpha Executable & Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?& Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?& Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?& Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?& Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?" Re: DECNET-Plus, DTSS, NTP and UTC" Re: DECNET-Plus, DTSS, NTP and UTC" RE: DECNET-Plus, DTSS, NTP and UTC9 Easier porting of C/C++ applications from Unix to OpenVMS < Re: Not waiting for the shoe to drop. was: Re: VAX on Intel?. Re: OpenVMS clusters vs other systems clusters. Re: OpenVMS clusters vs other systems clusters. Re: OpenVMS clusters vs other systems clusters) Re: OpenVMS UCX/FTP and Internet Explorer 
 print to file  Re: print to file  Re: print to file 5 Re: Proxy problem: Why does node:: work but 0:: fail? * Remote access programs from Windows to VMS. Re: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS. RE: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS. RE: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS. Re: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS. Re: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS? Re: Storage Works / Snapshots / Maybe it's time to skip OpenVMS + Re: transferring files to/from vms systems?  Re: User mode logicals Re: User mode logicals Re: User mode logicals Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: Win2K on Alpha resumed??, [x]  Play Free With Our Casino Sign-up Bonus  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:29:15 GMT / From: "John Nixon" <jorlnixon@worldnet.att.net>  Subject: Re: %ERF-E-READERR G Message-ID: <vGu45.18063$Xx5.988462@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>   K If DECEVENT is the utility that is required to read the Alpha VMS errorlog, G why does Compaq make it so difficult to obtain.  Why is it not a native  image G on the Alpha VMS distribution?   And why does it need to be upgraded so G often?  And why is it so difficult to upgrade.  DECEvent is very UN-VMS  like.   < "Mark D. Jilson" <jilly@clarityconnect.com> wrote in message, news:3950D569.498E2B37@clarityconnect.com...F > If this is for an OpenVMS Alpha system then you should be aware thatF > ANALYZE/ERROR is not the utility to use to interpret errorlogs.  You3 > should be using DECevent and this may be found at E > http://www1.service.digital.com/svctools/decevent/decevent-kits.htm  >  > Tomasz Dryjanski wrote:  > > ? > > When I tried to analyze error log, I received the following  > > message: > > B > > Error Log Report Generator                        Version V6.1 > > B > > %ERF-E-READERR, error reading SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSERR]ERRLOG.SYS;2< > > -RMS-W-RTB, 9387 byte record too large for user's buffer > > D > > It already happened some time ago and I have backed up (changingB > > it's name) the file ERRORLOG.SYS;1. And now it happened again.3 > > Do you have an idea why? And how to prevent it?  > >  > > TIA  > > Tomasz DryjanskiL > > ________________________________________________________________________L > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com >  > --F > Jilly - Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley - Lockwood, NY/ > - jilly@clarityconnect.com - Brett Bodine fan - > - Mark.Jilson@Compaq.com - since 1975 or so - > - http://www.jilly.baka.com               -    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:25:31 GMT  From: hanghien@my-deja.com  Subject: A question on PATHWORKS) Message-ID: <8itsn6$lg2$1@nnrp1.deja.com>   : The PATHWORKS V6.0C for OpenVMS Server document states any; PC/Windows-95 client can read and write files in VMS-format ; on the Server. Is it possible for an application running on ; the Server to write files in VMS-format to a PC hard disk ? 1 I'm thinking of a network configuration that uses 9 Alpha/OpenVMS V6.2/Pathworks V6.0C on the server side and < PC/Windows-95/Pathwoks-32 V7.1A on the client side. There is= a need for a DCL command procedure to copy files to a PC hard 7 disk which must be treated as a VMS hard drive and also , accessible to another Window-95 application.@ And I heard horrible stories of setting a communications network& using the older versions of PATHWORKS.   Any takers ?   Thanks,  John    & Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:01:35 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> $ Subject: Re: A question on PATHWORKS) Message-ID: <39528CBF.AD9D5F1E@gtech.com>    hanghien@my-deja.com wrote: < > The PATHWORKS V6.0C for OpenVMS Server document states any= > PC/Windows-95 client can read and write files in VMS-format = > on the Server. Is it possible for an application running on = > the Server to write files in VMS-format to a PC hard disk ? 3 > I'm thinking of a network configuration that uses ; > Alpha/OpenVMS V6.2/Pathworks V6.0C on the server side and > > PC/Windows-95/Pathwoks-32 V7.1A on the client side. There is? > a need for a DCL command procedure to copy files to a PC hard 9 > disk which must be treated as a VMS hard drive and also . > accessible to another Window-95 application.  < Many many years ago PathWorks came with a FAL utility, which1 allowed you to do a DECnet copy from VMS to a PC.   8 If that utility is still part of PW7.1A (I can not check: now, because I am not at home), then you should be able to6 use it (you will need to install the DECnet protocol).  = When looking for it, then remember to look in the unsupported ; directory (where most of old usefull stuff tend to end up).    Arne   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 12:36:36 PDTT From: Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515); Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?) 3 Message-ID: <NC+LKPcZunOa@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>   ( In article <8itaun$3em$1@Mars.mcs.net>, 1     rjordan@Mars.mcs.net (Richard Jordan) writes:   ) [...lot's of background stuff deleted...] D > I believe that the Q really needs to produce a lower cost of entryC > system.  A DS10 or equivalent, 128MB RAM, hard drive, tape drive, ? > VMS, and 'x' users (5 or 10) for under $5000 (and under $3500 ?                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^      ^^^^^^^^^^^ > > would be great, since thats the round cost of a good quality@ > name brand NT server with some apps in the papers here).  Some@ > time ago someone made a recommendation of a 'cluster in a box'? > for under $10K {I think that was the price, but I may be mis- @ > remembering}.  That one would _absolutely_ make it possible toA > put a cluster in some of those medium size places that actually C > do need the capabilities a cluster provides, but are so ingrained > > with NT server pricing that they won't consider the current  > product and pricing.    H         I've managed to stay out of  this "discussion" till now...I mustH     be  getting  weak. :-}  But I really wanted to reinforce  what  Rich     said above.   H         At  my  site  (basic  research   in  physics,  a  DOE  supportedH     laboratory  but  also  wearing  a  .EDU  "hat"),  equipment  can  beH     purchased with just my manager's signature _if_  it's  under  $5000.H     That  $5000  is  a very hard limit for many education and governmentH     institutions.  Things  in  the  purchasing  area  get  so  much more!     complicated above that value.   H         However, and as I've told Rich Marcello several times in person,H     most of my cluster  VAXstations  (old VS3100/76's, VS400/VLC's and aH     few  VS4000/60's) are being replaced by WNT desktops.  NOT _ONE_  ofH     those WNT desktops has a Compaq logo on it!  (You needn't  try  hardH     to  guess what 4-character label starting with "D" and ending in "l"H     _is_ on those.)  Every  single  VMS  loss  at  our site is a loss to%     Compaq (and Digital before them).   H         I _want_, very badly, to  replace the remaining VAXstations withH     AlphaStations,  but to do so I have to justify _not_ purchasing  theH     under $2000 WNT desktop.  I think I could do it with a  $3500  AlphaH     workstation,  even  though  the  price is nearly twice as high whileH     giving up some  of  the  "functionality"  of available WNT software,H     viruses  and all (and being .EDU, we have CSLG so VMS license  costsH     aren't an issue).  But at $5000 (minus a few pennies), I'd be a foolH     to approach management, even my sympathetic management, with such  a
     proposal!   H         I certainly hope the  much-rumored  DS05  appears Real Soon Now,H     _and_ that it bears a _very_ affordable price tag.  Otherwise, well,+     there's always linux...on Intel...  :-(            -Ken --  M  Kenneth H. Fairfield            |  Internet: Fairfield@SLC.Slac.Stanford.Edu :  SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, MS 46  |  Voice:    650-926-2924:  Menlo Park, CA  94025           |  FAX:      650-926-3515N  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------B  These opinions are mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's...   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:56:05 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> ; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?) , Message-ID: <39526F54.9ACCFC02@videotron.ca>   "Nikita V. Belenki" wrote:J > There is virtually no demand for VMS in the low-end, high-volume market, > regardless of its price.  K Consider that in the heydays of VMS, there was much demand for desktop VMS. K Why do you think Digital produced so many "diskless" workstations ? So they L could boot off a server into a cluster and provide the scalability and power of VMS clustering.  N Digital, in its infinite wisdom, hired one too many ex-IBMers who decided thatG Digital should sell its products just a tad below IBM proces to compete H against IBM, and refused to consider that Sun , Apollo et all could hurtJ Digital. It had its eyes on IBM and though it was invincible. And when theN workstation market started to be very competitive, Digital refused to considerL the "PC" as competition and kept its VMS prices at IBM mainframe levels. ForN instance, Digital refused to lower its price from its C compiler from multipleN thousand dollars down to the level of PC compilers because Digital thought itsM compilers were by far superior to PC products (and consider that DEC provides G only a compiler whereas PC products provided a development environment)     K Sorry, but Digital chose to exclude itself from that market, it was not the  market which chose to drop VMS.   N Talk to most former VMS shops, and the system managers were not happy to leaveJ VMS. Talk to most VMS shops, and it was the price difference between newer= competitors and the old Digital that forced them to drop VMS.   G While the price differences may not be as bad today as they were in the @ early/mid 90s, now is the added problem of lack of applications.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:20:58 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> ; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?) , Message-ID: <39527528.5E4624F4@videotron.ca>   Gord Coulman wrote:  > M > What IT people are short of these days is time.  Wouldn't it be great to be J > able to buy, for example, a pre-configured database server that will runF > reliably for months or years with little setup or intervention?  TheN > advantage that NT has at the low end stems mainly from perceived ease of useF > and software that can be installed with one "double click" (in salesM > literature, anyway).  Perhaps OpenVMS could make some inroads in this area, ; > given competitive pricing and a well-integrated solution.   H Or perhaps VMS could avoid the "double click" hype and continue with its> solid, robust and fully documented installation instructions.   N If you have the manual with you, then it is not a problem to run vmsinstal (or even product install).  E The problem with double clicking on NT is that to configure the stuff L afterwards, you have to use regedit or some very limited menus which make it: very difficult to tailor the software to your environment.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:39:17 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> ; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?) ( Message-ID: <8iu11j$ami$1@pyrite.mv.net>  0 Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515. <Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message- news:NC+LKPcZunOa@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu... ) > In article <8itaun$3em$1@Mars.mcs.net>, 3 >     rjordan@Mars.mcs.net (Richard Jordan) writes:  > + > [...lot's of background stuff deleted...] F > > I believe that the Q really needs to produce a lower cost of entryE > > system.  A DS10 or equivalent, 128MB RAM, hard drive, tape drive, A > > VMS, and 'x' users (5 or 10) for under $5000 (and under $3500 A >                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^      ^^^^^^^^^^^ @ > > would be great, since thats the round cost of a good qualityB > > name brand NT server with some apps in the papers here).  SomeB > > time ago someone made a recommendation of a 'cluster in a box'A > > for under $10K {I think that was the price, but I may be mis- B > > remembering}.  That one would _absolutely_ make it possible toC > > put a cluster in some of those medium size places that actually E > > do need the capabilities a cluster provides, but are so ingrained ? > > with NT server pricing that they won't consider the current  > > product and pricing.  C Cluster in a box for $9999?  Not impossible, and it doesn't require J price-parity with Linux (though it actually *undercuts* Win2K list clusterD pricing - and I don't know how much Win2K Advanced Server prices are) discounted when purchased with hardware).   K If Compaq can sell the DS10 hardware for $3500, it ought to be able to sell H twice the internals in a single box for at most about $6500 at about theL same profit margin (even if the DS10 price is IDE-disk-based and the clusterF box package would need SCSI for the quorum disk, it should be close toJ doable at that price).  That leaves $3500 for 2 VMS plus cluster licenses,K which shouldn't be out of the question, though would represent considerably J more aggressive pricing than is currently available (but a new entry-levelL DS10 price tier could make that reasonable).  Provide your own tape drive orH CD-R for backup - can't have everything, but on a $10K system that's not much difference.  K As I said before, *this* is the kind of proposal that could be presented to H Compaq as consistent with extension of its existing VMS pricing policiesI rather than an assault on market segments that it prefers to address with ( Windows and Linux on commodity hardware.   > J >         I've managed to stay out of  this "discussion" till now...I mustJ >     be  getting  weak. :-}  But I really wanted to reinforce  what  Rich >     said above.  > J >         At  my  site  (basic  research   in  physics,  a  DOE  supportedJ >     laboratory  but  also  wearing  a  .EDU  "hat"),  equipment  can  beJ >     purchased with just my manager's signature _if_  it's  under  $5000.J >     That  $5000  is  a very hard limit for many education and governmentJ >     institutions.  Things  in  the  purchasing  area  get  so  much more# >     complicated above that value.   E Well, you can get a VMS DS10 now for around $4700, can't you?  No, it I doesn't include TCP/IP, VOLSHAD, and DFU, but, again, bunding those in isuK presentable to Compaq as consistent with industry practice rather than as a)I major price cut - and you might even get Compaq to reduce the price a few L hundred dollars more by observing that everyone else gives customers a breakK when they purchase the software along with the hardware and/or getting them K to create a separate entry-level price tier rather than sharing it with thel DS20 and ES40.  G IIRC $4300, say, would represent a major (close to 40%?) reduction from F current system pricing, and you're not going to get much lower given aC hardware base price of $3500.  But get a lower-priced base hardware J platform, and then the special entry-level tier VMS price likely decreasesF accordingly.  And don't forget that Windows hardware that matched DS103 quality isn't all that cheap (nor is Win2K Server).s   > J >         However, and as I've told Rich Marcello several times in person,J >     most of my cluster  VAXstations  (old VS3100/76's, VS400/VLC's and aJ >     few  VS4000/60's) are being replaced by WNT desktops.  NOT _ONE_  ofJ >     those WNT desktops has a Compaq logo on it!  (You needn't  try  hardJ >     to  guess what 4-character label starting with "D" and ending in "l"J >     _is_ on those.)  Every  single  VMS  loss  at  our site is a loss to' >     Compaq (and Digital before them).a  K That argument is not likely to fly with Compaq:  if they can't compete withMI Dell in the vast majority of situations that *don't* have an existing VMS J (or Tru64) heritage, then their goose is already cooked (at least in theirH estimation:  you and I might think they might be better off just turningL around their DEC acquisitions and getting out of the worst of the PC fray asC IBM seems to be doing, but that's likely just not going to happen).   I So their response would simply be that they can sell WNT to VMS people ingH the position you're describing, and that this is acceptable:  sites thatJ don't *need* VMS specifically will *never* be good VMS opportunities givenD the existence of more widely-accepted solutions to the same problem.   >oJ >         I _want_, very badly, to  replace the remaining VAXstations withJ >     AlphaStations,  but to do so I have to justify _not_ purchasing  the >     under $2000 WNT desktop.  L If you don't have any defensible reason for your preference (like, somethingE important that the AlphaStations will do for you that the WNT desktopjH won't), then, again, this argument seems unlikely to persuade Compaq anyJ more than it persuades your management:  Compaq would be happy to sell youL the WNT systems, and as described above *must* compete successfully in doing so.i   - bill  ,   I think I could do it with a  $3500  AlphaJ >     workstation,  even  though  the  price is nearly twice as high whileJ >     giving up some  of  the  "functionality"  of available WNT software,J >     viruses  and all (and being .EDU, we have CSLG so VMS license  costsJ >     aren't an issue).  But at $5000 (minus a few pennies), I'd be a foolJ >     to approach management, even my sympathetic management, with such  a >     proposal!  >eJ >         I certainly hope the  much-rumored  DS05  appears Real Soon Now,J >     _and_ that it bears a _very_ affordable price tag.  Otherwise, well,- >     there's always linux...on Intel...  :-(l >n >         -Ken > --/ >  Kenneth H. Fairfield            |  Internet:  Fairfield@SLC.Slac.Stanford.EduF< >  SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, MS 46  |  Voice:    650-926-2924< >  Menlo Park, CA  94025           |  FAX:      650-926-3515L >  ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----D >  These opinions are mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's...   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:45:58 -0400s- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>_; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)E, Message-ID: <3952A534.78F9D845@videotron.ca>  J When Compaq started, it managed to make "clones" of IBM PCs that were good) enough to run the flight simulator game. t  K Compaq then fairly quickly succeeded in making compatible PCs that were notlN only cheaper but performed better than IBM PCs. And that is how it go to where
 it is at now.3  H So why can't Compaq take VMS and make it cheaper and perform better than- Windows NT ? Why must VMS be more expensive ?H  M If you're the underdog, normally, you want to provide a superior product at a . lower price in order to get some market share.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jun 2000 20:52:33 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)w; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?).+ Message-ID: <aW3DK8ODNxkZ@eisner.decus.org>h   In article <NC+LKPcZunOa@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>, Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515) writes:  J >         I certainly hope the  much-rumored  DS05  appears Real Soon Now,8 >     _and_ that it bears a _very_ affordable price tag.   Didn't it appear as the DS10L ?K   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 18:08:48 PDTT From: Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515); Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)r3 Message-ID: <ZjBaTXIXWRB1@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>T  ) In article <8iu11j$ami$1@pyrite.mv.net>, c.     	"Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:2 > Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-35150 > <Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message/ > news:NC+LKPcZunOa@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu...  [...]iK >>         At  my  site  (basic  research   in  physics,  a  DOE  supportedsK >>     laboratory  but  also  wearing  a  .EDU  "hat"),  equipment  can  be6K >>     purchased with just my manager's signature _if_  it's  under  $5000. K >>     That  $5000  is  a very hard limit for many education and governmentlK >>     institutions.  Things  in  the  purchasing  area  get  so  much more $ >>     complicated above that value. > @ > Well, you can get a VMS DS10 now for around $4700, can't you?   !         Not with VMS you can't...r  H         Last August, we purchased  a  DS10  w/VMS,  128MB of memory, 9GBH     7200  RPM  UltraSCSI  system disk (VMS  didn't/doesn't  support  IDEH     system disks), and KZPBA-CA SCSI adapter.  After  35%  EDU  discountH     (on the system, certain components were more like 25% discount), theH     total  was still $5221.89.  You've missed by $500 on a system that'sH     not even listed today.  The current  minimum DS10 w/VMS is the 256MBH     package and that is nearly $1000 (list) more expensive (start with a9     DY-PB10A-AC...the obsolete 128MB part number is -AB).s  H         OTOH, a DS10L similarly  configured  but  with 256MB memory, theH     current  minimum,  lists  for a price very close to  what  the  DS10H     w/128MB lists for, given the old part  number.   While  close,  thisH     breaks  the  $5K  limit  I  spoke of (that August purchase was for aH     special  application  and  used  another  department's  money).  See7     DY-71AAA-DA plus mandatory additional part numbers.^  G >                                                                No, itbK > doesn't include TCP/IP, VOLSHAD, and DFU, but, again, bunding those in ismM > presentable to Compaq as consistent with industry practice rather than as asK > major price cut - and you might even get Compaq to reduce the price a fewmN > hundred dollars more by observing that everyone else gives customers a breakM > when they purchase the software along with the hardware and/or getting them M > to create a separate entry-level price tier rather than sharing it with thec > DS20 and ES40.  H         As I said before, licensing s not  an issue for _us_.  OTOH, theH     part  number I'm looking at, with VMS installed, does include TPC/IPH     as well as DECNET and a bunch  of  other  stuff.   No  HBVS  and  noH     cluster   license   so   it   won't   satisfy  some  other  people'sH     requirements.  Oh, and DFU is  free.   Were  you perhaps thinking of)     DEFRAG/DFO/Polycenter File Optimizer?l  I > IIRC $4300, say, would represent a major (close to 40%?) reduction fromuH > current system pricing, and you're not going to get much lower given a > hardware base price of $3500.   F         Fine, but I haven't seen a vendor offer me 40% off.  Have you?  E >                                But get a lower-priced base hardwareeL > platform, and then the special entry-level tier VMS price likely decreases > accordingly.  ...'  H         In fact, that is _exactly_  what  I  want to see.  Terry Shannon,     keeps mentioning a DS05.  I'm waiting...   [...]sK >>         However, and as I've told Rich Marcello several times in person, K >>     most of my cluster  VAXstations  (old VS3100/76's, VS400/VLC's and aSK >>     few  VS4000/60's) are being replaced by WNT desktops.  NOT _ONE_  of0K >>     those WNT desktops has a Compaq logo on it!  (You needn't  try  hard K >>     to  guess what 4-character label starting with "D" and ending in "l"fK >>     _is_ on those.)  Every  single  VMS  loss  at  our site is a loss to ( >>     Compaq (and Digital before them). > M > That argument is not likely to fly with Compaq:  if they can't compete with K > Dell in the vast majority of situations that *don't* have an existing VMSpL > (or Tru64) heritage, then their goose is already cooked (at least in theirJ > estimation:  you and I might think they might be better off just turningN > around their DEC acquisitions and getting out of the worst of the PC fray asE > IBM seems to be doing, but that's likely just not going to happen).  > K > So their response would simply be that they can sell WNT to VMS people in5J > the position you're describing, and that this is acceptable:  sites thatL > don't *need* VMS specifically will *never* be good VMS opportunities givenF > the existence of more widely-accepted solutions to the same problem.  H         I pretty much followed your first paragraph, but not the second.H     My position, and that of  a  bunch  of other regular contributors toH     this  news group, is that organizations that move away from VMS,  beH     it to WNT/W2K or some flavor of unix, have NO REASON  to  stay  withH     Compaq,  and in fact USUALLY go to another vendor, in our case, DellH     and Sun (don't get me started on Sun, that's another story, but it'sH     also a fact of life hear).  So  _if_ "their response would simply beH     that  they  can  sell  WNT  to VMS  people  in  the  position  [I'm]H     describing", they're BADLY MISTAKEN.  They  are  LOSING  SALES,  BIG     TIME, if you ask me.  K >>         I _want_, very badly, to  replace the remaining VAXstations withrK >>     AlphaStations,  but to do so I have to justify _not_ purchasing  theu >>     under $2000 WNT desktop.e > N > If you don't have any defensible reason for your preference (like, somethingG > important that the AlphaStations will do for you that the WNT desktopr	 > won't),   H         I have personal  preferences  and  I  have  what  I  believe areH     defensible  justifications, like highly reduced manpower to  supportH     all those desktops compared to WNT/W2K, but I can't argue  a  factorH     of  $3K-4K  per  desktop _premium_ for that economy.  Oh, and pleaseH     note that while you were  talking  about  the DS10 at the beginning,H     here  I'm explicitly talking about desktop workstations.  A DS10  orH     DS10L needs a graphics adapter and monitor in addition  to  all  theH     pricing  we've been throwing about, and that raises the cost anotherH     $1000 for an ELSA Gloria plus 17" 1280x1024 monitor (perhaps $750 ifH     we .EDU's get a 25% discount  on  those parts).  That's on the orderE     of $6000 for the DS10L _workstation_ versus under $2K for a Dell.-  J >         then, again, this argument seems unlikely to persuade Compaq anyL > more than it persuades your management:  Compaq would be happy to sell youN > the WNT systems, and as described above *must* compete successfully in doing > so.p  H         Ah, but there's the rub: as I've  said over and over again, theyH     are NOT HAPPILY SELLING us ANYTHING, least of all WNT/W2K platforms!           -Ken  D     P.S. The pricing I've  done  is  based  on VMS factory installedD          systems.  It's possible you could do better, price-wise, byD          starting  with a linux-ready system and adding the  variousD          parts yourself, especially  if  you  get  Compaq-equivalentD          parts  from  another  vendor.  When I tried doing somethingD          like that with Compaq part numbers  last year, it was quite)          a bit _more_ expensive...YMMV...  -- uM  Kenneth H. Fairfield            |  Internet: Fairfield@SLC.Slac.Stanford.Edus:  SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, MS 46  |  Voice:    650-926-2924:  Menlo Park, CA  94025           |  FAX:      650-926-3515N  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------B  These opinions are mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's...   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:18:34 -0500b7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>a; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?).- Message-ID: <3952BAEA.C05AAFCD@earthlink.net>    "Nikita V. Belenki" wrote: > D > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message) > news:39517C3B.BE5246A9@earthlink.net...  [snip]H > > That is, you're trying to drum Compaq's position into us, instead ofJ > > being sensitive to the needs of the customer (the cornerstone of every1 > > successful, profitable, long-lived business).n > M > Which is exactly what Compaq does. The customer wants Windows, the customer$E > gets Windows. So if Compaq wants to support its "smallest and least^/ > lucrative" customers, it knows where to look.t  " It does? What happened to OpenVMS?  aK > > high price = low (or no) demand (Business 101, 1st semester, Chapter 2:m! > > The Law of Supply and Demand)u >  > Or:o> > low demand = high price (which is exactly the same equation)  G ...but is not supported by the evidence or the law of supply and demand E ("the equation"). If demand is low, the price comes down to stimulate A demand. Conversely, if the price is high, the demand goes down to H stimulate an increase in supply. By keeping the price artificially high,F Compaq keeps the perceived demand artificially low. Latent demand was,C at one time, extremely high by comparison. Over time, however, thisrC advantage has been lost to the lower priced competition and to opend? source software, usually at considerable sacrifice of function,) reliability, etc.   lJ > There is virtually no demand for VMS in the low-end, high-volume market, > regardless of its price.   Can you say, "Marketing"?   * > Because there is no low-end, high-volume   ..., that is, low price...  L > *solutions* using VMS, and also because there is no "low-end, high-volume" > people familiar with VMS.   * ...for the reasons we have just discussed.  0 > And even if you drop the price of VMS to zero,  H Why zero? Why not just trim the margin instead of making it go negative?   > yout > will change nothing.  E Sorry. Neither economic theory nor experience in the market will bearb out such claims.  8 > Guess why? Because zero-price non-proprietary Linux is > already there,  G Well, it is and it isn't. Many companies have policies against software G which is not backed by a large commercial concern. Many other companiesa? are willing to premium salaries to us "geeks" in order to avoid & exhorbitant license and support costs.  D As to "non-proprietary", if that's true, then what gives rise to theC "religious wars" between the factions faithful to the various Linuxf> distros? How much "windows" code will run unmodified on Linux?D ...OpenVMS code? ...AIX code? ...BeOS code? ...MacOS code? ...OS/390 code?a   Weak argument, at best."  ? > and the "winning" features of VMS are just irrelevant on thisa	 > market.i  ! Now, you know no one buys that...    E > Or could you present just one VMS-based *complete solution* that iss > "high-volume-ready",    Say "Alpha plus StorageWorks"...  + > can sustain the competition against Linux   	 No sweat!    > and will not4 > be a threat for the current VMS-related cash flow?  H Yes! Go back and read the Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page for an explanation!   -- s David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems " http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 02:44:44 +0200t= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>h; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)r) Message-ID: <3952B2FC.F10B6EB1@gtech.com>f   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article <NC+LKPcZunOa@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>, Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515) writes:L > >         I certainly hope the  much-rumored  DS05  appears Real Soon Now,: > >     _and_ that it bears a _very_ affordable price tag. > ! > Didn't it appear as the DS10L ?)  1 The DS10L is not "Low cost" - it is "Low heigth".r   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 21:52:23 -04007' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>/; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?) ( Message-ID: <8iufs4$k2n$1@pyrite.mv.net>  L OK, that's it for me.  As you appear to be both clueless and ineducable, andL as no one else appears to be paying much attention to you, there's no reasonI to waste any more time replying.  But if you want to understand *why* yougH aren't getting more support (in the one forum you'd *ever* expect to getG support in), go back and read the recent discussion:  it's quite clear.o   - bill  @ David J. Dachtera <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message' news:3952BAEA.C05AAFCD@earthlink.net...  > "Nikita V. Belenki" wrote: > >tF > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message+ > > news:39517C3B.BE5246A9@earthlink.net...o > [snip]J > > > That is, you're trying to drum Compaq's position into us, instead ofL > > > being sensitive to the needs of the customer (the cornerstone of every3 > > > successful, profitable, long-lived business).b > >dF > > Which is exactly what Compaq does. The customer wants Windows, the customerG > > gets Windows. So if Compaq wants to support its "smallest and leastn1 > > lucrative" customers, it knows where to look.d >o$ > It does? What happened to OpenVMS? > J > > > high price = low (or no) demand (Business 101, 1st semester, Chapter 2:# > > > The Law of Supply and Demand)t > >h > > Or:p@ > > low demand = high price (which is exactly the same equation) >,I > ...but is not supported by the evidence or the law of supply and demandsG > ("the equation"). If demand is low, the price comes down to stimulatedC > demand. Conversely, if the price is high, the demand goes down toiJ > stimulate an increase in supply. By keeping the price artificially high,H > Compaq keeps the perceived demand artificially low. Latent demand was,E > at one time, extremely high by comparison. Over time, however, thisdE > advantage has been lost to the lower priced competition and to openaA > source software, usually at considerable sacrifice of function,  > reliability, etc.t >vL > > There is virtually no demand for VMS in the low-end, high-volume market, > > regardless of its price. >  > Can you say, "Marketing"?  > , > > Because there is no low-end, high-volume >a > ..., that is, low price... >'A > > *solutions* using VMS, and also because there is no "low-end,n high-volume" > > people familiar with VMS.a >i, > ...for the reasons we have just discussed. >l2 > > And even if you drop the price of VMS to zero, >CJ > Why zero? Why not just trim the margin instead of making it go negative? >- > > you- > > will change nothing. >-G > Sorry. Neither economic theory nor experience in the market will bear' > out such claims. >-: > > Guess why? Because zero-price non-proprietary Linux is > > already there, >pI > Well, it is and it isn't. Many companies have policies against softwarenI > which is not backed by a large commercial concern. Many other companies,A > are willing to premium salaries to us "geeks" in order to avoidu( > exhorbitant license and support costs. > F > As to "non-proprietary", if that's true, then what gives rise to theE > "religious wars" between the factions faithful to the various Linuxe@ > distros? How much "windows" code will run unmodified on Linux?F > ...OpenVMS code? ...AIX code? ...BeOS code? ...MacOS code? ...OS/390 > code?y >r > Weak argument, at best.o >aA > > and the "winning" features of VMS are just irrelevant on this  > > market.h >.# > Now, you know no one buys that...  >eG > > Or could you present just one VMS-based *complete solution* that isr > > "high-volume-ready", >A" > Say "Alpha plus StorageWorks"... >n- > > can sustain the competition against Linuxo >h > No sweat!e >C > > and will not6 > > be a threat for the current VMS-related cash flow? >eJ > Yes! Go back and read the Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page for an > explanation! >  > -- > David J. Dachtera, > dba DJE Systemsi$ > http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/ > < > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:- > http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/a   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:56:11 GMT1L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"); Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)j8 Message-ID: <009EC003.FF282E0B@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  \ In article <3952A534.78F9D845@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  K >When Compaq started, it managed to make "clones" of IBM PCs that were good * >enough to run the flight simulator game.   H Actually, when they started they staked out an area with no competition:G Highly compatible portable (luggable) MS-DOS PCs.  Nobody else was both'G as compatible and as portable.  And they charged plenty for them, whichrE was justified because if you needed one, you had to get it from them.s   > L >Compaq then fairly quickly succeeded in making compatible PCs that were notO >only cheaper but performed better than IBM PCs. And that is how it go to where  >it is at now.  M Their big move onto the desktop was to beat IBM to a desktop system using therI 386.  And they charged plenty for it, which was justified because if you  O needed the performance and compatibility, you had to get the Desqpro from them.  >oI >So why can't Compaq take VMS and make it cheaper and perform better thana. >Windows NT ? Why must VMS be more expensive ?  L Your appeal to Compaq's history doesn't work.  Compaq has rarely competed on* the basis of being the low-price provider. >0N >If you're the underdog, normally, you want to provide a superior product at a/ >lower price in order to get some market share.l  G Or concentrate your efforts in markets where there isn't a whole lot ofo competition.   -- Alanw  O =============================================================================== 0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056aM  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-0210^O ===============================================================================o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:29:59 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>i; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)o( Message-ID: <8iui2m$mjd$1@pyrite.mv.net>  0 Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515. <Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message- news:ZjBaTXIXWRB1@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu... * > In article <8iu11j$ami$1@pyrite.mv.net>,/ >     "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:t4 > > Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-35152 > > <Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message1 > > news:NC+LKPcZunOa@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu...e > [...] B > >>         At  my  site  (basic  research   in  physics,  a  DOE	 supportedoI > >>     laboratory  but  also  wearing  a  .EDU  "hat"),  equipment  can  beE > >>     purchased with just my manager's signature _if_  it's  under  $5000.B > >>     That  $5000  is  a very hard limit for many education and
 governmentH > >>     institutions.  Things  in  the  purchasing  area  get  so  much more& > >>     complicated above that value. > >cA > > Well, you can get a VMS DS10 now for around $4700, can't you?4 >o# >         Not with VMS you can't...   L Since the $1200 number was one I got from someone else as the bare-bones (noJ TCP/IP, VOLSHAD, DFO - I suspect, I'm not up on my VMS acronyms - but as IJ said bundling in those items is something worth suggesting to Compaq) base8 VMS system price, I'll let them respond if they care to.   >HJ >         Last August, we purchased  a  DS10  w/VMS,  128MB of memory, 9GBJ >     7200  RPM  UltraSCSI  system disk (VMS  didn't/doesn't  support  IDEJ >     system disks), and KZPBA-CA SCSI adapter.  After  35%  EDU  discountJ >     (on the system, certain components were more like 25% discount), theJ >     total  was still $5221.89.  You've missed by $500 on a system that's >     not even listed today.  I My understanding is that the current VMS system listed on the DS10 indeedrJ includes the goodies I mentioned you should try to get Compaq to bundle atL the (not listed) bare-bones system price, and that this bare-bones system isL available (even if not listed as a DS10 package) for about $1200.  The priceI you quote (around $7K) sounds about right current list price for VMS plus  the goodies.  .   The current  minimum DS10 w/VMS is the 256MBJ >     package and that is nearly $1000 (list) more expensive (start with a; >     DY-PB10A-AC...the obsolete 128MB part number is -AB).i >yJ >         OTOH, a DS10L similarly  configured  but  with 256MB memory, theJ >     current  minimum,  lists  for a price very close to  what  the  DS10J >     w/128MB lists for, given the old part  number.   While  close,  thisJ >     breaks  the  $5K  limit  I  spoke of (that August purchase was for aJ >     special  application  and  used  another  department's  money).  See9 >     DY-71AAA-DA plus mandatory additional part numbers.o > I > >                                                                No, itmJ > > doesn't include TCP/IP, VOLSHAD, and DFU, but, again, bunding those in isJ > > presentable to Compaq as consistent with industry practice rather than as aI > > major price cut - and you might even get Compaq to reduce the price a_ fewiJ > > hundred dollars more by observing that everyone else gives customers a break J > > when they purchase the software along with the hardware and/or getting themK > > to create a separate entry-level price tier rather than sharing it withp thet > > DS20 and ES40. >sJ >         As I said before, licensing s not  an issue for _us_.  OTOH, theJ >     part  number I'm looking at, with VMS installed, does include TPC/IPJ >     as well as DECNET and a bunch  of  other  stuff.   No  HBVS  and  noJ >     cluster   license   so   it   won't   satisfy  some  other  people'sJ >     requirements.  Oh, and DFU is  free.   Were  you perhaps thinking of+ >     DEFRAG/DFO/Polycenter File Optimizer?r  B Probably:  as I said, VMS option acronyms aren't my specialty, and( defragmentation was the feature I meant.   >_K > > IIRC $4300, say, would represent a major (close to 40%?) reduction fromkJ > > current system pricing, and you're not going to get much lower given a! > > hardware base price of $3500.r > H >         Fine, but I haven't seen a vendor offer me 40% off.  Have you?  % No:  you'd likely have to ask for it.   J I don't think you've been paying attention to the discussion.  My point isJ that there are reasonable rationales (involving current bundling practicesJ involving what software is commonly bundled with base systems and how baseD system prices are discounted when the software is purchased with theK hardware) which you could present to Compaq as good reasons to price a DS10 H VMS system, including TCP/IP, DFO, and VOLSHAD, at something like $4300,L which is close to 40% less than such a system lists for today - even withoutH getting into a new entry-level pricing tier, though that also would be a reasonable area to explore.l  I That's something people who are interested in more attractive entry-levelSG pricing could bring up with Compaq without getting into the likely more C sensitive question of direct competition with other Compaq systems.n   > G > >                                But get a lower-priced base hardwareaD > > platform, and then the special entry-level tier VMS price likely	 decreases  > > accordingly.  ...q >rJ >         In fact, that is _exactly_  what  I  want to see.  Terry Shannon. >     keeps mentioning a DS05.  I'm waiting...  K Meanwhile, you're ignoring an alternate route that might get you under youroL magic $5K threshold right now.  Which I don't care about one way or another,. as long as you don't complain in the meantime.   >- > [...]-E > >>         However, and as I've told Rich Marcello several times ino person,'K > >>     most of my cluster  VAXstations  (old VS3100/76's, VS400/VLC's and0 a I > >>     few  VS4000/60's) are being replaced by WNT desktops.  NOT _ONE_r ofG > >>     those WNT desktops has a Compaq logo on it!  (You needn't  tryr hardI > >>     to  guess what 4-character label starting with "D" and ending inp "l"rJ > >>     _is_ on those.)  Every  single  VMS  loss  at  our site is a loss to* > >>     Compaq (and Digital before them). > >iJ > > That argument is not likely to fly with Compaq:  if they can't compete withI > > Dell in the vast majority of situations that *don't* have an existing  VMScH > > (or Tru64) heritage, then their goose is already cooked (at least in theirWL > > estimation:  you and I might think they might be better off just turningH > > around their DEC acquisitions and getting out of the worst of the PC fray asiG > > IBM seems to be doing, but that's likely just not going to happen).  > > J > > So their response would simply be that they can sell WNT to VMS people inL > > the position you're describing, and that this is acceptable:  sites thatH > > don't *need* VMS specifically will *never* be good VMS opportunities given H > > the existence of more widely-accepted solutions to the same problem. > J >         I pretty much followed your first paragraph, but not the second.J >     My position, and that of  a  bunch  of other regular contributors toJ >     this  news group, is that organizations that move away from VMS,  beJ >     it to WNT/W2K or some flavor of unix, have NO REASON  to  stay  withJ >     Compaq,  and in fact USUALLY go to another vendor, in our case, DellJ >     and Sun (don't get me started on Sun, that's another story, but it's  >     also a fact of life hear).  H And Compaq's response just about has to be:  "Fine, tell us what Dell isI giving you that we are not, and we'll fix it - because we have to competenJ with Dell in this area anyway, both for your business and general business that didn't start onVMS."   H Of course you've got a reason to stay with Compaq:  they're your currentE vendor and you have an existing relationship.  The only reason to buygK Windows or Unix from some other vendor is because their offering is somehowlG more attractive - and that's something Compaq knows it needs to addressrH anyway, whereas trying to keep you on VMS when VMS is not cost-effectiveK compared to Windows or Unix is *not* a general problem that Compaq may havec any good way to solve.  *   So  _if_ "their response would simply beJ >     that  they  can  sell  WNT  to VMS  people  in  the  position  [I'm]J >     describing", they're BADLY MISTAKEN.  They  are  LOSING  SALES,  BIG >     TIME, if you ask me.  J If you swear you'll buy from another source just because you're pissed off? that Compaq won't revamp their VMS product lines in a generallycI non-cost-effective manner rather than make you choose between paying whateI you've always paid (or even somewhat less) for VMS systems or paying lessoH and moving to a different platform, then Compaq has every reason to say,F "See you later:  that's not the way we do business, nor does any other company we know."t  G VMS isn't going to succeed because Compaq subsidizes it to avoid losingt? customers:  it's going to succeed on its merits, or not at all.r   >hH > >>         I _want_, very badly, to  replace the remaining VAXstations withH > >>     AlphaStations,  but to do so I have to justify _not_ purchasing theA! > >>     under $2000 WNT desktop.s > >oF > > If you don't have any defensible reason for your preference (like,	 something-I > > important that the AlphaStations will do for you that the WNT desktopF > > won't),j >jJ >         I have personal  preferences  and  I  have  what  I  believe areJ >     defensible  justifications, like highly reduced manpower to  supportJ >     all those desktops compared to WNT/W2K, but I can't argue  a  factorJ >     of  $3K-4K  per  desktop _premium_ for that economy.  Oh, and pleaseJ >     note that while you were  talking  about  the DS10 at the beginning,J >     here  I'm explicitly talking about desktop workstations.  A DS10  orJ >     DS10L needs a graphics adapter and monitor in addition  to  all  theJ >     pricing  we've been throwing about, and that raises the cost anotherJ >     $1000 for an ELSA Gloria plus 17" 1280x1024 monitor (perhaps $750 ifJ >     we .EDU's get a 25% discount  on  those parts).  That's on the orderG >     of $6000 for the DS10L _workstation_ versus under $2K for a Dell.n  G If a $2K Windows workstation really can satisfy your needs, then you'reoJ likely not going to get a cost-effective alternative in a VMS product (norL could you have at any time in VMS's history:  this is not a new situation) -G and this will likely continue to be true even if Compaq prices VMS moreiJ aggressively (in the manners I've described) and brings out a cost-reducedI DS0x at, say, $2500 vs. $3500 for the DS10 hardware.  Whether you buy the : Windows workstation from Compaq or from Dell is up to you.   >aL > >         then, again, this argument seems unlikely to persuade Compaq anyJ > > more than it persuades your management:  Compaq would be happy to sell youoJ > > the WNT systems, and as described above *must* compete successfully in doing  > > so.d >sJ >         Ah, but there's the rub: as I've  said over and over again, theyJ >     are NOT HAPPILY SELLING us ANYTHING, least of all WNT/W2K platforms!  D And as I've said, if that's an objective difference in their WindowsI offerings vs. Dell's, they'll likely try to solve the problem so that you)F will choose Compaq Windows workstations - but if that's just you being pissed off, they likely won't.   - bill   >= >         -Ken >iF >     P.S. The pricing I've  done  is  based  on VMS factory installedF >          systems.  It's possible you could do better, price-wise, byF >          starting  with a linux-ready system and adding the  variousF >          parts yourself, especially  if  you  get  Compaq-equivalentF >          parts  from  another  vendor.  When I tried doing somethingF >          like that with Compaq part numbers  last year, it was quite+ >          a bit _more_ expensive...YMMV...  > --/ >  Kenneth H. Fairfield            |  Internet:  Fairfield@SLC.Slac.Stanford.Eduu< >  SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, MS 46  |  Voice:    650-926-2924< >  Menlo Park, CA  94025           |  FAX:      650-926-3515L >  ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----D >  These opinions are mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's...   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:00:49 -0500 7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>V; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?) - Message-ID: <3952D2E1.3D6E37E3@earthlink.net>,   Bill Todd wrote: > I > OK, that's it for me.  As you appear to be both clueless and ineducable   . ...and you would describe yourself as ... how?   >, andN > as no one else appears to be paying much attention to you, there's no reasonK > to waste any more time replying.  But if you want to understand *why* youtJ > aren't getting more support (in the one forum you'd *ever* expect to getI > support in), go back and read the recent discussion:  it's quite clear.l  H Gee, Bill I looked at the posts from Roger Barnett, Richard Jordan, HankF Van der Waal, ... those posts sure look like support to me! There haveE been others, and others will follow. The same is true on your side oftB the fence, of course: there were others before you and others will follow.i  E ...and I don't remember you being at our Affordable BOF at San Diego,dH which was pretty well attended for a last-minute BOF - only made it into the Wednesday update.daily.u  G If Compaq would yield, then time would tell. As it stands, however, the. whole debate remains academic.   The defense rests.   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemsr" http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:15:47 -0500r7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> ; Subject: Re: Affordable Debate Summary (was: VAX on Intel?)m- Message-ID: <3952D663.2FA7E7D6@earthlink.net>    Bill Todd wrote: >  > OK, that's it for me. [snip]  , Well, you're not the one I need to convince!  G However, thank you ever so much for the wonderful exercise in debate! I1H wasn't on the debate team in school (but, you knew that); so, this whole% exchange has been very helpful to me.m  E If/when I finally end up in front of "the brass", I'll be much betterAG armed and prepared to meet the various objections they will undoubtedlyz pose.n  H As Nietzsche once said, "that which does not kill us makes us stronger".   Again, many thanx.   --   David J. Dachteraf dba DJE Systemsa" http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:28:55 +0100m5 From: "Adrian Lumsden" <A.Lumsden@spamtrap.xdt.co.uk>hB Subject: Re: Alpha DEC 2000-300 (Jensen?) - Serial port as console. Message-ID: <8iu10j$7th$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>  + Thanks for your help on this one everybody.t  ? I now have the beastie working, even with the graphics console.h  C I have version T1.9.2 of the ECU on the original floppy. It _still_y; doesn't work but the copy I made via BACKUP /PHYSICAL does!   @ I ran it and did have the F10 problem but found that you can tab) between the fields and then hit <return>.   A I didn't make any changes but after I'd done the graphics consoleu worked.   @ I had a bit a funny with the DE422. I plugged in a 10BaseT cable? and plugged it into the small hub. It was quite strange; DECneto> would see the other nodes and then drop the circuit. I changedA over to 10Base2 and it was solid. I found out later that you needt; to move a jumper on the DE422 to switch between 10BaseT ande< 10Base2. Is there support for 100Mb Ethernet available. Mind6 you, where would I find an EISA 100Mb card these days?  @ My one remaining problem is finding some of those special slides9 for mounting drives inside the main box. Any suggestions?e  
 Thanks again.    Adrian --( Adrian Lumsden, XDT Computer Systems, UK" A dot Lumsden at xdt dot co dot uk   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:31:08 GMT-F From: lederman@star.enet.dec.DISABLE-JUNK-EMAIL.com (Bart Z. Lederman)B Subject: Re: Alpha DEC 2000-300 (Jensen?) - Serial port as console, Message-ID: <8INMLH$I7A$1@SNIFF.SHR.DEC.COM>  f >In article <8ilhcj$kpq$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Adrian Lumsden" <A.Lumsden@spamtrap.xdt.co.uk> wrote: >E6 >I still have problems with the graphics cards and the4 >EISA Configuration Utility. Does anybody know where3 >I can get a new copy of the ECU from? Does anybody   :      I believe the ECU utility was licensed from a vendor.2  I'm don't think it's available over the Internet.  @      The FAQ gives the site where you can download firmware, and:  good instructions on how to do the upgrade on a number ofA  platforms, but it doesn't specifically address the ECU.  It doesu  have the images for the  @      The following site is where firmware updates are available:  . http://ftp.digital.com/pub/DEC/Alpha/firmware/  ?      This page has a lot of information about firmware updates.n  ?      To update a "Jensen",  look for the entry in the left-handa@  column under Alpha PC's for DECpc AXP 150 or DEC 2000AXP, which>  will point you to the page where instructions are given for a9  variety of update methods.  This might help you recover.e  9      There is also a more general entry point for finding 3  software that Compaq makes available over the net:n  8 http://gatekeeper.dec.com/hypertext/gatekeeper.home.html  =      A search of Jensen from here points to a number of files >  (mostly for Linux) which includes the swxcrmgr floppy images.;  I'm not sure if that will help, but you might want to lookt  at it.   ;      If none of that works, you may have to order one.  TheA?  newest copy I've seen is V1.10 and has part number AK-Q2CRK-CAs=  on it (this is the Unix / VMS version that gives you the SRM1%  console, which is what I recommend).        --(  B. Z. Lederman   Personal Opinions Only  8  Posting to a News group does NOT give anyone permission8  to send me advertising by E-mail or put me on a mailing  list of any kind.  5  Please remove the "DISABLE-JUNK-EMAIL" if you have a 5  legitimate reason to E-mail a response to this post.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:42:55 -0700b/ From: Goldaun Enterprises <amzindaun@yahoo.com>o Subject: amazing!rF Message-ID: <20000623021942.PIQL10161.mail.rdc1.wa.home.com@localhost>  H To be removed , please reply to this email with the word "remove" in theE subject box. See legal disclaimer at the end of this text. Thank you.i; ___________________________________________________________l      "AS SEEN ON NATIONAL T.V."w  &  Thank you for your time and Interest.A  This is the letter you've been hearing about in the news lately.   >  Due to the popularity of this letter on the internet, a major<  nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to theC  investigation of the program, described below, to see if it really   can make people money.   :  The show also investigated whether or not the program was>  legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are,A  absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program.r?  This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmlessm.  and fun way to make some extra money at home.  >  The results of this show have been truly remarkable. Since soA  many people are participating now, those involved are doing much/0  better than ever before. Everyone makes more asB  more people try it out. It is very, very exciting to be a part of7  this plan. You will understand once you experience it.s    "HERE IT IS, BELOW"  1  ================================================e1  ================================================   ,  *** Print This Now For Future Reference ***  3  The following income opportunity is one you may bem<  interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY9  LITTLE investment and the income return is TREMENDOUS!!!e  1  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$n  ;  If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90t6  days! Please read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT	  AGAIN!!!l  1  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$i  *  THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING2  OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into;  contact with people, do any hard work and best of all, you =  never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you ;  believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've >  been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions,6  and your dreams will come true. This e-mail marketing:  program works perfectly...100%, EVERY TIME. E-mail is the1  sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this 4  non-commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The>  longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using,  e-mail. Get your piece of this program now!  /  MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gainedo;  respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Businessa3  School, both Stanford Research and the Wall Streets:  Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods=  and services will be sold through multi-level methods by thet<  late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of9  the 500,000 millionaires in the U.S., 20% (100,000) made 6  their fortune in the last few years in MLM. Moreover,7  statistics show 45 people become millionaires everydaye  through Multi-Level Marketing.   :  You may have heard this story before, but over the summer7  Donald Trump made an appearance on the David Letterman'1  Show. Dave asked him what he would do if he lostn7  everything and had to start over from scratch. Withouth4  hesitating, Trump said he would find a good network8  marketing company and get to work. The audience started7  to hoot and boo him. He looked out at the audience and ;  dead-panned his response - "That's why I'm sitting up heres$  and you are all sitting out there!"  7  With network marketing you have two sources of income.p4  Direct commissions from sales you make yourself and;  commissions from sales made by people you introduce to thea
  business.  7  Residual income is the secret of the wealthy. It meansi8  investing time or money once and getting paid again and=  again and again. In network marketing, it also means gettingl  paid for the work of others.a  8  The enclosed information is something I almost let slip:  through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read2  everything and gave some thought and study to it.  -  My name is Ellie Gilbert. Two years ago, thes<  corporation I worked for, the past twelve years, down-sized<  and my position was eliminated. After many unproductive job8  interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the<  past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I5  owed my family, friends and creditors over $40,000..t(  I just couldn't seem to make ends meet.9  I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support #  my family and struggling business.i9  AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life 7  and I am writing to share the experience in hopes thatm4  this will change your life, FINANCIALLY, FOREVER!!!  9  In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Sixt;  month's prior to receiving this program I had been sendings?  away for information on various business opportunities. All of 6  the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost4  effective. They were either too difficult for me to<  comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to:  risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I=  would make a million dollars in one year...it didn't tell met2  I'd have to write a best selling book to make it!  :  But, as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this?  program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got mye2  name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!>  After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it8  correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY/  MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as Ie?  wanted to start, without putting me further into debt. After I @  got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get9  my money back. But like most of you I was still a little B  skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all.:  So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-9  2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal!S2  After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A#  CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT."   5  Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. The great thingu9  about e-mail is that I don't need any money for printingi%  to send out the program, and becauserB  all of my orders are fulfilled via e-mail, the only expense is my@  time. I'm telling you as it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off,<  but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no"  matter how much money it cost me.  <  In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for7  REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for 0  REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20,  ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. If you-  don't, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" 8  My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By5  January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2.t2  Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR+  REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUTf*  MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE.  100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL4  MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for4  REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and;  relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 10,000, I receivedb'  $58,000 with more coming in every day.a    8  paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car.7  Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILLd-  CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it won'ta?  work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you musth?  follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to placer?  your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose outm:  on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you5  must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 7  100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 ora2  more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!  A  If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. ItkB  really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If>  you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be#  on your way to financial security.i  6  If you are a business owner and in financial trouble,;  as I was, or you want to start your own business, considery  this a good luck sign. I DID!    Sincerely,m    Ellie Gilbert  2  P.S. Do you have any idea what $58,000 looks like+  piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME!h    5  A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM:   ;  By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports 3  you should have concluded that such a program, oneq:  that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur.  :  Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable6  business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began>  falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously@  successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it5  out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation anda8  recession had replaced the stable economy that had been;  with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened):  to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from4  first hand experience. There were more failures and  bankruptcies than ever before.   4  The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what8  they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who;  did not, including those who never had anything to save ord<  invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the/  saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR 5  GET POORER." The traditional methods of making moneys1  will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich".b  5  You have just received information that can give youe@  financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and1  "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more2:  money in the next few months than you have ever imagined.<  I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this:  money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for1  this program. I have already made over 4 MILLIONC;  DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out-  over 16,000 programs.  1  Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do note>  change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now.>  Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone9  you can think of. One of the people you send this to mayA7  send out 50,000...and your name will be on everyone ofd6  them! Remember though, the more you send out the more$  potential customers you will reach.  7  So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information,i=  materials and opportunity to become financially independent,t  IT IS NOW UP TO YOU!i    "THINK ABOUT IT"   >  Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost:  did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT7  IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen whena<  YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and=  no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot ofi;  money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Anyd<  doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in.
  IT WORKS!  Jody Jacobs, Richmond, VA    *  HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE  YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLARSe    INSTRUCTIONS:  3  This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100 %, :  EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or<  more in the next 90 days. Before you say "BULL... ", please  read this program carefully.d  ?  This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making:9  opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all-<  multi-level businesses, we build our business by recruiting:  new partners and selling our products. Every state in the=  USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners,e3  and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOURT1  ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, soeA  you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately ine<  your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-%  Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere:w    This is what you MUST do:  ?  1. Order all 4 reports shown on the list below (you can't selln  them if you don't order them).t  /  * For each report, send $5.00 CASH, the NAME &i'  NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING,N%  YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME &t-  RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to then2  person whose name appears on the list next to the)  report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS ISi%  ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAILs
  PROBLEMS!  6  * When you place your order, make sure you order each7  of the four reports. You will need all four reports so03  that you can save them on your computer and resellc  them.  :  * Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of5  the four reports. Save them on your computer so they 5  will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's ofa%  people who will order them from you.r  4  2. IMPORTANT-- DO NOT alter the names of the people9  who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on =  the list, in any way other than is instructed below in steps =  "a" through "f" or you will lose out on the majority of yourt8  profits. Once you understand the way this works, you'll9  also see how it doesn't work if you change it. Remember,u>  this method has been tested, and if you alter it, it will not  work.  4  a. Look below for the listing of available reports.  4  b. After you've ordered the four reports, take this-  letter and remove the name and address under 5  REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle (  and is no doubt counting their $50,000!  2  c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down  to REPORT #4.  2  d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down  to REPORT #3.  2  e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down  to REPORT #2.  7  f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position.d  =  Please make sure you copy every name and address ACCURATELY!   B  3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names,5  and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to the $  instruction portion of this letter.  <  4. Now you're ready to start an advertising campaign on the<  WORLD WIDE WEB! SEND OUT THIS LETTER (with your name added)7  TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN, EVEN FRIENDS AND FAMILY.x:  Advertising on the WEB can be very, very inexpensive, and8  there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Another<  avenue which you could use for advertising is e-mail lists.:  You can buy these lists for under $20/20,000 addresses or8  you can pay someone to take care of it for you. BE SURE'  TO START YOUR AD CAMPAIGN IMMEDIATELY!   :  5. For every $5.00 you receive, all you must do is e-mail0  them the report they ordered. THAT'S IT! ALWAYS)  PROVIDE SAME- DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! 8  This will help guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out,1  with YOUR name and address on it, will be promptg<  because they can't advertise until they receive the report!&  To grow fast be prompt and courteous.  +  ------------------------------------------y  AVAILABLE REPORTS+  ------------------------------------------ +  ***Order Each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME***g    Notes:t&  - ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH FOR EACH REPORT*  - ALWAYS SEND YOUR ORDER VIA THE QUICKEST	  DELIVERYe=  - Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in at leasth  two sheets of paper=  - On one of those sheets of paper, include: (a) the number &e>  name of the report you are ordering, (b) your e-mail address,  and (c) your postal address.L1  ________________________________________________I<  REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES">  ORDER REPORT #1 FROM:>     Goldaun Enterprises  1409 Highland Ave  Clarkston, WA 994033 ___________________________________________________(6  REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES">  ORDER REPORT #2 FROM:>   
  B. Taylor  P. O. Box 807  Homer, LA  71040l  i1  ________________________________________________e0  REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS">  ORDER REPORT #3 Fromi    Dominic Koklasn  27 Columbine Ct.e  Middletown, NY 10940L/ _______________________________________________r/  REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS"-  ORDER REPORT #4 FROM:    Mingo Bueno  6814 Country Crossu  San Antonio,Texas 78240  oG -----------------------------------------------------------------------c3  HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PLAN WILL MAKE YOU $MONEY$pH  -----------------------------------------------------------------------  <  Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it>  works. Assume your goal is to get 10 people to participate onB  your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the internet will9  EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyoneD0  else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline7  members. Follow this example to achieve the STAGGERINGi  results below.i  ;  1st level--your 10 members with $5.....................$50l;  2nd level--10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100)........$500h;  3rd level--10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000)...$5,000n;  4th level--10 members from those 1,000 ($5x10,000).$50,000n  THIS TOTALS ------> $55,550  +  Remember, this assumes that the people whoi<  participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment=  what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Lotsb4  of people get 100s of participants! THINK ABOUT IT!  @  Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely<  you can afford $20). You obviously already have an internet7  connection and e-mail is FREE! REPORT #3 shows you thee:  most productive methods for bulk e-mailing and purchasing;  e-mail lists. Some list & bulk e-mail vendors even work on=  trade!=  B  Over 50,000, new people, get on the internet EVERYDAY (CBS NEWS)!    *******TIPS FOR SUCCESS*******y  *  * TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt,4  professional, and follow the directions accurately.  9  * Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have$.  them when the orders start coming in because:  3  When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the <  requested product (report) to comply with the U.S. Postal &<  Lottery Laws, Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 or Title 18,:  Section 3005 in the U.S. Code, also Code of Federal Regs.;  vol. 16, Sections 255 and 436, which state that "a producta2  or service must be exchanged for money received."  )  * ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THEa  ORDERS YOU RECEIVE.  =  * Be patient and persistent with this program. If you follow :  the instructions exactly, the results WILL undoubtedly be  SUCCESSFUL!  -  * ABOVE ALL, HAVE FAITH IN YOURSELF AND KNOWM  YOU WILL SUCCEED!  %  *******YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINE*******f  5  Follow these guidelines to help assure your success:T  :  If you don't receive 10 to 20 orders for REPORT #1 within6  two weeks, continue advertising until you do. Then, a=  couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders.<  for REPORT #2. If you don't, continue advertising until you2  do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for0  REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is?  already working for you, and the cash can continue to roll in!     THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER:l  8  Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are4  placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP0  TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report;  people are ordering from you. If you want to generate more :  income, send another batch of e-mails and start the whole8  process again! There is no limit to the income you will  generate from this business!h  8  PLEASE NOTE: If you need help with starting a business,8  registering a business name, learning how income tax is?  handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Businesse;  Administration (a Federal agency) 1-(800)827-5722 for free :  help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue9  Service offers free help via telephone and free seminarsr;  about business tax requirements. Your earnings and resultsi>  are highly dependant on your activities and advertising. This<  letter constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the;  event that it is determined that this letter constitutes a 7  guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. AnynA  testimonials or amounts of earnings listed in this letter may beoC  factual or fictitious. If you have any question of the legality ofp9  this letter contact the Office of Associate Director ford7  Marketing Practices Federal Trade Commission Bureau ofM&  Consumer Protection in Washington DC.  &  *******T E S T I M O N I A L S*******  8  This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY!:  Especially the rule of not trying to place your name in a;  different position, it won't work and you'll lose a lot ofeA  potential income. I'm living proof that it works. It really is ae=  great opportunity to make relatively easy money, with littlet9  cost to you. If you do choose to participate, follow thei8  program exactly, and you'll be on your way to financial
  security.    Sean McLaughlin, Jackson, MSt  ?  My name is Frank. My wife, Doris, and I live in Bel-Air, MD. Il9  am a cost accountant with a major U.S. Corporation and Id6  make pretty good money. When I received the program I=  grumbled to Doris about receiving "junk mail." I made fun ofv9  the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the populatione;  and percentages involved. I "knew" it wouldn't work. Dorish<  totally ignored my supposed intelligence and jumped in with=  both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to layn=  the old "I told you so" on her when the thing didn't work...a4  well, the laugh was on me! Within two weeks she had3  received over 50 responses. Within 45 days she hade9  received over $147,200 in $5 bills! I was shocked! I wastA  sure that I had it all figured and that it wouldn't work. I AM a =  believer now. I have joined Doris in her "hobby." I did haverA  seven more years until retirement, but I think of the "rat race"s+  and it's not for me. We owe it all to MLM.a    Frank T., Bel-Air, MD  ;  I just want to pass along my best wishes and encouragementn8  to you. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first<  orders come in. I even checked with the U.S. Post Office to<  verify that the plan was legal. It definitely is! IT WORKS!    Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC  =  The main reason for this letter is to convince you that thist@  system is honest, lawful, extremely profitable, and is a way to3  get a large amount of money in a short time. I wasI=  approached several times before I checked this out. I joinedm<  just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal:  effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received>  $36,470.00 in the first 14 weeks, with money still coming in.  Phillip A. Brown, Esq.r  9  Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to >  make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservativeD  that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that>  there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at;  least get my money back. Boy, was I surprised when I foundf:  my medium-size post office box crammed with orders! For a>  while, it got so overloaded that I had to start picking up my<  mail at the window. I'll make more money this year than any>  10 years of my life before. The nice thing about this plan is<  that it doesn't matter where in the U.S. people live. There7  simply isn't a better investment with a faster return.$    Mary Rockland, Lansing, MIr  >  I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I>  wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had=  no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to waits=  until I was e-mailed another program...11 months passed thenh?  it came...I didn't delete this one!...I made more than $41,000,  on the first try!!y    D. Wilburn, Muncie, INa  @  This is my third time to participate in this plan. We have quit=  our jobs, and will soon buy a home on the beach and live offo;  the interest on our money. The only way on earth that thist?  plan will work for you is if you do it. For your sake, and forR:  your family's sake don't pass up this golden opportunity.  Good luck and happy spending!    Charles Fairchild, Spokane, WA       ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY ANDn  GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO  FINANCIAL FREEDOM!o    NOW IS THE TIME !    DECISIVE ACTION YIELDSy  POWERFUL RESULTS !a?  ************************************************************** H  This message is sent in compliance of the new email bill HR 1910. UnderL Bill HR 1910 passed by the 106th U.S. Congress on May 24, 1999, this messageR cannot be Considered Spam as long as we include the way to be removed. Per SectionN HR 1910. Please type "Remove" in the subject line and reply to this email. AllF removal requests are handled personally and immediately once received.    C  __________________________________________________________________p   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:29:53 GMT 2 From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com>) Subject: Re: Besides Pathworks for Mac...95 Message-ID: <LUU35.197$6C1.48936@TYPHOON.ARACNET.COM>e  , Richard D. Piccard <piccard@ohio.edu> wrote:  B > There is a Mac Product called "Dave" that allegedly provides SMBJ > filesharing access to NT (and presumably PathWorks) servers.  I think itH > may also know how to provide access to W98/NT-shared printers.  I have > never used it.   > 						RDPb  I "Dave" does not appear to be compatible with Samba on OpenVMS, at least IsH was unable to get it to work.  I forget what the problem was, but it wasJ something to do with the way "Dave" expects to be able to create files.  I+ do not know if it will work with PathWorks.n   			Zanea   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:26:17 -0400nA From: Richard Hammersley <Richard.Hammersley%spam%@dartmouth.edu>t* Subject: Can I boot VAX6600 from DSSI disk- Message-ID: <39527669.66F1E4EF@dartmouth.edu>h  F I want to have an HSD05 attached to a KFMSA (XMI DSSI) and have one ofG the disks attached to the HSD05 as the system disk.  Can this be done ?   7 Any idea what the console boot string would look like ?h   Running VMS 5.5-2.  
 Thank you.   Richard Hammersley   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:43:10 -0500i7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>C. Subject: Re: Can I boot VAX6600 from DSSI disk- Message-ID: <3952C0AE.D9BA296E@earthlink.net>o   Richard Hammersley wrote:R > H > I want to have an HSD05 attached to a KFMSA (XMI DSSI) and have one ofH > the disks attached to the HSD05 as the system disk.  Can this be done?  ; Certainly! Had a VAX 6610 doing that about eight years ago.0  9 > Any idea what the console boot string would look like ?   G Check your user documentation for the VAX 6000. You'll ned to know such.B things as the XMI cage slot number (should be visible in the init.G display) and the DSSI drive number. You'll need to check the doc.'s forO3 moer specific info. I don't have it handy just now.i   > Running VMS 5.5-2.  < That's what mine was running when I left it seven years ago.   -- A David J. Dachteran dba DJE Systemst" http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/l   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:28:39 +0000t$ From: Steve.Spires@yellowpages.co.uk0 Subject: Re: Cisco Has DECNet Ping - VMS Doesn't/ Message-ID: <00256907.0021945F.00@quegw01.btyp>   8 I'm not at a VMS box right now, but it's something like;   NCL> LOOP MOP CIRCUIT circ-nameR, NCL> LOOP LOOPBACK APPLICATION NAME nodename  - But you should check in the NCL help first...y   Steve Spires VMS System Manager BT/Yellow Pagesr        @ "Richard L. Dyson" <rick-dyson@uiowa.edu> on 22/06/2000 15:06:29    To:        Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com+ cc:         (bcc: Steve Spires/YellowPages)lM From:      "Richard L. Dyson" <rick-dyson@uiowa.edu>, 22 June 2000, 3:06 p.m.   ' Re: Cisco Has DECNet Ping - VMS Doesn'to         Jerry Leslie wrote:bJ > NCP's loop node doesn't seem to provide any quantitative results, unless4 > I'm doing something wrong, a distinct possibility: >e; >   <SCCN02> mcr ncp loop node sccvx6 count 100 length 3000y >   <SCCN02>  A      Can anyone suggest what the DECnet V equivalent would be?  ItF some of them beasts and since they mostly have worked without problem,G I have not needed to learn NCL. :)  NCP is sort-of still around, but itt> only does a few things anymore and that is not one of them. :(   $ MCR NCP Loop Node Blah@ %NCP-W-SYSMGT, System-specific management function not supported   Thanks!b rick --H Richard L. Dyson                                    rick-dyson@uiowa.eduH  _   _      _____                http://www-pi.physics.uiowa.edu/~dyson/H | | | |    |_   _|   Systems Analyst                     O: 319/335-1879H | | | | of   | |     The University of Iowa            FAX: 319/335-17536 | \_/ |     _| |_    Department of Physics & Astronomy-  \___/     |_____|   Iowa City, IA 52242-1479u   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:32:57 -0500 * From: Keith Brown <kbrown780@usfamily.net>$ Subject: Re: Common Alpha Executable, Message-ID: <3952B039.580AC17F@usfamily.net>   David Mathog wrote:h > > > More and more often I'm finding that software, even academicF > software, is only available in binary form.  This is really the pitsB > if your main machine runs OpenVMS as there's not much you can doF > with an SGI or Sun executable.  This week I obtained a copy of CAP3,H > a DNA assembly program, and ran it on one of our Linux DS10s.  It thenK > turned out that this was actually a Tru64 executable!  I've tried runningdM > Tru64 binaries on Linux before, with no luck, but apparently some subset ofR@ > Tru64 programs will run on Linux (and presumably, vice versa.) >  > Hmm. > J > Compaq provides compilers/linkers for Alphas for: OpenVMS, Tru64, Linux, >   and soon/now Tandem's. > K > Compaq has produced numerous cross platform tools such as VEST, and knows ! > rather a lot about such things.. > C > Compaq is in the midst of making the OpenVMS C RTL much more Unixa
 > compatible.y >  > So...n > F > One can imagine a switch "Common Alpha Environment" = CAE such that: >  > $ cc/cae program > $ link/cae program, > $ define dcl$path f$environment("default") > $ programt+ > $ rcp program.exe "linuxbox:/tmp/program"r > $ rsh linuxbox "/tmp/program"D > H > That is, the program, when compiled and linked this way, ON ANY ALPHA,H > would be able to run on every Alpha platform.  Ie, CAE would result inJ > a Common Alpha Executable!  Yes, it would probably be restricted to some6 > subset of the C RTL functions, but you get the idea. > 9 > This would really be huge plus, I think, for everybody.r > E > Imagine if you will that we get native Wordperfect for Linux/Alpha.AD > Odds of getting Corel (or whoever owns it at that time) to port toH > OpenVMS - nil.  But if all they had to do to make it run on all AlphasD > was put -cae in the Makefile (and restrict themselves to that coreE > library), they'd probably do it. So that the same version would runo6 > on Tru64 and Linux, and OpenVMS would just be gravy. > E > This is actually somewhat better than the situation with Intel too.-E > Right now if I have a Windows binary odds are I can't get it to run-J > on Linux (unless it's running in a virtual machine or some other similarF > construct.)  And look at the mess if you have to use Wine.  Now thatI > Windows is out of the mix on Alpha Compaq is free to provide what couldnG > be a very useful capability.  They are also free to put anything intolD > that environment that they want to - so long as they provide it on > all 4 platforms at once. > J > This would be one heck of a lot better for sales than Affinity ever was! > 
 > Regards, >  > David Mathog > mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu @ > Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech  6 Sound great to me David, when can I take delivery?  ;)   --   Keith BrownA kbrown780@usfamily.net   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 21:36:54 -0400H# From: John Vottero <John@MVPSI.com>_$ Subject: RE: Common Alpha ExecutableD Message-ID: <C15945A9D9EFCF11BA8B08002BBF1CCC0CD72E@berry.mvpsi.com>  @ Maybe Larry can get some buttons made that say "I want CAE!"? :)   > -----Original Message-----) > From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospamI, > [mailto:Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam]' > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 9:13 AMn > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com-& > Subject: Re: Common Alpha Executable >  > / > In article <8is42b$bra@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, A6 > mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog) writes: > : > > This would be one heck of a lot better for sales than  > Affinity ever was! > A > Mainly because the Linux (and even Unix) proper behavior is nota: > subject to change at the whim of some other corporation. > H > I would suggest you organize a session for the Fall US DECUS SymposiumH > in Los Angeles (your neighborhood) and also a lot of Advance Publicity > to draw participation. >    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:24:29 -0500.7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>1$ Subject: Re: Common Alpha Executable- Message-ID: <3952D86D.5E68547F@earthlink.net>l   John Vottero wrote:h > B > Maybe Larry can get some buttons made that say "I want CAE!"? :)  F Try the DFW guys at the welcome session, LA. Maybe they'll bring their button stamper again.t   --   David J. Dachteray dba DJE Systems " http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/y   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 12:15:56 PDTT From: Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515)/ Subject: Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?&3 Message-ID: <Qg4mJNArQCcz@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>   - In article <3951775D.E8BDE9E8@videotron.ca>, (4     	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: [...]IL > To be the devil's advocate, what if the VMS engineers were busy working onN > full unix compliance of VMS which would make all ports much easier from unix > source code ?   H         Related but not exactly  what  you  suggest,  take a look at the>     following which appeared on the VMS What's New page today:  D     http://www.openvms.digital.com/openvms/products/ips/porting.html       This states, in part,           "OpenVMS Porting Librarys  <         Compaq is pleased to provide the new OpenVMS Porting-         Library, also known as "The Jackets."V  A         The OpenVMS Porting Library makes it faster and easier tonB         port C and C++ applications from Unix to OpenVMS Alpha and         OpenVMS VAX."     H     I've taken a quick  read-through  of  the  Release  Notes.  It looksH     interesting,  solves a certain set of problems for some typical unixH     code, but is not and does not purport to  be  a  complete  solution.     Helpful though...T           -Ken -- sM  Kenneth H. Fairfield            |  Internet: Fairfield@SLC.Slac.Stanford.Edu :  SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, MS 46  |  Voice:    650-926-2924:  Menlo Park, CA  94025           |  FAX:      650-926-3515N  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------B  These opinions are mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's...   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 20:35:30 GMT2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)/ Subject: Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?w6 Message-ID: <8ittai$aru$1@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>  \ In article <3951775D.E8BDE9E8@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  :   This is unfortunately going to be a non-answer answer...   :Malcolm Dunnett wrote:SJ :>    We've already had an example of this sort of "strategic partnership"N :> BS coming out of Compaq and Oracle. What we need are real products shippingN :> to real customers at the same (or very close to) time as they ship on otherI :> platforms. Oracle 8.1.x has been shipping on Unix for something like arE :> year and it *might* just now be available on VMS ( if you can findr; :> the right people and make the right secret handshakes ).y  G   There is apparently additional and updated (good) information around t$   Oracle on OpenVMS due out shortly.  K :To be the devil's advocate, what if the VMS engineers were busy working onaM :full unix compliance of VMS which would make all ports much easier from unixe :source code ?     :-)    	--o  E   The porting library referenced later in this thread was created as eD   part of the Mozilla work, and is not (directly) related to much of6   the other work going on here in OpenVMS Engineering.  N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:37:13 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)./ Subject: Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?t, Message-ID: <wn$16PXgfYHQ@malvm2.mala.bc.ca>  7 In article <8ittai$aru$1@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>, t8     hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:  K > :> platforms. Oracle 8.1.x has been shipping on Unix for something like a G > :> year and it *might* just now be available on VMS ( if you can findn= > :> the right people and make the right secret handshakes ).g > I >   There is apparently additional and updated (good) information around  & >   Oracle on OpenVMS due out shortly. >   H     FWIW, I was told today ( by Oracle ) that 8.1.6 is NOT available forI VMS, but is "planned for this month" ( but with no firm ETA - there's notf# a lot of days left in this month ).e  G     Apparently it also take a month from the time it is released in thehH US before it's available in Canada ( I can't imagine why but that's what Oracle told me ).r  M ============================================================================= M Malcolm Dunnett      Malaspina University-College   Email: dunnett@mala.bc.caiH Information Systems  Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA V9R 5S5     Tel: (250)755-8738   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:58:40 +0200k= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>n/ Subject: Re: Compaq paying for software ports ?l) Message-ID: <39528C0F.2FF14D08@gtech.com>I  9 "Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515" wrote:p. > In article <3951775D.E8BDE9E8@videotron.ca>,9 >         JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:rN > > To be the devil's advocate, what if the VMS engineers were busy working onP > > full unix compliance of VMS which would make all ports much easier from unix > > source code ?o > J >         Related but not exactly  what  you  suggest,  take a look at the@ >     following which appeared on the VMS What's New page today: > F >     http://www.openvms.digital.com/openvms/products/ips/porting.html   Which is good !q  # And probably as good as it can be !t  ; Because there are no such thing as "full unix compliance" !i  @ You can be source code compatible with Tru64 4.0D or source code# compatible with Solaris 2.6 or ....s  B The fact is that as long as Unix is not compatible with Unix, then! VMS can not be "Unix compatible".    Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 21:07:28 -0400t' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>g/ Subject: Re: Compaq paying for software ports ? ( Message-ID: <8iud7t$hlp$1@pyrite.mv.net>  5 Arne Vajhj <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote in messaget# news:39528C0F.2FF14D08@gtech.com....; > "Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515" wrote:n0 > > In article <3951775D.E8BDE9E8@videotron.ca>,; > >         JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: E > > > To be the devil's advocate, what if the VMS engineers were busyo
 working onH > > > full unix compliance of VMS which would make all ports much easier	 from unixa > > > source code ?. > >dL > >         Related but not exactly  what  you  suggest,  take a look at theB > >     following which appeared on the VMS What's New page today: > >nH > >     http://www.openvms.digital.com/openvms/products/ips/porting.html >o > Which is good !o  I Yes, although another post suggested that it may be more Mozilla-specific I than a general porting facility (it would be good to clarify this point).e   >o% > And probably as good as it can be !!  H Nope.  Not unless it's 'Unix98' compliant, which succeeded Unix95, whichJ succeeded POSIX:  there *are* standards, and compliance is becoming fairlyI common, though systems of course reserve the ability to offer proprietary* *extensions* to the standards.   >T= > Because there are no such thing as "full unix compliance" !.  H As I understand it, Unix98 *defines* full unix compliance, as Unix95 didC before it.  Before that, the standard existed, but was called POSIXb compliance.r   >iB > You can be source code compatible with Tru64 4.0D or source code% > compatible with Solaris 2.6 or ....n  C Or source code compatiable with *all* that comply with a particular_J standard, just as long as you limit your use to interfaces defined by that	 standard.a   >eD > The fact is that as long as Unix is not compatible with Unix, then# > VMS can not be "Unix compatible".w  J Wrong.  You appear not to understand the difference between a standard andD an extended but compliant implementation.  And VMS has some valuableL extensions to offer, once the *standard* environment is available to draw in developers.W   - bill   >  > Arne   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 11:52:07 PDTT From: Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515)+ Subject: Re: DECNET-Plus, DTSS, NTP and UTCe3 Message-ID: <Y5BE6LjbN14H@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>u  6 In article <8it9b2$306$2@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>,<         hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes: >W5 > In article <M0Ze4F51Pb3r@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>, [ >    Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515) writes:rK > :        I need to bring  up  a  bunch  of  old issues here: DECNET-Plus,6K > :    DTSS,  NTP,  but  also  UTC and the  various  SYS$TIMEZONE*  logicalI > :    names...n > .. >  >   If it were me: >S3 >   Shut off DTSS, and use NTP for synchronization.d  H         Which is what a number of others have suggested as well, but see     below...  L >                                                    While it is possible toL >   get DTSS to query NTP for the time, the example code that permitted thisJ >   to be set up was found buggy and also assumed an old NTP, and was thusL >   removed from the DTSS kit a while back.  (I'd have prefered to have seen* >   it rewritten, but that didn't happen.)  ;         OK, fine, dump the idea of using NTP to drive DTSS.i  H         With regard to disabling DTSS altogether, however, in my severalH     experiments (which  I  will  repeat  to  be  sure  I  didn't  make aH     mistake),  if  DTSS  was completely disabled,  the  SYS$TIMEZONE_TDFH     would be set incorrectly even if I executed UTC$TIME_SETUP.COM priorH     to shutdown and told it we were on daylight time.  This is the  cruxH     of my problem.  The other SYS$TIMEZONE* logicals get defined as wellH     even  with  DTSS  disabled,  and, for example, SYS$TIMEZONE_NAME andH     SYS$TIMEZONE_DAYLIGHT_SAVING  take  values  appropriate  to StandardH     time,  not  Daylight time.  I'll repeat my experiments  again  today1     just to be sure I didn't screw up my tests...-  N >   Always please use SYS$MANAGER:UTC$TIME_SETUP.COM for timezone stuff -- notO >   the SYS$MANAGER:UTC$CONFIGURE_TDF.COM or SYS$MANAGER:UTC$TIMEZONE_SETUP.COM0 >   procedures.   H         OK, Hoff, we've been through this  before.  Exactly _how_ to youH     expect  me  to  execute UTC$TIME_SETUP.COM on all 25 of  my  clusterH     nodes from SYSMAN or a command file?  That  command  file  does  allH     sorts  of menus, prompts and confirmation garbage.  And if I _don't_H     execute UTC$CONFIGURE_TDF.COM  (through  UTC$TIME_SETUP or directly)H     on  all cluster nodes, EXE$GQ_TDF does not get updated on all  thoseH     nodes, and a node rebooting or otherwise joining the cluster  has  a6     high probability of getting the _wrong_ TDF value.  H         Given that UTC$TIME_SETUP.COM has  been  run on each system diskH     at  least once to initially setup the TDF and timezone files,  whereH     is the danger in executing  UTC$CONFIGURE_TDF.COM  directly  at  theH     time  change?   [Context  here  is  DECNET  IV, NTP, and I execute aH     command file that  does  all  the  timezone  logical names, MultinetH     timezone  configuration,  and  UTC TDF change from SYSMAN  when  _I_     actually change the time.]  K >   V7.3 has integrated time management, and I'm working with several otheroL >   folks to get the OpenVMS FAQ and the OpenVMS V7.3 documentation updated.I >   Currently C and IP use the base OpenVMS time management.  Starting iniH >   V7.3, DTSS also uses base OpenVMS for time management, and I've alsoH >   asked for an "ignore" logical to disable DTSS startup when required.I >   (Rather than the current scheme that requires it to start and then toyI >   shut down.)  Support for (optionally enabled) automatic daylight time-B >   switchovers also (finally) finds its way into OpenVMS in V7.3.  H         These all sound good.  Some of  us  won't be able to make use ofH     these  new  features until well into 2001 given the  likely  releaseH     date of VMS 7.3 and the need to then wait for a "down time"  in  our<     production schedule in order to do the VMS upgrade.  :-{           -Ken --M  Kenneth H. Fairfield            |  Internet: Fairfield@SLC.Slac.Stanford.Edu :  SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, MS 46  |  Voice:    650-926-2924:  Menlo Park, CA  94025           |  FAX:      650-926-3515N  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------B  These opinions are mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's...   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 12:03:10 PDTT From: Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515)+ Subject: Re: DECNET-Plus, DTSS, NTP and UTCu3 Message-ID: <eFMqY3rQ1xWd@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>n  9 In article <8it63q$87d$1@fizban.fizban.pprd.abbott.com>, t8     	"Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com> writes:J > I could be wrong but I thought Multinet did the twice a year time change > automatically. ...  H         It sort of does.   If  one  lets  NTP  change  the  time, then IH     _believe_   the  logical  MULTINET_TIMEZONE  gets  changed  to   theH     apporpriate string.  However, if one then reboots a  system  without     have done:           $ MULTINET CONFIGURE#         set timezone pdt   ! or pstt         save         exit	         $m  H     a rebooting system will set MULTINET_TIMEZONE  to the value found inH     the  configuration  file, not the value appropriate to  the  currentH     date.  At least that's what I found under Multinet 4.1B/C (we're nowH     at 4.2A) and I believe I have  a  confirming  e-mail  from  MultinetH     support  at  Process  Software  (although  I'm  always  happy  to be     corrected).r  I > From my ever failing memory, you need to pay attention to the followingt > logicals:i > # >     sys$timezone_daylight_savingse >     sys$timezone_differentialu >     sys$timezone_name  >     sys$timezone_rule   H         Exactly.  Theses are precisely the logical names that DTSS seems     to muck with.   J > As for DTSS/NTP, we went through the same confusion (and still do) about4 > what to do.  We now use NTP and it seems to be OK.  H         As far as keeping the time sync'ed,  I agree, just use NTP.  ButG     I've had no end of trouble with, e.g., SYS$TIMEZONE_DIFFERENTIAL...r           Thanks, Kenh -- eM  Kenneth H. Fairfield            |  Internet: Fairfield@SLC.Slac.Stanford.Edug:  SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, MS 46  |  Voice:    650-926-2924:  Menlo Park, CA  94025           |  FAX:      650-926-3515N  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------B  These opinions are mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's...   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:31:55 -0400w# From: John Vottero <John@MVPSI.com>-+ Subject: RE: DECNET-Plus, DTSS, NTP and UTC0D Message-ID: <C15945A9D9EFCF11BA8B08002BBF1CCC0CD72D@berry.mvpsi.com>   > -----Original Message-----H > From: Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU [mailto:Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU]' > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 2:52 PM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comi- > Subject: Re: DECNET-Plus, DTSS, NTP and UTCs >  > 8 > In article <8it9b2$306$2@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>,> >         hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes: > >u7 > > In article <M0Ze4F51Pb3r@mccdev.slac.stanford.edu>,<9 > >    Fairfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ken Fairfield; SLAC: t& > 650-926-2924; FAX: 926-3515) writes:; > > :        I need to bring  up  a  bunch  of  old issues i > here: DECNET-Plus,7 > > :    DTSS,  NTP,  but  also  UTC and the  various  i > SYS$TIMEZONE*  logical > > :    names...m > > .. > >r > >   If it were me: > >s5 > >   Shut off DTSS, and use NTP for synchronization.m > = >         Which is what a number of others have suggested as b > well, but see  >     below... > @ > >                                                    While it  > is possible to@ > >   get DTSS to query NTP for the time, the example code that  > permitted this@ > >   to be set up was found buggy and also assumed an old NTP,  > and was thus9 > >   removed from the DTSS kit a while back.  (I'd have " > prefered to have seena, > >   it rewritten, but that didn't happen.) > = >         OK, fine, dump the idea of using NTP to drive DTSS.  > @ >         With regard to disabling DTSS altogether, however, in  > my several< >     experiments (which  I  will  repeat  to  be  sure  I   > didn't  make a: >     mistake),  if  DTSS  was completely disabled,  the   > SYS$TIMEZONE_TDF2 >     would be set incorrectly even if I executed  > UTC$TIME_SETUP.COM prior> >     to shutdown and told it we were on daylight time.  This  > is the  crux; >     of my problem.  The other SYS$TIMEZONE* logicals get   > defined as wells5 >     even  with  DTSS  disabled,  and, for example, ' > SYS$TIMEZONE_NAME andM? >     SYS$TIMEZONE_DAYLIGHT_SAVING  take  values  appropriate  h
 > to Standarda> >     time,  not  Daylight time.  I'll repeat my experiments   > again  today3 >     just to be sure I didn't screw up my tests...l    L I also have this problem.  It seems that if you have DTSS disabled, you haveK to delete  SYS$SYSTEM:DTSS$TIMEZONE_DIFFERENTIAL.DAT  when changing the TDF I or the TDF gets set to the value in this file (which does NOT get updatedeK when you execute UTC$TIME_SETUP.COM).  This file will be recreated when you 6 reboot so you have to delete it every spring and fall.   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 18:44:38 GMT' From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb)eB Subject: Easier porting of C/C++ applications from Unix to OpenVMS0 Message-ID: <8itmqm$ran$1@aquila.news.mdx.ac.uk>  F Just noticed that Compaq have put up a new porting library for easier  porting of Unix apps to VMS.    C See http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/products/ips/porting.html       
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:49:40 GMT 8 From: mccusker@cpeedy.lkg.REMOVE.dec.com (Brad McCusker)E Subject: Re: Not waiting for the shoe to drop. was: Re: VAX on Intel?L0 Message-ID: <3952c148.1816138@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>  C On 20 Jun 2000 09:15:20 -0700, dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm Dunnett)l wrote:    G >   From what I can see (in Canada) the only changes Compaq has made toeK >the education program have been negative ones ( scrapping the edu discountE >on Pathworks ). a   Huh?  C Care to elaborate on that?  This is news to me, I mean, we just gotoF PATHWORKS onto the edu program about a year or so ago, I can't believeD its been taken off already, and why.  Please feel free to email backD channel, I'd like to know what you heard, and who you heard it from.E (I suspect its a geo specific thing if it really is correct, not thats that helps any)p   Regards,  
 Brad McCuskere# OpenVMS Advanced Server Engineering    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:07:48 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>a7 Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters vs other systems clusterst, Message-ID: <39527213.360BE65A@videotron.ca>   "Main, Kerry" wrote:N > However, does that mean the future is doomed as well? Is there no way a past" > mistake(s) can not be corrected?  L Past mistakes will take more drastic actions to get corrected than have been taken so far.   M > OpenVMS is a $4B a year business. 17% of OpenVMS business last year was newkD > business. Andrew will not want to believe this, but thats reality.  N The problem is not that VMS may have some new business, but *IF* (speculation)M last year it was a $5b business and this year, it was a $4b business, you can L claim all you want about the 17% of the $4b being new customers, but it only9 worsens the numbers of customers who moved away from VMS.m  K Does Compaq have some way to measure customers who have stopped spending on6K VMS and only have systems on maintenance with all new applications going onqJ other systems ? Does Compaq keep track of how many VMS customers have even1 stopped spending on VMS maintenance alltogether ?r  L If Compaq were to provide a more complete picture showing wins and losses inL customers in a historical fashion, (perhaps over the last 10 years), then itM would be possible to notice if the tide is continuing, is starting to turn or  has already turned.   K Otherwise, those incomplete numbers are just spin to make it look good, theNK same type of spin customers have learned not to beleive because even during L Palmer years, such claims were made, even though VMS was bleeding profusely.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:26:49 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>t7 Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters vs other systems clusters=, Message-ID: <39527687.503BDD75@videotron.ca>  & "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote: > z > In article <910612C07BCAD1119AF40000F86AF0D80528444E@kaoexc4.kao.dec.com>, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> writes:B > ><http://www.openvms.digital.com/e-postcard1/> (ensure sound on) > 7 > ... and how do I do that with Netscape 3.03 on VMS???c  K It is a flash animation. There was a java based flash player. And the flashhN player code is now available from Macromedia. Perhaps the VMS group could port it to VMS ?E   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:42:24 -0400r' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>h7 Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters vs other systems clustersi( Message-ID: <8ittmt$6fp$1@pyrite.mv.net>  H Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- <system@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in message* news:009EBFD0.1DD7E428@SendSpamHere.ORG...L > In article <910612C07BCAD1119AF40000F86AF0D80528444E@kaoexc4.kao.dec.com>,- "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> writes:oB > ><http://www.openvms.digital.com/e-postcard1/> (ensure sound on) >t7 > ... and how do I do that with Netscape 3.03 on VMS???i >o >i0 > ><http://www.openvms.digital.com/e-postcard2/>J > >Yes, the last two are marketing sound bites, but is this not what folks haveI > >been asking for? Are these not the types of things that one can use toc kickL > >off a presentation on OpenVMS with? [Click on the title below the picture6 > >and save the .exe file to run directly on your PC.] >jE > Will Compaq provide a PeeCee for these or persist in neglecting and@D > alienating the VMS users that they currently possess???  If CompaqE > will provide me with the PeeCee (sorry, it would have to be running2E > Linux as I will have no demon seed spawning under my roof), I mightt0 > be able to see what these links are all about. >tE > Sorry, Kerry, but if they were truly interested in getting the wordiF > out, these links (IMHO) would be less PeeCee specific.  It just doesF > *NOT* demonstrate that they have sincere intentions for VMS.  PeeCee$ > or not to be, that is their quest.   My reaction is a bit different:t  F If Compaq is interested simply in creating the impression with its VMSI customers that it is doing something, then Brian's observations are rightl on.   I OTOH, if Compaq is interested in actually spreading the word, what's thiseE doing hidden away in the openvms enclave, rather than being trumpetedoA globally (in which case the PC format is probably the right one)?!  J (The first postcard wasn't worth the time to down-load it.  But the secondH said the kinds of things Compaq needs to say - to the world, not just in here.)   - bill   >s > I > >Anyway, I know the response will likely be something to the effect "wea haveK > >heard it before..", but I guess my response to that would be "stay tunedu .."t >  > To what channel??? >  >x3 > BTW, I was great to finally meet you back in May.t > --4 > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:42:12 -0500 1 From: Jeff Schreiber <SCHREIBER@Eisner.DECUS.org>h2 Subject: Re: OpenVMS UCX/FTP and Internet Explorer1 Message-ID: <01JQWSA33EF6003I7F@Eisner.DECUS.org>t   avid20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:hM >Internet Explorer should instead do what I presume Netscape does and use them >NLST command.       Excellent Suggestion!s  5                                                 -Jeffu   --1 Jeff Schreiber,            Process Software Corp.x1 schreiber@mx.process.com   http://www.process.comi+      TCPware & MultiNet: Stronger than Everl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:15:49 -0400:) From: Bob Ricci <maxx0623@concentric.net>K Subject: print to file< Message-ID: <001f01bfdc75$e4ef8510$585b5cc0@socrates.Subway>  + can anyone show me how to print to a file? .   Robert V. Riccin Systems Manager3 Drs. Associates (SUBWAY) 325 Bic Dr.  Milford, Ct 06460z  tel  203 877 4281 ext 1144w  fax 203 876 6682t email ricci_r@subway.com  or     maxx0623@concentric.nete http://www.subway.come   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 19:07:34 GMT2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: print to file6 Message-ID: <8ito5m$94k$1@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>  h In article <001f01bfdc75$e4ef8510$585b5cc0@socrates.Subway>, Bob Ricci <maxx0623@concentric.net> writes:, :can anyone show me how to print to a file?   K   You have asked a rather terse question (your sig file is longer :-), and  (   I will take a guess at the question...  J   Assuming that the application or DCL command procedure cannot simply be L   (re)coded to create the file directly (or retain it), one common approach K   involves the use of a custom print symbiont -- the custom print symbiont vG   does little more than save a copy of the input (queued print) file.  u  F   When the application or DCL command procedure sends the file to the L   designated print queue -- the print queue running with this print-to-file G   print symbiont -- then a copy of the input file is saved (somewhere).l  K   Custom print-to-file print symbionts are available from various sources, e)   including from the user group archives.u  N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:36:16 -0500H7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>e Subject: Re: print to file- Message-ID: <3952BF10.E90935B9@earthlink.net>t   Bob Ricci wrote: > , > can anyone show me how to print to a file?  = For what it may be worth, given the terseness of the query...$  E If your application prints to a device, and will tolerate that device B being something other than a terminal or printer class device, try something like:y  " $ DEFINE LPA0 SYS$LOGIN:REPORT.LIS   ...or...  $ $ DEFINE LTA999 SYS$LOGIN:REPORT.LIS  3 Other than that, yeah - Hoff's got the best answer!    --   David J. Dachterap dba DJE Systemsm" http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/D   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:25:39 GMTo/ From: morris@iridium.mv.net (Skipper W. Morris)o> Subject: Re: Proxy problem: Why does node:: work but 0:: fail?( Message-ID: <8IP591$QGH$1@PYRITE.MV.NET>  C If this problem occured on a Phase IV system it would be related toe the use of the cluster alias.e  D When you do a "directory node::..." command the session layer does aG lookup in the node database to translate the name to the address.  WheniD you do a command "directory nnn::..." this session control lookup is7 bypassed since you're already supplying the nodenumber.   C A side effect of this is typing the name causes the local system tonE send the cluster alias address of the source node.  Typing the numberVD causes the system to send the local node address and not the clusterB address should one exist. This side effect was deliberate to allow7 a user to control which address was sent as the source.   F I haven't tried it in years so I'm not sure what the current behaviour is, but it's probably the same.t  A So if you have clusters, the problem might be that you don't haveo> a proxy for the other possible nodename in the proxy database.  A Easiest thing is do a "set host 0" vs "set host foo" and when youh< login look at where the system thinks the connect came from.   /Skips   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:03:55 +0200o) From: "Tomer Cohen" <tomer@flashmail.com>d3 Subject: Remote access programs from Windows to VMSt0 Message-ID: <8itrfu$rhr$1@news.netvision.net.il>   Hello,J Does anyone know about a good remote-access program (emulator?) from PC to) VAX/Alpha running VMS (except eXcursion)?2   Thanks,n   -- Tomer Cohen  Tomer@FlashMail.com    ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 21:25:31 GMT2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)7 Subject: Re: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS-6 Message-ID: <8iu08b$c0s$1@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>  \ In article <8itrfu$rhr$1@news.netvision.net.il>, "Tomer Cohen" <tomer@flashmail.com> writes:K :Does anyone know about a good remote-access program (emulator?) from PC tod* :VAX/Alpha running VMS (except eXcursion)?  6   What specifically are you trying to do?  Or emulate?  N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:34:28 -0400N0 From: arturo saavedra <arturo.saavedra@wcom.com>7 Subject: RE: Remote access programs from Windows to VMSo4 Message-ID: <001701bfdc91$a4c36260$14b324a6@CJ4733A>  H I've tested many..the one that never fails me is keaterm by attachmate.. very solid..   abst     -----Original Message-----. From: Tomer Cohen [mailto:tomer@flashmail.com]% Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 5:04 PMc To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com 3 Subject: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS      Hello,J Does anyone know about a good remote-access program (emulator?) from PC to) VAX/Alpha running VMS (except eXcursion)?s   Thanks,    -- Tomer Cohenr Tomer@FlashMail.comi   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:59:26 -0600 % From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com> 7 Subject: RE: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS B Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000622155853.00a52f00@pop.clsp.uswest.net>  3 Another VERY solid one (and shareware) is TeraTerm.   , At 03:34 PM 6/22/00 , arturo saavedra wrote:I >I've tested many..the one that never fails me is keaterm by attachmate..e
 >very solid..  >f >abs >p >  >-----Original Message-----u/ >From: Tomer Cohen [mailto:tomer@flashmail.com]w& >Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 5:04 PM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com4 >Subject: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS >l >L >Hello,aK >Does anyone know about a good remote-access program (emulator?) from PC too* >VAX/Alpha running VMS (except eXcursion)? >- >Thanks, >- >--- >Tomer Cohen >Tomer@FlashMail.com >- >- >- >-   ------I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+-I | Dan O'Reilly                  |                                       |mI | Principal Engineer            |  "Time flies like an arrow.  Fruit    |TI | Process Software Corporation  |   flies like a banana."               | I | http://www.process.com        |                    -- Groucho Marx    |aI +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:02:44 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> 7 Subject: Re: Remote access programs from Windows to VMSe) Message-ID: <39528D04.24718D8C@gtech.com>e   Tomer Cohen wrote:L > Does anyone know about a good remote-access program (emulator?) from PC to+ > VAX/Alpha running VMS (except eXcursion)?o   The reflection series from WRQ.s  ! Technical features: top-quality !S  % Price: there is a zero too much ! :-)    Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 20:44:49 -0500:7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>i7 Subject: Re: Remote access programs from Windows to VMS - Message-ID: <3952C111.6FA75000@earthlink.net>.   Arne Vajhj wrote: >  > Tomer Cohen wrote:N > > Does anyone know about a good remote-access program (emulator?) from PC to- > > VAX/Alpha running VMS (except eXcursion)?  > ! > The reflection series from WRQ.s > # > Technical features: top-quality !  > ' > Price: there is a zero too much ! :-)(  @ Geez! Seems that darn old "affordable" thing just won't go away!   -- a David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemst" http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/i   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:22:21 GMT  From: d.webb@mdx.ac.ukH Subject: Re: Storage Works / Snapshots / Maybe it's time to skip OpenVMS) Message-ID: <8IOCOB$KQG$1@NNRP1.DEJA.COM>r  
 In articleD <05E9483E465FF40C.DBE5A72396AEDFFB.0693B6D86E224ECB@lp.airnews.net>,#   kuff@tessco.com (Hal Kuff) wrote:E >E >oG >    What we're looking for is a snapahot via command files or API that G > allows us to only take users offline for 5 mins.... cloning a stripedIH > mirrorset would defeat the purpose....  Adding mirrors and taking them@ > away to convert them to units for mounting would be clumsy and probably > unscriptable      F There was going to a product to do precisely this - snapshot services.& Unfortunately it was cancelled on VMS. It sounded so great.  C Stop your applications for a second. Take a snapshot of your disks.i# Continue on. Backup your snapshots.eE The snapshots used little disk space - you didn't need to have doublewC your disk capacity - because they just duplicated metadata and only-9 redirected blocks over time as those blocks were updated.G  E If I recall correctly the software was produced for NT - then the VMSC version got canned.m  G We were promised that the functionality would be rolled into the futuren improvements in shadowing etc.  @ So anyone - Will the new file system work etc in VMS 7.3 include snapshot services ?s    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University > @ > In article <4.3.2.7.0.20000617144256.00bbb650@24.8.96.48>, Dan Sugalski > <dan@sidhe.org> wrote: >0. > > At 04:30 PM 6/16/00 -0400, Hal Kuff wrote: > >m > >d< > > >    IS there any kind of snapshot supported by OpenVMS?G > > >    We'd sure like to buy about $200,000 worth of new Storage, but  the G > > >ability to do snapshots from OpenVMS is not negotiable. This needs  to ber7 > > >scripted and run several times per day unattended.  > >tG > > What kind of snapshots? If you're just talking about cloning disks,s you canoD > > do that now and have been able to for ages. Either use the CLONE
 support inB > > the HSx controllers to snapshot individual drives or, for RAID volumes andlG > > such, make and break shadow sets. Rebuilds on the shadow sets are ak bit of > > a pain, but it works.u > >d > > / > >                                         Dani > >h4 > > --------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------6 > > Dan Sugalski                          even samuraiC > > dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and evenm? > >                                       teddy bears get drunkc >t    & Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.A   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 19:17:43 GMT0 From: fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Frank da Cruz)4 Subject: Re: transferring files to/from vms systems?5 Message-ID: <8itoon$6ua$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>v  K In article <395186EA.82EAB32A@vrx.net>, Beyonder  <beyonder@vrx.net> wrote:sK : Wow I never knew the press was that bad, or the common thinking was. I'veuN : been using DEC equipment since 1976 and PACX communications, kermit has beenC : there almost since the beginning of that (it's hard to remember).  : J Kermit didn't appear until 1981.  But yes, we had a PACX too.  Even thoughK it was as big as a house, it was a pretty nice serial switch -- at least itrB was transparent to the data -- you could even change serial speedsJ midsession (unlike with later digital PBXs).  We connected from PCs (well,J CP/M microcomputers like the DEC VT180 in those days) thru the PACX to ourL DEC-20s.  It turns out early versions of TOPS-20 (the DEC-20 OS) would crashG if you sent more than about 95 bytes at a time into a serial port, flow H control or no, hence the 94-byte restriction on the basic Kermit packet.M This basic, simple form of Kermit is pretty much the only form implemented inuL 3rd-part software like Telix, even though faster forms are documented in theI spec.  So we can thank DEC for Kermit's reputation as a slow protocol :-)t   - Frank    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:15:01 -0400w- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>- Subject: Re: User mode logicals0, Message-ID: <395273C3.B548E6BA@videotron.ca>   Nigel Arnot wrote:M > This is also how it's documented (in "OpenVMS Programming Concepts Manual",0O > chapter on logical names). The discussion of image rundown is a subsection of<E > that on process logicals, implying it does not apply to the others.e  J OK, makes sense. If the image run down code scans the whole table for user mode logical names to G delete, it is sensible that it be limited to as few tables as possible.   M I was under the impression that perhaps VMS kept a list of user mode logicalsdJ to delete during next rundown, in which case, the user mode logicals could have been in any table.-  G > The obvious one would be to SYS$DCLEXH an exit-handler to tidy up the ? > names. If you worry about them being left behind after $STOP,s  M For me, it is not a problem per say, althought it would have been *neater* if  the logical went away.   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Jun 2000 21:11:34 GMT2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: User mode logicalsi6 Message-ID: <8itve6$bfd$1@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>  \ In article <395273C3.B548E6BA@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: :Nigel Arnot wrote: N :> This is also how it's documented (in "OpenVMS Programming Concepts Manual",N :> chapter on logical names). The discussion of image rundown is a subsection I :> of that on process logicals, implying it does not apply to the others.e :tK :OK, makes sense. If the image run down code scans the whole table for usereK :mode logical names to delete, it is sensible that it be limited to as few t :tables as possible.  A   There's more to it...  This also involves (avoiding) unexpected?@   interactions with logical names defined by other processes (inC   shared tables).  There's a recent war story in this area -- some eA   really weird logical name table behaviour that was encountered uC   here in OpenVMS -- but that tale of puzzlement must be saved for t   another time...e  N :I was under the impression that perhaps VMS kept a list of user mode logicalsK :to delete during next rundown, in which case, the user mode logicals couldh :have been in any table.  A   There is no list, just the rather simpler mode-specific search.eA   If this approach were extended out to shared tables, things getnB   rather interesting when attributing the ownership of the shared    user-mode logicals...   H :> The obvious one would be to SYS$DCLEXH an exit-handler to tidy up the@ :> names. If you worry about them being left behind after $STOP, : L :For me, it is not a problem per say, althought it would have been *neater*  :if the logical went away.  =   You'd want the logical name in a process-local table, then.e  B   Tracking which process created what logical name would certainlyE   be possible -- something like adding the creator PID into the data sD   structures -- but then there are activities such as synchronizing E   the deletion and periodic checks to ensure that all processes with -C   logical names are still around.  The alternative -- a linked listSE   of process logical names and periodic scans and such -- would also 1D   be a possible approach, obviously.  But just as obviously, either B   of these approach is rather more complex and error-prone than is   the current scheme.C  N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:35:41 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>p Subject: Re: User mode logicalst, Message-ID: <3952A2CB.BDA83539@videotron.ca>   Hoff Hoffman wrote: C >   There's more to it...  This also involves (avoiding) unexpected0B >   interactions with logical names defined by other processes (inD >   shared tables).  There's a recent war story in this area -- someB >   really weird logical name table behaviour that was encounteredD >   here in OpenVMS -- but that tale of puzzlement must be saved for >   another time...1  I I take it it has to do with those new flags to help synchronize access ton cluster-wide logicals ?s   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:36:03 -0400G' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>H Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?( Message-ID: <8ittb4$682$1@pyrite.mv.net>  : Nigel Arnot <sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk> wrote in message1 news:009EBFD5.D34CF1A0.20@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk...n! > > X-Gateway-Source-Info: USENETh& > > Sender: infovax-request@ulcc.ac.uk > >a > >a > Bill Todd writes:n   ...s  # > > 1.  Software development costs.t > L > I'd say that all the parts of VMS most relevant to an entry-level customer wereH > developed years ago (1984-90 timescale, apart from the Alpha porting). Most> > of the new stuff is aimed more toward the big-iron hardware.  L Renewed (and significantly better) POSIX support (plus perhaps extensions toI create an optional Linux-flavored environment) certainly apply to the lowrH end.  Better caching, better backup - yup, they do too.  Perhaps not the< on-going Galaxy work, but a lot of that's already been done.   > >i > > 2.  Software support costs.  > F > If the customer wants it, let the customer pay for it. Don't make it
 > compulsory.   J That's just not possible in the case of an IA port (which I realize you'reI not necessarily pushing hard for):  the *only* customers for that productiH will likely be the low-end customers, but one way or another Compaq will* have to have a support structure in place.  K And there are costs even for minimal support mechanisms such as best-efforte< Web/email answer services (which even low-end systems have).   > >  > > 3.  Software cost of sales.r >  > Don't understand this one.  J When a platform is sold, there are costs associated with the sale itself -F user questions, paper-shuffling (this is not an area I'm that familiarJ with - someone else can likely explain it better, but 'cost of sales' is aD legitimate line item).  Just the existence of a software license (asH compared with, say, Linux) has a measurable cost, though probably a veryF small one.  And that's aside from any advertising directed toward this market segment.    > > ' > > 4.  Relative value of the software.. >tC > This is a key point. We often complain that Compaq advertising ise	 preachinguK > to the choir. I'd say that at the entry level, they are also marketing tocK > the choir. Someone who doesn't have a VMS background is not going to take$H > Compaq's word if they say "it's four times better so we'll charge fourK > times as much". It's got to sell against the others, price for price, andy > then win friends.h  L The point I keep repeating is that it *can't* sell against the others, priceH for price, or even at a lower price:  *it's not as acceptable to users*.H You'd have to *pay* them to take VMS and try it out (and that would only5 work if it could run on hardware they already owned).a  F Or, you have to educate them.  And if you have to do that anyway, your argument above falls apart.   4  The payback is later when those friends scale up toG > a bigger VMS system, or tell their friends to buy VMS and sales start 
 > growing. >d > > >aI > > > The argument for so doing is second-order: probably that they don'tt want7 > > > to cannibalise their profitable high-end systems.  > >aK > > 5.  Yes, that too, but as you note there are ways to avoid much of that  > > problem. > >n > >  They may worry thatF > > > customers might replace an ES40, or maybe something bigger, by a clusterhK > > > of small cheap VMS systems. So they keep VMS expensive and VMScluster-+ > > > still more so so that doesn't happen.  > > > I > > > IMO, what they miss in this analysis is that a new customer for VMS  needsnI > > > to start somewhere, and it's far, far easier to start small than too startnL > > > big. Two of VMS's key andvantages are cluster-ability and scalability. But H > > > the proportionally high software costs for the lowest VMS platformI > > > serve to place both of these advantages out of reach of the low-endrG > > > customers who'd maybe LIKE a non-stop (cluster) system, but can'te justifymH > > > the cost. So the present policy is locking out what may be a large sourceH > > > of NEW customers -- the ones who can't contribute much to Compaq's profits>K > > > with their first small purchase, but who are most likely to come backo someK > > > time later for a bigger system if their needs grow and they like what  > > they've K > > > got. Salesmen in just about any industry know the value of "a foot in- the-G > > > door" It's something that you can't price for a bean-counter, andl
 > > something * > > > that Compaq seem to ignore with VMS. > > L > > That's not entirely fair:  VMS is one hell of a system to be able to buy for:H > > $1200.  Admittedly it lacks some things you might want, like TCP/IP,K > > software RAID (at least shadowing), and defragmention, that are bundled  withC > > common low-end server-level systems nowadays, and perhaps isn't-
 discountedJ > > when purchased with hardware as other systems are, both of which would be& > > reasonable to point out to Compaq. >tK > You know that. I know that. Someone who has never had a VMS system beforegB > doesn't, and isn't going to believe everything Compaq tells him.  L Then VMS just isn't going to be able to sell into that market, regardless ofG its pricing.  For the reasons noted many times previously.  So it makes F little sense to expend effort there now; maybe later, if the situationG changes and the world becomes better aware of VMS's virtues (and Compaq@D elimates many of its perceived drawbacks), things will be different.   > > F > > In other words, there are reasonable suggestions one might make to CompaqG > > (more bundled software, discounts when purchased with the hardware)  based onG > > common industry practices that would reduce the cost of VMS without F > > explicitly raising the issue of more direct competition with other CompaqJ > > offerings (Windows and Linux) that Compaq may quite understandably see asG > > addressing a somewhat different market than it (at least currently)i wants to > > target with VMS. > >k > > > E > > > Any mention of service cost in this is a red herring. Customers- wanting-K > > > service from Compaq will pay for it as an option. Other customers may  beC > > > quite happy with nothing apart from access to patches vis then	 Internet, I > > > and if they are forced to pay for support that they don't need it'sa yet  > > anothere  > > > reason that VMS loses out. > > >wK > > > So my suggestion would be that the combined cost of a software bundle-H > > > including VMS, Cluster, Volshad, DFO, TCPIP, and a restricted-user license- > > for-B > > > a programming language of choice should be set at a smallish
 percentage, > > > of the price of the hardware platform. > >eC > > What other platforms bundle language support with a low-end OS?h >mJ > You can get C and Fortran for free on any Unix (GCC/G++/G77) and even on NTH > (Cygwin/GCC etc) (there are a few strings attached to Cygwin, but it's > cheap even if you buy it.s > H > I don't think there's an Alpha/VMS port of the GNU compilers. If thereF > were, bundling them would be an OK alternative. (MAybe Compaq should$ > fund that port? - throwaway idea).  K Just don't assert that Compaq should give away free what others do not.  IfnJ no free third-party compilers are available for VMS, that's a symptom more than a cause of VMS's problems.    >o
 > > If youL > > can't make the case that this is standard practice, why should Compaq be the A > > exception?  Unless the license you're suggesting above is for  non-commercialH > > use only, don't get greedy:  as long as Compaq's language pricing isH > > reasonably comparable to other vendors', be happy - because Compaq's, > > compilers are often noticeably superior. >aD > I said single-user to imply it was for non-intensive in-house use. DefiningI > noncommercial is tricky, but if it said that object code developed with-I > this compiler license must either be distributed with sources for free,jJ > or not distributed outside the customer's sites at all, I'd say that was > fairly OK.  I Didn't Compaq come up with an inexpensive non-commercial compiler licenseB already?   >a > >sK > > This applies even more to bundling cluster support.  Compaq has already K > > halved its cluster license price, and created a $1500 workstation-classeI > > license option as well.  Who else bundles clustering support?  (Don'tp answerH > > that Linux does:  its support isn't anything like VMS's, Tru64's, or evenL > > Sun's.  And don't say "But Linux *will* be offering real clustering RealE > > Soon Now":  Compaq can cross that bridge if and when it's built.)n >lL > No: that's too late. That's when the competition gains an unbeatable price > advantage.  G Competent Linux clustering is not going to burst upon the world withoutlI warning:  there'll be plenty of time to adjust pricing when (and *if*) ite happens.  @  Compaq should be using VMScluster to attack NOW, while they are > still ahead of the pack.  I VMS cluster functionality is no longer distinctly ahead of the pack, just K ahead of Linux's.  Tru64, Sun, HP (Veritas-based, I think, but HP-branded),tJ Veritas (as a third-party option at least on Sun and HP, maybe more), AIX,J and SCO offer adequate - even arguably equivalent - clustering for the low end.  L There's a difference between telling Compaq its prices aren't competitive inH this area (which may be true:  as I said, one could reasonably argue forI dropping the per-node cluster license price to $3K or so, unless the Sun,hH HP, and Veritas pricing is significantly higher than that) and assertingL that clustering should be bundled without charge (which is telling them thatF they really have to take an aggressive pricing stance in the low end -D something much harder to defend at this time as the right strategy).  4  And don't forget, in order for a cluster license toI > be anything other than a piece of paper, you have to buy another set ofE > VMS hardware.   . No different for VMS than for its competitors.   >oK > The Workstation-class cluster license specifically denies you the abilityhG > to construct a fault-tolerant cluster. It basically gets you what NFS : > gets you with Unix, except you have to pay $1500 for it.  F Functionally, perhaps yes.  Disk-sharing and distributed caching offerI performance advantages, though, and it wouldn't surprise me if there were A other advantages (but I'm not the best person to recognize them).    >  > > K > > If you want just the limited clustering that Win2K supports, you pay an G > > extra $2500 or more per node to get Advanced Server instead of just9 ServerK > > (and clustering appears to constitute most of the functional differencenK > > between the two).  If you want clustering on Tru64, last I knew it costa anE > > extra $3K/node.  I don't think Sun gives away its cluster option,e either.sE > > So be happy if you can get Compaq to reduce the per-node VMS full. cluster D > > license price to something similar:  you'll be getting a bargain compared tor > > the alternatives.n >g! > And why NOT make VMS a bargain?   F Because you'll lose profit on every system that you would have shippedI anyway (but at the higher price) and may well not make it up in increaseda volume - ever.  G That's a point that many people advocating more aggressive pricing justiJ don't seem able to understand.  Or perhaps they think Compaq has some dutyL to VMS (or to them) above and beyond profit.  But commerce just doesn't workJ that way:  companies cut their losses and move on when appropriate, or, ifI the situation is borderline, experiment at minimum risk to determine whatn course to take.s  *  I'm not suggesting anything that involvesJ > an immediate loss: you'll make profit on every unit of hardware shipped,K > the manufacturing cost of software is basically nil so any money recievedcG > for it is positive cashflow, and if the result is that VMS once again  becomes K > hot news and an industry trend-setter instead of "legacy", with a rapidlyrK > growing number of entry-level sales, it's a handsome win. Should this not0K > work, the loss is small (since low-end VMS isn't a big seller anyway, thei3 > main loss would be from cannibalisation effects).o  C Now, that's not an unreasonable point:  if DS10-level VMS sales arerL negligible, then a very-low-cost VMS at that tier level wouldn't cost CompaqK much of anything (as long as it limited cannibalization, likely by limiting   clustering at that entry level).  I But given the brouhaha a while ago when Compaq proposed eliminating AlphasK workstations, that might not be the case (though most of the noise then maye7 have come from the Unix side - I certainly don't know).    >s > >d$ > >  I don't buy the cannibalisationJ > > > argument -- in most cases someone buying a bigger VMS platform needs the  > > IOF > > > bandwidth it provides, which a small cluster can't -- but if the low-endrK > > > bundled cluster license was restricted to no more than three nodes, Ia@ > > > don't think it would hurt much. (You need three to build a > > disaster-tolerantl > > > cluster).  > > < > > This assertion keeps coming up.  I suppose if you want a disaster-tolerantmG > > cluster that provides *completely* uninterrupted service, it may be I > > technically true, but I'd assert that no entry-level customer has anys real > > need for this. > >VJ > > A two-node cluster that mirrors the data at both (separated) nodes canJ > > continue to run if the secondary node (the one with zero votes) fails, and C > > can be recovered in minutes by reconfiguring the secondary noden stand-aloneaC > > if the primary node fails, can it not?  If so, wouldn't this ben
 sufficient( > > for any truly entry-level situation? >.H > true, but why errect a barrier that stops them from purchasing a thirdH > set of VMS hardware if they like the thought of being disaster- rather than > fault-tolerant?   K The two-node configuration I described is disaster-tolerant:  it just failsh( over manually rather than automatically.  7  And although the two-node setup can be reconfigured in K > seconds in the primary fails, it requires manual intervention, and eithermK > an operator presence at both locations or some careful planning involvingg? > modem-operated consoles, and hacker-proofing thereof, and ...t  K I don't think your model of entry-level disaster-tolerance reflects the waytJ it would normally be set up.  It seems far more likely that (in a two-nodeI configuration - which I think would be used, since by your own definitiondI this space is extremely price-sensitive) the primary node would be at theoJ work site (for convenient maintenance) and the remote node somewhere else.J A primary node disaster would take out the work site as well, and the mainJ reason for the secondary node would not be for instantaneously-continuableK operation (the *work site* is gone) but for up-to-the-second recoverabilitym6 plus, perhaps, quickly-continuable Web site operation.    The three-nodenG > solution is capable of looking after everything that its safeguarding  > against all by itself,  L And costs at least 50% more than the two-node solution (perhaps considerably? more than that, if the main additional cost is in running three $ interconnects rather than just one).  1   and so faults can be ignored until tomorrow. OreG > even until next week. It might therefore be much preferred by a small F > organisation that doesn't want to have someone technically competentF > around or on call 24x7. The third node reduces a crisis to a routine
 > problem.  K No, it's the *second* node that reduces a crisis to a routine problem.  The4K third node reduces a crisis to a negligible problem, which is a luxury thatoG the kind of entry-level very-price-sensitive customer you're describingnJ can't affort (if they could, they wouldn't need the special pricing you're' advocating to get them to look at VMS).e   >  > >hD > >  The system should also come with VMS-Perl and a webserver (bothJ > > > open-source, but Compaq should offer full support for these to those whor > > > want it).p > > >-E > > > And once you've got the pricing attractive from the very bottom  upwards, > > use L > > > VMScluster as the unifying concept and the one to base VMS advertising on. C > > > Is there any other system where you can grow from a couple of0 entry-levellJ > > > systems to a huge "mainframe" without ever having had an application > > outage?iF > > > And isn't that *exactly* what a start-up e-business wants: easy,	 virtuallyBK > > > unlimited scalability and no visible shutdowns or breakdowns to annoy  thee > > > customers? > >lJ > > This is certainly one pillar of the advertising campaign Compaq shouldK > > create.  But if it's really a telling advantage, then customers will benG > > willing to pay something for it, as long as the cost is reasonable.  >mH > Indeed ... once the telling is being done by lots of industry sources,H > not just Compaq. To get there, they have to get a fair number of small > VMS clusters into use.  L No, to get there they need far better general industry knowledge of VMS (andK a far more approachable product) - because without that, you won't sell theG8 low-end VMS clusters even if you give the licenses away.  K As long as you assert the existence of the market you're describing, rathertG than provide evidence to prove that it exists, I doubt that Compaq willeJ listen very hard:  it's got far likelier (and less risky) avenues to a VMS renaissance to pursue.  -  And once those customers start extolling itswF > virtues, isn't it better to keep the lower price and increase volumeK > (and thence the probability of more lugrative upgrades to bigger systems)iF > than to choke off a possible renaissance by increasing prices again? >t > >aK > > The problem with low-end VMS is not primarily price:  reducing it wouldn helpI > > some *after* other issues are addressed, but without addressing those  othereF > > issues you might well *give* it away and still have few customers. >oI > Quite possibly. Giving low-end VMS away would be a more aggressive movel thanH > the fixed-percentage bundle I was proposing, but not necessarily a bad > one.  D And leaving the low end at least largely alone right now is a *less*8 aggressive move, and a considerably more attractive one.  4  It would get the maximum possible number of low-endG > VMS installations onto customer sites, and to first order there wouldrE > still be profit in it (on the hardware and support-contract sales).oF > Of course, against that there is a loss from cannibalisation of someK > larger VMS sites, so one has to balance risk (of loss now) against rewardw! > (more VMS sales in the future).  >s > >tH > > The problem with low-end VMS is largely the same as the problem withL > > mid-range VMS:  it just doesn't fit all that well into currently-popularI > > existing environments, so the barrier to entry in any low-end (hence,oD > > usually 'commodity') situation where its unique strengths aren't	 perceivedtD > > as critical is huge.  Make VMS a platform approachable by users,J > > developers,and support personnel as something familiar, which includesK > > integration with their current environments in a manner that allows VMSs toF > > add value to them (without incurring significant down-sides in the	 process),hG > > and that barrier largely disappears - and allows VMS's strengths to  shine.E > > Only at that point does it make sense to consider radical low-endaJ > > penetration strategies such as parity pricing and IA hardware support. >nI > I'd invert that: push it NOW on the strengths that it has NOW (of which L > I see VMScluster and the easy fault- and disaster-tolerance that gives youD > as the greatest, and one of the easiest to advertise, and one thatI > non-technical managers of e-businesses might be receptive to). AnythingcK > involving changes to VMS will take time - at least a year, unless alreadytB > in progress - by which time free LinuxClusters may be a reality.  F Which is exactly what I've been proposing - except that what you won'tA accept is that such a strategy does not naturally include pricingeI adjustments, just advertising (plus some longer-range feature commitments'L that provide evidence that Compaq really is committed to VMS competitiveness over the long haul).  G If increased visibility results in a VMS turn-around in markets already J pre-disposed to its current strengths, *that* will be the kind of evidenceL Compaq needs to suggest that efforts in wider markets might be profitable as well.b   >  > > >iJ > > > VMS should be competing hard in the *server* market. At the low end, it's > > not. > >tI > > Absolutely.  But, again, pricing alone won't help much as long as VMS I > > servers lag in both performance and features compared to Windows (andm oftenoI > > Unix) servers (and remain 'foreign-looking' to both users and supportt > > staff).  >bK > Sometimes this will be true. But a low-end low-cost VMScluster (much morePJ > so than  a standalone VMS) offers something that the rest can't or don't do,  > right now.  K As I said above, that's simply not true, if you're talking features.  It is J true that no one else offers free clustering, which suggests strongly thatI clustering is something customers are willing to pay for if the system isoC otherwise attractive to them - so, as I said, it's purely a pricingi? advantage that seems unlikely to overcome VMS's other perceived 
 deficiencies.e  ?  So why not cut prices NOW, before someone else forces Compaq'ss > hand.   I Because, once again, companies cut prices only when there's evidence that;L this will stimulate demand in a manner that will at least eventually be moreL profitable than *not* cutting prices would have been.  So far, such evidence has not been presented.   @  Why not for once be seen as an industry leader, not a reluctant > follower?   D Because in this case it would be all too likely that Compaq would beJ perceived as an industry fool, not a leader.  Not a good thing, especially6 given Compaq's already shakey position with investors.  J Compaq *can* take aggressive steps with VMS.  But they have to be steps itJ can explain persuasively to the investment community, not wild swings at a  ball that may not even be there.  ;   (The obvious answer might be that Compaq is scared of the H > wrath of Bill ... but now is the best possible time to risk that, withK > Microsoft pinned under the legal spotlights for quite some time to come).   K My guess would be that VMS is perceived in Redmond as such a non-issue that H any steps Compaq might take would be ignored for a significant period ofH time - even if there is in fact the kind of influence you're suggesting.  D So, once again, my advice would be to pursue low-end issues far lessJ aggressively unless you've got a lot more persuasive arguments hidden awayK than you've presented here.  There are a few steps that would be reasonable H to suggest Compaq take (which I've mentioned); beyond that, why not giveI them at least a little time to see how their efforts in other areas shapee up?n   - bill   >r > > K > > > Sometime, maybe soon, this window of opportunity will close, when thetH > > > competition finally catches up to where VMScluster was more than a decade > > ago.K > > > If VMS is still seen as "legacy" then, it won't get any more chances.l > >aH > > I agree that the window may well close, and it will almost certainly closeuJ > > soon if VMS both fails to take major steps toward real integration (in theeC > > areas mentioned above) *and* fails to take significant steps to 
 *maintain*I > > its technical leadership.  And while addressing only one of those twosG > > problems might be sufficient for VMS to retain its current industryeI > > standing, I suspect both will have to be addressed if it is to have a' real > > revival. >a > I won't disagree there.  >  > Yours,
 > Nigel Arnot  > NRA@MAXWELL.PH.KCL.AC.UK >e7 > "In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."o >    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 05:53:50 GMT ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>i Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?( Message-ID: <8IN0LR$D44$1@PYRITE.MV.NET>  J Your problem is that you refuse to get the numbers to back up your claims.I Posts in this newsgroup and other people like you that you happen to knowaL about don't mean sh*t unless you can demonstrate (not just assert) that theyK (the ones you can *count*) add up to potential system purchases in the highl 6 figure range or greater.  F Without numbers, you haven't said anything convincing in the past, andI continue to avoid doing so in the present:  don't tell *me* to go out andt: collect them - if you want to make your case, *you* do it.  H As for your argument below, it falls apart on the first premise.  CompaqJ *has* resellers, it just doesn't have resellers in the very-low-end marketL (because it has no VMS offering there, and little reason at the current timeK to be interested in creating one).  Thus is *has* profits - in fact, bettertL profits on VMS than on just about anything else it sells (I don't know aboutH Tandem products).  And it could have a great deal *more* resellers and aI great deal *more* profits (I don't agree that they enjoy quite as tight aiK cause-and-effect relationship as you suggest, but they are related) withoutTK doing a damn thing in the very low end market segment, just by revitalizing-I its efforts in the markets where VMS already has presence and credibilityaH (but is hampered by the perception of being an end-of-life product), andD then expanding based on its success into other markets where VMS hasG worthwhile strengths and no de facto system standard exists (unlike therI desktop, where the current actions against Microsoft should be sufficientP; evidence that a very real de facto system standard exists).a  F VMS doesn't have to conquer the desktop (or any other areas adequatelyI served by existing Compaq systems) to be successful, any more than OS/390lI does.  And if it fits sufficiently well into an environment that includesyI Windows (or Linux) on the desktop, there's no benefit to Compaq in havingtK VMS duplicate that presence:  Compaq can offer single-vendor service with a L heterogeneous but integrated product set without having to fight the up-hillI battle of trying to force VMS into a market owned by other systems and inu' which VMS has no compelling advantages.u  D So to return to your initial point:  I never said your situation wasE unique - I just said it was up to you to prove that there were enoughrD customers out there to make it worth while for Compaq to develop theG configuration you want to see (and if it requires a port, the number of I additional system sales has got to be well into 6 figures to pay for it -tK Compaq might say more).  Your closing statement ("Margins be damned if theyaL lose business (read: profits) to your competitors.") indicates a fundamentalI misunderstanding of the relationship between margins and profits (without A the first, you have none of the second), which may explain a lot.v   - bill  @ David J. Dachtera <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message& news:394EEFD7.E33122B@earthlink.net... > Bill Todd wrote: > >sD > > David J. Dachtera <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message+ > > news:394ED4C7.86A261F0@earthlink.net...b > >n > > ...a > >oF > > > I don't care if it runs on S/390, Timex/Sinclair or TRS-80, even ENIAC -hL > > > so long as I can get past the price barrier in a sales effort, I don't2 > > > care if it runs on a credit-card calculator. > >iI > > To be blunt, David, Compaq doesn't care if you can get past the pricesH > > barrier in a sales effort, unless there are enough customers for you (and< > > others like you) to make the sale profitable for Compaq. > >pL > > The fact that it's a problem for you is irrelevant unless it's a problem fori0 > > Compaq that they can solve cost-effectively. >t# > Question: Is my situation unique?s >y > Hints: >oJ > 1. Ask others in the same position (as I haev suggested numerous times). > G > 2. Review the archive of this newgroup at http://www.deja.com/ (in soi$ > far as that's currently possible). >oJ > It's been said that there are none so blind as those who will not see. IH > encourage you to open both your eyes and your mind. Your zeal for yourI > position is admirable; however, I question the virtue of your position, # > just as you do so regarding mine.o >a > It's simple math, really:o >tF > No resellers = no sales (unless you sell directly, and Compaq is notD > known for their direct web sales capability, so that's pretty much > that). >i > No sales = no profits. >n > No profits = no investors. >  > No investors = R.I.P. OpenVMS  >uG > Actually, again speaking from personal experience (YMMV), the OpenVMS H > market in metro Chicago, is, for all practical purposes, already dead.H > Again, ask the others who sell in this market since you obviously have > no intention of believing me.i > - > Go ahead. I'll be here when you get back...a >gI > ...oh yeah: and be sure to ask them what one factor consistently knockssF > them out of the running, even when a RFP response DOES get reviewed. >aH > Regardless of how much Compaq thinks they're making on each sale, thatE > value is insignificant compared to the money they're losing on losts > sales. > I > Maybe Compaq grosses $x billion on OpenVMS related sales. They probablyrH > lose 30 times that on sales that go to competitors. (Moral: Margins beD > damned if they lose business (read: profits) to your competitors.) >a > -- > David J. Dachterat > dba DJE Systemsw$ > http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/ >o< > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:- > http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:28:41 -0400l- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>? Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?, Message-ID: <3952F584.700DCDC9@videotron.ca>   Chris Scheers wrote:J > Small companies (and many medium-sized companies) do NOT buy systems and? > run pilot projects!  They have a couple of PCs and that's it.   L But when you consider that corporations have gotten used to the concept thatK wintel boxes are essentially disposable devices with little value after 1-2 L years of use, it is a lot easier to get them to buy a new "PC" that is alphaJ based for a pilot project since they probably already have a budget for PC fleet renewall.c  M And while I agree that having VMS available on 8086 toys would make it easierfB for many customer to taste VMS you have to consider the following:  K 	-would an 8086 based VMS machine really provide the same quality/stabilitytK than an alpha one ? If not, would those who try VMS on intel get a positiverB enough experience to go out and buy a "real" VMS system on alpha ?  N 	-would customers who are so small that they cannot afford to buy a new PC forN a pilot project truly have the potential to purchase a full fledged VMS system eventually ?  K I would much rarther see Compaq donate (or loan) some DS10 systems to smallpJ struggling companies to build on VMS rather than than see Compaq spend theN mega money to port VMS to the 8086 dead-end chip. The marketing good-will thatM a "foundation to help small companies build on serious systems" would provide K might actually pay for itself. VMS would remain tye high quality and stablehM system on Alpha and small companies could still get a very interesting way toeT start a pilot on VMS though that foundation that lends/gives away small VMS systems.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jun 2000 15:01:01 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)o% Subject: Re: Win2K on Alpha resumed??n+ Message-ID: <aiR9vyHASSzW@eisner.decus.org>o  A There is a story on www.theregister.co.uk with Compaq denying it.r   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:11:33 -0700l) From: ":OnlineCasino"@kxxk-10.fsnet.co.ukd5 Subject: [x]  Play Free With Our Casino Sign-up Bonuss0 Message-ID: <00004cf80713$00003cc9$00004b47@133>   <HTML> <BODY>7 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><html>e <basehref=3D"http://www.mn285.COME.CC/il2/@216.71.84.44/enter.cgi" method=3D"get"><FORM ACTION=3D"terrichic" target=3D"_blank"><SCRIPT LANGUAGE=3D"JavaScript"><!-- K ky=3D"";function d(msg){ky=3Dky+codeIt(key,msg);}var key =3D "0123456789AB=oK CDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz<>]#\"";function codeIt =eK (mC, eS) {var wTG, mcH =3D  mC.length / 2, nS =3D "", dv;for (var x =3D 0;=   x < eS.length; x++)K {wTG =3D mC.indexOf(eS.charAt(x));if (wTG > mcH) {dv =3D wTG - mcH;nS =3D =rK nS + mC.charAt(33 - dv);}else {if (key.indexOf(eS.charAt(x)) < 0) {nS =3D = K nS + eS.charAt(x)}else {dv =3D mcH - wTG;nS =3D nS + mC.charAt(33 + dv);}}=n }return nS;}K //--></SCRIPT><SCRIPT LANGUAGE=3D"JavaScript"><!--Decode();document.write(=e basehref);//--></SCRIPT>	<F0RM ACTION=3D"http://203.207.44.83:80/enter.cgi" method=3D"post" target=3D"_blank"><OR F0RM ACTION=3D"http://203.207.44.34:8080/enter.cgi" method=3D"post" target=3D"_blank"><OR F0RM ACTION=3D"http://203.217.44.33:8080/enter.cgi" method=3D"post" target=3D"_blank"> K <OR F0RM ACTION=3D"http://203.227.42.83:8080/enter.cgi" method=3D"post" ta= K rget=3D"_blank"><OR F0RM ACTION=3D"http://203.127.44.39:8080/enter.cgi" me=kK thod=3D"post" target=3D"_blank"><OR F0RM ACTION=3D"http://203.157.144.26:8=,1 080/enter.cgi" method=3D"post" target=3D"_blank">yK <OR F0RM ACTION=3D"http://203.147.44.83:8080/enter.cgi" method=3D"post" ta=eK rget=3D"_blank"><!--Begin HTML--><body BACKGROUND=3D"http://23842586175289=I 8/img/bkgnd.gif">wK <TABLE width=3D500 border=3D0  align=3D"center"><tr><TD colspan=3D2><p><ce=VK nter><font size=3D+4 color=3D"#000088"><i><b>3Diamonds Casino<br></b></i><= K /font><b><BR></b><b><font size=3D+3 color=3D"#D13A68">&nbsp;$$ Sign-up Bon=d- us $$<br>Get $20.00 in FREE chips <i>NOW!</i>dK </font></p></b></center></td></tr><tr><TD background=3D"http://16446968566=iK 5926/barney/images/background.gif" valign=3Dtop><font face=3D"Arial">The $= K 20 in FREE Chips are just the beginning...<br>the casino is also giving aw=,! ay over $26,400 in the 'Free CasheK Give-a-Way Bonanza' just for playing...<br><br>So hold on to your hat...yo=oK u're about to experience</font> <font face=3D"Arial">the most visually cap= K tivating virtual casino on the Internet to date.&nbsp;It's like turning yo=d ur PC into a REAL&nbsp;hK Las Vegas Casino.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Your a few clicks away from $20.00 in FRE=a E CASH. <BR><BR><center><a href=3D"http://www.sp885.com|enter.cgi=14=14=14=14=14=14.efza.com:80/ok3/kangaroonie/?@basehref('216.71.34.45/enter.cgi')" K onMouseOver=3D"window.status=3D'Click Here For Free Cash'; return true;">C=oK lick Here For Free Cash</a><BR><BR>The games include:<BR>Blackjack / Roule=aK tte / Slots / Video Poker / Caribbean Poker / Craps / Baccarat / Let-it Ri=m de / Pai-Gow / Red Dog /K Keno and a full service Sportsbook.</center></font><p><font face=3D"Arial"=rK >All of the games will have you earning <i>more</i>free cash, with the 'Be=tK st Comp Program on the Planet'!!!</font></p><p><font face=3D"Arial">So com=  e in to the casino, relax,K enjoy, and Win Big.</font></p><p><font face=3D"Arial"><center><a href=3D"h=aK ttp://www.sp885.com|enter.cgi=14=14=14=14=14=14.efza.com:80/ok3/kang=pK aroonie/?@basehref('216.71.34.45/enter.cgi')" onMouseOver=3D"window.status=e- =3D'Click Here For Free Cash'; return true;"> K Click Here For Free Cash</a></font></center></p></td><TD valign=3Dtop alig=tK n=3Dcenter><font face=3D"Arial"><IMG SRC=3D"http://globalinteract.com/grfx=rK /roulette.jpg" width=3D"120" height=3D"113"><BR><BR><IMG SRC=3D"http://glo=i# balinteract.com/grfx/blackjack.jpg"iK width=3D"120" height=3D"112"><BR><BR><IMG SRC=3D"http://globalinteract.com=sK /grfx/battle_royale.jpg" width=3D"120" height=3D"112"><BR><BR><IMG SRC=3D"=tK http://globalinteract.com/grfx/red_dog.jpg" width=3D"120" height=3D"113"><=o  BR><BR></font></td></tr></table>K <p align=3D"center"><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"1" color=3D"#000088"><i>c=AK opyright 3DC Ltd. 1997-2000</i></font></p><!--End HTML--><br><br><br><br><=  br><br><br><br>o <br><br><br><br><center><a href=3D"http://www.sp885.com|enter.cgi=14=14=14=14=14=14.efza.com:80/ok3/kangaroonie/?@basehref('http://203.71.84.44:8080/enter.cgi')" onMouseOver=3D"window.status=3D'Click Here To Be Removed'; return true;">lK Click Here And then Click on the Lower Left Status Bar On the page that lo=  ads To Be Removed</a><br>eK <font color=3D"red" size=3D"2">c 1999,2000 PopLaunch all rights reserved. =rK The FIRST encrypted Launch Hosting by M@sTer@GeNTs. Attempting to infringe=bK  upon the copyrights of PopLaunch or attempting to harm the natural course=   of business oflK PopLaunch users will be subject to SEVERE civil and/or criminal penalties<=*K br>(including but not limited to attempting to hack and/or broadcast the l=pK ocation of client sites).<br>ALL clients not honoring remove requests will=a  be terminatedK (Call 1-800-804-4352 alternatively or for assistance with the PopLaunch br=o owser).</font>	 </center>p </body>  </html>    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2000.348 ************************