1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 12 Aug 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 445       Contents:  AMD and Samsung could save Alpha Att: Steve Reece (again) Re: FYI 	 Re: HSD10 	 Re: HSD10 = Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/Intel = Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/Intel = Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/Intel = Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/Intel = Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/Intel & Re: open vms hobbist tcpip license???? Re: Press Release  Re: Press Release ! Re: Red Code: where are we going? ! Re: Red Code: where are we going? A Re: The Alpha Systems Customer Update will no longer be published  VAX/ALPHA FORTRAN and me! :-)   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 04:24:45 GMT " From: unixguys <unixguys@home.com>) Subject: AMD and Samsung could save Alpha ( Message-ID: <3B7603DD.1D4B960C@home.com>  $     AMD and Samsung could save Alpha     day         Root and branch speculation   (     By Mike Magee, 01/07/01 12:05:03 BST  ;     SO WE NOW KNOW that Samsung and API Networks are in the 7     clear on being able to produce Alphas for whenever.   >     But what if AMD and Samsung - and the API Networks bunch -=     were to get together and make a go of the "non-exclusive" ?     technology that, according to Compaq's Capellas and Intel's 	 Otellini, <     means that the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will be     disinterested in the deal?  B     We know some facts. First, the old DEC and Compaq engineers onB     the Alpha project are very very unhappy with the odd move that9     came out of the blue for them a week ago last Friday.   E     Secondly, we know that Samsung, despite retaining a lofty silence 0     throughout, is also unhappy about the moves.  B     Samsung has an Alpha architectural licence that covers EV8 andC     beyond and also has cross licensing deals with La Intella which #     also, we suspect, last forever.   C     Thirdly, we know that AMD is not going to just sit around while  Intel B     sews up the 64-bit world, seeing as Sun is looking a tad shakyH     without an Itanic offering, HP has more or less given up the PA RISC;     project and the Alpha is... well... almost an ex-Alpha.   F     Wouldn't it be possible for AMD, Samsung and said engineers all toE     cabal together to work on an EV8 with backward X86 compatibility?   F     Just think - four way motherboards, a fast bus, and all that Alpha
     whoosh...   A     It's just a what if and sheer speculation, but should such an 
 initiativeF     form, we believe it would be in the best interests of the industry and      of consumers.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 01:05:26 GMT ! From: no.spam@spam.spam.eggs.spam ! Subject: Att: Steve Reece (again) A Message-ID: <997578326.20329.0.nnrp-07.9e982739@news.demon.co.uk>    Steve,: your mail config is up the spout again, it's bouncing mail4 back to the demon servers with a 'relayeyed' status.  ? you been switching on the relay prevention? forgot to define an  inside address?   - i'll keep trying to email, cheers nic  @ home    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 20:47:39 +0200 , From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch> Subject: Re: FYI& Message-ID: <3B757DCB.17263276@gmx.ch>   Sue Skonetski wrote: >  > Dear Newsgroup,  > H > I just wanted to let you know, that I am unable to respond to all yourN > email.  I have damaged my hand, and one handed typing is way to slow and theA > cast hits wrong keys, so please do not think I am ignoring you.  >  > sue   D best wishes Sue, and thanks for your courage (how many eMail a day?)   D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:30:14 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>  Subject: Re: HSD10' Message-ID: <3B74A6C6.4AB9EE1C@fsi.net>   
 MikeWJ wrote:  > - > I know that the HSD10 has a DSSI connector.  > L > BUT...is there an HSD10 model that has a SCSI connector, so that it may be/ > attached to a MicroVAX 3100 as a SCSI device?    SCSI would be HSZsomething...    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:06:22 GMT . From: Burnie M <burniem.NOSPAM@ozemail.com.au> Subject: Re: HSD108 Message-ID: <nsp9ntk9bsbnm8oupi0mark8lvrdrco1k6@4ax.com>  D On Fri, 10 Aug 2001 19:10:27 -0500, MikeWJ <mjenkins@jcn.net> wrote:  , >I know that the HSD10 has a DSSI connector. > K >BUT...is there an HSD10 model that has a SCSI connector, so that it may be . >attached to a MicroVAX 3100 as a SCSI device? >  >MikeWJ      I'm a bit confused here.+ Why not just attach a wide (or narrow) BA ?    Burnie M   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:55:19 +0200 & From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>F Subject: Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/Intel* Message-ID: <3B74D6D7.997060E4@dplanet.ch>   Sue Skonetski wrote: >  > Dear Newsgroup,  > M > Ok folks here goes.  For all the people that have sent me mail (flame mail) N > and posted responses about the death of Alpha  I am going to give a personalH > opinion and ask a few questions and if you want to blast me go for it.    F * Sorry that I'm late replying but its been a busy week.  I'll try not, to repeat too much of what others have said.    F > In all reasonableness did you think that the Alpha Chip was going to > continue forever?   G * On its 1989 release and at that time, and on many occasions since, it H was said to have an estimated 25 year lifespan.  With less than 12 yearsF past, Compaq is now announcing the demise of Alpha.  Twenty-five yearsG may not be forever but it is 66% more than the 15 years that Alpha will 
 now live for.   : >  We upgraded from PDP's to VAXes to Alpha and now we are > upgrading again.  D * But are you actually upgrading ?  As others have said, there is noE current evidence to support this assertion because performance of anf F future IPF processor is an unknown.  At best Compaq can only hope thatG it is an "upgrade".  That is, unless you are already very well-informed A about how much of the Alpha characteristics will be in future IPF  processors..  = >  Not only are we upgrading but we gave several years notice  > for your planning purposes.   B * Yes, something like a road-sign which says "Danger Ahead".  WhatC exactly lies ahead is the big question.  Compaq are quite obviously ; still trying to decide how they will handle the changeover.   D * Vax to Alpha upgrades were clearly defined and there was a 10-yearE period of parallelism.  Can you make a similar promise with regard to  Alpha to IPF ?    1 > VMS is committed to continue development on the N > GS and the next Alpha system and to move onto the Intel platform.  We have aJ > number of engineers in VMS (around 400) and are hiring some more for the > porting project. > L > We still have customers that are being supported using PDP's and VAXes whoF > will continue to have their systems supported. Alpha systems will beL > supported into the next decade and longer under support contracts.  Please9 > tell me where else you can get this kind of commitment.  >  > So from my opinion >  >     We are porting VMS  E * It is understood that Compaq are still in the process of research.  C Compaq may have stated a commitment to port VMS but most of us have H become so cynical about CPQ's statements that we will believe it when we see it.   Z >     And in case you did not know majority of the worlds major chip manufacturers use VMS  C * And what percentage of the much-quoted 450,000 systems is this ?  H Something way less than 0.1% I would guess, so the obvious reaction is -	 So What ?   4 >     Alpha Systems will be supported for many years  G * Is this your opinion or a Compaq commitment (a term which is starting  to sound like an oxymoron) ?  : >     Compaq gave plenty of lead time vs. a 9 month window  F * Lead time ? Yes.  Information on which to make rational judgements ?H No.  As we have seen this week, there are already questions of processorE compatibility in GS series machines but this is something that Compaq  should already have answered.   E I make no bones about it. Compaq is treating the VMS community like a G bunch of PC buyers who will replace their systems within the next three A years and really don't care what processor is in the new machine.   M >     This was not a Compaq (Houston) directive but a technical decision made # > by Alpha engineers that you know.   D * IIRC, it was stated that the decision was based on the comparativeG estimated performance of Alpha and IPF processors in about 3 years time F but many here have questioned that the validity of that estimation andD suspect that the true reason was the somewhat more prosiac - We want
 Money Now.  E * At this time it must surely be impossible to accurately predict the G performance of an IPF chip which might or might not contain some degree E of Alpha concepts.  The degree to which Alpha features are in any new D chip must surely depend on the requests being placed on Intel by theE various users of this proposed chip (ie. your AND your competitors).  E They may have requests which oppose those from Compaq or on the other G hand they may be happy to take advantage of Alpha ideas.  Either way is  to the detriment of Compaq.   C * Why is Alpha performance a major issue at this time ?  Compaq has H never prominently featured the level of performance in their advertisingF and slower processors from your competitors appear to sell better than Alpha.  F * If it was purely a financial decisions then why wasn't Compaq honest@ and state this.  A short paragraph could have said all this in aD reassuring manner, one that did not only reassure customers but alsoH reassured everyone that Compaq knew what they were doing.  It would have@ created far more credibility than the piffle that was presented.    ? >     Engineering is more excited than they have been in years.   C * Of course they are but this is not an endorsement for the change; G moving to IPF is best described as a "professional challenge". In their B position I would be equally enthusiastic an opportunity to do thisD work.  It is a break from the maintenance and tinkering at the edgesF that they have done for years (because that is all they have needed toA do).  Now they can restructure and tidy the code, and improve the D efficiency of the processing.  In their position I would be enthusedG too.  Mind you, having the opportunity to do this same work and stay on 9 Alpha processors would also have been pretty interesting.   L >     I think that this will give VMS exposure in markets where we could not" > go and a good business decision.  G * This idea about increased exposure is about as unsubstantiated as the F idea that ISV's will suddenly find VMS an attractive platform.  VMS isH VMS; VMS is not unix.  The IT market, in its foolishness or its wisdom, G has become unix dominated and has naturally taken the ISV's with them.  A My understanding is that  ISV's create applications for operating A systems and only very, very rarely do these applications directly F interface with the underlying processor.  As things stand, there is noA obvious reason why interest in VMS from ISV's or customers should  suddenly increase.  E Now I admit that the ISV interest and market might really grow if VMS H could run unix executables.  Somehow I doubt this will happen but if you! want to correct me, please do so.     , >     There is plenty of work for all of us.  F * By "us" do you mean Compaq's VMS  marketing department ???  Now that would really be some good news.      > $ > Folks what is the real issue here?  = * Simple - the credibility, honesty and commitment of Compaq.   C As a brief example, let's look at the business decisions.  Compaq's G emphasis continues to be on PCs regardless of the fact that income from H PCs has usually been less than one-tenth of the income from the high-endD products (that is, when PCs have made any profit at all).  Compaq isB stubbornly refusing to admit that PC really means "Profit Cancer".  H Compaq has a stated aim to be more like IBM.  The service arm is a majorH component of IBM but they got there by selling high-end systems and thenG providing the consulting to run them.  As for product, IBM concentrates G on selling its mid and high-end offerings;  PC's have been relegated to H a very minor role. I can also add that IBM have stepped into Linux areasH only when they have a very strong footing in their other business areas.  H Now compare that to Compaq and we see a company that is fixated on PC's,E neglects to market the high-end, hands VMS features to Tru64 Unix who C then hands them to Linux, and now belated has decided to try to buy , service companies in order to play catch up.  ? Which company appears to be smarter and have more credibility ?   F Sorry, but to paraphrase the titles of many children's stories, Compaq- is looking like the PC Company That Couldn't.     E I am honestly surprised that you have asked us what is wrong.  I only H hope that this is to gather information that you can pass up through the company.     John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 21:59:31 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)F Subject: Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/IntelL Message-ID: <rdeininger-1008012159310001@user-2ivech6.dialup.mindspring.com>  5 In article <3B748AF0.AB30ABD5@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei % <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:    > Carl Perkins wrote: H > > They are. As far as I can tell, they still plan to do another shrinkG > > (which would be the EV69). Of course, that assumes that their newly % > > revised "roadmaps" are correct...  >  > * > But isn't EV7 sort of a waste of money ? > I > The effort put in for lockstep is wasted since Tandem won't run on EV7. O > And the current customers of wildfires won't really be investing in EV7 since , > it isn't compatible with their mainframes. > O > So who is left to buy EV7s at a time when competing companies will already be @ > on what, according to Compaq, will be the chip of the future ?  H The wildfire replacement systems will work with EV7, and will be able toI accept IPF replacement CPUs, from what I've read.  EV7 really means EV7x, ; since there will be several generations if there is demand.   F So I assume the customers will be anyone who needs more performance orF higher CPU count than they can obtain with the current systems and the later EV6x chips.   E By the time Compaq's IPF servers are shipping for mainstream use, the H current GS series will be 4 or 5 years old, with design roots going backJ another year or two.  That's pretty old by today's standards.  I'd be moreI upset if Compaq's system designers DIDN'T render a big system obsolete in  that length of time.  I I can still buy a modern PowerPC implant for my 1995 NuBus PowerMac.  But I the resulting system would be very unbalanced.  Big servers are similar.  H After 1 or maybe 2 CPU upgrades, it's usually time for a new box, taking9 advantage of all the new non-CPU technology improvements.   G The current generation of servers will doubtless find homes in the used E market, with owners who need previous-generation performance at cheap  prices.   E The lockstep investment may not be useful in EV7, but the engineering J experience will be transfered to IPF at some point.  And I understand that1 lockstep wasn't a particularly big effort anyway.    --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 02:47:34 GMT . From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>F Subject: Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/IntelD Message-ID: <a7md7.3290$Kl2.336848@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  : Well, if we're going to use The Inquirer as a news source,  we might as well consider these:  % Intel accused of failure to pay bills ' http://www.theinquirer.net/10080120.htm  Intel to face cash meltdown?' http://www.theinquirer.net/26060106.htm   3 "Rob Young" <robyoung@my-deja.com> wrote in messageV7 news:9c40b5bf.0108092108.2635caf2@posting.google.com...t > What is happening is:  >eD > 1)  Major skeptics have flipped just recently.  Mike Magee writes: > ) > http://www.theinquirer.net/06080116.htm  >hF > After having seen these latest Alpha roadmaps, we have to say at the
 > INQUIRERG > that we now believe this strategy actually is a goer, and we're readyp > to > bury our initial scepticism. >  >eD >      With many in the past to quote Mike in "supporting evidence." > "Your Honor, I wish to$ >      introduce a hostile witness!"   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 04:14:17 GMTi. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>F Subject: Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/IntelD Message-ID: <tond7.3405$Kl2.351161@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  G Cynically, Industry Standard means that the chip vendor (AMD or Intel),AH Microsoft, and Dell make profits while Compaq, HP, Gateway, Micron, IBM,I SGI, NEC, lose money on products built with Industry Standard parts.  IBMpH and Sun are making money selling systems built with something other than Industry Standard chips.  < If it weren't for AMD, Intel would be making far more money.  H The words and actions from Intel are that they are going to attack AMD -G clearly AMD gaining market share and forcing Intel to cut prices is noteG acceptable to Intel.  Its unclear how Intel will manage to compete with J itself. With AMD keeping Intel honest, Intel will need to price IA32 chipsI at a much lower price than the cost of producing an IA64 chip and it willi< need to keep developing new IA32 chips at a fast cycle time.  H If IA64 is sold in percentages of the overall chip market similar to theG PowerPC and Sparc, I'm not sure that you can call it Industry Standard. L Unless IA64 penetrates the Industry Standard market in a significant way, it; will be the new chip in a mature market, much as Alpha was.   L Ah, yes, someone asked about an IA64 notebook.  Intel has made it clear thatL it doesn't see a IA64 1U server design any time soon - the current chip runs at 130W.  3 "Rob Young" <robyoung@my-deja.com> wrote in messagea7 news:9c40b5bf.0108100651.60a9a808@posting.google.com...r: > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message( news:<3B737540.824AECAC@videotron.ca>... > > Rob Young wrote:I > > > 4)  Best for last.  Industry Standard.  The loss of an advantage in8 > > > Alpha is more than3 > > >     made up for with going Industry Standard.  > >bJ > > IA64 isn't an industry standard. Alpha is actually more of an industryL > > standard than IA64 because Alpha has more market share than IA64 at this point : > > in time, even without any marketing by Digital/Compaq. > >- >-7 >  No.  You are wrong.  It is an industry standard, as:M >  >  HPo >  SGI	 >  Compaqs >  IBM >  DellA >  etc. etc. >aG >   Will be manufacturing and selling IA64 hardware.  The only one that J >   isn't committed to selling IA64 hardware is Sun Microsystems.  I can't seehD >   how you can even remotely suggest it isn't an industry standard. >e > Robv >i   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 04:16:34 GMTc. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>F Subject: Re: I just have to post this - and apoligse later Alpha/IntelD Message-ID: <Cqnd7.3411$Kl2.337679@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  ? "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messageuF news:rdeininger-1008011054100001@user-2ivec3b.dialup.mindspring.com...J > These have been answered also.  The current servers will not support EV7L > via board swap; a system swap will be required. (This was known before theH > big announcement.)  Compaq does plan a generation of EV7-based systemsJ > that will allow in-cabinet upgrades to IPF.  The server design groups atG > Compaq are merging together, and will work together on these systems.D  , Where is the statement supporting the above?   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Aug 2001 21:22:20 -0700- From: merritt.robert@spsd.sk.ca (rob merritt)S/ Subject: Re: open vms hobbist tcpip license????i= Message-ID: <b6bf97d5.0108112022.36caa4f2@posting.google.com>   C hmm its was the montagar cd i got not dcl licensing scripts (like a D cslg pak any way) so i will poke arounfd at the site under licensing and see what turns up-        k sy18889@COYOTE.FMR.COM (Bradford J. Hamilton) wrote in message news:<MsQc7.54$4W2.160@news-srv1.fmr.com>...: > Hi,  > J > I'm going to assume you received the VMS Hobbyist CD from the kind folks > at DFWCUG and Montagar.n > S > You should have received e-mails containing licenses.  The UCX license is the one W > you need.  BTW, if you can extract the e-mails on to your system, and strip away the 0L > non-DCL "stuff", you are left with a DCL file that you can simply execute,# > to load all the licenses at once.n > 	 > Thanks,- > Brad > p > >In article <b6bf97d5.0108092107.2ffc5680@posting.google.com>, merritt.robert@spsd.sk.ca (rob merritt) writes:D > >OK i asked this once before here and waas flamed buy someone "for- > >cluttering up the NG with vague questions.:) > >so i will make this short and specificr > >sH > >I loaded up vms 7.2 on my vax 4000/50 loaded UCX went in to configure3 > >it as Ive done a million times at work and I see G > >                 1  -  BIND Resolver        Requires TCPIP-IP-CLIENT  > >PAKG > >                 2  -  Domain               Requires TCPIP-IP-CLIENTy > >PAKG > >                 3  -  Routing              Requires TCPIP-IP-CLIENTi > >PAK > >hE > >I realize I need paks but I recieved no paper, and can find no DCLeA > >scripts on the Montgar cd ??? do you have to purchase licensest   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Aug 2001 14:17:50 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)y Subject: Re: Press Release3 Message-ID: <s2aVwnGlFItw@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  V In article <3B752CF6.513FD7CD@bigfoot.com>, Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com> writes: >  >  > Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> gY >> In article <3B74B906.93C74B5E@bigfoot.com>, Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com> writes:rL >> > Sound like extortion of the government to me: You give us a lot of yourL >> > contracts, and we won't kill support on your critical military systems. >>  L >> Any sufficiently large "voting block" of customers can do the same thing. > I > Last time I checked Lech Walesa is not rallying Compaq customers into aoG > "voting block" as you put it, yelling "solidarity" as they march downaA > spit brook road.  When was the last time you knew businesses to  > unionize?i  @ Several people posting in this newsgroup seem to feel a majority> of customers prefer an all-Alpha future to IA64.  If that were@ truly the case, Compaq could be made to feel the impact.  I have doubts that it is true.I   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Aug 2001 17:57:40 -0700& From: robyoung@my-deja.com (Rob Young) Subject: Re: Press Release= Message-ID: <9c40b5bf.0108111657.5abbc6a7@posting.google.com>m  X John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> wrote in message news:<3B759575.7CCEDDD3@dplanet.ch>...  
 > Compaq haveXG > also said that customers want an industry-standard but have curiouslyl9 > failed to state what advantage this will bring anyone. p > G     Some of them are obvious, maybe they don't want to bore us with theeK     obvious (but they will when marketing mavens get cranking). They shoulds     include:  8         1)  Value.  Cheaper than high-end servers today.=         2)  Shared components.   Racks.  Power Supplies, etc. @         3)  Purchasing decisions.  Simple across the board here.2         4)  Support.  No specializations required.  I > With that amount of uncertainty about the Intel-based future I can tellt> > you that if I had a choice, I know what processor I would be > preferring.  g >   D      Me too.  But last I checked VMS doesn't love VAX processors anyK      more than it loves Alpha processors , can't see things being differenta      with other processors.s  '                                     Robv   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:40:30 +0200o  From: Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch>* Subject: Re: Red Code: where are we going?+ Message-ID: <VA.00000419.004f04c6@sture.ch>b  M In article <y48zgsovno.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, Jan v Vorbrueggen wrote:P > I think the problem with NT backup is that you cannot restore a working systemP > from tape, i.e., there is no such thing as standalone backup (and we know thatP > in 99.99% of all cases, a backup of a live system will yield a bootable system > damn near to the original).e > P There _is_ such a thing as standalone backup/restore (sort of). All it takes is L to have another installation of NT on another disk and boot to that for the F restore. Granted, not many folks think of it, but it definitely works. ___d
 Paul Sture Switzerlandd   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:48:42 +0200e  From: Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch>* Subject: Re: Red Code: where are we going?+ Message-ID: <VA.0000041b.00c46555@sture.ch>   H In article <20010809150135.14951.qmail@nym.alias.net>, Doc.Cypher wrote:$ > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >  [snip]  L > What is most worrying is that the second version of Code Red leaves telnetL > access open to the infected computer. All machines thus infected should be7 > completely wiped and rebuilt from known safe backups.t >aS Funniest comment seen this week: "I've always wanted the ability to telnet into my s* Windows box - where can I get this virus?"  = > How many of those Windoze users will actually have backups?a > E As ever, the common advice seems to be reformat and reinstall... Doh!r   ___l
 Paul Sture Switzerland    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 20:23:46 GMT 3 From: sy18889@COYOTE.FMR.COM (Bradford J. Hamilton)iJ Subject: Re: The Alpha Systems Customer Update will no longer be published0 Message-ID: <mvgd7.58$4W2.145@news-srv1.fmr.com>   Hi Jan,I  R Ghostscript will convert PS to PDF on VMS.  I take the PDF files and serve them upP on an Alpha running CSWS (Apache).  Is there anything that prevents someone fromR sending a PDF file using VMS Mail? (I've never tried it myself; when I get to work on Monday, I can try it.)n  S If you have a need to communicate with your users via PDF, consider web-serving thekL content, and have them go to the website, rather than send e-mail, which can be (accidentally) deleted.   Thanks,t Brad  h >In article <3B758F50.75CD3221@home.com>, Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <noone@home.com> writes: >Larry Kilgallen wrote:w >> bH >> I was under the impression that the VMS enewsletter only came in PDF.5 >> There is no supported PDF reader shipped with VMS.y >t< >It would suprise me *a lot* if not the vast majority of the= >VMS managers also happens to have an PeeCee somewhare, maybe. >even right on there own desk !x >uA >What I'm missing, is some tool to convert text and PS files intol: >PDF that run on VMS, so I could mail pretty reports in anA >easy-to-use format directly from VMS to my users. Something likee5 >the "Acrobat Distiller". But that's another issue...t >. >Jan-Erik Sderholm. Bradford J. Hamilton  bradhamilton@mediaone.net	(home) brad.hamilton@fmr.com		(work)   ; "All opinions that I express are my own, not my employer's"c   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 20:50:31 -0500o% From: Paul Lentz <plentz@airmail.net>i& Subject: VAX/ALPHA FORTRAN and me! :-)O Message-ID: <8FED8E380E400818.4D7BB3F87D1267B0.6F8F7FD923C33FE3@lp.airnews.net>I   Help!!!!  C I'm trying to shut down the last of my VAXes and I'm having troublehC porting jobs from the VAX to the ALPHA. I'm having really good lucksC recompiling the C code, especially the stuff I wrote in pretty welleC standard ANSI, using the /standard=VAXC/NOMEMBER_ALIGNMENT compilerc flags. y  G The problem is I can read FORTRAN and maybe even almost write it, but IhF can't get the it to re-compile and run properly on the ALPHA. I'm alsoF brain dead on using the VMS Symbolic debugger... I've used pretty goodF ones on a PC before and just can't get the hang of it. I probably justC don't know what qualifiers to put on the compiler's command line to + compile it on a VAX... let alone an ALPHA. s  H I've tried FORTRAN/EXTEND/ALIGN and managed to get it to compile, but itE blows up when I try to run it, and even got linker errors a couple of  times. l   Can anybody help me?   Thanks!I *Paul*   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.445 ************************