1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 01 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 668       Contents:/ (not OT) anyone here have a Casio Wrist Camera? 
 Big thanks' Block sizes + VMS install  with VMS 7.3 9 Re: Compaqs VMS plans for IPF port ... any doubters left? * Re: Require info on EMC and Compaq storageE Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.org . Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues. Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues	 Re: TLZ09 E Re: Tru64 .vs. HP-UX  (was: Compaq's Secret VMS Plans (The Inquirer)) E Re: Tru64 .vs. HP-UX  (was: Compaq's Secret VMS Plans (The Inquirer)) 	 Re: xdmcp   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------   Date: 1 Dec 2001 01:13:03 -0800 ) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young) 8 Subject: (not OT) anyone here have a Casio Wrist Camera?= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0112010113.2ddc91cc@posting.google.com>   7 Any OpenVMS users here have a Casio Wrist Camera, model  WQV3 (the colour one).  5 http://www.casio.com/product/product.cfm?product=3972   9 The question is not actually off topic (I'm a little ways < into a new VMS project). Please respond by email if you have one -> P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU   Many thanks.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:42:06 -00006 From: "Paul Savage" <paul@the-savages.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: Big thanks . Message-ID: <9uaj46$25t$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>  K Thanks to everyone who took the time to read and answer my query last week.   8 Big thanks to Roy Omond who veni, vidi, vici my problem.    Thanks, thanks, and thanks again   Paul   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:28:41 -05000 From: "Island Computers" <dbturner@islandco.com>0 Subject: Block sizes + VMS install  with VMS 7.3/ Message-ID: <u0ht8ra2qbrvbf@news.supernews.com>   	 Question:  DS20! SCSI CDROM on Qlogic Ctr QLA1040B - CMD Viper II RAID Controller with 128MB Cache & 6 x DS-RZ1EF-VW as one raid set RAID 5 Write cache enabled.1    RAID set of approx 70GB   ? Installed VMS 7.2-1 on a DS20 with Viper II CMD RAID Controller   A Worked very fast and beautifully with 256 Block setting (default)   5 Then tried it with 7.3 and all kind of errors occured F Finally gave up even after changing block size to 512 and reinstalling raidset   1 Anyone got any pointers or has anyone tried this? K Or are we just going to have to state that we can't support this setup with  VMS 7.3 ???    -- David Turner   We sell Alpha systems & parts  http://www.islandco.com  sales@islandco.com Island Computers US Corp.  2700 Gregory Street  Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622  Fax: 912 201 0096    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:21:46 +0100 ( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>B Subject: Re: Compaqs VMS plans for IPF port ... any doubters left?- Message-ID: <VA.000004d2.b473ba72@bluewin.ch>   F In article <A6EEt+Se7wSp@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Bob Koehler wrote:j > In article <r9VM7.2016$RL6.62420@news.cpqcorp.net>, hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes: > > 8 > >   Various new boxes have arrived here in Engineering > I >    So did they settle on the HP boxes, or did Compaq actually find some  >    chips that work?  > , From: http://ww.theinquirer.org/27110118.htm   --start quote-- " Intel claims Itanium problem fixed   Working together as partners  & By Mike Magee, 27/11/2001 19:04:47 BST  H AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT FROM Intel said that it and Compaq have now solvedF the problem, sighting or whatever with the Itanium 64-bit processor we< reported on and Proliants using the chips will ship shortly.  D The statement said: "Compaq and Intel worked together to resolve the reported issue (sighting).    ? "Compaq expects to introduce its Itanium-based systems shortly.   G "A BIOS software configuration change was made to address the sighting.   I "The BIOS software change we recommended is Itanium processor-related and D how hardware interfaces with the operating system and data flow. TheI change we recommended has helped meet Compaq's criteria for shipments and I the company expects to begin shipping systems shortly." What implications J this may have on other Itanium systems shipped by the other 19 vendors was unclear at press time.
 --end quote--   F From the dates I'll speculate that OpenVMS Engineering was waiting for5 the problem to be resolved before accepting shipment.   I > >   We may soon have to officially close the OpenVMS Itanium bootstrap  L > >   contest submission window -- after the submission deadline, we can no L > >   longer accept your guesses for the date when OpenVMS first bootstraps  > >   on Itanium.  :-) > F >    Since I assume all the cross compilers run on Alpha I assumed theF >    first boot was 26-OCT-2001. I should have known it took more than; >    one day to read an Intel architecture reference.   8-)  >  >    I bid 18-DEC-2001.  > @ Since you're being so optimistic, I'll join you with 21-DEC-2001 ___ 
 Paul Sture Switzerland    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 09:59:37 +0100  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>3 Subject: Re: Require info on EMC and Compaq storage ' Message-ID: <3C089BF9.BCCF8099@home.nl>   J Yes, I have something like the second option running, but we use 15000 rpm! 18.2GB disks for max performance. ) Works like a dream, fast and no problems. I I refused to use EMC on VMS, because at the time I was not convinced that L 100% compatibility was ensured. That proved to be a wise decision, our Tru64L colleagues used EMC and had looooots of trouble. They tried to hook up 'our'7 HSG80's, and got the whole thing running in 30 minutes. L You could also check out the HSV110, not the successor of the HSG80, but its 'bigger brother'. K By the way: you can use VMS and WinNT on the same HSG80, but not HP UX. The  SCSI versions don't match.   Lee Y T Mah wrote:  H > I would appreciate input comparing two storage configurations.  One ofC > them will be implemented in setting up of a disaster-tolerant VMS 1 > cluster.  The cluster will have these features:  >  >     Two data centers! >     SAN FC as primary HBVS path B >     Gigabit Ethernet for cluster traffic and alternate HBVS pathH >     Two ES45 nodes in each center.  A fifth quorum node (AS1200) is to& > be located away from the two centersJ >     Production users to be load-distributed into both centers via TELNET	 > and LAT G >     If one center dies, the surviving center continues running and is 8 > available to the dropped users from the failed center. > 0 >   1.  EMC system - one set in each data center! >         Symmetrix 8530 hardware  >         SRDF and FC @ >         System to be shared among NT, HP-UX, and VMS platformsJ >         A subset of the EMC system will be connected directly to the two  > ES45's in each center for HBVS > 9 >   2.  Compaq Storageworks.  One set in each data center  >         SAN FCJ >         1 x Compaq M-Series Rack with Redundant Power Distribution Units > / >         1 x EMA12000 Enterprise Storage Array ? >         2 x HSG80 Controllers with 512MB Cache in the EMA1200 1 >         HSG80 Array Controller Software V8.6-1S D >         36 GB Hot Plug Ultra3 SCSI 1" Disk Drives in each EMA12000& >         2 x 16 Port Brocade SwitchesJ >         1 x Modular Data Router (MDR) with FC and SCSI ports for a TL891 > Tape Library system  > / > Does anyone have such configurations running? 7 > Any hints and gotcha's re implementing these systems?  >  > -- > Lee  > = > Lee Y T Mah                        Capital Health Authority A > Email: lytmah@cha.ab.ca            Information Systems, RAH CSC 6 > Phone:  (780) 477-4725, 477-4233   10240 Kingsway NWA > Fax:      (780) 491-5119, 491-5619    Edmonton, AB, CAN  T5H3V9    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 11:03:29 +0100 ( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>N Subject: Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.org- Message-ID: <VA.000004d1.b42c0ee4@bluewin.ch>   J In article <5dVM7.143$h24.23578@typhoon1.gnilink.net>, Jeff Killeen wrote:7 > "Paul Sture" <paul.sture@bluewin.ch> wrote in message ) > news:VA.000004cf.a1e5b914@bluewin.ch... M > > "it is only a recompile away" is one heck of an assumption. We've already N > > seen comments on this forum that VAX C support is unlikely, and Ada might H > > not be ported. The latter is already of direct concern to me since IG > > currently support an application written in it. If I have to switch G > > compilers, something  tells me it won't be "only a recompile away".  > I > If Compaq induces significant pain into this game over - OVMS will die.  > N And it seems they already have introduced pain in the case of Ada. From slide  20 of yesterday's webcast:   "ADA#  - We will provide an Ada compiler"   8 Doh - didn't get the case right in the title line there.  K The slides relating to other compilers contain specific details, which are  H significant by their absence here. I can only conclude that I should be K investigating a port to GNAT in the future. But given the difficulty we had N recently finding an Ada programmer, we could maybe take the opportunity to go O for a full rewrite in another language. Only a maybe at this stage, but I feel  O I have to consider it. This is a small(ish) application in the grand scheme of  M things, so could serve as a useful pilot. I dread to think what folks with a  5 heavier commitment to Ada are thinking at the moment.    See where this is leading?  0 Yet another application could get moved off VMS.  L > > But this is still before we get to _testing_. Most of the former testingG > > teams have long since moved onto other projects or pastures new. To H > > retrain a new set of folks in the applications concerned and perform' > > adequate testing is a mammoth task.  > L > Question - I will grant you this is a unwarranted cost to the customer butI > what is the alternative?  A port to another platform would be even more  > painful... > M Cynical response: With a recession now on (and that's now official in the US  M according to the paper I was reading the other day), one could simply wait a  L couple of years or so until prices and wages hit rock bottom, then go for a O full port of everything to another platform. The beancounters would love that,  N but would fail to see until too late that the quality is missing, because the % same level of motivation isn't there.   O Non-cynical response: The fact that the Alphacide announcement came out of the  O blue makes one wonder if Compaq understand the long term planning requirements  I of enterprise customers. If one comes to the conclusion that they don't,  M justifying a full scale port away from them is very, very, easy. Think about  L controlling risk - price and product superiority are important factors when L choosing a platform, but controlling risk outweighs both of those. The risk K only needs to be _perceived_ as such to become a deciding factor, which is  H where the senior management of Compaq has, IMHO, somewhere got it wrong.   ___ 
 Paul Sture Switzerland    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 01:00:20 -0500 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continues , Message-ID: <3C0871F4.4090502@tsoft-inc.com>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:     > Followups to: comp.sys.dec   >E  > In article <TYTN7.195337$dk.13414216@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, D  > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes: : :"Fred Kleinsorge"2  > <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message . :news:wHSN7.2188$RL6.63696@news.cpqcorp.net...  >  G  > :> Bill Todd wrote in message ... :> :> <lots of whining snipped for B  >  brevity> :> :> It's getting tiring just listening to you whineD  > (you want cheese with it :> now?). : :And I should care if you're?  > getting tired of what you choose to consider :whining - why?   >  >K  > What is the response expected from a killfile entry?  (Is that the sound #  >  of a Zen question flopping? :-)   >  >D  > :> For the sake of argument, lets just say that Compaq decided toE  > stop Alpha :> production completely on a complete whim.  THE WORLD E  > HAS NOT STOPPED :> TURNING.  GET OVER IT. : :I'll get over it when D  > Compaq 'fesses up to having committed one of the more :monumental'  > blunders in recent industry history.   >  >I  > You clealy have a vested (no pun intended. :-) interest in Alpha or  a K  >  definite preference for the Alpha architecture.  I, too, like the Alpha   >  architecture.   F Then you too might be more than a little sorry to see a 'good' productF discontinued?  I'm guessing that many if not all the VMS people withinG Compaq, and maybe the Tru64 people also, may be a bit discourged by the F discontinuation of the Alpha product.  I'd also guess that being vocal) about it might not be a good career move.   I  > You also apparently have dislikes for Intel and/or for Itanium.  (And  E also apparently for Compaq apologists and folks in Compaq management,   >   but I digress.)  >?  >   You state the decision by Compaq was a monumental blunder.    Yes.  L  >   I infer that you believe anyone defending the decision is an apologist.  C No, not everyone.  Let's forget the name calling and any defensive  % reaction to such, and look at issues.   K  >   Infering further, there is no response that you would support -- short B  >   of a total reversal of the EV8 decisions and a serious Alpha  microprocessorD  >   design and development push (past the current EV7-class plans) 	 and/or an H  >   admission of (guilt, culpability, complicity, stupidity, monumentalB  >   incompetence, etc) by some of the key folks in Compaq senior  management. H  >   (The likelyhood of either of these situations arising is remote at  best.)  B The situation is a bit like jumping off a ship, and then afterward? hoping someone will throw you a life preserver.  Current PUBLIC C knowledge about IA-64 sure doesn't generate much confidence in it's F being able to provide leading performance anytime soon, or even not soB soon.  Anybody that made the original decision certainly would notD reverse themselves, nor admit any mistakes.  That doesn't disqualify them for the label 'idiot'.   J  >   Assuming Itanium does not crater as a microprocessor architecture andC  >   assuming that Intel maintains a budget for new microprocessor   development,I  >   the validity or the error of the Compaq decision to embrace Itanium   willK  >   only be entirely certain as the EV8 timeframe arrives -- in hindsight, K  >   in other words.  (Based on what I know at present, the decision to use I  >   the then-current Itanium processor as the upgrade from the EV7-class G  >   platforms looks to be a solid one and a good decision.  But I have I  >   likely been established as an apologist, so my opinions carry little   >   weight in the discussion.)   H You've put it very well.  Everything will be based upon hindsight, sinceB Compaq has committed themselves to a course without any backup or I foresight.  Let's forget the 'apologist' title for a moment, and ask you  H (if you can publically) to explain why it's a 'solid and good decision'.  G There are some, possibly many, that think IA-64 will crater.  IA-64 and G Alpha are direct opposites of each other in at least one way.  Alpha is E dedicated to being efficient.  IA-64 tries to be a bit of everything. G Anything put on an IA-64 chip that is not dedicated to performance will G be wasted resources, with respect to performance.  Competitors with the E same (for sake of comparison) resources, with everything dedicated to D performance, will be ahead of IA-64, which will be carrying an extraE load, which will do nothing for 64 bit performance.  Without invoking E additional differences such as power usage, heat, EPIC, and such, all 4 else being equal, IA-64 will not be able to compete.  I  >   The work on the Alpha EV7-class microprocessors and on the platformsnK  >   based on these microprocessors continues -- this discussion is largelyiH  >   a review of what happens when applications need an upgrade from the  >   EV7-class platforms.u  F Yep!  And the concern that if it's perceived by customers that no such9 upgrade exists or is being planned, they will desert VMS.h  H  >   The alternatives I see to the currently announced plans involve theI  >   effort of continuing new Alpha microprocessor and system developmentpJ  >   after the EV7-class microprocessors and systems ship, or migrating toI  >   the Itanium platform later in its development cycle, or migrating toi9  >   another (current or future) microprocessor platform.h    I If I was in VMS engineering, and I was faced with a stupid decision made c> by management that I could do nothing about, and had the sole H consolation of funding to make VMS as hardware independant as possible, ? then I would grab this one escape route and do my best with it.q  F As for platforms, it looks like Power4 is doing well.  I have no idea H how well it would mate with VMS.  Should IA-64 crater, and Compaq or HP I or whoever not want to lose the profitable VMS business, changing course tH to another platform will be an option.  But, there will be harm done to D the public perception of VMS, losing first Alpha, then having IA-64  being inadequate.p  G I don't know why Compaq had to announce discontinuing Alpha before the cG IA-64 port was completed.  It scares off the customers.  Don't believe pH that?  Take a look at sales since June.  Can you or anyone justify this  action?-  H It wouldn't be a good idea to announce a port to Power4 coinciding with ? the IA-64 port, not with Intel's money financing the port.  :-)s  I I can suspect that something like that may be happening, with or without  G the knowledge of management.  I wouldn't expect confirmation if it was h
 happening.  H But, if you can, can you give 'good' reasons that an intellegent person A can accept, for killing Alpha before IA-64 proves itself capable?    Dave   -- r4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com6 T-Soft, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Dec 2001 04:14:42 -0600 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesr3 Message-ID: <EQjxwk2qYH$N@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  W In article <3C0871F4.4090502@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:a  H > Then you too might be more than a little sorry to see a 'good' product > discontinued?r  A The PDP-10 was a good product, but I am glad DEC switched to VAX.r   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 11:49:03 +0100m1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>o7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesa5 Message-ID: <3C08B59F.6B67A4F5@swissonline.delete.ch>    JF Mezei wrote:- >  > one more thing:  > N > Why can't Compaq simply admit that it wasn't interested in developping AlphaN > and just wanted to nurtur its relatiohsip with Intel and use Itel products ? > (eg: tell the truth).  > M > Could it be that Compaq knows that it would be very bad PR move to admit totP > the truth and therefore has to produce lots of technical meaningless documentsJ > that lack any credibility in an attempt to not reveal the real reasons ? > N > Now, if it is a very bad PR move to tell the customer the real reasons for aI > decision, once has to wonder why they took that decision to begin with.     E I was just about to post a 2-page criticism of the White Paper when IaE saw Bill's post and now I'll have to look in detail at what he's saidTF and comment where I think necessary.  A few hours work trashed .. :-((  F Just to comment on this point JF, to me the termination of Alpha seemsG only an opportunistic decision and that the opportunity in question wasaH to enhance the attraction of Compaq for HP.  There is nothing, zip, nada) in that document to justify the decision.b  F I'm not sure if this "white paper" is in virgin-white for the marriage? or whether Compaq should nail it to a stick and start waving ind surrender to their competition.n     John McLeani   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:21:46 +0100e( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesm- Message-ID: <VA.000004d3.b473ba7c@bluewin.ch>n  @ In article <3C0871F4.4090502@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble wrote: [snip]  K >  >   The work on the Alpha EV7-class microprocessors and on the platformsgM >  >   based on these microprocessors continues -- this discussion is largely J >  >   a review of what happens when applications need an upgrade from the >  >   EV7-class platforms.- > H > Yep!  And the concern that if it's perceived by customers that no such; > upgrade exists or is being planned, they will desert VMS.  >)L You have hit the nail on the head. I've seen too many comments to the effectC that Alpha is already dead, some from folks who should know better.n  : It is the _perception_ that it is dead which is important.   [snip] ___d
 Paul Sture Switzerland    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:43:57 +0100e1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> 7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesm5 Message-ID: <3C08C27D.CBF5B59E@swissonline.delete.ch>a   Jack Peacock wrote:  > B > "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message/ > news:wHSN7.2188$RL6.63696@news.cpqcorp.net...f  L > > It's getting tiring just listening to you whine (you want cheese with it
 > > now?). > >c ...a > > N > I have to agree.  It's pointless now to bemoan the demise of the Alpha.  ForM > all it's technical merit it didn't pull in enough dollars to remain viable.T/ > There's no guarantee the Itanium will either.w    H Continuing to make people aware of the duplicity of Compaq may save them& an awful lot of angst at a later date.  A Further, if these rumblings trigger events that cause a change of8> management in Compaq there is every chance that an alternativeG management team will be more positive and supportive of this platform. n= In fact it is difficult to see how a new team could be *less*t supportive.      John   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 13:27:06 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>e7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesw5 Message-ID: <3C08CC9A.E96A41F2@swissonline.delete.ch>0  - Bill Todd wrote at length on the White Paper:  > =      Bill,u  G I agree with your comments.  The justifications in the White Paper lack G irrefutable evidence and the credibility of the paper must be in doubt.i  C (Yes, by now it is long after the event but perhaps this could be atF useful lesson for people who take Compaq's comments at face value.  ItE could easily be that your company, your department, your applicationsdG and even your future career prospects that hinge on what Compaq choosesr to say.)  E Rather than take up arms to defend your comments on technical issues,.: I'd like to make some other comments about the document: =    = 1.   The date on the report (October 2001) suggests that is a E retrospective justification of the decision, long after the event and E probably in an attempt to appease the disquiet over this transfer andt the proposed merger with HP.  D 2.  Concerning the performance of Alpha and Intel:  It is clear thatA right now we can say "Alpha has it now.  Intel in time =85 maybe"   B Dimishing differentiation ?  Using current SPECfp2000 figures as aG base...  Let's say Alpha increases 100 and Intel 150 (because they mustsE be able to catch up a bit).  That puts Alpha at 900 and Intel 790 and H Alpha is still in the lead.  Alternatively, add 100 to each and you find? the Alpha's percentage advantage diminishes.  Both methods show5D diminishing differentiation but Alpha retains the lead.  At the veryE least the document could have provided some decent numbers to justify  its conclusion.1    D 3.  The document tries to say that IPF will be cheaper than Alpha at> some date several years away.   (If Compaq can indulge in suchG crystal-ball gazing them why couldn't they foresee a collapse of the PC2E market a few years ago ?)  The issue is that Compaq are assuming thatlF the cost of the processor is significant when it is just a part of theE total cost of the system.  Customers are willing to pay it now so whynH does Compaq consider that this will become an important isue in future ?    A 4.  At a number of places, before degrading into sales fluff, theeE document shows that the evaluation team wasn't entirely familiar withiH what their own company was doing.  For example, they concluded that theyE realized the effort to innovate was being put into other areas.  ThistC realization is a conclusion ?  Give us a break !  At one point theyeG state that Tru64 and VMS would be enhanced by "a broad server family" -sF the meaning of which is not explained - but on page 10 they state that Compaq is already doing this.h? (I could give you several more examples but I think you get thee	 picture.)h    @ Compaq seem to think that there is no difference between seriousF computing at the high-end, where often the software application is theG vital factor, and at the low-end where a computer is used as adjunct to G other work.  They do not understand, or have chosen to ignore, the factyC that an installation like the Pittsburg super computer does not uselD packaged software that one buys in a glossy box from the local shop.  H Compaq's attempt to justify Alpha's demise appears to be written for the> low-end of the computer market, the market where computers areG commodities, users' skills are limited to mouse-clicking and the marketlD is more gullible.  This document lacks substance, lacks evidence andE presents conclusions that can't be called conclusions, all merging toiH erode any vestige of credibility.  I read it and found that it presentedA nothing which would cause me to reconsider my opinion of Compaq'sh transfer of Alpha.  C I continue to see the demise of Alpha primarily as opportunistic in F directions other than those presented by Compaq.  My suspicion is thatD the study into alternative microprocessors was hijacked by those whoD want Compaq's financial state to look better than it is (by reducingG expenditure, which happens to be in the only part of the company making H real money) and/or as a way to smarten Compaq up before the wedding withD HP (because HP is Intel-oriented and the merged company would not beC interested in supporting Alpha only for VMS following the demise ofa Tru64).e       John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:35:37 +0000n% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>m7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesl* Message-ID: <3C08CE99.665484A9@virgin.net>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:  Y > In article <3C0871F4.4090502@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:r >tJ > > Then you too might be more than a little sorry to see a 'good' product > > discontinued?n >nC > The PDP-10 was a good product, but I am glad DEC switched to VAX.   Z The VAX and the PDP-10 line complemented each other and  many a site ran both side by sideV for years. Often the PDP-10 would handle the huge interactive workloads and scientificW programming with VAX/VMS handling admin, database, smaller departments etc. I think thei[ ending of the PDP-10 line signalled the real beginning of the downsizing of DEC in parallelo[ with its "one OS fits all" strategy. At one time VMS benefited from this approach until theo one OS became Unix then NT.d  Y Internal competition in DEC between hardware designers and OS designers was no bad thing.g   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 08:58:51 -0500.( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesw, Message-ID: <3C08E21B.5020002@tsoft-inc.com>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:  Y > In article <3C0871F4.4090502@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:r >  > H >>Then you too might be more than a little sorry to see a 'good' product >>discontinued?  >> > C > The PDP-10 was a good product, but I am glad DEC switched to VAX.  >   0 But are you happy that Compaq switched to IA-64?   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com6 T-Soft, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Dec 2001 08:45:57 -0600c- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuest3 Message-ID: <wna0pRKLvZNe@eisner.encompasserve.org>u  W In article <3C08E21B.5020002@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:e > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > Z >> In article <3C0871F4.4090502@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes: >> g >> tI >>>Then you too might be more than a little sorry to see a 'good' producta >>>discontinued? >>>d >> lD >> The PDP-10 was a good product, but I am glad DEC switched to VAX. >> b > 2 > But are you happy that Compaq switched to IA-64?  = I may be in the future.  Right now I am ambivalent because iti; means some degree of porting effort on my part but offers a 6 chance for increased market penetration in the future.  7 I have only written one subroutine in Macro64 that mustn6 certainly be rewritten for IA64.  Those who started in9 1992 to write large applications in Macro64 have a chance . to stop now, before they are halfway done :-).  < In general what I do is not particularly performance-driven,; but for those who really wanted an EV8, I say "Let them eati< EV79".  The SMT route always seemed to me a bit of a kludge,@ highly dependent on taking advantage of multithreaded processes.: That is not quite so bad an niche market as the market for; Spiralog, but certainly in the same direction.  Saying that ; the only direction in which Alpha could excel would be suchI1 a route makes me think EV8 would not have helped.h  @ By contrast, I am _very_ enthused about the capabilities of EV7,A although they are aimed at machines much larger than LJK Softwarei uses.r  ; I am confident that if IPF does not live up to expectationsT8 Compaq will consider following EV79 with straightforward8 process tricks (EV7A ?) to satisfy their customers.  IBM8 certainly could help with their FAB expertise, and for a  price would be willing to do so.  < If Power should end up superceding IA64 and Alpha, a further9 port to Power should be possible for VMS, for even bettert	 ubiquity.f  = I am _much_ less sentimental about Alpha than I am about VAX.h   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 15:20:19 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuesI< Message-ID: <Ty6O7.1230$zX1.2428665@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  5 "Paul Sture" <paul.sture@bluewin.ch> wrote in message ' news:VA.000004d3.b473ba7c@bluewin.ch... B > In article <3C0871F4.4090502@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble wrote: > [snip] >uC > >  >   The work on the Alpha EV7-class microprocessors and on thea	 platformsdG > >  >   based on these microprocessors continues -- this discussion is  largely.L > >  >   a review of what happens when applications need an upgrade from the > >  >   EV7-class platforms.a > >hJ > > Yep!  And the concern that if it's perceived by customers that no such= > > upgrade exists or is being planned, they will desert VMS.h > > G > You have hit the nail on the head. I've seen too many comments to thep effectE > that Alpha is already dead, some from folks who should know better.t >v< > It is the _perception_ that it is dead which is important. >h  D Yep. Now might be a good time for Compaq to address that perception.  H Those who have attended events including Supercomputing 2001, CETS 2001,G Dutch Innovate, the VX Company's VMS: The Facts seminar, MicroprocessortK Forum, CPQ analyst briefings, etc ought to be able to put the pieces of themI puzzle together... virtually everything Compaq will tell you under NDA isgI available in public domain forums if you know where to look. EV7 is real.t/ Marvel is real, and both are alive and kicking.o   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 09:30:01 -0700+ From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com>>7 Subject: Re: the Compaq pseudo-technical spin continuess3 Message-ID: <1007224201.254430@nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net>r  7 "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote ...sH >  The justifications in the White Paper lack irrefutable evidence [...]  / The report deals with the future, does it not ?i  < I don't know about _your_ planet, but here on Earth, there's: never any "irrefutable evidence" about what will happen in. the future, when dealing with stuff like this.  : John, I'd come to expect better-quality thinking from you. --3 Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.comd3 We don't become a rabid dog to destroy a rabid dog.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 02:17:29 -0500o' From: Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net>- Subject: Re: TLZ09< Message-ID: <howard-D64642.02172901122001@enews.newsguy.com>  , In article <9u9ish$s4c$1@odo.ecs.umass.edu>,/  Joe Heimann <heimann@nog.ecs.umass.edu> wrote:   I > It is a DDS-2 tape drive, 4 GB uncompressed and 8 GB compressed on 120mn9 > tapes.  Will also read and write 60m and 90m DDS tapes.n  C Thanks.  Do you know what the difference is between it and a TLZ07?e -- o Howard S ShubsD "Run in circles, scream and shout!"  "I hope you have good backups!"   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Dec 2001 13:57:26 GMTr& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)N Subject: Re: Tru64 .vs. HP-UX  (was: Compaq's Secret VMS Plans (The Inquirer))% Message-ID: <9uank6$brj@web.nmti.com>   ? In article <r19N7.54018$RG1.29054927@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>,r- Duane Sand <duane.sand@mindspring.com> wrote:aE > Will the merged Unix be big-endian, like PA-RISC and IPF HP-UX are,  > or little-endian, like Tru64?o  M I don't think that matters that much either, but there's arguments to be made-M for both. Let's think like an HPaq manager for a moment, and pretend that the, HPaq manager cares...i  % (concentrates, steam rises from head)    (wavy lines)  * Big-endian will make HPUX customers happy.I Little-endian will make porting to the Wintel juggernaut later on easier.L   (wavy lines)  < Pardon me, I gotta go take an Advil. What was I thinking of?   --  +  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.nE   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."cL                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Dec 2001 13:53:48 GMTV& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)N Subject: Re: Tru64 .vs. HP-UX  (was: Compaq's Secret VMS Plans (The Inquirer))% Message-ID: <9uandc$bfd@web.nmti.com>s  , In article <3C051224.4A2BB9CC@videotron.ca>,/ JF Mezei  <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:iO > HP-UX has many more customers than Tru64. So while they may embed many of thenF > "system" functiosn available in Tru64 into HP-UX, my bet is that theK > application and user interface will remain HP-UX so that HP-UX can reallyoO > simply recompile. It will be the Tru64 folks who will have to port their apps ? > to HP-UX (but in many cases, those apps already exist there).d  H You now, that wouldn't be bad. So long as it's Tru64 under the hood, andN I suspect parts of the native API exposed as a "Tru64 compatibility extension"M because system programs will need to talk to the *real* kernel, it's not thatiC important what minor variations in the common UNIX API get exposed.e   -- w+  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.lE   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything." L                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 07:18:56 GMTa2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: xdmcp- Message-ID: <Av%N7.5$BK1.41@news.cpqcorp.net>   \ In article <3C087F79.D3D7E293@peoplepc.com>, Jack Patteeuw <jjpatteeuw@peoplepc.com> writes: :Hoff Hoffman wrote: :> tM :>   If there is some way to identify an incoming XDM login (I haven't looked-M :>   at the context), a trivial workaround exists for providing the requestede2 :>   updates to the SYSUAF login dates, of course. :o :Not that I know of.  H   Please check the context from within SYLOGIN or LOGIN.  This includes +   checking the username, process name, etc.   E   And have you looked at the CREATE/TERMINAL/NOLOG stuff mentioned inh   another response.b  F   (I'm *guessing* here, not knowing details of the XDM login sequence.F   I'm *assuming* there is some way to identify this environment, sinceF   I am *assuming* this is some network-mode client process involved in0   the XDM processing and application startup...)  ? :Besides "NETWORK" logins don't check for expired passwords !!!t  C   Ayup.  (I thought I mentioned that trivia was at the core of why p@   the other remote jobs should not be rejecting the remote loginC   access attempts, but I've a half-dozen messages in various stages_B   of completion, and I've two source builds running, and I've justD   found and hopefully slain a truely ancient bug in some local code,	   and...)t    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.668 ************************