1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 15 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 696       Contents:8 Re: ALPHA strategy (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)8 Re: ALPHA strategy (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)8 RE: ALPHA strategy (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)> RE: balls and other things (was Re: Compaq without the merger)' Re: Command-line driven graphs from ECP   Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target Re: Compaq without the merger  Re: Compaq without the merger  Re: Compaq without the merger " Re: DEC Alpha 255 - 300 Mhz wanted" Re: DEC Alpha 255 - 300 Mhz wanted# Re: More about Alpha and the merger # Re: More about Alpha and the merger # Re: More about Alpha and the merger # Re: More about Alpha and the merger 2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.> OT: balls and other things (was Re: Compaq without the merger)! Problems with internet DNS lookup % Re: Reloading device drivers on Alpha % Re: Reloading device drivers on Alpha % Re: Reloading device drivers on Alpha  Re: The demise of compaq Re: The demise of compaq Re: The demise of compaq Re: The demise of compaq Re: The demise of compaq" Re: Unknown VAXstation 4000-90 ??? VS3540, Free to good home (USA)   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:51:28 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> A Subject: Re: ALPHA strategy (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) 5 Message-ID: <3C1B0100.95C40FBF@swissonline.delete.ch>    Fred Kleinsorge wrote: >  ... N > I think a better example would be where someone stopped making compact cars,E > because SUVs are what people were buying, and where the profit was.   G Bad example.  There is no sinificant relationship between a compact car G and an SUV.  An Alpha workstation running VMS has a strong relationship C to a Galaxy system.  Binary compatibility across the entire range.   Remember ??      W > An NT workstation is a much more cost-effective desktop solution.  It's the *volume*.   6 Is this from the customers' perspective or Compaq's ??  G If it's from Compaq's, ... it's not the profit.  Compaq lose money here  when others make money.       ; > Volume and profit.  We know we need a smallish system for J > workstations/development.  The hard part is building one that will stillI > make a good profit on a small volume.  When most of the world is buying 2 > pentiums for the desktop, with margins so low...  F Posters to this newsgroup discussed various options with Marcello lastE year.  I believe the conclusion was that it was quite possible.  (You @ also have to understand here that said "smallish system" was notD directly competing for the "office" and "games" applications markets" dominated by Microsoft & Intel.)     J > Let us imagine for a second that Itanium does "succeed" and Intel startsM > selling them in the million unit range, which also means that all the other C > giblets that go into it are in the millions.  The volume, and the J > competition from multiple vendors will result in prices lower than Alpha" > could get with its small volume.  E We've been on this merry-go-round before !  Your making an optimistic B assumption regards success and then translating the thousand or soC dollars saved into something highly significant in the total price.      John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:57:19 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> A Subject: Re: ALPHA strategy (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) 5 Message-ID: <3C1B025E.30C450AA@swissonline.delete.ch>    "Main, Kerry" wrote: >  > JF,  > . > re: what type of development workstations .. > G > Fwiw, the Government of Canada earlier this year had a large UNIX RFP F > (open to public) to replace a large number of Sun servers with a newF > middleware platform. The entire RFP was based on the J2EE middlewareC > architecture so that it did not matter what platform the code was B > developed on - the deployment platform can be totally different. > @ > They mandated that NT workstations were to be proposed for theF > development environment, but made it very clear (mandatory) that the+ > deployment platform was going to be UNIX.  > I > The choice of development platforms in a J2EE environment is based more I > on more on cheap $'s AND the SW development tools availability to build F > the app's. That is an entirely different decision than what platform> > they plan to use to run their important production stuff on.    $ Now that's an interesting way to go.  G We often hear that the applications are the factor which will determine B the platform but here it is one step back to the development toolsE (okay, they are aplications of a kind), and we have a customer who is 2 not afraid to develop their own user-applications.  G I must admit that I am pleasantly surprised that a government has taken E that step and not tried to take the common path and use COTS software A with a whole range of customisations...and usually end p way over  budget.      John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:42:07 -0500 + From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> A Subject: RE: ALPHA strategy (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4010D721D@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   John,   , >>> Now that's an interesting way to go. <<<  H Yep, and from my perspective, its great as many ISV's are moving towardsG the J2EE/Java environment as its future. So, as long as you have a good B J2EE environment (and VMS's has improved a huge amount in the lastE year), then getting app's on your platform is really more a matter of D certification (read testing time) as opposed to convince ISV to port code and then testing.  G [yes, in general, J2EE/Java needs improvement, does have some holes and E one does need to be concerned about scalability, but it is definately 
 improving]  D And as a bit of an interesting sidebar, check out article on SAP:=20H http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,5099254,00.h tml = "SAP said it would introduce a new version of its application F server--the underlying technology upon which software applications areG built--that will enable companies to build Web services using their own D proprietary technology or using Java. Java, the programming languageH developed by Sun Microsystems, is popular with developers because it can run on any computer system."  A http://www.sap.com/solutions/technology/news.asp?pressid=3D148=20  "SAP Fully Embraces Java"   6 http://www.oracle.com/features/onlinearticles/jdj.htmlF "... I was delighted to find the show had a high-energy crowd that was: very tuned in to Java, especially J2EE and Web services. "   :-)    Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Compaq Canada Corp.  Professional Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----8 From: John McLean [mailto:mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch] Sent: December 15, 2001 2:57 AM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com A Subject: Re: ALPHA strategy (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)          "Main, Kerry" wrote: >=20 > JF,  >=20. > re: what type of development workstations .. >=20G > Fwiw, the Government of Canada earlier this year had a large UNIX RFP F > (open to public) to replace a large number of Sun servers with a newF > middleware platform. The entire RFP was based on the J2EE middlewareC > architecture so that it did not matter what platform the code was B > developed on - the deployment platform can be totally different. >=20@ > They mandated that NT workstations were to be proposed for theF > development environment, but made it very clear (mandatory) that the+ > deployment platform was going to be UNIX.  >=20D > The choice of development platforms in a J2EE environment is based moreC > on more on cheap $'s AND the SW development tools availability to  build F > the app's. That is an entirely different decision than what platform> > they plan to use to run their important production stuff on.    $ Now that's an interesting way to go.  G We often hear that the applications are the factor which will determine B the platform but here it is one step back to the development toolsE (okay, they are aplications of a kind), and we have a customer who is 2 not afraid to develop their own user-applications.  G I must admit that I am pleasantly surprised that a government has taken E that step and not tried to take the common path and use COTS software A with a whole range of customisations...and usually end p way over  budget.      John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:21:06 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> G Subject: RE: balls and other things (was Re: Compaq without the merger) 9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEPJDLAA.tom@kednos.com>   ? Actually, I think kloten is simply a platt deutsch word meaning J spheres.  It appears in the scandinavian languages as well as swiss-german0 and dutch, all of which are low german dialects.  ; Do you mean that Swissair no longer refers to is as Kloten?    > -----Original Message-----: > From: John McLean [mailto:mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch]+ > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 8:37 AM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com I > Subject: OT: balls and other things (was Re: Compaq without the merger)  >  >  >  >  > Richard McMullen wrote:  > >  > > Jan Vorbrueggen < > <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote in > > message D > news:y4ofl2kpu1.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...= > > > "Ken and Kelley Coleman" <knkcoleman@attbi.com> writes:  > > > C > > > > I've never had the cajones to do something like that. Then   > again, being. > > > > female, I've never had cajones at all. > > > % > > > Spanish nit-pick: it's cojones.  > > >  > > A > > If I remember my high school Spanish, cajones means drawers,   > which might beA > > inferred as room for large cojones.  It is still annoying to   > see it misused.  > F > While on this OT, I live in Zurich and the local airport is Kloten. G > "Kloten" is a dutch word meaning testicles.  (Life's a ball in Kloten C > ??) The airlines used to announce it as Kloten but now as "Zurich F > airport" presumably because Dutch passengers could not contain their > mirth. > H > The temperature yesterday around here was about -10 or -12 C.  I don't> > think the residents of Kloen woud be out and about too much. >  > 
 > John McLean  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:16:21 +0100 2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender)0 Subject: Re: Command-line driven graphs from ECP; Message-ID: <3c1b3105.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>   # Ed Wilts (ewilts@ewilts.org) wrote: 7 > Has anyone written any tools to process the ECP data?   E I thought about a (perl) web interface to the data, but (lacking time G <sigh>) all I have implemented up to now is a program (or really - like A it often is in perl - a quick hack, i.e. certainly not production F quality. You have been warned!) to split the data by the category intoG Excel sheets on an NT machine using the Spreadsheet::WriteExcel module. @ If anyone wants to try it, drop me a mail to my address at work.   cu,    Martin --  B                         | Martin Vorlaender | VMS & WNT programmer1  OpenVMS: Where do you  | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de D  want to BE today?      |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/8                         | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------  + Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:48:00 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target + Message-ID: <9vfgq0$78i$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   t In article <A2AS7.12834$Sj1.7514664@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes: > 2 >"Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in message) >news:u19em742ehd1b@corp.supernews.com... L >> It is far more likely that Blackmore will take over if a senior executive >is  >> given the post. >>L >> If the merger fails Capellas walk away with a $675 million dollar partingC >> gift which will given some time to find the "better answers" and / >> "inspiration technology" to "invent" plan B.  >>K >> The most serious wreckage the Capellas will need to most recover from is  >theM >> criminal damage that has been done to Tru64's reputation at least with the # >> non-Compaq Unix ISV community...  >> > J >Yup. Merger or no merger, Tru64 as we know it is not long for this world.D >Absent the merger, Compaq most likely will OEM HP-UX, equip it withL >TruCluster bells and whistles, and end up with a lesser Unix with a greaterH >apps portfolio. Which might be OK... Sun has succeeded with Solaris notL >because of the technical excellence of the product, but because of the apps  >portfolio the OS has attracted. >   K The death of Tru64 will mean that the user base will have to do a migration L anyway. Why on earth would those customers even consider staying with Compaq and trying to port to HP-UX ? = The OS was not designed with the Trucluster etc bits in mind. N I'd think most customers would probably move to Sun since it has the Unix withO the greatest visibility/mindshare and has it's own (albeit inferior) clustering L specifically designed to work with it. HP-UX security seems about as equally bad as Suns.< Those who don't want to move to Sun will probably go to IBM.   
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:55:49 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target = Message-ID: <9oKS7.13213$Sj1.7822798@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>   + <david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in message % news:9vfgq0$78i$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk... I > In article <A2AS7.12834$Sj1.7514664@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, "Terry C. , Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:   > > L > >Yup. Merger or no merger, Tru64 as we know it is not long for this world.F > >Absent the merger, Compaq most likely will OEM HP-UX, equip it withF > >TruCluster bells and whistles, and end up with a lesser Unix with a greater J > >apps portfolio. Which might be OK... Sun has succeeded with Solaris notI > >because of the technical excellence of the product, but because of the  apps" > >portfolio the OS has attracted. > >  > C > The death of Tru64 will mean that the user base will have to do a 	 migration G > anyway. Why on earth would those customers even consider staying with  Compaq > and trying to port to HP-UX ?    Good question.  ? > The OS was not designed with the Trucluster etc bits in mind.    Absolutely.   K > I'd think most customers would probably move to Sun since it has the Unix  withF > the greatest visibility/mindshare and has it's own (albeit inferior)
 clusteringF > specifically designed to work with it. HP-UX security seems about as equally  > bad as Suns.> > Those who don't want to move to Sun will probably go to IBM.  H McDonald's has more visibility and mindshare than does a restaurant thatK serves quality food. Where would you rather eat? I dunno about you, but I'd F pick the upscale restaurant every time. And if I was a Compaq customerJ intent on leaving Compaq, the last thing I would do is condemn myself to a diet of McNealy's Happy Meals.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:56:25 -0500 # From: Paul DeMone <pdemone@igs.net> ) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target ' Message-ID: <3C1B80B9.57E46E53@igs.net>    "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:   J > McDonald's has more visibility and mindshare than does a restaurant thatM > serves quality food. Where would you rather eat? I dunno about you, but I'd H > pick the upscale restaurant every time. And if I was a Compaq customerL > intent on leaving Compaq, the last thing I would do is condemn myself to a  > diet of McNealy's Happy Meals.  ? But you get a free SunBLADE 100 with every order over $10   ;^)s   --D Paul W. DeMone       The 801 experiment SPARCed an ARMs race of EPICE Kanata, Ontario      proportions to put more PRECISION and POWER intoaG demone@mosaid.com    architectures with MIPSed results but ALPHA's well.$ pdemone@igs.net      that ends well.    > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----A http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!l> -----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Dec 2001 11:51:36 -0500# From: Chris Morgan <cm@mihalis.net>l) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targeth/ Message-ID: <87heqsfmuf.fsf@tweety.mihalis.net>   6 "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:  J > McDonald's has more visibility and mindshare than does a restaurant thatM > serves quality food. Where would you rather eat? I dunno about you, but I'd@H > pick the upscale restaurant every time. And if I was a Compaq customerL > intent on leaving Compaq, the last thing I would do is condemn myself to a  > diet of McNealy's Happy Meals.  D This is a ridiculous analogy IMO. If Sun is McDonald's, what are the wintel vendors?a  E I see it very differently, I would say it's more like Tru64 users mayuD feel they've been loyal porsche customers and now porsche is getting> out of the high-end sports car business and focussing on, say,% reselling souped-up VWs or something.r  F These porsche fans obviously don't want to lower their standards quiteB that much, but in this analogy I'd say Sun is more like BMW. MaybeE never quite the performance level of the Porsche (although this years.F BMW is better and faster than slightly older Porsches) but they have a; single-minded focus on drivers cars which a porsche fan can B appreciate, plus they're a mass manufacturer and actually get someE economies of scale. They make money, they support their products, the @ stuff holds some value second-hand etc. Not really such a dismal	 prospect.p --  H Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net>                  http://www.mihalis.net        Temp sig. - Enquire within   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:01:54 GMTn4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target 0 Message-ID: <3C1B811E.CFEA5B46@blueyonder.co.uk>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:e >   ? > K > Yup. Merger or no merger, Tru64 as we know it is not long for this world.uE > Absent the merger, Compaq most likely will OEM HP-UX, equip it with M > TruCluster bells and whistles, and end up with a lesser Unix with a greater I > apps portfolio. Which might be OK... Sun has succeeded with Solaris notaM > because of the technical excellence of the product, but because of the apps0! > portfolio the OS has attracted.(  K how much HPUX compared to Solaris is out there in academia? Surely a reasonDJ for Solaris' strong apps portfolio is the number of graduates with Solaris	 exposure?e   regardsn -- w Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  C  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of c! my employers or service provider.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:25:50 +0100u1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>Y) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targett5 Message-ID: <3C1B879E.3A5108B1@swissonline.delete.ch>h   Tim Llewellyn wrote: >  > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:y > >d >  > >mM > > Yup. Merger or no merger, Tru64 as we know it is not long for this world.aG > > Absent the merger, Compaq most likely will OEM HP-UX, equip it withvO > > TruCluster bells and whistles, and end up with a lesser Unix with a greatertK > > apps portfolio. Which might be OK... Sun has succeeded with Solaris not-O > > because of the technical excellence of the product, but because of the apps@# > > portfolio the OS has attracted.  > M > how much HPUX compared to Solaris is out there in academia? Surely a reason<L > for Solaris' strong apps portfolio is the number of graduates with Solaris > exposure?.  G Yeah.  And we all saw the long-term advantage that Unix gained over VMS:B by getting into academia.  The graduates were familiar with it and recommended it for their sites.i     John McLean    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:24:09 GMTa4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target = Message-ID: <ZGLS7.13229$Sj1.7877574@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>m  0 "Paul DeMone" <pdemone@igs.net> wrote in message! news:3C1B80B9.57E46E53@igs.net...  >a > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:4 >rL > > McDonald's has more visibility and mindshare than does a restaurant thatK > > serves quality food. Where would you rather eat? I dunno about you, buts I'dhJ > > pick the upscale restaurant every time. And if I was a Compaq customerL > > intent on leaving Compaq, the last thing I would do is condemn myself to ai" > > diet of McNealy's Happy Meals. >hA > But you get a free SunBLADE 100 with every order over $10   ;^)b >b  > Oops... thanks for bringing that omission to my attention! ;-}   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:25:32 GMTn4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target = Message-ID: <gILS7.13231$Sj1.7878594@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>i  A "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in messaget* news:3C1B811E.CFEA5B46@blueyonder.co.uk... >d >r > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:f > >) >u > >nF > > Yup. Merger or no merger, Tru64 as we know it is not long for this world.G > > Absent the merger, Compaq most likely will OEM HP-UX, equip it withBG > > TruCluster bells and whistles, and end up with a lesser Unix with a  greater-K > > apps portfolio. Which might be OK... Sun has succeeded with Solaris notCJ > > because of the technical excellence of the product, but because of the apps# > > portfolio the OS has attracted.8 >pF > how much HPUX compared to Solaris is out there in academia? Surely a reasonL > for Solaris' strong apps portfolio is the number of graduates with Solaris > exposure?e  J This is indeed the case. I note that academia is a market segment that DECE virtually abandoned some years ago. And now CPQ is reaping the bitter % harvest of some boneheaded DECisions.w   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:23:21 GMTp4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targeti= Message-ID: <dGLS7.13228$Sj1.7876650@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>r  0 "Chris Morgan" <cm@mihalis.net> wrote in message) news:87heqsfmuf.fsf@tweety.mihalis.net...T8 > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes: >oL > > McDonald's has more visibility and mindshare than does a restaurant thatK > > serves quality food. Where would you rather eat? I dunno about you, butt I'dgJ > > pick the upscale restaurant every time. And if I was a Compaq customerL > > intent on leaving Compaq, the last thing I would do is condemn myself to ae" > > diet of McNealy's Happy Meals. >nF > This is a ridiculous analogy IMO. If Sun is McDonald's, what are the > wintel vendors?m  @ They have been shut down by Board of Health food inspectors, ;-}   >uG > I see it very differently, I would say it's more like Tru64 users mayeF > feel they've been loyal porsche customers and now porsche is getting@ > out of the high-end sports car business and focussing on, say,' > reselling souped-up VWs or something.  >eH > These porsche fans obviously don't want to lower their standards quiteD > that much, but in this analogy I'd say Sun is more like BMW. MaybeG > never quite the performance level of the Porsche (although this years H > BMW is better and faster than slightly older Porsches) but they have a= > single-minded focus on drivers cars which a porsche fan canrD > appreciate, plus they're a mass manufacturer and actually get someG > economies of scale. They make money, they support their products, thetB > stuff holds some value second-hand etc. Not really such a dismal > prospect.v  C I see your point, but I would prefer to characterize IBM as the BMW K purveyor. I believe IBM offers a technologically superior hardware platformu? and RISC architecture. Sun of course remains the leader in apps:K availability, which often is the determining factor in the plan to purchaseo	 decision.E   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:49:24 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target > Message-ID: <E2MS7.212585$YD.16017951@news2.aus1.giganews.com>  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messageg7 news:gILS7.13231$Sj1.7878594@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...k >eC > "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message , > news:3C1B811E.CFEA5B46@blueyonder.co.uk...   ...n  H > > how much HPUX compared to Solaris is out there in academia? Surely a > reasonF > > for Solaris' strong apps portfolio is the number of graduates with Solarist
 > > exposure?  >eL > This is indeed the case. I note that academia is a market segment that DECG > virtually abandoned some years ago. And now CPQ is reaping the bittero' > harvest of some boneheaded DECisions.a  I Rubbish.  Compaq knew all about those decisions when it acquired DEC, and.K paid an appropriately-discounted price then.  What Compaq is reaping now istL the harvest of its *own* boneheaded decisions since the acquisition, when itI could have reaped the rewards of having reversed those decisions that hade' made DEC acquirable in the first place.   K Placing the blame on DEC, or on management no longer at the helm at Compaq,eI is a smoke screen:  I can see why Compaq would try to blow it around, but- not why you would.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:49:42 GMT04 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetu= Message-ID: <W2MS7.13236$Sj1.7894566@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>n  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C1B879E.3A5108B1@swissonline.delete.ch...i >c >a > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > >w > > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:r > > >r > >w > > > H > > > Yup. Merger or no merger, Tru64 as we know it is not long for this world.I > > > Absent the merger, Compaq most likely will OEM HP-UX, equip it withxI > > > TruCluster bells and whistles, and end up with a lesser Unix with a  greaterNI > > > apps portfolio. Which might be OK... Sun has succeeded with Solarisl not L > > > because of the technical excellence of the product, but because of the apps% > > > portfolio the OS has attracted.m > >hH > > how much HPUX compared to Solaris is out there in academia? Surely a reasonF > > for Solaris' strong apps portfolio is the number of graduates with Solarisa
 > > exposure?  >eI > Yeah.  And we all saw the long-term advantage that Unix gained over VMStD > by getting into academia.  The graduates were familiar with it and! > recommended it for their sites.M >e  G Right you are, John. You saw it, I saw it, most of us regulars in these( Usenet forums saw it...t  $ ...but apparently DEC didn't see it.   ------------------------------  + Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:12:47 +0000 (UTC)a From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetm+ Message-ID: <9vg3qv$dbq$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>h  t In article <9oKS7.13213$Sj1.7822798@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes: >u, ><david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in message& >news:9vfgq0$78i$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk...J >> In article <A2AS7.12834$Sj1.7514664@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, "Terry C.- >Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:n >g  N >> The death of Tru64 will mean that the user base will have to do a migrationO >> anyway. Why on earth would those customers even consider staying with Compaq-  >> and trying to port to HP-UX ?   >Good question.   L >> I'd think most customers would probably move to Sun since it has the Unix >withEG >> the greatest visibility/mindshare and has it's own (albeit inferior)e >clustering G >> specifically designed to work with it. HP-UX security seems about asr >equally >> bad as Suns.h? >> Those who don't want to move to Sun will probably go to IBM.  >eI >McDonald's has more visibility and mindshare than does a restaurant thataL >serves quality food. Where would you rather eat? I dunno about you, but I'dG >pick the upscale restaurant every time. And if I was a Compaq customereK >intent on leaving Compaq, the last thing I would do is condemn myself to ao >diet of McNealy's Happy Meals.r >e >    Terry,  L I'm not a great fan of Solaris. However that visibility/mindshare translatesN into application availability + a perception of a company which is 110% behind it's operating system.  N I've never used HP-UX or IBM's AIX. However looking at bug reports leads me toJ suspect that the quality of HP-UX is about on a par with Solaris ie pretty abysmal.N Hence I'd suspect many users faced with Compaq trying to force them to migrateN to HP-UX would be no worse off qualitywise porting to Solaris and maybe betterO off in some other respects. (Though of course much worse off than if Compaq hade actually supported Tru64).      
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2001 12:23:34 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>s& Subject: Re: Compaq without the mergerH Message-ID: <y4ofl2kpu1.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  7 "Ken and Kelley Coleman" <knkcoleman@attbi.com> writes:0  I > I've never had the cajones to do something like that. Then again, beingP( > female, I've never had cajones at all.   Spanish nit-pick: it's cojones.1   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2001 12:29:38 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>t& Subject: Re: Compaq without the mergerH Message-ID: <y4lmg6kpjx.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  6 "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:  M > Well, I've had a couple of Presarios and was very dissatisfied with them. I K > was thermonuclearly PO'd when the Imitation SuperDisk failed and both CPQaL > and Best Buy (from whom I purchased a service contract) blew me off 'cos IK > had installed a real OS (Win2K) over the squatulent Win98 virus. Best BuyfK > said that the software change invalidated the purchase contract. CPQ saidiI > that the Presario was a consumer product and Win2K was a commercial OS,,+ > hence they refused to remedy the problem.u  K The US of A has, in German public perception, the image of being a paradiseiK in the area of services - people pack your groceries for you, everybody hass/ a friendly customer support line, and all that.o  J But I'm sure nobody here would put up with what you describe. One writes aJ letter giving them at most 10 working days to remedy the situation, and ifL they don't, you demand your money back. In addition, the local newspaper (atL least) will be very happy to publish some negative publicity for the company@ concerned in the form of publishing an article on your travails.   Sheesh!d   	Jan   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 16:19:46 GMTn/ From: "Richard McMullen" <rbmcmjr@adelphia.net>s& Subject: Re: Compaq without the merger< Message-ID: <CKKS7.3419$QK1.1225666@news1.news.adelphia.net>  J Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y4ofl2kpu1.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...9 > "Ken and Kelley Coleman" <knkcoleman@attbi.com> writes:  > K > > I've never had the cajones to do something like that. Then again, beings* > > female, I've never had cajones at all. >a! > Spanish nit-pick: it's cojones.I >F  K If I remember my high school Spanish, cajones means drawers, which might beiL inferred as room for large cojones.  It is still annoying to see it misused.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:20:44 +0100-( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>+ Subject: Re: DEC Alpha 255 - 300 Mhz wantedt- Message-ID: <VA.000004ee.0077ca48@bluewin.ch>n  O In article <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF170@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>, a John Macallister wrote:0   [snip] > M > I don't remember my desktop Windows system, which runs continuously because M > it hosts long-running applications in addition to normal "office" activity,tN > ever crashing since August 1997 when it was installed. It has been rebooted,L > infrequently, for software installation, hardware upgrades, the occasionalG > "problem", etc but that is also my experience with "actively used andw > changing" VMS systems. >sO I find that hard to believe. For example, the NT system from which I am typing eK this just started to "hang", with much disk rattling, and a reboot was the 5G answer. Before it totally collapsed I noted that it was last booted on vK 27-Oct-2001. Nowadays I only use this system for newsgroup reading and the nA occasional WordPerfect document, so I'm not exactly stressing it.i  O Please note that the NT 4.0 Server Resource Kit (1996) specifically recommends u rebooting every 1-2 weeks.  M The NT4 system at work frequently demonstrates that it is grossly intolerant aL of network problems, sometimes requiring several reboots a day. OK, network N problems are _our_ problem, but why is it then that our VMS and Tru64 systems ' just carry on working through all that?t  K Now tell me why when I get an error saving an Excel file to a network disk rL (aforesaid network problems), it then refuses to save the file to the local < disk, repeating the same error message. That is inexcusable.  N > By all means praise the good points of VMS but keep an open mind about otherL > options. This news group/mailing list is probably the principal VMS windowF > to the computing world. We need to give the impression that we're anK > outgoing and forward looking community if we're to promote VMS to others.) > L I have a very open mind about other options. I was once keen on NT from the K point of view that I could at last afford a development system at home. It fN ended up being a useful tool for certain tasks, but a complete disappointment  in other areas.c  N For example, at first I was still running a few 16 bit apps. They worked fine O except that once or twice a month the whole 16 bit system would get hosed, and -K in spite of international support from some of the very best NT experts, a wN complete restore was necessary. The first time that happened was after owning I the box for 2 days, and it took a further 2 days of >12 hours per day to wM reinstall from scratch. I quite liked the idea of doing a fresh installation  H as a learning experience, but I never expected it to take over 24 hours!  O Needless to say, I then concentrated on a backup strategy which got me down to  N recovery only lasting 1 hour. Most folks don't even realise that can be done, N instinctively reaching for their installation disks, but I assure you, it can N be done. It's got to be worth noting that AFAIK Microshrott* themselves don't ) appear to have cottoned onto that method.   M Oh, compilers/databases where the answer to a showstopping bug is to buy the uL upgrade, and as a loyal customer, you get a massive 5-10% discount over the = new price - big deal, shopping around can get more than that.s  L I could go on, but I'll leave you with a reference which states the problem D quite well enough for me. Please read it and tell us what you think.  0 http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/IhateMS.html  4 * For non-German speakers, der Schrott = scrap metal ___l
 Paul Sture SwitzerlandC   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Dec 2001 08:43:23 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) + Subject: Re: DEC Alpha 255 - 300 Mhz wantedO3 Message-ID: <PGPnGlkjP9Tp@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  W In article <1011214210333.418A-100000@Ives.egh.com>, John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> writes:.  F > Also, John mentioned the P only works with old VMS x.y, but not withH > x+n.y+n.  If P is user-mode-only, then this should never (well, hardly > ever) happen.   C Only since you use the word "should".  But it "does" happen becauseaB software is typically tested into acceptable shape more than it isB properly coded in the first place.  Programs that depended on some@ of the $GETxxx system services always being synchronous got intoB trouble when VMS started taking advantage of possible asynchronous) behavior that had always been documented.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:40:33 +0100o1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> , Subject: Re: More about Alpha and the merger5 Message-ID: <3C1AFE71.A25F00D1@swissonline.delete.ch>e   JF Mezei wrote:  >  > John McLean wrote:L > > Now you're saying it was decided before January, which surely would have* > > been enough time to stifle that paper. > P > Consider that often long term strategic decisions are known only to a few very" > high exec VPs and president/CEO. > L > From Compaq's point of view, they may have decided that Alpha was out backP > when Windows was dropped, with various metrics to gauge how quickly they couldN > move with that long term project (eg: dependant on Intel finally producing aM > working 64 bit chip). Meanwhile, it is business as usual below at the grunt-P > level, and since Alpha is still technologically superior to IA64, it is normalH > to expect engineers to continue to say that Alpha is superior and will" > continue to be superior to IA64.  ) You may have something of a point but....m  8 (a) Winkler said in January that Himalaya was going IPF.C (b) The comparitive paper could have been blocked and any number ofhH reasons given internally (but no reason was necessary externally because no-one really expected it).    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:04:03 GMTt. From: "Duane Sand" <Duane.Sand@mindspring.com>, Subject: Re: More about Alpha and the merger+ Message-ID: <TtDS7.468$X94.76740@rwcrnsc52>s  3 "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrotec >e > Duane Sand wrote:uB > > In January 2001, Compaq directors spoke to stock analysts at aE > > web-casted annual meeting.  Alan Greig listened and reported hereyD > > that he heard a Compaq VP say that the NonStop Himalaya line wasH > > going to be ported onto IPF rather than onto Alpha EV7 as previously@ > > planned.  This was half a year before Compaq management toldD > > anyone in the Himalaya division that we should stop the EV7 portB > > and resurrect our pre-Digital-acquisition port onto IPF.  ThisC > > announcement proves to me that Capellas and that VP had alreadye> > > definitely decided by Jan 2001 to cancel future Alpha chip; > > developments (at least for EV9 and beyond, if not EV8).a ><I > Interesting.  IIRC someone mentioned a few weeks back during the livelyTI > (?) refutation of Compaq's White paper that Compaq started looking intodA > in February.  I recall commenting that this was odd because the F > Alpha-is-better-than-IPF paper was released at almost the same time. > 2 > Now you're saying it was decided before January,  ? No, I meant in January. The web-casted industry analyst meetingt? was on Jan 26 2001.  The decision or intention to shorten Alpha @ was sometime before that day, but could have been months or justE days earlier.  The actual culmination of that intention didn't becomeb> definite until a complete contractual agreement with Intel was? reached much later.  Finalizing that agreement took many monthseC longer than Compaq execs originally expected.  During that intervalfC until the Intel contract was signable, Alpha was in a Shroedinger's > Cat state of limbo: maybe already dead,  or maybe still having: a long life of many generations of chips ahead.  The whole7 maneuver could have been scuttled by Intel's responses.e   > which surely would haveeG > been enough time to stifle that paper.  If it had been blocked beforelE > release, we would have been none-the-wiser about what it contained.sC > In fact many of the statements to the effect that Compaq can't beu@ > serious because they've just said Alpha was better would never > have been voiced.i  > Alpha marketeers certainly knew nothing of any of these secretB negotiations, and were off doing their white paper marketing thing< just as Alpha fans have always wanted them to vigorously do.    C > > We in the Himalaya division certainly didn't want the delay andrA > > costs of starting over, yet again; EV7 and its chip designersf= > > and compiler team were far nicer to work with than Intel.n > F > But you've just claimed that Compaq had decided to terminate Alpha 6B > months before they redirected your efforts from Alpha to IPF forH > Himalaya.  What reason can you suggest as to why they would completely/ > waste 6 month's effort by you and your team ?d  D 1. Until the Intel contract was successfully concluded, the decision@ to terminate EV9 and EV8 was only a goal, not something that was- certain to be achieved by some definite date.6A 2. Telling us to stop our EV7 work and re-start on IPF would havei= immediately told the whole world that Alpha was toast, before'( we had gotten what we wanted from Intel.> 3. At this scale of wastage, the costs of keeping the Himalaya> migration team intact via busywork was a minor insurance item.? The lost months in Himalaya time-to-market was perhaps a largero> concern, but still not good enough reason to break the secrecy about the Intel deal.i    C > > The HP board of directors have said that they began discussionstG > > among themselves about possible acquisitions and mergers, including > > > possibly Compaq.  Some reporters and many people here haveB > > interpreted that remark to mean that Fiorina and Capellas haveG > > been discussing mergers and joint restructurings from that time on.n >oF > As far as I am aware the HP people have never stated, one way or theH > other, who they discussed mergers with before Fiorina talked seriously > to Capellas.  D IIRC, some CNET-like article described those intra-board discussions= in general terms, without naming companies other than Compaq.rD I don't trust my memory enough to be sure.  My reading of the actualC quotes at the time did not suggest any actual contacts with Compaq, " contrary to some reporters' spins.    B > > Capellas has said no, that's not what happened; he and Fiorina? > > first began discussing possible merger after some unrelated ; > > proposals for licensing HP-UX to Compaq for filling outt8 > > Compaq's commercial Unix mid-range offerings on IPF. >xG > Ahh, No !  According to Fiorina - and I think subsequently Capellas - F > they had met in New York for some IT forum discussions last year andF > there was a meeting-of-the-minds (my words, not hers) on a number of	 > issues.u  G Yeah, they said similar things in response to the same forum questions.o# Great minds think alike.  Big deal.t    < > I will have to dig up her submission to SEC, but I seem toG > recall mention of a series of discussions earlier this year and these C > gradually developed from working together on some projects/issues  > into a merger. >tI > I recall no mention of any licensing of HP-UX to Compaq re Unix on IPF,tF > but I will search some of the EDGAR submissions over the weekend and2 > will report anything that I find on that matter.  D You've missed a major element in the progression.  This whole mergerA grew out of a quest to improve Compaq's commercial Unix offeringsmD in order to have the enterprise system product line that would bring= in substantial IBM-like service contracts.  Windows and Tru642? number-crunchers don't do that.  Himalaya's ZLE stuff does, butd@ that's niche stuff.  VMS could, but of course it's not Unix, and! not immediately available on IPF.c    @ > > Those Unix license discussions occurred well after the long-> > > running Alpha/IPF contractual negotiations with Intel were
 > > underway.h >  > ... snip ...E > it becomes increasingly likely that the decision to terminate Alpha 5 > came about while preparing for the June 22 meeting.-  > No, the dealings with Intel started way way back, and finished when they were finished.   > ... snip ...  + -- Duane Sand, not speaking for Compaq etc.s   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:21:48 +0100>1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>i, Subject: Re: More about Alpha and the merger5 Message-ID: <3C1B86AC.38865C24@swissonline.delete.ch>g  E I've spent an afternoon wading through the copious submissions by CPQ H and HP with respect to the proposed merger, and I've discovered just oneB submission by CPQ about the Alpha transfer; Intel only bothered to6 mention it in one sentence of their Annual financials.  B The one thing that I am now rlativey certain about is that seriousE discussions about the merger were going on before the announcement ofeH the Alpha termination.  The only lattitude that I will allow would be ifB Capellas and Fiorina are repeatedly sloppy about time periods (eg.* "several months" when they mean 2 months).   Duane Sand wrote:p > =l  5 > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote  > > H > > Now you're saying it [Alpha termination] was decided before January, > =q  A > No, I meant in January. The web-casted industry analyst meetingiA > was on Jan 26 2001.  The decision or intention to shorten AlphacB > was sometime before that day, but could have been months or justG > days earlier.  The actual culmination of that intention didn't becomee@ > definite until a complete contractual agreement with Intel wasA > reached much later.  Finalizing that agreement took many monthsa> > longer than Compaq execs originally expected.  ....The whole9 > maneuver could have been scuttled by Intel's responses.-  H At the end of June, Terry Shannon stated at least twice that he believedA that the Alpha termination notion had  originated about mid-June.n   And I found ...   F "The deal, and single-slide "planning", and announcement happened in aF crazed secret rush that precluded any real planning.  This secrecy andG rush apparently happened because Intel's lawyers insisted that this was H potentially a "material event" by SEC public disclosure rules.  ... It'sD really hard to talk Intel lawyers out of extreme acts of paranoia. =  H Perhaps we didn't try.  The deal took longer to conclude than expected."F - Duane Sand (comp.os.vms thread: Re: Some thoughts on the recent turn, of events.., posted 2001-07-12 19:07:43 PST)  F At least I give you credit for consistency ... but you did say "crazed secret RUSH" ???    ( But in a Compaq submission to the SEC atJ http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/714154/000091205701533394/a2059811= z425.txt@ we find an IDG article INTERNET INFRASTRUCTURE HARDWARE Bulletin= "HEWLETT-PACKARD ACQUIRES COMPAQ - AN INFRASTRUCTURE HARDWAREh PERSPECTIVE" =2E..mE "Starting in early 1993, HP co-designed the Itanium architecture withrH Intel, and optimized its enterprise-oriented HP-UX Unix operating system@ for use on Itanium. More recently, Compaq decided to halt futureG development of its Alpha microprocessor line after the EV 7 generation,tG and to move all its enterprise servers to the Itanium platform by 2004.yD Compaq and Intel reached an agreement in July, and the two companiesH have already begun the process of "re-badging" more than 100 of Compaq'sG RISC and software-compiler engineers, moving them over to Intel as they * completed their Alpha development tasks.."  ( Note !  "reached an agreement in JULY" =      H > > But you've just claimed that Compaq had decided to terminate Alpha 6D > > months before they redirected your efforts from Alpha to IPF forJ > > Himalaya.  What reason can you suggest as to why they would completel= yy1 > > waste 6 month's effort by you and your team ?h > =.  F > 1. Until the Intel contract was successfully concluded, the decisionB > to terminate EV9 and EV8 was only a goal, not something that was/ > certain to be achieved by some definite date.aC > 2. Telling us to stop our EV7 work and re-start on IPF would haveo? > immediately told the whole world that Alpha was toast, beforeo* > we had gotten what we wanted from Intel.  F Given that Compaq and Intel both refer to this as a transfer, it looks? like no money changed hands (despite many confident comments inuB comp.os.vms by a number of people in late June, early July).  WhatH Compaq wanted would surely have been different if there is no money and,D as many here have suggested, this deal was okay by the Digital-Intel
 agreement.  @ > 3. At this scale of wastage, the costs of keeping the Himalaya@ > migration team intact via busywork was a minor insurance item.A > The lost months in Himalaya time-to-market was perhaps a largert@ > concern, but still not good enough reason to break the secrecy > about the Intel deal.  > =c    J > > Ahh, No !  According to Fiorina - and I think subsequently Capellas -=  H > > they had met in New York for some IT forum discussions last year andH > > there was a meeting-of-the-minds (my words, not hers) on a number of > > issues.t > =   J > Yeah, they said similar things in response to the same forum questions.=  % > Great minds think alike.  Big deal.   G However, in Fiorina's own words, in one of the SEC submissions of 4 Sepe* 2001, a transcript of an NBC interview)...  D CARLY FIORINA: Actually, Michael and I first met each other about 18H months ago. We were in Washington and discovered we agreed on just aboutC everything in a meeting about public policy issues in the high-techmG industry, which is statement in and of itself. Then we put together the_E first public exchange for the high-tech community. That was maybe sixcE months later and again worked well together. And so I would call thiso= gathering momentum - we saw our companies aligning themselvespF strategically, we were making technical moves that were similar aroundG Itanium, for example. And I actually picked up the phone several monthsh@ ago to start a conversation about licensing and one thing led to another, I think.i  D Okay, if this is credible ... 18 months - that's March 2000, 6 monthD later - that's Sep 2000.  SEVERAL months ago from 4th September (and5 that's generous by a few days) - that's probably May.   
 And later =85 F "Fiorina:  You all know that, as an example of this commitment to openD and commitment to partnership, both HP and Compaq have announced ourC intention to build on the Titanium platform across the whole serveroH line-up. It's just an example I think right down to the technology levelD of how we have interpreted an understanding of where the industry isB going and applied it right down to technology choices day by day."  1 Okay, she - or the recorder - got the name wrong.a    C And in two comments from MC, the first a Q & A session in New York,r  G "MR. CAPELLAS: Yes, it was amazing. So we thought, we started with this G concept of an exchange where we said, well, you know, how do you change G the game for the benefit of the both companies. And if I recall, we got 8 through the basics in about 20 minutes on a phone call."  D And the current mystery is, exactly when was that phone call ... and/ when was the decision about Alpha really made ?     G On September 4, 2001, Compaq Computer Corporation sent an email message  toE all of its employees. The text of the email message -from MC - was aso follows: =2E..aH "The decision to merge was the result of serious discussion and rigorousF strategic analysis during the past three months by the Compaq board ofB directors and the management team. Collectively, this was the only@ combination we considered because it made complete strategic and cultural sense."  E Ahem.  THREE months ?  Thats ... all of August, all of July, ... mosta (or all) of June.a    F > You've missed a major element in the progression.  This whole mergerC > grew out of a quest to improve Compaq's commercial Unix offeringseF > in order to have the enterprise system product line that would bring? > in substantial IBM-like service contracts.  Windows and Tru64:A > number-crunchers don't do that.  Himalaya's ZLE stuff does, buteB > that's niche stuff.  VMS could, but of course it's not Unix, and# > not immediately available on IPF.t  H Well there's not an awful lot in the various submissions to support thisH point.  Maybe it got a bit lost in statements about how much better each was going to be.    =  J > No, the dealings with Intel started way way back, and finished when the= y were finished.  A There's not a lot of (or to be honest, ANY) public information to G support this statement.  On the contrary the evidence strongly suggestswF that merger discussions with HP were under way before the announcement was made about Alpha.o  B I also admit that it is quite possible that Alpha evaluations wereC taking place prior to merger discussions and that the prospect of aaB merger was a powerful inducement to reach a decision about Alpha'sH termination.  At the very least, HP would have been very pleased to hear4 that Compaq were trying to pass Alpha over to Intel.  D HP didn't even have to volunteer to pay any shortfall to Compaq.  IfD there was no merger then it was Compaq's problem; if the merger wentF ahead then it didn't matter greatly if Compaq lost money to Intel (andE basically had to pay Intel to take Alpha) because HP would merge withd Compaq anyway.  H As I concluded before - and you ignored - the dropping of Alpha saved HPG several billion dollars of merger costs (as well as some ongoing costs)tF and was thus a very powerful encouragement for Compaq being purchased.     John McLeana   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:48:30 GMTt4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>, Subject: Re: More about Alpha and the merger= Message-ID: <O1MS7.13235$Sj1.7893753@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>o  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C1B86AC.38865C24@swissonline.delete.ch...   E I've spent an afternoon wading through the copious submissions by CPQeH and HP with respect to the proposed merger, and I've discovered just oneB submission by CPQ about the Alpha transfer; Intel only bothered to6 mention it in one sentence of their Annual financials.  B The one thing that I am now rlativey certain about is that seriousE discussions about the merger were going on before the announcement of H the Alpha termination.  The only lattitude that I will allow would be ifB Capellas and Fiorina are repeatedly sloppy about time periods (eg.* "several months" when they mean 2 months).  K Sounds like a fair assessment. What is UNKNOWN is whether the fate of AlphaaJ was on the merger discussion agenda. Given that Compaq kept the lid on theL June 25 decision pretty darned effectively, it is indeed possible that AlphaA was not a significant topic of discussion between the principals.t  L Of course, unless you were a fly on the wall during the discussions, there's no way of knowing for sure!    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2001 12:15:05 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>a; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.qH Message-ID: <y4r8pykq86.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  , "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  L > 'Facing the proposed merger, 45 percent of the Alpha customers interviewedF > by Warburg believed it was "less likely" that they would stay with aH > combined HP/Compaq company, while 55 percent said their feelings aboutI > remaining a Compaq customer were "unchanged" by the proposed merger. NoeK > company interviewed said it was "more likely" that they would stay with a . > combined HP/Compaq if the merger succeeded.' > ; > Admittedly, the poll here was merger-specific rather thanhH > Alpha-to-Itanic-specific, but it still indicates significant sentimentK > toward defection that Fred's radar does not appear to have detected [...]i  ? It's worse than that - the next paragraph in the article reads:b  L "Of those that indicated unchanged, the majority required more knowledge of I  HP's product road map or had already made the decision to leave Compaq, d
  Young said."e   And then it says:t  M "For Compaq Alpha customers, putting their faith in a future Intel chip road eM  map that is still in its proof-of-concept phase with a first-generation chiptK  called Itanium is something less than a  comfortable feeling, according tow  industry experts."e  : I wonder how customers get such stupid ideas? And on cost,  L "Also, the majority of Alpha customers interviewed by Warburg believed that J  the cost of migrating to an HP platform would be the same as switching to  another server vendor."   Ouch!    	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:36:40 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> G Subject: OT: balls and other things (was Re: Compaq without the merger)i5 Message-ID: <3C1B7C18.96C2C1FA@swissonline.delete.ch>e   Richard McMullen wrote:o > L > Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inL > message news:y4ofl2kpu1.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...; > > "Ken and Kelley Coleman" <knkcoleman@attbi.com> writes:9 > >EM > > > I've never had the cajones to do something like that. Then again, beingn, > > > female, I've never had cajones at all. > >r# > > Spanish nit-pick: it's cojones.l > >d > M > If I remember my high school Spanish, cajones means drawers, which might benN > inferred as room for large cojones.  It is still annoying to see it misused.  D While on this OT, I live in Zurich and the local airport is Kloten. E "Kloten" is a dutch word meaning testicles.  (Life's a ball in KlotengA ??) The airlines used to announce it as Kloten but now as "Zurich D airport" presumably because Dutch passengers could not contain their mirth.  F The temperature yesterday around here was about -10 or -12 C.  I don't< think the residents of Kloen woud be out and about too much.     John McLeanm   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:13:52 +0100 * From: dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons)* Subject: Problems with internet DNS lookupP Message-ID: <Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-bmGchQknXbrm@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>   Hello,  > I have finally gotten round to connecting my AS200 to my smallB LAN and would like to use another box as a gateway to the internet but I seem to be stuck.q  ? The AS200 runs VMS 7.2 with TCPIP 5.0 and seems to be installedc> more or less corectly. I can access all the other boxes on the= LAN by name or by address. I can access hosts on the internets/ via the gateway box by address but not by name.o7 If I try an external host by name I get 'unknown host'.m0 The gateway works fine from all the other boxes.  - So far I have done the following within TCPIP 9 TCPIP> set host ... for all the boxes on the lan and theng= TCPIP> set route/def/gate=192.168.1.1    with & without /permmG TCPIP> set name/server=194.25.2.129      with & without /system /enable   TCPIP> set name/path=btx.dtag.de  & It isn't even trying to go to the DNS.   Anyone see what I have missed?   --   Dave   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:04:52 GMTh= From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)n. Subject: Re: Reloading device drivers on Alpha0 Message-ID: <00A068BF.41CA4CE9@SendSpamHere.ORG>  j In article <8MuS7.616$BK1.15996@news.cpqcorp.net>, "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:9 >"Peter Weaver" <peter.weaver@stelco.ca> wrote in message . >news:q3sS7.76051$Z2.1097831@nnrp1.uunet.ca...C >> "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message / >> news:P5rS7.609$BK1.16022@news.cpqcorp.net...o' >> > Simon Clubley wrote in message ...UI >> > >I am aware that reloading of device drivers on Alpha as such is notuK >> > >possible, but I am interested in hearing what techniques other driverb >> >...eM >> > Nope.  I agree it's a pain in the ass, and I disagreed with the decisionuG >> > when it was made.  But the only really safe thing to do is reboot.  >> >...h >>+ >> Is this a bug that will be fixed in IPF?t >> >-J >No.  But perhaps it might as a side effect of hot-plug PCI.  Drivers will0 >need to know how to quiece, and perhaps unload.                      quiesce  8 Just incase you didn't understand what Fred was stating. --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMt            sJ   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery I   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbesm   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Dec 2001 08:51:30 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)8. Subject: Re: Reloading device drivers on Alpha3 Message-ID: <KwXXc7UQgv94@eisner.encompasserve.org>P  p In article <00A068BF.41CA4CE9@SendSpamHere.ORG>, system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) writes:l > In article <8MuS7.616$BK1.15996@news.cpqcorp.net>, "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:  K >>No.  But perhaps it might as a side effect of hot-plug PCI.  Drivers will 1 >>need to know how to quiece, and perhaps unload.m >                      quiesce > : > Just incase you didn't understand what Fred was stating.  " Real programmers don't eat quiece.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 16:49:28 GMTh4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>. Subject: Re: Reloading device drivers on Alpha0 Message-ID: <3C1B7E34.B771E293@blueyonder.co.uk>   Carl Perkins wrote:t > 3 > "Peter Weaver" <peter.weaver@stelco.ca> writes...d  sN > }You may not call it a bug, but I always have, it was a major step backwardsM > }when upgrades to applications started including reboots. A few years ago IoM > }was on an airplane sitting next to a PC person who had some VMS experiencewK > }from many years ago. He was complaining that he had to reboot a PC aftergJ > }installing IE, and he said that as he was doing it he remembered how heM > }could never remember the VMS boxes going down at all. I really had to bitetM > }my lip to keep from telling him that things had gotten worst since he lasti > }touched VMS.- > = > Since when do typical applications include a device driver?" >  yeah, thats what I thought too.z    D > Sure you have to reboot after modifying your IP stack or whatever,E > since that involves device drivers. But you still don't have to fore > an application.   M actually, you can upgrade recent enough versions of UCX/TCP without a reboot.r: Its the UCX 4.x eco packs that require a mandatory reboot.   > E > I have noticed that some applications' installation instructions domI > tell you to reboot, which is usually both unfortunate and unneccessary.-H > (As I recall, the last thing I installed which said this was PMDF. YouG > don't have to, and I didn't. Really. It worked just fine anyway.) For F > the most part all the reboot gains you is knowing whether or not youB > got the code to setup/startup anything the new software needs to= > setup/startup into the system startup proceedure correctly.S    which is important, of course.   --   Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  s  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of s! my employers or service provider.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:20:44 +0100o( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>! Subject: Re: The demise of compaqv- Message-ID: <VA.000004ed.0077ca2a@bluewin.ch>t  E In article <9vddi7$bpj$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Nick Maclaren wrote:o+ > In article <ubsh1pw4c.fsf@earthlink.net>, / > Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:s > |> -@ > |> there was also link-edit apars about specifying re-entrant,D > |> serial-reusable, etc options to bind the code into load libraryH > |> ... affecting could it be executed directly from shared, R/O memory > |> (i.e. BLDL list). > ! > It's coming back to me now ....o > ? > Did you know that there have also been bugs in quite a few ofw  > the versions of /bin/true? :-) >   G Sheesh. Here's the first bit of the output from "man true" on my Linux n box:  A TRUE(1)                        FSF                        TRUE(1)w     NAME&        true - do nothing, successfully  > or, as you imply, do nothing, successfully, with a failure :-)   ___o
 Paul Sture Switzerlandu   ------------------------------   Date: 15 Dec 2001 09:45:56 GMT( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)! Subject: Re: The demise of compaqn0 Message-ID: <9vf64k$jd9$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>  - In article <VA.000004ed.0077ca2a@bluewin.ch>, * Paul Sture  <paul.sture@bluewin.ch> wrote:F >In article <9vddi7$bpj$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Nick Maclaren wrote:, >> In article <ubsh1pw4c.fsf@earthlink.net>,0 >> Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes: >> |> A >> |> there was also link-edit apars about specifying re-entrant,pE >> |> serial-reusable, etc options to bind the code into load libraryrI >> |> ... affecting could it be executed directly from shared, R/O memorye >> |> (i.e. BLDL list).n >> o" >> It's coming back to me now .... >> b@ >> Did you know that there have also been bugs in quite a few of! >> the versions of /bin/true? :-)a >=H >Sheesh. Here's the first bit of the output from "man true" on my Linux  >box:  >r' >       true - do nothing, successfullyo >e? >or, as you imply, do nothing, successfully, with a failure :-)a  C Yes, I do.  That is why I said there were bugs in some versions :-)n  @ The ones that I saw were both because /bin/true was a C program,? and it had been built making assumptions about its environment.i; In one case to do with locales, and in the other to do withc? dynamic libraries.  I once had to write my own, in order to getd a script to work ....t  B The joke that all programs can be reduced to a single instruction,. which will be wrong, has a lot of truth in it!     Regards, Nick Maclaren,* University of Cambridge Computing Service,> New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England. Email:  nmm1@cam.ac.uk/ Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679e   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:28:25 +0100w, From: Toon Moene <toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>! Subject: Re: The demise of compaqr3 Message-ID: <3C1B4FF9.DAA415E@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>n   Paul Sture wrote:o  H > Sheesh. Here's the first bit of the output from "man true" on my Linux > box: > C > TRUE(1)                        FSF                        TRUE(1)  >  > NAME( >        true - do nothing, successfully  E Hmmm, reminds me of a story about Oscar Wilde.  Once, an acquaintancetG asked him over lunch: "What did you do this morning ?".  Oscar replied: G "I removed a comma.".  At dinner, the same person asked: "And, what dide: you do this afternoon ?".  Answer: "I put the comma back."   ...    -- hG Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290d6 Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The NetherlandsG Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.htmlaE Join GNU Fortran 95: http://g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)k   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Dec 2001 10:49:06 -0500# From: Chris Morgan <cm@mihalis.net>e! Subject: Re: The demise of compaqu/ Message-ID: <87n10kfpql.fsf@tweety.mihalis.net>m  5 Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@hda.hydro.com> writes:b  , > BTW, these programs proves the old adage:  > J > "All programs contain at least one bug, and can be shortened by at least > one instruction.I > Therefore, all programs can be shortened to a single instruction, which  > will be wrong."f  F This reminds of a paradox I came across at work - one of those moments@ when you're in a boring meeting and take a wild flight of fancy.  F We have a software freeze coming up. Let's pretend it's on January 1stF for 1 month and is absolutely 100% inviolable (you know how inflexible management edicts are).e  E The discussion then focuses on when is the last time it's a good ideahF to put in a change, since obviously if you put in a change on the lastE day of the year, and then it proves to be bad the next day, you can'tn= fix it for a whole month. This is completely unacceptable, so = obviously you can't actually put a change in on the last day.y  D Ok, so we rule out the last day of the year. Now consider the secondE to last day. Well, that's no good either by the same logic (can't fixy it the next day).   D By this logic then, as soon as a software freeze is announced at any: point in the future, it takes effect immediately. Great... -- uH Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net>                  http://www.mihalis.net        Temp sig. - Enquire within   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:15:47 GMTt  From: cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net>! Subject: Re: The demise of compaq'+ Message-ID: <3C1B9316.83CC2599@prodigy.net>i   Chris Morgan wrote:  > 7 > Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@hda.hydro.com> writes:t > - > > BTW, these programs proves the old adage:b > > L > > "All programs contain at least one bug, and can be shortened by at least > > one instruction.K > > Therefore, all programs can be shortened to a single instruction, which  > > will be wrong."r > H > This reminds of a paradox I came across at work - one of those momentsB > when you're in a boring meeting and take a wild flight of fancy. > H > We have a software freeze coming up. Let's pretend it's on January 1stH > for 1 month and is absolutely 100% inviolable (you know how inflexible > management edicts are).  > G > The discussion then focuses on when is the last time it's a good ideaaH > to put in a change, since obviously if you put in a change on the lastG > day of the year, and then it proves to be bad the next day, you can't ? > fix it for a whole month. This is completely unacceptable, soi? > obviously you can't actually put a change in on the last day.  > F > Ok, so we rule out the last day of the year. Now consider the secondG > to last day. Well, that's no good either by the same logic (can't fixm > it the next day).: > F > By this logic then, as soon as a software freeze is announced at any< > point in the future, it takes effect immediately. Great... > --J > Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net>                  http://www.mihalis.net" >       Temp sig. - Enquire within    Software frozen by induction ...   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:28:53 GMT " From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>+ Subject: Re: Unknown VAXstation 4000-90 ??? 1 Message-ID: <F6JS7.1327$8p1.5512@typhoon.bart.nl>   G That is correct. The turbochannel connector was not properly seated andu dust got into the connector.K So the system failed even after I made sure everything was properly seated.iG Cleaning solved the problem. The 4000-90A is now the fastest machine inm a four node NI cluster.m   Hans  2 WLTippitt <WLTippitt@charter.com> wrote in message$ news:3C17E2BC.1672018@charter.com...L > Try checking to see if the graphics card is installed.  I have encountered a K > number of VAXstations that have had the graphics card removed and this ist what > happened.i >f > Hans Vlems wrote:s > I > > Today I was given a VAXstation model 4000-90A. That's what it says onr theh > > box.C > > I connected the serial console and powered it up. It responded:- > >- > > ?? CRPT - Reenter bit clr+ > > ?? CRPT - Reenter bit clrn > >hK > > This message was repeated about thirty times and suddenly a more normal  > > message appeared:q > >s > > ?? CRPT - Reenter bit clrt > >o > > U > >h! > > KA49-A V1.3-0BC-V4.4   83 MHZl > > 08-00-2B-94-CD-C3i > > 80MB > >n > > OK > >dH > > So far so good, so I installed VAX/VMS V7.3. During the first reboot (after# > > unpacking VMS073.B) I spotted a  > > strange message: > >qD > > This system has an unsupported CPU configuration.  Your softwareH > > licenses may not function properly until your hardware is corrected.< > > %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM  11-DEC-2001 21:08:14.95  %%%%%%%%%%%3 > > Logfile has been initialized by operator _OPA0: 1 > > Logfile is SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]OPERATOR.LOG;1h > >aL > > Installing PAK's did not work since no number of units would satisfy LMF as > > the next commands showed:r > >  > > $ sho lic/charge. > > VMS/LMF Charge Information for node VS4090B > > This is a Unknown VAXstation 4000-90A, hardware model type 477J > > Type: A, * Not Permitted *      (VAX/VMS Capacity or OpenVMS Unlimited or	 > > Base)e8 > > Type: B, * Not Permitted *      (VAX/VMS F&A Server)= > > Type: C, * Not Permitted *      (VAX/VMS Concurrent User) 9 > > Type: D, * Not Permitted *      (VAX/VMS Workstation)-H > > Type: E, * Not Permitted *      (VAX/VMS System Integrated Products): > > Type: F, * Not Permitted *      (VAX Layered Products). > > Type: G, * Not Permitted *      (Reserved)< > > Type: H, * Not Permitted *      (Alpha Layered Products)6 > > Type: I, * Not Permitted *      (Layered Products) > > $ sho cpu/full > >t) > > VS4090, a Unknown VAXstation 4000-90AoL > > Multiprocessing is DISABLED. Uniprocessing synchronization image loaded. > >a > > PRIMARY CPU = 00 > >0 > > CPU 00 is in RUN state3 > > Current Process: SYSTEM          PID = 00000212h > > Capabilities of this CPU:u > >         PRIMARY QUORUM RUN1 > > Processes which can only execute on this CPU:c > >         *** None *** > > $g > >j* > > Question: what kind of system is this?/ > > And, more importantly: can I run VMS on it?o > >u > > Hans Vlems >n   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:46:07 GMTs# From: ualski <ualski@earthlink.net>j( Subject: VS3540, Free to good home (USA)- Message-ID: <3C1B6230.E13F3CF5@earthlink.net>a  < I have a VaxStation 3540, 48MB, TK70 - all working.  It's up: for grabs to anyone who can give it a good home.  Location< is Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA.  The only restriction is: the taker has to come pick it up.  (I'll help lift it into the truck).a   Aaron Sliwinskit ualski@earthlink.net   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.696 ************************