1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 18 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 702       Contents: alpha firmware versions  Re: alpha firmware versions  RE: alpha firmware versions  Re: alpha firmware versions  backup problems   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: CXX and the Hobbyist license  Re: CXX and the Hobbyist license  Re: CXX and the Hobbyist license Re: Disaster recover - issues? Re: Disaster recover - issues?: Disaster Recovery Experts Recovering Disks From WTC Attack> Re: Disaster Recovery Experts Recovering Disks From WTC Attack> Re: Disaster Recovery Experts Recovering Disks From WTC Attack FREE Resumes for Recruiters  help/ Re: How to do daemons on VMS? (additional info) / Re: How to do daemons on VMS? (additional info) / Re: How to do daemons on VMS? (additional info) 4 Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe4 Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe4 Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe4 Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe4 Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe4 Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe IBM to drop PCs ??  InForm article about Alpha & IPF$ Re: InForm article about Alpha & IPF Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) RE: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model ) Re: Learn about the Compaq business model 2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not. nfsmount missing PALcode and SRM definitions & Problem with proxies on DECnet over IP* RE: Problem with proxies on DECnet over IP, Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft, re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft, Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft, Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft, Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft, Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft, Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft, Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytes7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)  Re: VMS workstations Re: VMS workstations Re: VMS workstations: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) WAP gateway for OpenVMS   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 11:28:29 +0100, From: Nazim MANSER <Nazim.Manser@socgen.com>  Subject: alpha firmware versionsT Message-ID: <0589E3C1F1A4D046*/c=FR/admd=ATLAS/prmd=SG/o=INFI/s=MANSER/g=NAZIM/@MHS>   Hi all,   E Can someone explain me what is the relationship between the following    vms pal code version,  srm console version,   osf pal code  version W arc console version                  and                    alpha firmware cd version ?     
 as an example    in alpha firmware cd vers. 5.6   the following applies    vms pal code version 1.18  arc console version     4.23 srm console version    7.0 osf pal code version    1.22  ) but i have an alpha station 250  4/266       with the following   srm console v 6.9-4  arc console  v 4.23  vms pal code 4.xx    and an alpha station 600 5/266  % i upgraded the firmware with cd v 5.6    srm console v 7.0-10 arc console v 4.23 vms pal code 1.20    My question is:   Y 1) how is it possible that the as 250 with srm v6.9-4 have a vms pal code version of 4.xx L      and the as 600 with srm  v7.0-10 have a vms pal code version of 1.20  ?  \ 2) which alpha firmware cd version do i need to upgrade the vms pal code to at least v4.xx ?   any help would be appreciated    reguards Nazim Manser    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:26:57 +0000 - From: "Dr. J.C.Hill" <hill@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> $ Subject: Re: alpha firmware versions1 Message-ID: <3C1F2801.7DA7FBAE@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk>   , This is a multi-part message in MIME format.& --------------40CD19A407DD7B89E2BA7BF5* Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit    Nazim MANSER wrote:  > 	 > Hi all,  > G > Can someone explain me what is the relationship between the following  >  > vms pal code version,  > srm console version, > osf pal code  version Y > arc console version                  and                    alpha firmware cd version ?   B In principle I don't believe that there is a "relationship". I've C noticed that the SRM version for (for example) the AlphaServer 1200 E follows the CD version, but the same is not true on the older systems E (e.g. the AlphaStation 200 4/100 reached (and stopped at!) SRM V7.0).    >  > as an example  >   > in alpha firmware cd vers. 5.6 >  > the following applies  >  > vms pal code version 1.18  > arc console version     4.23 > srm console version    7.0 > osf pal code version    1.22 > ( > but i have an alpha station 250  4/266 >  > with the following >  > srm console v 6.9-4  > arc console  v 4.23  > vms pal code 4.xx  >   > and an alpha station 600 5/266 > ' > i upgraded the firmware with cd v 5.6  >  > srm console v 7.0-10 > arc console v 4.23 > vms pal code 1.20  >  > My question is:  > [ > 1) how is it possible that the as 250 with srm v6.9-4 have a vms pal code version of 4.xx N >      and the as 600 with srm  v7.0-10 have a vms pal code version of 1.20  ?  A Because they are different systems - the vms pal code version is  B specific to the hardware, and cannot be updated by the firmware CD> (it is fixed at manufacturing time). The srm (and arc) consoleD firmware are the only two items in your list that are updated by the CD.    > ^ > 2) which alpha firmware cd version do i need to upgrade the vms pal code to at least v4.xx ?  C As mentioned above, you can't. In general you should update the srm B and arc console firmware to the latest versions (though check that> the release notes don't advise otherwise for special reasons).    >  > any help would be appreciated  >  > reguards Nazim Manser    Regards,	 John Hill & --------------40CD19A407DD7B89E2BA7BF5- Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;   name="hill.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit * Content-Description: Card for Dr. J.C.Hill  Content-Disposition: attachment;  filename="hill.vcf"   begin:vcard  n:Hill;John  x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:University of Cambridge  version:2.1 % email;internet:hill@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk  tel;fax:01223-353920 tel;work:01223-337243 Q adr;quoted-printable:;;Cavendish Lab.=0D=0AMadingley Road;Cambridge;;CB3 0HE;U.K.  x-mozilla-cpt:;0 fn:John Hill	 end:vcard   ( --------------40CD19A407DD7B89E2BA7BF5--   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:43:51 -0500 + From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> $ Subject: RE: alpha firmware versionsT Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4010D7231@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Some additional pointer info -  H <ftp://ftp.digital.com/pub/Digital/Alpha/firmware/v6.1/doc/alpha_v61_fw_ upd.pdf>=20 . (one url - may wrap .. latest release is V6.1)  > <ftp://ftp.digital.com/pub/Digital/Alpha/firmware/readme.html>4 See release notes for specific processor you have ..   Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Compaq Canada Corp.  Professional Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----2 From: Dr. J.C.Hill [mailto:hill@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk] Sent: December 18, 2001 6:27 AM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com $ Subject: Re: alpha firmware versions     Nazim MANSER wrote:  >=20	 > Hi all,  >=20G > Can someone explain me what is the relationship between the following  >=20 > vms pal code version,  > srm console version, > osf pal code  version C > arc console version                  and                    alpha  firmware cd version ?   D In principle I don't believe that there is a "relationship". I've=20C noticed that the SRM version for (for example) the AlphaServer 1200 E follows the CD version, but the same is not true on the older systems E (e.g. the AlphaStation 200 4/100 reached (and stopped at!) SRM V7.0).    >=20 > as an example  >=20  > in alpha firmware cd vers. 5.6 >=20 > the following applies  >=20 > vms pal code version 1.18  > arc console version     4.23 > srm console version    7.0 > osf pal code version    1.22 >=20( > but i have an alpha station 250  4/266 >=20 > with the following >=20 > srm console v 6.9-4  > arc console  v 4.23  > vms pal code 4.xx  >=20  > and an alpha station 600 5/266 >=20' > i upgraded the firmware with cd v 5.6  >=20 > srm console v 7.0-10 > arc console v 4.23 > vms pal code 1.20  >=20 > My question is:  >=20F > 1) how is it possible that the as 250 with srm v6.9-4 have a vms pal code version of 4.xxF >      and the as 600 with srm  v7.0-10 have a vms pal code version of 1.20  ?   C Because they are different systems - the vms pal code version is=20 B specific to the hardware, and cannot be updated by the firmware CD> (it is fixed at manufacturing time). The srm (and arc) consoleD firmware are the only two items in your list that are updated by the CD.    >=20E > 2) which alpha firmware cd version do i need to upgrade the vms pal  code to at least v4.xx ?  C As mentioned above, you can't. In general you should update the srm B and arc console firmware to the latest versions (though check that> the release notes don't advise otherwise for special reasons).  =20 >=20 > any help would be appreciated  >=20 > reguards Nazim Manser    Regards,	 John Hill    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:52:27 -0500 5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> $ Subject: Re: alpha firmware versions0 Message-ID: <lBJT7.70$sK3.4125@news.cpqcorp.net>  K The "SRM" is the console program.  Along with the console program, PAL code D is bundled.  Each has a version.  For VMS there is a text file whichJ contains the minimum versions for each platform.  This file is read duringJ boot (V7.1-2 and later I think) and VMS will complain if you are below the minimum.      9 "Nazim MANSER" <Nazim.Manser@socgen.com> wrote in message L news:0589E3C1F1A4D046*/c=FR/admd=ATLAS/prmd=SG/o=INFI/s=MANSER/g=NAZIM/@MHS. ..	 > Hi all,  > G > Can someone explain me what is the relationship between the following  >  > vms pal code version,  > srm console version, > osf pal code  version L > arc console version                  and                    alpha firmware cd version ? >  >  > as an example  >   > in alpha firmware cd vers. 5.6 >  > the following applies  >  > vms pal code version 1.18  > arc console version     4.23 > srm console version    7.0 > osf pal code version    1.22 > ( > but i have an alpha station 250  4/266 >  > with the following >  > srm console v 6.9-4  > arc console  v 4.23  > vms pal code 4.xx  >   > and an alpha station 600 5/266 > ' > i upgraded the firmware with cd v 5.6  >  > srm console v 7.0-10 > arc console v 4.23 > vms pal code 1.20  >  > My question is:  > K > 1) how is it possible that the as 250 with srm v6.9-4 have a vms pal code  version of 4.xx K >      and the as 600 with srm  v7.0-10 have a vms pal code version of 1.20  ?  > J > 2) which alpha firmware cd version do i need to upgrade the vms pal code to at least v4.xx ?  >  > any help would be appreciated  >  > reguards Nazim Manser    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:16:37 +0100 % From: "Peter Skoog" <psk@it.volvo.se>  Subject: backup problems, Message-ID: <9vnc42$pl6$1@vg170.it.volvo.se>   Hi,   J I am trying to backup script on my VMS-workstation. After having tried allI combinations of backup /backup /record  /since=backup etc, I give up, Can J somebody give me a hint how to make this script for daily(incremental) and monthly(total) backups.    Regards  Peter    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:35:41 +0000   From: Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target : Message-ID: <OF08D58657.CEC13AAD-ON00256B26.00500D1A@btyp>  I Have any of you actually LOOKED at a Skoda these last few years - some of D the best mid-priced cars around - and the RS is a brilliant fun car.  / Too many living in the past in so many areas...    ;^D    Steve S         D "Rupert Pigott" <Darkb00ng@btinternet.com> on 12/17/2001 11:23:47 PM    To:        Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com cc: H From:      "Rupert Pigott" <Darkb00ng@btinternet.com>, 17 December 2001,            11:23 p.m.     Re: Compaq now a takeover target    3 Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message < news:20011217095414.Y67997-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu... > > ...and Microsoft ??? >  > Yugo or Skoda??   I Dunno about Yugos, but all the Skodas I've known have been cheap, durable H and reliable. 3 words you can't apply to Billwarez. Maybe I've just been
 lucky, dunno.    Cheers,  Rupert              F ______________________________________________________________________     [Information] -- PostMaster:D This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) and may beG confidential. If you are not the named addressee, or if the message has G been addressed to you in error, you must not read, disclose, reproduce, $ distribute or use this transmission.  H Delivery of this message to any person other than the named addressee isG not intended in any way to waive confidentiality.  If you have received K this transmission in error please contact the sender or delete the message.   
 Thank you.  D Yell Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7PT.; Registered in England and Wales, registered number 4205228.   I Yellow Pages Sales Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire, D RG1 7PT. Registered in England and Wales, registered number 1403041.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:45:23 -0500 + From: "Chris Moore" <mc.moore@sympatico.ca> ) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetn; Message-ID: <mvJT7.12450$J%2.1603342@news20.bellglobal.com>   J Anybody else heard the rumour concerning IBM........who are waiting in theH wings for the collapse of the CHOMPAQ 'deal' and will then pick up Q for
 loose change.a  H Eliminates a PC competitor, gives them strong mid-range credibility, andC they could 'cherry-pick' the Service organization, all for relativec& pennies...........or so the story goes  @ ================================================================J any resemblance to the truth is purely coincidental and will be avoided in
 the future   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:09:11 GMTs4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetn> Message-ID: <HSJT7.17541$Sj1.10255842@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  6 "Chris Moore" <mc.moore@sympatico.ca> wrote in message5 news:mvJT7.12450$J%2.1603342@news20.bellglobal.com...uL > Anybody else heard the rumour concerning IBM........who are waiting in theJ > wings for the collapse of the CHOMPAQ 'deal' and will then pick up Q for > loose change.  > J > Eliminates a PC competitor, gives them strong mid-range credibility, andE > they could 'cherry-pick' the Service organization, all for relativer( > pennies...........or so the story goes >n  J Yeah, the rumour has been circulating, I know not if there is any credenceH to it. I still maintain that if the merger fails to go through CPQ couldD render itself a more attractive acquisition candidate by exiting theF consumer peecee market. Might well make the firm more profitable, too!   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:00:21 -0500s- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>o) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targeto, Message-ID: <3C1F9241.3205D88F@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:qL > Yeah, the rumour has been circulating, I know not if there is any credenceJ > to it. I still maintain that if the merger fails to go through CPQ couldF > render itself a more attractive acquisition candidate by exiting theH > consumer peecee market. Might well make the firm more profitable, too!  G Compaq can make itself attractive by making all sorts of bad managementtM decisions that will drive the sahare price down at which point, a garage sale I buy of Comapq makes sense because of all the hidden jewels that have beentN underutilised by Compaq which the new owner can clean and make shiny again andG rake in the profits that Compaq refused to generate on those platforms.    ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 10:06:28 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> & Subject: Re: Compaq without the mergerH Message-ID: <y44rmoj3sb.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  3 "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:t  G > Sorry to burst your bubble. Customer service complaints in the US run 
 > rampant.  H Oh, I know - I've lived some time in the US and know that, for instance,H customer service is staffed by people taken from the street the same dayB and sat in front of a phone and monitor. That's why I said "German perception".  J There was a very amusing article from two of Der Spiegel's correspondant -H one in New York, the other in San Francisco - about their experiences inG this area (about a year ago, IIRC). Made great reading, especially with  regard to craftsmen.   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 08:28:35 +0100M* From: dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons)) Subject: Re: CXX and the Hobbyist licenseoP Message-ID: <Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-jK3FZjnnzjr3@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>  Q On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:57:01, "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> wrote:   - > Dave Parsons <dwparsons@t-online.de> wrote:rP > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:53:15, koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:L > >>    Yes.  I have it working on mine.  The CXX license ships with all theJ > >>    other layered product licenes.  IIRC the compielr is on the 2nd CDI > >>    with most of the other compilers, but I'm a little foggy on that.m > N > > Err, 2nd CD? I only received one. I have C,Pascal & Fortran but can't find. > > CXX (or CCXX). I received mine a year ago. > L > He means the ConDist, Unfortunatly the OpenVMS Hobbyist CD is only one CD,+ > while a ConDist is a whole stack of CD's.  > 1 Thanks, is that available - at a realistic price?0I If so, do you have any pointers? As I said earlier, I spent a lot of timek: Saturday going round Compaq's site and found nothing much.   Dave   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 03:00 PST:+ From: rankin@eql14.caltech.edu (Pat Rankin)k) Subject: Re: CXX and the Hobbyist license01 Message-ID: <18DEC200103001688@eql14.caltech.edu>-  Q In article <Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-jK3FZjnnzjr3@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>,\0   dwparsons@t-online.de writes...  > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:57:01,\4  "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> wrote: [...]pM >> He means the ConDist, Unfortunatly the OpenVMS Hobbyist CD is only one CD, , >> while a ConDist is a whole stack of CD's. > 3 > Thanks, is that available - at a realistic price?oK > If so, do you have any pointers? As I said earlier, I spent a lot of timeh< > Saturday going round Compaq's site and found nothing much.  >      "Condist" is short for "consolidated distribution", which< you may or may not find via searching.  It was renamed to be? "Software Product Library" several years ago and I'm reasonably5? sure (but haven't checked) that you'll be able to find it undero> this name.  There is a subscription update service that can be? ordered to go with it, so don't get them mixed up when checking.? prices.  I have a vague recollection of the initial set costing ? something on the order of $1700, but don't take my word for it.s  2                 Pat Rankin, rankin@eql.caltech.edu   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:55:44 GMTw1 From: "Mark D. Jilson" <jilly@clarityconnect.com>e) Subject: Re: CXX and the Hobbyist licensep2 Message-ID: <3C1F58F2.E271FFB1@clarityconnect.com>  D From the OpenVMS SPD, http://www.compaq.com/info/SP2501/SP2501PF.PDFF page 31, what you want is either the LP & OS binaries CD set (no docs)D QA-5FX8A-A8 or the LP CD set w/ docs QA-03XAA-H8.  I do not know the cost of these items.  G Additionally that page lists the order numbers for the Listings CDs andnD the numbers for the periodic update services for all of these items.   Pat Rankin wrote:  > S > In article <Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-jK3FZjnnzjr3@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>,\ " >  dwparsons@t-online.de writes..." > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:57:01,\6 >  "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> wrote: > [...] O > >> He means the ConDist, Unfortunatly the OpenVMS Hobbyist CD is only one CD,h. > >> while a ConDist is a whole stack of CD's. > >m5 > > Thanks, is that available - at a realistic price? M > > If so, do you have any pointers? As I said earlier, I spent a lot of timea> > > Saturday going round Compaq's site and found nothing much. > @ >      "Condist" is short for "consolidated distribution", which> > you may or may not find via searching.  It was renamed to beA > "Software Product Library" several years ago and I'm reasonably A > sure (but haven't checked) that you'll be able to find it under @ > this name.  There is a subscription update service that can beA > ordered to go with it, so don't get them mixed up when checkingrA > prices.  I have a vague recollection of the initial set costing A > something on the order of $1700, but don't take my word for it.s > 4 >                 Pat Rankin, rankin@eql.caltech.edu   --  D Jilly	- Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley - Lockwood, NY0 	- jilly@clarityconnect.com			- Brett Bodine fan. 	- Mark.Jilson@Compaq.com			- since 1975 or so, 	- http://www.jilly.baka.com               -   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:17:53 +0100e, From: "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl>' Subject: Re: Disaster recover - issues?)* Message-ID: <9vmuaj$p2v$1@news1.xs4all.nl>  : "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message- news:K98lESblqP8T@eisner.encompasserve.org... @ > In article <%htT7.5486$Q06.32246@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>, "Syltrem"( <syltrem@videotron.spammenot.ca> writes:I > >> If that's DECnet Phase IV, then DECnet actually changes the hardware  MAC G > >> address when it starts up, so you won't have to change your DECnetD > > address. > >n9 > > What about Phase V? Do you know? I'm running phase V.  >t1 > DECnet Phase V does not change the MAC address.C  H Well, it depends :-). If you enable DECnet IV addressing in DECnet V, it DOES change the MAC addresses.K However, since the 'old' and the 'new' clusters are not running together onnF ther same network, there is no need to change anything with respect to DECnet, be it either IV or V.i  	 Bart ZornM   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:50:19 -0500:- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>5' Subject: Re: Disaster recover - issues?a, Message-ID: <3C1F032E.75D3389E@videotron.ca>   Bart Zorn wrote:M > However, since the 'old' and the 'new' clusters are not running together on2H > ther same network, there is no need to change anything with respect to > DECnet, be it either IV or V.p  K How many disaster recovery plans have the backup node on a totally separateo6 network that never communicates with the primary one ?  M Consider the scenaruio where main system is kaput, building is still standingcM and occupied, so you bring up the backup one. But the backup one will need toqT communicate with the users who are still connected to the primary computer building.  F Another issue to look at: if your clusters are via ethernet, isn't theM ethernet address important (and that is the one seen well before decnet comeso+ up to change the ethernet address, right ?)r  L So when asked to build a cluster with a bunch of surprise machines, one willK have to carefully set out procedures to ensure that their hardware ethernetvN address are taken and the cluster and MOP databases updated to allow the nodes to boot from each other.   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 10:20:48 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)IC Subject: Disaster Recovery Experts Recovering Disks From WTC Attackr' Message-ID: <9vn5a0$fic$2@joe.rice.edu>a- Keywords: data,recovery,multisite,vmsclusters   G Disk data recovery is an expense that multisite VMSClusters could have a
 avoided.    J Hopefully, there will be a government after action report on what systems 5 minimized loss of data from the September 11 attacks.   9    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2101075,00.html H    ZDNet |UK| - News - Story - Computer experts probe 11 September deals  #    09:27 Tuesday 18th December 2001     Reuters  Source: Reutersa  F   "A sharp rise in financial transactions just before the disaster may,    have been the result of criminal activity  D    German computer experts are working round the clock to unlock theH    truth behind an unexplained surge in financial transactions made justH    before two hijacked planes crashed into New York's World Trade Center    on 11 September.   ?    Were criminals responsible for the sharp rise in credit cardsC    transactions that moved through some computer systems at the WTCa1    shortly before the planes hit the twin towers?n  I    Or was it coincidence that unusually large sums of money, perhaps moreiI    than 70m, were rushed through the computers as the disaster unfolded?i  H    A world leader in retrieving data, German-based firm Convar is trying<    to answer those questions and help credit card companies,E    telecommunications firms and accountants in New York recover theireH    records from computer hard drives that have been partially damaged by    fire, water or fine dust.  G    Using a pioneering laser scanning technology to find data on damaged-H    computer hard drives and main frames found in the rubble of the World@    Trade Centre and other nearby collapsed buildings, Convar hasF    recovered information from 32 computers that support assumptions of    dirty doomsday dealings.g  I    "The suspicion is that inside information about the attack was used toMG    send financial transaction commands and authorisations in the belieffI    that amid all the chaos the criminals would have, at the very least, al9    good head start," said Convar director Peter Henschel.E  F    "Of course it is also possible that there were perfectly legitimateG    reasons for the unusual rise in business volume," he told Reuters in     an interview.      Profiting from disaster?e  G    "It could turn out that Americans went on an absolute shopping binge I    on that Tuesday morning. But at this point there are many transactions 0    that cannot be accounted for," Henschel said.  G    "Not only the volume but the size of the transactions was far higher G    than usual for a day like that. There is a suspicion that these were34    possibly planned to take advantage of the chaos."      [ snip ]   I    Citing client privacy, Henschel declined to say which companies ConvaroF    is working for, or provide details about the data retrieved so far.E    But he said the raw material, up to 40 gigabytes per computer hard G    drive, is sent immediately by satellite or courier back to New York.       Money trail  G    Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert at the company, said illegalsG    transfers of more than $100m (70m) might have been made immediatelye"    before and during the disaster.  F    "There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of theE    approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts I    exceeding $100m," Wagner said. "They thought that the records of their >    transactions could not be traced after the main frames were    destroyed."  I    The companies are paying between $20,000 and $30,000 for each computern    recovered, Henschel said..."s      4 --Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:14:18 GMTo# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>mG Subject: Re: Disaster Recovery Experts Recovering Disks From WTC Attack-= Message-ID: <e3JT7.58465$pa1.20583335@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>m  F Those that had no/minimal data loss are those which had off-site mediaE backup (tape) or multi-site clusters that were shadowed or were doingoG 2-phase commit to a hot off-site. Don't count on any goverement doing atI study about what is essentially operational procedures that were/were notvJ implemented by the companies affected. What do you expect such a report toI say -  that 9 out of 10 companies wiped out in the WTC attacks were usingfJ stupid implementations of computer systems and the IT heads were dorks for8 not using OpenVMS? It may be true, but it won't be said.  E That said, DECHPaq should be be doing some promotional advertising of C clusters/shadowing, but if that involves mentioning OpenVMS you can. fuggetaboutit.    6 "Jerry Leslie" <leslie@clio.rice.edu> wrote in message! news:9vn5a0$fic$2@joe.rice.edu...nH > Disk data recovery is an expense that multisite VMSClusters could have
 > avoided. >nK > Hopefully, there will be a government after action report on what systems_7 > minimized loss of data from the September 11 attacks.a >n   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:07:15 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>mG Subject: Re: Disaster Recovery Experts Recovering Disks From WTC Attack , Message-ID: <3C1F85D3.87E19DFB@videotron.ca>   Jerry Leslie wrote:sH >   "A sharp rise in financial transactions just before the disaster may. >    have been the result of criminal activity  K If only those firms located in WTC were the target of those unusually large K number of transactions just before the accident, how come those firms wouldf really know about that surge ?  L I could understand a fishng expedition (or archeological dig ?) to get thoseL drives and see if there was anything suspicious on the prior to the crashes,K but  if the banks already have data that shows an unusually large number of-M transactions, then they would already have access to the data , so why botherm% with the hard drive reconstructions ?m   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:09:33 -0500l  From: webmaster@buildacareer.com$ Subject: FREE Resumes for Recruiters0 Message-ID: <20011218165308984.DJY904@webmaster>   <html>   <head>J <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"> </head>n   <body>   <div>lV   <p align="center"><b><font face="verdana" size="5"><font color="#ff0000">Free</font>,   Resumes Delivered to Your Inbox</font></b> </div>{     <p align="center"><img src="http://www.buildacareer.com/banner1.gif" border="0" NOSEND="1" width="416" height="66"></p>      <p align="center"><center><b><font face="verdana" size="5"><font color="#ff0000"><a href="http://www.buildacareer.com/recruitersignup.cfm">Free</a></font><a href="http://www.buildacareer.com/recruitersignup.cfm">2     Resumes Delivered to Your Inbox</a></font></b>L     <p align="center"></center><font face="verdana" size="2">With just a fewL     clicks of your mouse our <b>Resume Distributor</b> will&nbsp;</font><br>I     <font face="verdana" size="2">email you resumes instantly as they are 1     approved into our database .&nbsp;</font></p>o_   <p align="center"><font face="Verdana"><b>100% for FREE, No Tricks or Gimmicks</b></font></p>gd   <p align="center"><b><font size="4"><a href="http://www.buildacareer.com/recruitersignup.cfm">Sign   Me Up!</a></font></b></p>t   <div align="center">     <center>6     <table cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" border="0">
       <tbody>          <tr>;           <td align="middle" width="219" bgColor="#ffffff">k             <p align="center"><img src="http://www.buildacareer.com/images/newdef4.gif" border="0" NOSEND="1" width="126" height="31"></p>           </td>o         <tr>L           <td vAlign="top" borderColor="#336699" align="middle" width="219">2             <p align="center"><font face="Verdana,R Arial, Helvetica" color="#336699" size="1">&#21;</font><font face="Verdana, Arial,I Helvetica" size="2">Resumes Sent Instantly as Job Seekers Sign up.</font>s2             <p align="center"><font face="Verdana,R Arial, Helvetica" color="#336699" size="1">&#21;</font><font face="Verdana, Arial,J Helvetica" size="2">Email Messages can easily be imported into your Resume             Database</font></p>e2             <p align="center"><font face="Verdana,R Arial, Helvetica" color="#336699" size="1">&#21;</font><font face="Verdana, Arial,A Helvetica" size="2">The cost for our service is FREE&nbsp;</font>e             <p align="center"><a href="http://www.buildacareer.com/recruitersignup.cfm"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" color="#ff0000" size="3"><b>Click+             Here to Sign Up!</b></font></a>.2             <p align="center"><font face="Verdana,z Arial, Helvetica" color="#336699" size="1">&#21;</font><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" color="#000000" size="-1">NoN             old resumes! Our candidates are looking for jobs today!</font></p>           </td>n
         </tr>        </tbody>     </table>
     </center>c   </div>]   <p align="center"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" color="#ff0000" size="2">Thousands #   of Satisfied Customers</font></p>nH   <p align="center"><font size="1">It is the policy of Buildacareer thatF   recruiters not market the candidate's resume until the candidate<br>O   has given his/her consent. This includes sending it out to clients or postinge   it on the internet!<br>fM   Recruiters who violate this policy risk being removed from the Buildacareer8   Recruiter Network</font></p>P   <p align="center"><a href="http://www.buildacareer.com/remover.cfm">Click Here4   to Never Receive notification Again</a>.&nbsp;</p>   </body>>   </html>    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:20:23 +0100 ! From: stefan.appeltans@banksys.bee
 Subject: help J Message-ID: <FBD86325E818D311ADC10008C75B7A6303E3C5B6@azha.win.banksys.be>   help    % Stefan Appeltans - System Consultant X  	 OPS SE BOp Banksys n.v. Haachtsesteenweg 1442  B-1130 Brussel  # E-mail: Stefan.Appeltans@Banksys.be  Phone : +32 (0) 2 727 88 41c   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:45:04 -0500e  From: jamese@beast.dtsw.army.mil8 Subject: Re: How to do daemons on VMS? (additional info)0 Message-ID: <01121807450488@beast.dtsw.army.mil>  I geary@bermuda.io.com (Big Bird) wrote on Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:03:50 GMT in 7 <asqT7.296842$8q.27148912@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>:i  E > In article <3roT7.207043$tf5.13617499@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,f( > Big Bird <geary@bermuda.io.com> wrote: > < H > < I've got a program that runs on unix. It it started from the commandJ > < line and forks. The parent exits and the child continues to run in the# > < background as a server process.s > < G > < I want to port this to VMS. What is the VMS way to do these things?j > F > Thanks to all who have responded, I see there is additional relevant# > info that I neglected to include.5 > D > The program in question is the editor NEdit. It runs on unix, VMS,G > OS/2, and a cygwin environment. AFAICT, none of the active developers C > use VMS. There are a couple of us watching them to make sure they  > don't break things on VMS. > D > This program first checks to see if a server process exists. If itD > does, then the program sends some info the the server. If a server? > process does not exist, then it becomes a new server with thehD > previously mentioned fork. It is desirable to have as much code inC > common between the unix and VMS versions (and the OS/2 and cygwin 7 > versions, too, but I don't know anything about them).h > % > Can all of these goals be achieved?r  > Already done.  Nedit works on OpenVMS already. Get a copy from= www.nedit.org.  It requires Motif, from DECWindows or anothern source such as Lesstif.h  : Ed James                           ed.james@telecomsys.com5 TeleCommunications Systems, Inc.   voice 410-295-1919-; 2024 West Street, Suite 300              800-810-0827 x191945 Annapolis, MD 21401-3556           fax   410-280-1094m   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 15:17:56 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)S8 Subject: Re: How to do daemons on VMS? (additional info), Message-ID: <9vnmn4$1s95$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  * In article <3C1ED472.7040102@qsl.network>,0  "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> writes: |> sH |> fork() will create a child process, not a server process.  But under H |> UNIX, the child can become it's own parent.  That can not be done on  |> OpenVMS presently.o  F Can't be done under Unix either.  The PID and PPID are never the same.; Unix may have some sins, but incest isn't one of them.  :-)    bill   -- 2J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   i   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 12:22:06 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) 8 Subject: Re: How to do daemons on VMS? (additional info)3 Message-ID: <8LrsLJzGpVTS@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  ` In article <9vnmn4$1s95$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:, > In article <3C1ED472.7040102@qsl.network>,2 >  "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> writes: > |> dJ > |> fork() will create a child process, not a server process.  But under J > |> UNIX, the child can become it's own parent.  That can not be done on  > |> OpenVMS presently.l > H > Can't be done under Unix either.  The PID and PPID are never the same.= > Unix may have some sins, but incest isn't one of them.  :-)k >   G 	Well .. duh!!!  Historically, Eunuchs has never had an incest problem.e 	;-)   				Rob    ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 09:59:21 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> = Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe7H Message-ID: <y47krkj446.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  6 "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:  L > Our European colleagues seem to look less kindly on layoffs, retrenchment,K > and rightsizing than do we Yanks. Since a significant workforce reductiontK > will accompany a consummated acquisition, I suspect that the EU will lookI  > long and hard at the proposal.  K But that is not Monti's concern, nor should it be. He is consumer-oriented,u not employee-oriented.   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:53:55 -0800a' From: David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu>n= Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europen+ Message-ID: <3C1F6693.110C8200@caltech.edu>    John McLean wrote: >  > David Mathog wrote:t > >eI > > Let's see, take two of the three biggest PC makers and eliminate one.eH > > Seems like a slam dunk for "fewer choices and higher prices" doesn'tI > > it?  I just don't see how HP can argue that they're planning on doing1J > > anything other than this since all the projected savings of the mergerH > > come about only after they axe Compaq's PC production (unfortunately& > > along with 15000 or so employees.) > M > I thought the announced 15,000 were pretty much because of job duplication.i > J > I don't recall seeing any plans by HP-CPQ to axe PC production, althoughK > every man and his dog are saying that is what should be done as priority.o  C Where else besides Compaq's PC division are they going to find thate leveluE of duplication?  And after they fire a company's worth of "redundant"d employees, howH can the PC division continue to function?  Obviously it can't.  The plan seems prettyA clear to me, shut down one of the PC lines (presumably Compaq's),o transfer some of theA engineers and maybe some sales droids (the ones that maintain theh corporate PCA accounts) and what you're left with is essentially one of the twor original PC companies. Exit stage left competition.   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:13:12 -0500r& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>= Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe-/ Message-ID: <u1v1pqjdq523e1@corp.supernews.com>2  G There have been several articles in the press lately about this generalo topic...  D >    At issue is whether the HP-Compaq merger will result in reducedC >    competition, giving consumers fewer choices and higher prices.e  J ...the author of the below article is making the mistake many writers makeJ when writing about the EU.  They assume the EU system is based on the sameI principles as ours - it is not.  Unlike the US system the focus of the EUtH system is will the merger harm competitors - not will it harm consumers.F The focus of the US system is will the merger harm consumers.  The keyJ difference being there are mergers that do cause the market to become moreH efficient thus benefiting the consumer even when competition is reduced.I The EU system is biased against these mergers which in fact means that EUtI systems will try block mergers that would actually benefit the consumers.t  L Remember competition alone is NOT the only factor that determines beneficialJ delivery to consumers.  There is also marketplace efficiency and economiesG of scale.  The EU system is very anti-consumer when a market changes to H maturing product market because at that point is when for reasons marketH efficiency competitions should be reduced.  When you can no longer driveC down the cost of mousetraps through innovation the next approach isA economies of scale.i  K Any who doubt this only need to look at incredible growth of the US economydK in the 1990's.  It grew at a remarkable rate during a period of significantNI mergers.  The US economy had huge productivity gains which unquestionably L drove down the cost to consumers. What made the economy grow was InformationJ Technology advances that allowed companies to become much larger but still. be able to effectively manage their operation.  B Give the heavy involvement of EU governments in industry it is notB surprising they would set up a system that protects companies with government ownership interests.   H US regulators are well aware a major fight is coming with the EU that isL going to become very ugly unless the EU system changes.  They have zeroed onL the fact the US only judges harm to the consumer while the EU judges harm to competitors.  E Over the long run this will backfire on the EU like all protectionism L usually does.  Now that it has become clear that being a multi-national withJ a involvement in the EU runs certain risks you will begin to see companiesE structure themselves to minimize the risk.  That likely will includesp" minimizing investment in the EU...    6 "Jerry Leslie" <leslie@clio.rice.edu> wrote in message! news:9vlmm4$4rs$1@joe.rice.edu...s@ >      http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/news/svtop/hp121701.htmD >      HP, Compaq face antitrust hurdle in U.S., Europe (12/17/2001) >h; >                       BY TRACY SEIPEL AND THERESE POLETTIc. >                                 Mercury News > ? >                General Electric and Honeywell couldn't do it.o >o; >                    Neither could MCI/WorldCom and Sprint.  >dJ >    "The planned merger between Hewlett-Packard and Compaq Computer facesH >     the twin hurdles neither of those deals could overcome: regulatoryG >     approval from the Federal Trade Commission or Justice Department,s, >     topped off by the European Commission. >vE >     At issue is whether the HP-Compaq merger will result in reducedrI >     competition, giving consumers fewer choices and higher prices. EachaJ >     regulatory agency must investigate the deal, and until HP and CompaqL >     executives receive full approval in the United States and Europe, they# >     won't set a shareholder vote.e >eI >     Given the regulatory timelines, the HP-Compaq deal is not likely to0J >     win government approval in both places before the end of January. HPK >     has said it expects a shareholder vote sometime between late Februarya >     and the end of June. >MJ >     Chief executive Carly Fiorina and other HP and Compaq executives areC >     confident they will win approval, saying they have done their2K >     homework. And they have learned from one of GE's mistakes: Don't rushh' >     through a complicated process..."e >r >l > --Jerry Leslie   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:21:43 -0500o& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>= Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europeo/ Message-ID: <u1v2a4s29she91@corp.supernews.com>o  L "Jan Vorbrueggen" <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y47krkj446.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...: > But that is not Monti's concern, nor should it be. He is consumer-oriented, > not employee-oriented.   Not ture   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:30:44 -0500o& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>= Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europes/ Message-ID: <u1v2qo3q95si2c@corp.supernews.com>d  4 "David Mathog" <mathog@caltech.edu> wrote in message% news:3C1E9294.92294D7C@caltech.edu...t > Jerry Leslie wrote:nG > >     At issue is whether the HP-Compaq merger will result in reduced F > >     competition, giving consumers fewer choices and higher prices. >1G > Let's see, take two of the three biggest PC makers and eliminate one.m > Seems like? > a slam dunk for "fewer choices and higher prices" doesn't it?s  L Nope - why would Dell go along with higher prices?  Since Dell has proven itL can make a nice profit at the current prices why would Dell raise prices andF pass up an opportunity to gain market share?  Remember without raisingK prices if a company can increase its marketshare, without a significant newaL investment, the return on investment to shareholders goes up - in fact it is; almost always the fastest way to significant increased ROI.g  F They only way what you describe would happen would be if no company isD making a nice profit (not the case here) or one company had achieved> commanding control of the market (not the case here either)...   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:44:32 +0100m1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> = Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europej5 Message-ID: <3C1F8E90.428AC337@swissonline.delete.ch>1   David Mathog wrote:e >  ...mK > Where else besides Compaq's PC division are they going to find that leveldG > of duplication?  And after they fire a company's worth of "redundant"cO > employees, how can the PC division continue to function?  Obviously it can't.uN > The plan seems pretty clear to me, shut down one of the PC lines (presumablyL > Compaq's), transfer some of the engineers and maybe some sales droids (theL > ones that maintain the corporate PC accounts) and what you're left with is3 > essentially one of the two original PC companies.u    ; Does the PC division really need to continue to function ??t  M Guess how much income Compaq's PC division produced betwen January 1998 until" September 2001 ?         (scroll down to find out)u                                R The PC's made a loss of $337 MILLION dollars against their costs (ie. expenses) of $67.469 BILLION dollars.  U At the same time, Enterprise cost $41.392 BILLION but made a profit of $4.391 BILLIONtE (ie. they returned better than 10% profit of the money spent on them.o    4 COMPAQ -   Charitable Old Men - PC Aims Quixotic ???       John McLeane   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:53:20 +0100n1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>" Subject: IBM to drop PCs ?? 5 Message-ID: <3C1F90A0.BCAFFBB1@swissonline.delete.ch>l  : Well-known industry analyst John Dvorak seems to think so.  
 In a piece atpJ http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2833148,00.html?chkpt=3D=
 zdnnp1tp01' (mind the wrap), he says things like...   J "It's not as though IBM needs to sell personal computers to survive. In f= act, theJ company's financials may improve if it gives up on the PC and concentrate= s onJ enterprise iron, advanced technologies, storage, and services=97all areas=
  in which IBM  does well."u   and =s    J "In 1999, analysts estimated that IBM desktops lost one billion dollars f= or the- company. That was during the last boom year!",   and =c    J "IBM doesn't need to be in a business where it has been mostly the fourth=	  or fifthoJ player, which is     embarrassing and doesn't help the company sell other=  systems or3J services. And you can be sure that having to pay stiff OS licensing fees = to Microsoft# for every machine sold is galling."       7 A pity Compaq doesn't reflect seriously on these words.r     John McLeanm   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:23:25 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> ) Subject: InForm article about Alpha & IPF,5 Message-ID: <3C1F899D.F0842BE4@swissonline.delete.ch>t  J Here's some interesting info from the latest release of Inform magazine (= No. 3,; 2001)  (Also known as INFORM NO. 35  FALL/WINTER 2001/2002)>  J The article is entitled "Compaq and Intel Accelerate Next-generation 64-B= it Servers" J and in the European edition, starts on page 20 but is a little diferent t= o this> version that I picked off the web.  My comments are in [ and ]   ------------  + "When Compaq introduced the Alpha chip,=85"e  $ [Oh really !  Who introduced it ???]    J The companies will combine Compaq's 10 years of 64-bit computing expertis= e.."   [Um, whose 10 years ?? ]    J "As part of the agreement, Compaq will transfer key 64-bit microprocessor=  technologyd and resources to Intel."  F [Yep, the old "transfer" word again.  Never "sell" or even "exchange"]    J Compaq Chairman and CEO Michael Capellas said the pending merger between =
 Compaq andJ Hewlett-Packard (HP) would support the Itanium technology roadmap. HP co-= designed theJ Itanium processor with Intel, and both companies are committed to advanci= ng thisCJ high-performance architecture based on open, market-unifying standards. "=	 Together,XJ Compaq and HP will drive a new cost and value model for enterprise comput= ing,"f Capellas said.  J [Sort of implies that it was a consideration in the deal but doesn't quit=
 e say so.]    J Compaq is converging its Tru64 UNIX and OpenVMS strategies on the Itanium=  J architecture. Moreover, the new family of enterprise servers will support=  the NonStopJ Kernel, Microsoft Windows 2000 and Linux operating systems. These servers=  will6J deliver enterprise-level performance, a lower price to suit the cost-cutt= ing1J initiatives of customers and a compelling roadmap to future server techno= logy.   J [**WARNING !  Note that plans are to have Windows 2000 on ENTERPRISE serv=	 ers usingdJ Itanium.!!!    I wonder, was this an influential part of the plan or a bi= t of co-lateral=85]      J "The bottom line is: We're creating great customer value," Capellas said.=  "I believesJ this agreement represents the best of both worlds: advanced systems engin= eeringJ expertise, clustering technology and global services from Compaq, and lea= dingJ microprocessor design and volume manufacturing from Intel. The ability to=  deliverJ high-performance solutions-including fault tolerance, industry-leading sy= stemshJ performance, high application throughput and high-volume Web servers-on a=  singletD microprocessor architecture is nothing but good news for all of us."  J [I've included this paragraph because it does not appear in the European =
 edition of Inform.]    J Compaq will also continue to work with the open source community to ensur= e thatJ future releases of the Linux kernel support the AlphaServer architecture.=    J [The European version had a sentence about merging Tru64 Unix and HP-UX.]=      J "Having the Intel architecture from the front-end to the back-end will gi= ve customersJ the flexibility to scale-out or scale-up at any level," said Capellas. "T= his is veryeJ consistent with what customers want and quite frankly, what the future ar=
 chitecture of the Internet will be."   J ["Scale up" and "scale out" have been defined by Compaq as getting higher=  performanceH from your processor and extending the clustering or machine connectivityJ respectively.  I thought we already had this with VMS and Unix on Alpha, = =85but perhaps8 it is Windows 2000 that needs it (according to Compaq).]    J The agreement also helps Compaq meet another customer demand: simplificat= ion. =  J Consolidating a wide range of enterprise servers on a single microprocess= orJ architecture will simplify Compaq's entire product line- making choices e=	 asier fore
 customers.  J [Huh ?  Surely this kind of "simplificatio" only matters if you want to s= wap betweent7 operating systems =85 oh, the Windows factor again ???]e       John McLean    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:37:32 GMTo4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>- Subject: Re: InForm article about Alpha & IPFs> Message-ID: <M1MT7.17756$Sj1.10317439@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C1F899D.F0842BE4@swissonline.delete.ch...n  L Here's some interesting info from the latest release of Inform magazine (No. 3,; 2001)  (Also known as INFORM NO. 35  FALL/WINTER 2001/2002)n  K The article is entitled "Compaq and Intel Accelerate Next-generation 64-Bitm Servers"J and in the European edition, starts on page 20 but is a little diferent to this> version that I picked off the web.  My comments are in [ and ]   ------------  ) "When Compaq introduced the Alpha chip,."y  $ [Oh really !  Who introduced it ???]    @ The companies will combine Compaq's 10 years of 64-bit computing expertise.."   [Um, whose 10 years ?? ]  G Well, the Digital name now applies only to Digital Networks and Digital;I India. Digital Equipment Corporation is no more. Gotta give CPQ a pass on:) this Great Moment in Revisionist History.s    I "As part of the agreement, Compaq will transfer key 64-bit microprocessorH
 technology and resources to Intel."  F [Yep, the old "transfer" word again.  Never "sell" or even "exchange"]  < An exercise in semantic opacity on the part of CPQ and INTC.    H Compaq Chairman and CEO Michael Capellas said the pending merger between
 Compaq andE Hewlett-Packard (HP) would support the Itanium technology roadmap. HPu co-designed thenK Itanium processor with Intel, and both companies are committed to advancingh thisG high-performance architecture based on open, market-unifying standards.l
 "Together,B Compaq and HP will drive a new cost and value model for enterprise computing,"0 Capellas said.  J [Sort of implies that it was a consideration in the deal but doesn't quite say so.]  J Compaq can rightfully assert that it's had an Itanium roadmap in place forG several years now. The ISSG and the erstwhile Tandem Division have beeneB playing with IPF stuff for quite a while. And the Tru64 Bravo port! commenced, what, three years ago?n    I Compaq is converging its Tru64 UNIX and OpenVMS strategies on the Itanium I architecture. Moreover, the new family of enterprise servers will support  the NonStoptI Kernel, Microsoft Windows 2000 and Linux operating systems. These servers1 willL deliver enterprise-level performance, a lower price to suit the cost-cuttingB initiatives of customers and a compelling roadmap to future server technology.   L [**WARNING !  Note that plans are to have Windows 2000 on ENTERPRISE servers using J Itanium.!!!    I wonder, was this an influential part of the plan or a bit of co-lateral.]  G Windows domains figure prominently in the post-Marvel enterprise serveryL family. Whether said OS will be attractive to mission-critical customers hasI yet to be seen. On the bright side, multi-OS support means that you don'tC5 HAVE to dumb down from VMS or UNIX or NSK to Windows.o      L "The bottom line is: We're creating great customer value," Capellas said. "I believetC this agreement represents the best of both worlds: advanced systemsl engineeringoE expertise, clustering technology and global services from Compaq, and- leading-I microprocessor design and volume manufacturing from Intel. The ability toM deliver F high-performance solutions-including fault tolerance, industry-leading systemspI performance, high application throughput and high-volume Web servers-on ar singleD microprocessor architecture is nothing but good news for all of us."  H [I've included this paragraph because it does not appear in the European
 edition of Inform.]    J Compaq will also continue to work with the open source community to ensure thatI future releases of the Linux kernel support the AlphaServer architecture.   I [The European version had a sentence about merging Tru64 Unix and HP-UX.]y    K "Having the Intel architecture from the front-end to the back-end will give 	 customersyL the flexibility to scale-out or scale-up at any level," said Capellas. "This is veryaF consistent with what customers want and quite frankly, what the future architecture of the Internet will be."h  I ["Scale up" and "scale out" have been defined by Compaq as getting highert performancebH from your processor and extending the clustering or machine connectivityH respectively.  I thought we already had this with VMS and Unix on Alpha, .but perhaps8 it is Windows 2000 that needs it (according to Compaq).]  6 It appears that Windows remains in a Scalability Daze.    = The agreement also helps Compaq meet another customer demand:  simplification.fK Consolidating a wide range of enterprise servers on a single microprocessortG architecture will simplify Compaq's entire product line- making choices 
 easier for
 customers.  L [Huh ?  Surely this kind of "simplificatio" only matters if you want to swap betweene5 operating systems . oh, the Windows factor again ???]   B It matters if you want to cut costs. Standardizing on a single CPUK architecture (albeit one that's not yet ready for prime time) in the futureaE will eliminate a lot of duplicated effort in the ISSG, HPSD, and NSD.b       John McLeano   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:25:43 +0000v% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>i' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20Lt8 Message-ID: <gg2u1u8l44u62gupp5h38boqmugbvuk5gk@4ax.com>  4 On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 23:52:45 GMT, "Terry C. Shannon"" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote:     >eJ >Aspen Systems was IIRC the first vendor to offer VMS-or-NT AlphaStations. >KryoTech did so as well.t  E I talked to Aspen a couple of years ago and ended up giving up tryingeC to buy a VMS system from them. First they said "yes" then "no" thencB "may be qualified in the future" Checking their current pages theyC still show a number of systems (new or refurbished) but do not sellvD them with VMS even if the hardware is capable. For example they sellC the XP1000 but only with Tru64. Why???? It costs them nothing extran( to offer it with the VMS license surely?  D Now 5-6 years ago it was a different story but then the motherboardsB were manufactured by Digital and formally qualified for VMS. ThinkF they sold a reasonable number as well but the prices were still on theB high side. There was certainly no option then to buy a cheap hobbyF license for home use either. Somehow after API was formed it seemed toF become harder for third parties to market a system with VMS - both for0 technical and legal reasons. Don't ask me why...  F A quick search on google shows a number of people claiming to have oneE of these systems running VMS back in the 1995-1997 timeframe. Just as ? this got started "Affinity" downplayed it. and the API spin off < finished it off. Recall that back in this time frame VMS wasD outselling OSF/1 and NT on Alpha put together and some people within7 DEC couldn't have that could they? As I see it. anyway.l  B Here's the original announcement: I leave the headers intact as it@ arrived on the Abertay University Alpha/VMS NNTP server (which IB administered)  for nostalgia reasons. When we ordered "zippy" (theF NNTP server below)  plus several other DEC 3000-400 systems around theD start of 1993 I got a phone call from DEC querying the specificationF of VMS. Surely you want Unix I was told. "No", I replied. To which DECA sales replied "Funny that we were led to believe almost all salesd= would be Unix but most people want VMS". As soon as NT became C available on Alpha that;s what DEC pushed and the booming Alpha VMSh6 desktop market was ignored as an embarrassment to DEC.  1 X-NEWS: zippy.dct.ac.uk biz.digital.announce: 220e< Relay-Version: ANU News - V6.1B9 05/16/94 AXP/VMS V1.5; site zippy.dct.ac.ukj Path:: zippy.dct.ac.uk!uknet!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!caen!sdd.hp.com!svc.portal.com!decwrl!pa.dec.com!rjonese  Newsgroups: biz.digital.announceA Subject: Press/Digital Exhibit Drives Home Performance Leadership 2 Message-ID: <9412162138.AA04567@raptor.pa.dec.com>8 From: pr-news@pa.dec.com (Digital Press & Analysts News)# Date: Fri, 16 Dec 94 13:38:57 -0800u  Sender: rjones@usenet.pa.dec.com Approved: rjones@pa.dec.comIE X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA25847; Fri, 16 Dec 94 13:38:59  -0800-E X-Received: by raptor.pa.dec.com; id AA04567; Fri, 16 Dec 94 13:38:57e -0800 ' X-To: Digital Press and Analysts News:;c
 Lines: 145  K ||||||  Digital Press and Analysts News  ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||l?                                               Digital Equipment  Corporationi@                                           Maynard, Massachusetts
 01754-2571 Editorial contact:   Judith Abrahamovicho (508) 264-5405   Fred Bateman (617) 267-0042 ext. 330-    ;           DIGITAL EQUIPMENT EXHIBIT DRIVES HOME PERFORMANCEe2                    LEADERSHIP OF ALPHA AND OpenVMS    ;          Texas Instruments, Liant Software & Magic Softwarer3                  Port Their Applications to OpenVMSp    > ANAHEIM, California -- December 12, 1994 -- Digital Equipment C Corporation and its partners are demonstrating the unequaled power sE of Alpha and OpenVMS at the DECUS trade show being held this week at oD the Anaheim Convention Center in Anaheim, California.  Powerful new E software applications from Texas Instruments, Reliability and Magic, n? and an industry-first non-Digital workstation running OpenVMS, - highlight the OpenVMS exhibit.  C      At Booth 464, Alpha microprocessors and the OpenVMS operating iC system are at the heart of the show's highest performing systems.  ,@ Workstations and PCs running OpenVMS from Digital Equipment and : Aspen Systems are demonstrating a variety of newly ported @ applications in the areas of database management and application development.  = Texas Instruments Make Available Composer by IEF* for OpenVMSn  B      The Texas Instruments (TI) software business announced today ? that Composer by IEF will be available for Digital Equipment's mD OpenVMS operating system on 64-bit Alpha-powered systems, beginning @ in the first quarter of 1995.  TI's Composer is a model-driven, @ integrated software application development solution for client/E server environments. Composer for IEF includes two specific software i7 products that are available for the Alpha OpenVMS line:u  ?      o 	The Implementation Toolset software runs on a computer oC         configured with the final target platform.  It ensures the sD         automation of the compilation, linking, and installation of +         the Composer-developed applicationsp  @      o 	The Client/Server Encyclopedia provides a repository of B         reuseable components for software application development 8         among workgroups in a client/server environment.  :      "Digital's Alpha line offers high reliability, price/C performance systems required for today's growing companies, and TI iA provides the tools to develop client/server software required to .D meet the changing business needs," said Duncan McClain, director of B marketing for the TI software division.  "With Composer available = for the OpenVMS Alpha platform, customers will have the best  @ solution available to enable them to develop and deploy client/ B server applications in the distributed environments where maximum 8 scalability and flexibility is required," McClain added.  ; Relativity, Inc. Demonstrates Relativity* for Alpha OpenVMSr  B      Relativity, Inc., a division of Liant Software, will also be E demonstrating Relativity for DEC COBOL, a new developer application, oE running on Digital's Alpha and VAX OpenVMS systems.  Relativity is a  C revolutionary software tool that provides direct relational access yC to existing DEC COBOL data without the inefficiencies of gateways, '? data warehousing or replication.  Relativity is the latest in aaD series of software tools to help developers integrate existing data 5 and applications with new open client/server systems.a  E      "Digital's Alpha systems are an ideal platform for Relativity," -C said Bruce Flory, director of marketing for Relativity, Inc.  "The mB speed of Alpha technology, combined with the price/performance of B these systems, their scalability from desktop to data center, and A the robustness of OpenVMS Clusters provides the platform support oA developers need to integrate existing systems with client/server F developments."  / Magic Software Enterprises Also Chooses OpenVMS   E      Magic Software Enterprises will be announcing and demonstrating oA their MAGIC rapid application development (RAD) system for Alpha h= systems running OpenVMS the first day of DECUS.  MAGIC's RAD -A capability comes from its unique visual programming methodology, !A through which developers describe applications in terms of their 0@ functionality and complete tables with details about data, event0 control, users interface and other requirements.  A      "By teaming with Digital, we can provide a complete systems tB solution to help MIS organizations integrate VAX, Alpha and other C platforms," said David Wegman, chief operating officer for Magic.  dD "Our partnership with Digital helps Magic develop a wider choice of D options for corporate developers and VARs using Alpha systems -- or  getting ready to do so.m  > Industry-First Agreement to Load OpenVMS on Aspen Workstations  E      Aspen Systems, Inc. of Wheat Ridge, Colo. will also be debuting aC their Alpha-powered ALPINE* workstations running OpenVMS.  Digital nC and Aspen announced jointly today a licensing agreement to package i? the OpenVMS operating system on their high-performance line of gB workstations.  This represents the first commitment by a hardware > vendor outside of Digital to load OpenVMS right on their Alpha systems.  ?      "The performance of the Alpha microprocessor allows us to hE create very powerful systems which will increase the OpenVMS systems cB presence in small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SME).  The rapidly D expanding SME market demands the business critical functionality of ? OpenVMS," notes Steven Spring, CEO of Aspen Systems, Inc.  "In d9 addition, we see great growth potential as more and more tB applications port to the OpenVMS operating system -- that adds up + to a tremendous market opportunity for us."   A      Digital Equipment Corporation is the world's leader in open d> client/server solutions from personal computing to integrated D worldwide information systems.  Digital's scalable Alpha platforms, C storage, networking, software and services, together with industry- E focused solutions from business partners, help organizations compete s& and win in today's global marketplace.$                                 ####  A Note to Editors:  Digital, the Digital logo, VAX and OpenVMS are e>                   trademarks of Digital Equipment Corporation.<      		  All other trademarks are owned by their respective                    companies.   CORP/95/755 L ============================================================================A Electronic Editorial Contact: judith.abrahamovich@bxb.mts.dec.comeL ============================================================================C Digital Press and Analysts News is sent as a courtesy to members ofl the F press, analyst and consulting community.  For subscription information please contact:w   Russ Jones   Digital Equipment Corporation 6   Voice: 415-853-6566   FAX: 415-853-6537    Internet: pr-news@pa.dec.comF All Digital press releases, fact sheets and backgrounders are archived onE ftp.digital.com in the /pub/Digital/info/pr-news directory.  They aree also< available at http://www.digital.com/ on the World Wide Web .L ============================================================================     >h   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:25:01 +0000s4 From: John Laird <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk>' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20Li8 Message-ID: <uigu1u058c575psbvmt6kvirh8gbjk5i64@4ax.com>  F On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:18:52 GMT, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:  7 >"Fred Kleinsorge" <nospam@please.com> wrote in messageh' >news:9vl9rg$ce8f$1@lead.zk3.dec.com...MH >> Perhaps, but the problem IMHO is that large page sizes, which helpingK >> certain types of problems, also limit the system.  You end up with a lotF >ofrI >> wasted space, since a 64kb chunk of memory is now the smallest unit ofmM >> protection.  So you end up with more memory than you need, because you use  >> it less efficiently.i >n5 >You use it less *space*-efficiently, but likely more L >*performance*-efficiently - which is, after all, what using physical memoryK >rather than virtual memory backed to disk is all about.  With current diskcG >and bus performance characteristics it's become almost silly to bothersK >fetching or storing anything much less than 64 KB from/to disk anyway, and G >this should at least reduce the need for 'clustering' paging activity.o  G Is bus performance that great ?  Perhaps Fred is alluding to the impactoE of sparser, less localised data access on the various levels of cache" memory.w     	Johnr   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:11:32 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L B Message-ID: <n8IT7.312473$8q.27859138@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  A "John Laird" <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in messagen2 news:uigu1u058c575psbvmt6kvirh8gbjk5i64@4ax.com...H > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:18:52 GMT, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> > wrote: >p9 > >"Fred Kleinsorge" <nospam@please.com> wrote in messagea) > >news:9vl9rg$ce8f$1@lead.zk3.dec.com...pJ > >> Perhaps, but the problem IMHO is that large page sizes, which helpingI > >> certain types of problems, also limit the system.  You end up with ac lott > >ofdK > >> wasted space, since a 64kb chunk of memory is now the smallest unit ofsK > >> protection.  So you end up with more memory than you need, because youo usee > >> it less efficiently.l > >i7 > >You use it less *space*-efficiently, but likely more G > >*performance*-efficiently - which is, after all, what using physicals memoryH > >rather than virtual memory backed to disk is all about.  With current diskI > >and bus performance characteristics it's become almost silly to botherrI > >fetching or storing anything much less than 64 KB from/to disk anyway,g andTI > >this should at least reduce the need for 'clustering' paging activity.h >eI > Is bus performance that great ?  Perhaps Fred is alluding to the impactfG > of sparser, less localised data access on the various levels of cache 	 > memory.l  L It may just be too early in the morning for me to be thinking clearly, but IG don't see how memory page size would affect cache utilization.  It does!E potentially impact main memory utilization, but I covered that above.   L Bus bandwidth is more questionable, since 32/33 PCI would take about 0.5 ms.I for a 64KB transfer.  Thus if you had more than about 10 high-performanceeJ SCSI drives (or perhaps 15 IDE drives) on a single 32/33 PCI bus you couldK saturate it with random 64KB transfers (sequential ones of course aren't attL issue:  the coarser request granularity should actually benefit them a bit),D whereas you could load more disks on it if the random transfers wereK smaller.  Infiniband should significantly improve that situation, as do the G multiple PCIs in, e.g., AlphaServer boxes - and the actual incidence ofcA applications doing such fine-grained random access to disk, whilenI non-negligible, may be fairly rare (e.g., large pages offer at least somesL significant compensating advantages even in relational database applications! with fine-grained data accesses).W   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:20:04 -0500l5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>e' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L 0 Message-ID: <Z6JT7.60$sK3.3968@news.cpqcorp.net>  D AFAIC - large page sizes only real benefit is on TB misses for largeJ applications and benchmarks.  Of course, I think the same thing could have4 been realized by aggresive use of granularity hints.  L Nobody pages in a single page from disk at a time today, so it really has noF impact on disk IO.  Other than the fact that partially used pages willG probably still transfer 64kb instead of 8kb - wasting disk bandwidth as  well.,  I But what it does mean is that for a given amount of memory, you have less K flexibility than a smaller page size.  If your system wasn't a couple largemL applications, but instead was a interactive workload with lots of users, you& have less pages and more wasted space.  H The argument is that 2GB as the minimum memory isn't unreasonable in theI next say, year or two.  But add a nickle, add a dime - eventually you arez talking real money.   K The real point of bringing up the page size issue, is to point out that thenH Alpha strategy was performance - and that has real costs associated with& it - not just the cost of the silicon.      5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messageu< news:n8IT7.312473$8q.27859138@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >pC > "John Laird" <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message 4 > news:uigu1u058c575psbvmt6kvirh8gbjk5i64@4ax.com...J > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:18:52 GMT, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>
 > > wrote: > >i; > > >"Fred Kleinsorge" <nospam@please.com> wrote in messaged+ > > >news:9vl9rg$ce8f$1@lead.zk3.dec.com...-L > > >> Perhaps, but the problem IMHO is that large page sizes, which helpingK > > >> certain types of problems, also limit the system.  You end up with a2 > lotu > > >of8J > > >> wasted space, since a 64kb chunk of memory is now the smallest unit ofI > > >> protection.  So you end up with more memory than you need, becauses youd > usef > > >> it less efficiently.  > > >c9 > > >You use it less *space*-efficiently, but likely moregI > > >*performance*-efficiently - which is, after all, what using physical  > memoryJ > > >rather than virtual memory backed to disk is all about.  With current > diskK > > >and bus performance characteristics it's become almost silly to botherwK > > >fetching or storing anything much less than 64 KB from/to disk anyway,t > andiK > > >this should at least reduce the need for 'clustering' paging activity.n > >rK > > Is bus performance that great ?  Perhaps Fred is alluding to the impact I > > of sparser, less localised data access on the various levels of cachel > > memory.e >mL > It may just be too early in the morning for me to be thinking clearly, but IpI > don't see how memory page size would affect cache utilization.  It doesAG > potentially impact main memory utilization, but I covered that above.y >mJ > Bus bandwidth is more questionable, since 32/33 PCI would take about 0.5 ms. K > for a 64KB transfer.  Thus if you had more than about 10 high-performanceeL > SCSI drives (or perhaps 15 IDE drives) on a single 32/33 PCI bus you couldJ > saturate it with random 64KB transfers (sequential ones of course aren't atH > issue:  the coarser request granularity should actually benefit them a bit),eF > whereas you could load more disks on it if the random transfers wereI > smaller.  Infiniband should significantly improve that situation, as doi thenI > multiple PCIs in, e.g., AlphaServer boxes - and the actual incidence ofnC > applications doing such fine-grained random access to disk, whilelK > non-negligible, may be fairly rare (e.g., large pages offer at least some A > significant compensating advantages even in relational databasen applications# > with fine-grained data accesses).  >l > - bill >a >e >r   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 07:07:10 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)n2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model' Message-ID: <9vmpuu$6kg$2@joe.rice.edu>b  2 John McLean (mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch) wrote:F : PS.  My Netscape gets upset because comp.unix.tru64 doesn't exist.   :   H You need to ask your ISP to carry comp.unix.tru64, which was created on G March 27, 2000.  Here's the announcement of it, as well as the removal s of the two "osf" newsgroups:  O ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/New_Usenet_Groups/20000321b  ( There's a free NNTP server available at:      http://www.news.cis.dfn.der    4 --Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 10:18:31 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>c2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business modelH Message-ID: <y41yhsj388.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ( "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:  L > There has been a group of posters in various newsgroup continuously takingK > shots at Compaq based on what I consider to be based on wholly uninformednL > positions about Compaq's history.  Specifically that Compaq could some howN > walk away from its enterprise business and compete with Dell.  That would beM > a death sentence for Compaq and the Compaq execs know it.  The following is I > an excellent article about the Compaq business model and the right pathS > forward for Compaq.s  F Thanks for the article, which is very good indeed. It proposes a clearG business model and strategic direction for both Compaq and HP. However,iG I am unconvinced that "Compaq exec know it." From all appearances, theyuH are trying to do exactly what this article advises against: compete with  Dell and IBM on their home turf.   	Jan n   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 04:42:14 -0500r- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>r2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model, Message-ID: <3C1F0F75.3AA4ABAB@videotron.ca>   Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:I > I am unconvinced that "Compaq exec know it." From all appearances, theysJ > are trying to do exactly what this article advises against: compete with" > Dell and IBM on their home turf.    J Compaq is not trying to emulate IBM. If it were, it wouldn't have murderedN Alpha and would not allow all the negative image messages of VMS and True64 toE exist for so long: it would act swiftly to quelch any rumours of VMS's impending death.    J My take is that Compaq wants to do to Windows what IBM did to its OSs, andJ when Windows rules the world, Compaq will automatically rule the world. SoI they are taking every step to position the company to eventually reap thelD rewards of window's taking over the world in the enterprise market.   L That stretegy has already failed: compaq is losing money big time because NTL just insn't generating the profits that Winkler and friends are convinced itK will. How long will Compaq weather the lack of enterprise presence for NT ?e  J The fact that Compaq was forced to accept an/any offer from HP should be aL clear indication to Compaq that its stategy of betting the farm on NT didn't6 work (at least not yet and not for foreseable future).  K DEC tried the same thing, cozzing up to Gates and telling customers to droptM VMS and go NT, but it was clearly premature. Compaq may now be the secon wavec* of this attempt and it is still too early.  N How many companies need to fail before everyone puts 2+2 together and realisesL that companies that bet 6the farm on wintel ruling the enterprise lose their shirts and cease to exist ?s   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:36:32 -0500m& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model/ Message-ID: <u1ue2pljbit8c4@corp.supernews.com>v  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message. news:3C1EE3EE.D4B0450@swissonline.delete.ch... >eJ > I'm not so sure that our opinions are "uninformed" Jeff, we can read the	 financiallI > statements and see that Enterprise stuff returns about 10 times as mucht
 income as PCs I > for every dollar spent.  Against that we see Compaq making little or nor visiblee+ > attempt to expand that Enterprise market.y  E The "uninformed" part is many portraying Compaq as a company built onaI pushing out mass market PC boxes rather than understanding that what madeoB Compaq successful was engineering leadership in their marketplace.  K It is in Compaq's nature, and as the article pointed out its likely path torL success, to provide technology leadership.  I believe management has come toI understand the folly of competing with Dell on Dell's terms.  What CompaqeB will do is return to its business model and position itself as theI technology leader in servers.  That is good for Tru64/OVMS/NSK.  Once thetJ QuickBlade and Storageworks technologies are fully implemented in the nextH 30 months Compaq will be in a very strong position to provide technologyJ leadership across all server markets and make money doing it.  What causedK Compaq's current problems is not WinTel but becoming obsessed with Dell anduG trying to play Dell's game (which they are weak at) rather than playingo Compaq's game.  H What that article added to my thinking was this - I have always believedL companies that attempt to charge a premium price for technology by providingJ technology leadership always get into trouble as the market matures.  WhatI that article correctly pointed out is there an emerging sweet spot in theSL server market and that Dell's business model can't fill it without breaking.K At least for the next 4-5 years Compaq's business model should work in thataJ sweet spot.  Until that sweat spot becomes commodity technology Compaq can win.  I There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that article 1)oF That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership 2) ThatG technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that theoK market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume that technology J leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology) will winG the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  If therL customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price.  Customers makeK that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis.  JusteH because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who make the( business decisions will appreciate it...   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:48:12 GMTt* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business modelC Message-ID: <wOHT7.212512$tf5.14397088@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>O  1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messaged) news:u1ue2pljbit8c4@corp.supernews.com...g   ...u  K > There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that article 1)m@ > That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership  J That's a laugh-and-a-half.  Perhaps you meant that Compaq's business modelG *should be* based on technology leadership.  Its current (this quarter, G anyway) model, from what Capellas says, is based on providing services.     2) ThatI > technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that thedB > market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume that
 technologyL > leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology) will winI > the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  If the=I > customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price.  Customersm makeG > that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis.= JustJ > because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who make the* > business decisions will appreciate it...  K If that's an oblique reference to Alpha, it's absurd.  Alpha had no problemiK being appreciated by anyone who actually knew anything about it, but CompaqtD and DEC before it ensured that such people were few and far between,= especially in the ranks of those making 'business decisions'.i   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:22:25 +0000o% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>=2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model8 Message-ID: <tbgu1u4261inuvoagaa1hkpbqak0j0f2ko@4ax.com>  C On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:41:37 GMT, ben_myers@charter.net (Ben Myers)l wrote:   > So why replace computersP >which are perfectly adequate for the usual office suite of stuff plus email andQ >some internet browsing?   In addition, the total cost of ownership of a computer Q >includes the SOFTWARE, and the latest full-featured MICROSOFT office software is8P >prohibitively expensive.   So is XP, especially with its onerous and cumbersome  D Sun are advertising in the UK with a poster size leaflet which has aE background of colour sky with clouds (XP desktop) and simply the wordmC "XPensive" in the foreground. Neat. Inside it details several majorm? organizations which have migrated *away* from Windows/Office toyE Solaris/Staroffice. Btw StarOffice 6 beta is a major improvement overrE StarOffice 5 ad has now become my default word-processor, spreadsheetr; and presentation tool. Hope we get to see it on vms one dayc   >l -- Alan   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:08:28 GMTf' From: ben_myers@charter.net (Ben Myers)n2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model/ Message-ID: <3c1f4c4d.1805687@news.charter.net>i   Jeff,s  O I agree with your statements about technology leadership.  What has happened at O Compaq and many other places is that the marketeers corrupt the engineers minds G into equating technology leadership with highly proprietary.  A further O corruption of the corporate occurs when collective group think convinces itself0N that highly proprietary is truly superior, when, in fact, it is only a vehicleO for locking the customer into expensive technology, not necessarily better thansL well-designed commodity stuff.  Show me the value and the benefits of highlyH proprietary technology, and I'll buy.  More often than not the value andO benefits accrue to the manufacturer, not the customer.  And that explains a lota1 of failures in the computer industry... Ben Myersw  K On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:36:32 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:p   > ? >"John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message / >news:3C1EE3EE.D4B0450@swissonline.delete.ch...o >>K >> I'm not so sure that our opinions are "uninformed" Jeff, we can read thec
 >financialJ >> statements and see that Enterprise stuff returns about 10 times as much >income as PCsJ >> for every dollar spent.  Against that we see Compaq making little or no >visible, >> attempt to expand that Enterprise market. >aF >The "uninformed" part is many portraying Compaq as a company built onJ >pushing out mass market PC boxes rather than understanding that what madeC >Compaq successful was engineering leadership in their marketplace.  >iL >It is in Compaq's nature, and as the article pointed out its likely path toM >success, to provide technology leadership.  I believe management has come tohJ >understand the folly of competing with Dell on Dell's terms.  What CompaqC >will do is return to its business model and position itself as the J >technology leader in servers.  That is good for Tru64/OVMS/NSK.  Once theK >QuickBlade and Storageworks technologies are fully implemented in the nextlI >30 months Compaq will be in a very strong position to provide technology K >leadership across all server markets and make money doing it.  What caused3L >Compaq's current problems is not WinTel but becoming obsessed with Dell andH >trying to play Dell's game (which they are weak at) rather than playing >Compaq's game.b >,I >What that article added to my thinking was this - I have always believedlM >companies that attempt to charge a premium price for technology by providingpK >technology leadership always get into trouble as the market matures.  WhatoJ >that article correctly pointed out is there an emerging sweet spot in theM >server market and that Dell's business model can't fill it without breaking.iL >At least for the next 4-5 years Compaq's business model should work in thatK >sweet spot.  Until that sweat spot becomes commodity technology Compaq can  >win.: >0J >There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that article 1)G >That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership 2) ThatrH >technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that theL >market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume that technologyK >leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology) will win H >the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  If theM >customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price.  Customers makeeL >that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis.  JustI >because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who make then) >business decisions will appreciate it...t >c >l >a >m  	 Ben Myerss Spirit of Performance, Inc.v 73 Westcott Road Harvard, MA 01451a tel: 978-456-3889o eFax: 810-963-0412 h  PayPal, MC, VISA, AMEX accepted.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:31:58 -0500k+ From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> 2 Subject: RE: Learn about the Compaq business modelT Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4010D7234@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Ben,  C >>> marketeers corrupt the engineers minds into equating technologyl& leadership with highly proprietary.<<<  ? Fwiw, I suspect what most Customers want to day is maximum RASSoF (reliability, availability, scalability, security) which comes from anE OS optimized for the hardware platform it runs on ie. proprietary.=20n  D However, this must also be combined with application layers based onF existing or emerging industry standard (or defacto standards) softwareF technologies like XML, LDAP, TCPIP, HTTP(s), Java etc which provides aH great deal of application interoperability and business flexibility with Customers and suppliers.=20s  G So, in many cases today, the best overall solution is likely based on a6C combination of proprietary HW/OS technologies and industry standard " application software technologies.   Regardse  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultante Compaq Canada Corp.  Professional Servicess Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----. From: Ben Myers [mailto:ben_myers@charter.net] Sent: December 18, 2001 9:08 AM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coma2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model     Jeff,b  C I agree with your statements about technology leadership.  What hasd happened at ? Compaq and many other places is that the marketeers corrupt the' engineers mindsnG into equating technology leadership with highly proprietary.  A furthertH corruption of the corporate occurs when collective group think convinces itselfF that highly proprietary is truly superior, when, in fact, it is only a vehicleiC for locking the customer into expensive technology, not necessarily  better thantE well-designed commodity stuff.  Show me the value and the benefits ofe highlyH proprietary technology, and I'll buy.  More often than not the value and@ benefits accrue to the manufacturer, not the customer.  And that explains a lot1 of failures in the computer industry... Ben Myersd  D On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:36:32 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:   >(? >"John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in messages/ >news:3C1EE3EE.D4B0450@swissonline.delete.ch...) >>G >> I'm not so sure that our opinions are "uninformed" Jeff, we can read  thee
 >financialE >> statements and see that Enterprise stuff returns about 10 times ase much >income as PCsG >> for every dollar spent.  Against that we see Compaq making little ore no >visible, >> attempt to expand that Enterprise market. >eF >The "uninformed" part is many portraying Compaq as a company built onE >pushing out mass market PC boxes rather than understanding that whatf madeC >Compaq successful was engineering leadership in their marketplace.- >-D >It is in Compaq's nature, and as the article pointed out its likely path toeE >success, to provide technology leadership.  I believe management has  come tokC >understand the folly of competing with Dell on Dell's terms.  Whatt CompaqC >will do is return to its business model and position itself as the F >technology leader in servers.  That is good for Tru64/OVMS/NSK.  Once the F >QuickBlade and Storageworks technologies are fully implemented in the next> >30 months Compaq will be in a very strong position to provide
 technologyD >leadership across all server markets and make money doing it.  What causedH >Compaq's current problems is not WinTel but becoming obsessed with Dell andtH >trying to play Dell's game (which they are weak at) rather than playing >Compaq's game.  >b@ >What that article added to my thinking was this - I have always believedC >companies that attempt to charge a premium price for technology byo	 providingoE >technology leadership always get into trouble as the market matures.  WhatF >that article correctly pointed out is there an emerging sweet spot in thehC >server market and that Dell's business model can't fill it withoute	 breaking.iG >At least for the next 4-5 years Compaq's business model should work ina thatG >sweet spot.  Until that sweat spot becomes commodity technology Compaq  can  >win.e >rG >There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that articlea 1)G >That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership 2) ThatpH >technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that theA >market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume that.
 technologyG >leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology) will  winrH >the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  If theH >customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price.  Customers makeF >that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis. JustE >because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who make1 the.) >business decisions will appreciate it...r >: >  >m >c  	 Ben Myers  Spirit of Performance, Inc.l 73 Westcott Road Harvard, MA 01451  tel: 978-456-3889s eFax: 810-963-0412=20t  PayPal, MC, VISA, AMEX accepted.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:41:33 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>l2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model= Message-ID: <NsJT7.58496$pa1.20604902@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>    Kerry,  K I agree with you for the most part, however you are mistaken about the vast C majority of customers when you wrote your first paragraph, "Fwiw, Il suspect..."l  I Most customers don't know what they want until advertising/marketing TELLvL them what they want. The small minority of informed customers work accordingJ to the statements you made - most participants in this newsgroup fall intoL this informed customer category. But as to the rest, bah bah bunch of sheep.E That's why Microsoft has been sucessful, that's why unix has made thesL inroads it has. But let's just skip the consumer/commodity PC business for a moment.s  L Remember that in the mid-80's DEC could have killed Sun and much of the unixH movement if it had dropped prices to be say even 30% more expensive thanK unix overall, rather than 100% or greater more expensive. EVERYBODY ran VMSnF then, nobody really wanted to move to unix, but when the bean countersL heard/saw Sun advertising saying spend less money for the same results, evenG though it cost much more than that to move to unix once all the porting G costs were included, that's when DEC's business began to crumble at its  foundation..  H It wasn't that VAX'es weren't fast enough (though more price/performanceI parity would have been good), it wasn't that they didn't have the layerediJ products or 3rd party products (that stuff was only spottily available forJ unix back then vs. VMS). It was that IT decision makers can't compete withI the power of senior executives holding the budget axe, no matter how goodrI the technical solution is. And the same power/budget equation still holdseI true today. That's why IBM is so successful. Have you ever seen IBM sell?sG How they schmooze their way into the corridors of power, how they fightpL every deal that they've been told they lost, how they convince the guys thatJ sign the cheques that IBM is a safe bet from a longevity perspective and a" 'good enough' bet technologically?  H You have to remember one thing - when a customer buys NT/W2K/XP they canG choose from a myriad of hardware suppliers; when they buy unix they cancI choose between a smaller but still significant group of software/hardwarenJ vendors; and in each case Compaq is just one of many. When a customer buysE OpenVMS, there's only one source for both HW/OS. Customers have to beoK convinced of the merits of buying from that sole-source, they need the warmaC fuzzies in the executive suite, they need it in IT, they need to be0I convinced that their shareholders investment is not going to be wiped outdJ overnight because some clown accountant in a shiny suit wants to get a $14I million bonus. Until Compaq can address these issue effectively, it'll ber5 the same shit, new day series of problems for Compaq.r    6 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> wrote in messageL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4010D7234@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. .. Ben,  C >>> marketeers corrupt the engineers minds into equating technologyi& leadership with highly proprietary.<<<  ? Fwiw, I suspect what most Customers want to day is maximum RASStF (reliability, availability, scalability, security) which comes from anB OS optimized for the hardware platform it runs on ie. proprietary.  D However, this must also be combined with application layers based onF existing or emerging industry standard (or defacto standards) softwareF technologies like XML, LDAP, TCPIP, HTTP(s), Java etc which provides aH great deal of application interoperability and business flexibility with Customers and suppliers.  G So, in many cases today, the best overall solution is likely based on a C combination of proprietary HW/OS technologies and industry standardo" application software technologies.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:15:10 GMTe4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model> Message-ID: <iYJT7.17543$Sj1.10258665@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messagee) news:u1ue2pljbit8c4@corp.supernews.com...- >-K > There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that article 1)dH > That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership 2) ThatI > technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that the B > market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume that
 technologyL > leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology) will winI > the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  If thenI > customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price.  Customersa makeG > that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis.h JustJ > because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who make the* > business decisions will appreciate it... >_  L I completely concur with Jeff on Number 2 above. That's the theme of MichaelI Capellas' 12 June "Transformation" memo and it appears to be reflected intH some of the work that's going on in the HPSD, NSD, and ISSG (QuickBlade,J Marvel, Yosemite). The QuickBlade/Future Enterprise Server strategy hingesH largely on software as a differentiator... stuff like Galaxy and WindowsB Resource Partition Manager, CIM, etc will start to really pay off.  K At least that is the plan. WRT to Number One above, is Compaq maintaining asC sufficient level of R&D expenditure to "make it so?" There has been ? significant downsizing in Compaq Research over the past year...a   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:17:46 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model> Message-ID: <K_JT7.17544$Sj1.10259664@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message7 news:NsJT7.58496$pa1.20604902@news3.rdc1.on.home.com...  > Kerry, >lH > I agree with you for the most part, however you are mistaken about the vastE > majority of customers when you wrote your first paragraph, "Fwiw, Ir
 > suspect..."s >wK > Most customers don't know what they want until advertising/marketing TELLd > them what they want.  L An outstanding heads-up for Compaq Marketing. Given that Compaq spends $300MH per year on marketing and advertising (or at least was supposed to do soH this year) it would seem that the resources are available to develop and disseminate the message.  C The effectiveness with which these resources have been leveraged isw something else entirely...   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 08:52:57 -0800, From: David Masterson <dmaster@synopsys.com>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model( Message-ID: <ud71cqxli.fsf@synopsys.com>   >>>>> JF Mezei writes:  C > Compaq is not trying to emulate IBM. If it were, it wouldn't havenD > murdered Alpha and would not allow all the negative image messagesA > of VMS and True64 to exist for so long: it would act swiftly toM- > quelch any rumours of VMS' impending death.u  C > My take is that Compaq wants to do to Windows what IBM did to its.B > OSs, and when Windows rules the world, Compaq will automatically? > rule the world. So they are taking every step to position themD > company to eventually reap the rewards of window's taking over the! > world in the enterprise market.   E Unless Compaq was planning on buying Microsoft so that they could setwD (rather than follow) the standard for OSes (as IBM did at one time),F Compaq would always be a bit player in the hardware wars.  With almostC everyone cutting back on buying new hardware, the place to be is inl8 having exciting software and the services to back it up.  C > That stretegy has already failed: compaq is losing money big timen@ > because NT just insn't generating the profits that Winkler andF > friends are convinced it will. How long will Compaq weather the lack! > of enterprise presence for NT ?   @ > The fact that Compaq was forced to accept an/any offer from HPD > should be a clear indication to Compaq that its stategy of bettingE > the farm on NT didn't work (at least not yet and not for foreseableu
 > future).  F I imagine that the view was that (if you discount Linux), it was goingF to be easier for NT to move into the markets of the other OSes than itA would be for the other OSes to push out NT.  Of course, if Compaqo= truly believed this, they should've held onto Alpha because aa@ high-performance NT on their hardware would be a differentiating factor in the market place.k  E > DEC tried the same thing, cozzing up to Gates and telling customerswE > to drop VMS and go NT, but it was clearly premature. Compaq may nows> > be the secon wave of this attempt and it is still too early.  C > How many companies need to fail before everyone puts 2+2 togethertD > and realises that companies that bet the farm on wintel ruling the3 > enterprise lose their shirts and cease to exist ?d   Unless you're Bill Gates...n   -- e: David Masterson                dmaster AT synopsys DOT com- Sr. R&D Engineer               Synopsys, Inc. , Software Engineering           Sunnyvale, CA   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 11:07:20 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)d2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model3 Message-ID: <seh4BjXHT62z@eisner.encompasserve.org>y  \ In article <3C1EE248.428DF94E@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > Jeff Killeen wrote:  >> December 17, 2001 >> Manager's Journal >> HP and Compaq Shouldp >> Return to Their Roots > N > Thanks for the article. While I agree with what the writers said, I note theN > omissions of the issue of Compaq's Digital products. For Compaq, the messageE > seems that it should simply focus on building a better wintel box. ' > O > Do analysts think that the Digital products are gone from Compaq ? Was CompaqlM > so succesful in its finantial news conferences that even analysts fogot thehC > tru enterprise products that Compaq carefully avoids to mention ?r >e  8 	Sad to say, the answer is a very easy to prove ... yes!  @ 	Compaq has been very successful at hiding Tandem, Tru64 and VMSC 	profits.  John McLean - et al - have been very busy over the years  	highlighting just that issue.  - 	Further example, check this chart carefully:l  ) http://www.eet.com/story/OEG20011214S0067)  C 	Note that the author notest that HP does "Wintel mixed" for servere2 	revenue but only has "Wintel" there for Compaq...  / 	But other place in the article he states this:l  K But the executives have their work cut out for them. Almost every server ineK their combined product lines faces an architectural transition to IA-64. HPiN uses its PA-RISC chip, the Tandem Non-Stop systems use MIPS, Compaq's high-endL line uses Alpha. There are plenty of painful bridges to build and cross, and% each one likely will cost customers. p  F 	So maybe he thinks that Alpha is Wintel.  Makes some sense to someone 	I suppose.    				Roby   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:17:25 -0500d& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model/ Message-ID: <u1v21rfbaj7p31@corp.supernews.com>s  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagee= news:wOHT7.212512$tf5.14397088@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...m >m3 > "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messagec+ > news:u1ue2pljbit8c4@corp.supernews.com...t >h > ...  >tJ > > There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that article 1)B > > That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership >rL > That's a laugh-and-a-half.  Perhaps you meant that Compaq's business modelI > *should be* based on technology leadership.  Its current (this quarter,nI > anyway) model, from what Capellas says, is based on providing services.a  H Bill it is truly regrettable that you feel the you can so forcibly speakL about Compaq's past when you clear are in so little command of the knowledgeG required to do so.  I suspect it is a market you had little involvementrJ beyond walking by the PC aisle at Circuit City.  As I said there are folksI who post in this newsgroup about Compaq with very little understanding of:  its past of corporate culture...   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:19:26 -0500t& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model/ Message-ID: <u1v25h92fdsa60@corp.supernews.com>   K Well said Ben - marginal engineering advances at best that come at the costn3 of locking someone into an expensive product set...u  4 "Ben Myers" <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote in message) news:3c1f4c4d.1805687@news.charter.net...l > Jeff,t > E > I agree with your statements about technology leadership.  What hash happened attK > Compaq and many other places is that the marketeers corrupt the engineerst minds.I > into equating technology leadership with highly proprietary.  A furthernJ > corruption of the corporate occurs when collective group think convinces itselfH > that highly proprietary is truly superior, when, in fact, it is only a vehicle.L > for locking the customer into expensive technology, not necessarily better thanG > well-designed commodity stuff.  Show me the value and the benefits ofe highlyJ > proprietary technology, and I'll buy.  More often than not the value andK > benefits accrue to the manufacturer, not the customer.  And that explainse a lotn3 > of failures in the computer industry... Ben Myerse >uF > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:36:32 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote: >i > >oA > >"John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message 1 > >news:3C1EE3EE.D4B0450@swissonline.delete.ch...  > >>I > >> I'm not so sure that our opinions are "uninformed" Jeff, we can readh thea > >financialL > >> statements and see that Enterprise stuff returns about 10 times as much > >income as PCsL > >> for every dollar spent.  Against that we see Compaq making little or no
 > >visible. > >> attempt to expand that Enterprise market. > >tH > >The "uninformed" part is many portraying Compaq as a company built onL > >pushing out mass market PC boxes rather than understanding that what madeE > >Compaq successful was engineering leadership in their marketplace.k > > K > >It is in Compaq's nature, and as the article pointed out its likely pathC toL > >success, to provide technology leadership.  I believe management has come toL > >understand the folly of competing with Dell on Dell's terms.  What CompaqE > >will do is return to its business model and position itself as theaL > >technology leader in servers.  That is good for Tru64/OVMS/NSK.  Once theH > >QuickBlade and Storageworks technologies are fully implemented in the nextK > >30 months Compaq will be in a very strong position to provide technologynF > >leadership across all server markets and make money doing it.  What causedJ > >Compaq's current problems is not WinTel but becoming obsessed with Dell andsJ > >trying to play Dell's game (which they are weak at) rather than playing > >Compaq's game.h > >tK > >What that article added to my thinking was this - I have always believed E > >companies that attempt to charge a premium price for technology by 	 providingtG > >technology leadership always get into trouble as the market matures.o WhatL > >that article correctly pointed out is there an emerging sweet spot in theE > >server market and that Dell's business model can't fill it without 	 breaking.eI > >At least for the next 4-5 years Compaq's business model should work ini thatI > >sweet spot.  Until that sweat spot becomes commodity technology Compaqi can  > >win.v > > L > >There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that article 1)I > >That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership 2) ThatoJ > >technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that theC > >market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume thatt
 technologyI > >leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology) willv winMJ > >the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  If theJ > >customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price.  Customers makeH > >that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis. JustK > >because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who make the + > >business decisions will appreciate it...t > >e > >o > >  > >k >a > Ben Myers  > Spirit of Performance, Inc.u > 73 Westcott Road > Harvard, MA 01451u > tel: 978-456-3889s > eFax: 810-963-0412" > PayPal, MC, VISA, AMEX accepted.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:34:18 -0500k- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>a2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model, Message-ID: <3C1F8C28.873AA44B@videotron.ca>   Jeff Killeen wrote:tN > success, to provide technology leadership.  I believe management has come toK > understand the folly of competing with Dell on Dell's terms.  What Compaq D > will do is return to its business model and position itself as theA > technology leader in servers.  That is good for Tru64/OVMS/NSK.x  L Based on comments from Compaq execs, this means that it might be good for NT& servers and high end wintel desktops.   M Note that IBM also stated many times that it would stop competing against thedL low end of the PC market since it was not profitable. But I see "Buck-a-day"F ads in Canada for a real IBM PC at $1 per day or $999 (canadian, aboutL USD600). And then there are those TV ads clearly destined to move PCs at theM consumer market.  What IBM probably did was to decide not to bet the business H on Wintel, but it doesn't mean that they won't do wintel. Heck, IBM does, direct sales in many countries to consumers.  K Compaq seems to have decided to bet its business on Wintel gradually takinghK over the world. If Compaq cuts the consumer pushes, then it will further go K back in the ratings of the world's largest PC makers and lower volumes willt$ mean harder negotiations with Intel.    J Curly gambled Tru64 in the wedding with Carly, and now that the wedding isJ probably off, Curly has lost his gamble and short of a massive influx into> Tru64, nobody will believe that it has any chance to survival.    K What may be happening at Compaq is that Compaq might be re-asserting itself I after the Digital indigestion that gave it so many more Digital mentalityeK employees that it has compaq mentality ones. As far as Compaq going back totN "innovate mode", except for the "internet" button on the keyboard, the rest isM just "inspire technology from others".  Ipaq is Microsoft's baby trying to dooA a better Palm.  and the Ipaq PCs were a copy of the Apple Imacs. t  N If you want innovation, look at the companies like Teklogix and Cybernaut thatN are making "wearable" wintel machines you put on a belt with headset providing! interface, or on a large pen pad.      >  Once theiL > QuickBlade and Storageworks technologies are fully implemented in the nextJ > 30 months Compaq will be in a very strong position to provide technology? > leadership across all server markets and make money doing it.   G Compaq squandered previous technology leadership. How much sooner would5M Wildfire have been released if it had been properly funded/managed ? Compaq'stK recent past says that Compaq is blind to its own assets and how to maximizea their potential. u  H Building one very large logical machine for VMS makes sense since VMS isN multitasking. But for NT, I think most find it much easier to stack a bunch ofJ separate PCs that perhaps share storage. NT is not very good at supporting7 multiple applications/environments on the same machine.i   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:58:35 +0100A1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> 2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model5 Message-ID: <3C1F91DB.8F393256@swissonline.delete.ch>    "Main, Kerry" wrote: >  > Ben, > E > >>> marketeers corrupt the engineers minds into equating technology ( > leadership with highly proprietary.<<< > A > Fwiw, I suspect what most Customers want to day is maximum RASS1H > (reliability, availability, scalability, security) which comes from anD > OS optimized for the hardware platform it runs on ie. proprietary. > F > However, this must also be combined with application layers based onH > existing or emerging industry standard (or defacto standards) softwareH > technologies like XML, LDAP, TCPIP, HTTP(s), Java etc which provides aJ > great deal of application interoperability and business flexibility with > Customers and suppliers. > I > So, in many cases today, the best overall solution is likely based on aiE > combination of proprietary HW/OS technologies and industry standard.$ > application software technologies. > 	 > Regardsh >  > Kerry Main      Sounds eminently sensible Kerry   @ ... so what on earth is the comprehension problem in Houston ???     John McLeanm   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:27:01 -0500g5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>d; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not. 0 Message-ID: <wdJT7.64$sK3.4030@news.cpqcorp.net>  ? You cannot murder an inanimate object.  Until you decide to usen: non-inflamitory rhetoric, it is pointless to discuss this.    : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C1EC389.39F7274F@videotron.ca... > Fred Kleinsorge wrote: > >rL > > Again Bill.  The "numbers" in this report are insufficient to form *any*I > > conclusions about OpenVMS.  For all we know, 99% of the VMS customers. polled > > said they were staying.  >bI > What immediate choice do VMS customers have ?  If you're running SAP on  HP-UX,I > you can migrate to SAP on Sun relatively easily. But the migration frome VMS is= > more involved since there is no logical replacement of VMS.0 >1H >  But all VMS customers have to consider the cost of Compaq's murder of AlphaLI > because like it or not, migrating to IA64 will cost customers plenty of@ money.I > and especially manpower/time with no benefit to the customer sicne IA64J will > underperform Alpha.d >oL > That uncalled for forced expenditure will force customers to take a minute toJ > evaluate the sitiation. They will see the broken promises of Compaq, the lackH > of committment/marketing/expansion of VMS, see a shrinking applicationI > portofolio on VMS, the lack of many key apps on VMS and may decide thatt thegH > future of VMS is too bleak to bet your business on, and at that point,9 > undertake a long term migration to some other platform.  > J > Also, by the time VMS becomes a commercial reality on IA64, it will have beenD > "stale" for a few years while the other cluster wannabes will have narrowedL > the gap. At that point, many VMS customers may find that some Unix variantK > offers sufficiant clustering features and are sold/supported by a companyuG > which has no problems selling and marketing that system and customersf don'tpL > constantly worry about how the ansty vendor is planning to phase out their product.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:28:32 -0500m5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> ; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.i0 Message-ID: <VeJT7.65$sK3.3995@news.cpqcorp.net>  L I suppose that those who repond to internet surveys, also tend to be a smallH number of people, and on the whole, people who are not in the management2 chain of many companies.  But that's just a guess.      : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C1EC4E4.C75AB1E2@videotron.ca... > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote: J > > For example, Compaq claims that .>95 percent of the customers who have beenF > > briefed on the IPF Consolidation are satisified with the Big Plan. > >tL > > The statistics that Ken Farmer and I compiled from the IPF ConsolidationG > > Surveys at www.openvms.org and www.tru64.org paint a much differentd picture. >oH > That is easy to explain. The customers who were briefed by Compaq wereG > selected  from the small elite that Compaq thinks it can keep. And wee doN'taH > know what sort of deal Compaq offered to those customer to get them to stayI > with Compaq.  The web surveys probably reflect those customers who weret nott, > contacted by Compaq and feel very shafted.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:25:17 -0500v5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>b; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.a0 Message-ID: <TbJT7.63$sK3.3837@news.cpqcorp.net>  L Read it again.  It could be that 100% of the VMS customers were staying, andJ none had made a decision to dump Compaq.  We have *no* way of knowing.  IsK the number 100% unlikely, but any other number is just a wild guess with no  data to base it on.w  H That is, the "report" is meaningless if you are looking at anything elseI other than "Alpha", if you try to look any closer, the only thing you cancJ say is that Tru64 customers today do not feel they can move to HP-UX.  And8 that some "Alpha" customers have decided to dump Compaq.      5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messager< news:KDvT7.300915$8q.27385428@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >AB > "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message, > news:dvtT7.13$sK3.3656@news.cpqcorp.net...I > > And again.  Give me some specific information about who the customers  were > > (not names). >R > Read this very slowly, Fred: >tI > 1.  You made the comment that the 55% who said that their feelings wereoC > unchanged by the merger might be the VMS customers in the survey.i >aJ > 2.  I responded that *in that case* there was something for you to worryH > about, since the article made it clear that *some* portion of this 55% worthnL > mentioning had not changed their feelings because they had already decided > to dump Compaq.e > K > Don't respond again:  the point I made was self-evident to anyone who hadmG > read the article at all carefully, and I was just bringing it to yourt > attention. >u > - bill >f > >o > >? > >C9 > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagea? > > news:80qT7.132961$C8.9547169@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...  > > >l< > > > "Fred Kleinsorge" <nospam@please.com> wrote in message, > > > news:9vl98b$cir5$1@lead.zk3.dec.com...J > > > > Again Bill.  The "numbers" in this report are insufficient to form > *any* C > > > > conclusions about OpenVMS.  For all we know, 99% of the VMSr	 customerse > > > polledC > > > > said they were staying.  We simply don't know from the datat
 presented.	 > > > ThetL > > > > report really was aimed at the question of if customers will migrate > toL > > > > HP-UX - which is not a question that would make sense in the context > of > > > > OpenVMS. > > >rJ > > > I guess you didn't read my response any more carefully than you read thea > > > synopsis of the report.s > > >-D > > > 1.  Only *one* part of the report was specific to the issue of	 migratingh > > toK > > > HP-UX; other questions did not contain that assumption and applied toc	 > > Alphar > > > in general.e > > > J > > > 2.  My comment was a direct response to your suggestion that the 55%G > > > constituted the VMS base.  *Under that assumption* (note "In that0
 > case..."K > > > below), the fact that a sufficient number of those people had decidedm toL > > > abandon Compaq to be worthy of mention *would be* cause for concern in > > VMS. > > >e > > > - bill > > >H > > > >$ > > > >0= > > > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messageID > > > > news:_gvS7.258144$8q.24307327@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...	 > > > > > J > > > > > "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message6 > > > > > news:_2rS7.608$BK1.15719@news.cpqcorp.net... > > > > > > I > > > > > > JF Mezei wrote in message <3C199651.FF940430@videotron.ca>...' > > > > > > >Bill Todd wrote: C > > > > > > >> 'Facing the proposed merger, 45 percent of the Alphay	 customerso > > > > > > interviewedbL > > > > > > >> by Warburg believed it was "less likely" that they would stay > > with > > > ayF > > > > > > >> combined HP/Compaq company, while 55 percent said their
 > feelings
 > > > > abouto; > > > > > > >> remaining a Compaq customer were "unchanged"e
 > > > > > > > K > > > > > > >What is important to consider is whether there are significantw > > > > > differenceshC > > > > > > >between the 45% and 55% in terms of customer profiles.-
 > > > > > > >- > > > > > >  > > > > > >1A > > > > > > Yeah, like 45% were Tru64 customers and 55% were VMS. 	 > > > > >:; > > > > > In that case, you should start worrying about thefI > > > > > unquantified-but-sufficiently-significant-to-mention portion of  that > > 55%m > > > > whonK > > > > > had already decided to dump Compaq (you might have missed that ine ac > > > quickr > > > > > reading).3	 > > > > >5 > > > > > - bill	 > > > > >e	 > > > > > 	 > > > > >h > > > >t > > > >o > > > >l > > >d > > >  > >  > >  > >n >a >    ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 15:52:45 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)s; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not. , Message-ID: <9vnood$1t4n$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>  0 In article <TbJT7.63$sK3.3837@news.cpqcorp.net>,8  "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:O |> Read it again.  It could be that 100% of the VMS customers were staying, andlM |> none had made a decision to dump Compaq.  We have *no* way of knowing.  IsrN |> the number 100% unlikely, but any other number is just a wild guess with no |> data to base it on.  G I can assure you that the number 100% is wrong based merely on the factcH that our datacenter is already considering alternatives.  And HPUX isn't" one of them. (Can you say "Blue"!)   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:48:11 GMTs* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.t@ Message-ID: <vjLT7.50633$Zd.4603817@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message* news:TbJT7.63$sK3.3837@news.cpqcorp.net...J > Read it again.  It could be that 100% of the VMS customers were staying, andeL > none had made a decision to dump Compaq.  We have *no* way of knowing.  IsJ > the number 100% unlikely, but any other number is just a wild guess with no > data to base it on.r >nJ > That is, the "report" is meaningless if you are looking at anything elseK > other than "Alpha", if you try to look any closer, the only thing you caneL > say is that Tru64 customers today do not feel they can move to HP-UX.  And: > that some "Alpha" customers have decided to dump Compaq.  L Since the only remaining viable assumption is that you are utterly incapableL of parsing English (at least in the current context), I will cease trying to! explain this conversation to you.    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:49:19 -0500h- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>a; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.a, Message-ID: <3C1F8FAC.6B8614F1@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote: > N > Read it again.  It could be that 100% of the VMS customers were staying, andL > none had made a decision to dump Compaq.  We have *no* way of knowing.  IsM > the number 100% unlikely, but any other number is just a wild guess with non > data to base it on.     
 "It could be"e  M Mr Kleinsorge, considering that VMS customers have been bettered by the ownertI of VMS for so long, and considering the multiple whammies in the last fewiN months (murder of Alpha, wedding of Curly-Carly, death of MPE, life support toN be pulled from Tru64), I would think that anyone stuck on a proprietary CompaqJ system (aka VMS) would think seriously about their position as slaves of aI vendor who has clearly no intentions to grow VMS back to life and attracts2 serious applications outside its narrowing niches.  K Migrating VMS->Unix is not as easy as Unix->Unix. Understandably, many willsN not make a knee jerk decisions and say that for now they are staying put. ThisI may make you happy, but I think that the mere fact that customers are now K considering the future (or lack thereof) of VMS is very bad news for VMS ine the medium/long term.'   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:41:07 +0800t From: "gt" <nospam@enw.cx> Subject: nfsmount missing 3 Message-ID: <3c1f1d34$0$21092@echo-01.iinet.net.au>   K I'm trying to mount a NFS share to a VMS v6.2 system running Multinet V3.5Ac+ I don't have much experience with Multinet.aG When I try to use NFSMOUNT I get an error saying that the EXE cannot bee5 found. I've checked and the file isn't in fact there.sC Now my question is: where can I get it from? Do I need to reinstallwC multinet? Could it be that NFS wasn't installed in the first place?e   Glennc0 ((email address munged, please reply to group.))   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:26:19 -0700e3 From: "David D Miller" <ddmiller@west.raytheon.com>s$ Subject: PALcode and SRM definitionsF Message-ID: <OFA2334351.20ED7A0A-ON07256B26.005EEDB7@rsc.raytheon.com>   Wizards:  F I've looked around for some PALcode and SRM definitions but can't find, anything very definitive.  I gather that ...  F SRM console firmware (also called AlphaBIOS) provides the bridge (i.e.G consistent software interface) between the hardware I/O devices and theaH software much like X86 BIOS does.  It also supports the interface to the operator's console.r  K PALcode provides the bridge between the Alpha architecture and OpenVMS (andb
 maybe Tru64).e  H Elaborations and corrections greatly appreciated.  I'd like to read more! about these two.  Any references?a   dave.d   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:47:55 +0800 - From: David B Sneddon <dbsneddon@bigpond.com>g/ Subject: Problem with proxies on DECnet over IP * Message-ID: <3C1F10CB.5010106@bigpond.com>  	 Hi Folks,w  	 Scenario:   F Two nodes HOME and AWAY.  Seemingly any combination DECnet-Plus (/OSI), on any version of OpenVMS on VAX or Alpha...  = On node AWAY I have a proxy "LOCAL:.HOME::DAVE DAVE/DEFAULT".   I also have a UCX proxy defined.  " On node HOME if I try to do a copy  6 HOME$ copy local.file away"DAVE password"::remote.file   it works fine.   If I try  ' HOME$ copy local.file away::remote.filet  	 it fails.q  F Extracted from the "Access Control Violation" OPCOM message on AWAY...D     NSAP Address=/AC110203           HOME's ip address is 172.17.2.3     Source=UIC = [0,0]DAVE     Destination USer="DAVE"      Node Name=LOCAL:.HOME   A The contents of the message look "OK" except for the NSAP Addressi8 which is not in the usual format of 49::00-01:AA-mumble.  F Is there something that needs to be done (and I'm not doing it) to getE proxies to work with DECnet over IP?  And if so, could someone pleaseaG enlighten me.  I don't have paper copies of the DECnet manuals and havemG tried "searching" the HTML versions but that is a PITA and thusfar beene
 fruitless.   Regards, Dave.e -- dI David B Sneddon (dbs)  OpenVMS Systems Programmer   dbsneddon@bigpond.com I Sneddo's quick guide ...          http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/ I DBS freeware at ...   http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/software.htmnI "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" Lennon    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:23:34 -0000 8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>3 Subject: RE: Problem with proxies on DECnet over IPoN Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF17C@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  L Whether or not I use all three in the naming search path I always define allF three for proxy access. All three being LOCAL, DOMAIN and XXXXXX where* XXXXXX would be the PhaseV domain if used.G Even with that there are times when proxies stop working but (multiple) ' reboots usually get them working again.m   John  B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk= Post: Denys Wilkinson Building, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKSA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)s   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 07:25:30 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)e5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsofto' Message-ID: <9vmr1a$6kg$3@joe.rice.edu>s  . JF Mezei (jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca) wrote: : Jerry Leslie wrote:tH : >   "A suspected member of the Al Qaeda terrorist network claimed thatJ : >    Islamic militants infiltrated Microsoft and sabotaged the company'sI : >    Windows XP operating system, according to a source close to Indianr : >    police. :l : This is simply unbleievable. p  * I thought so too until I got to this part:  H   "Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said Afroze's claims about the companyH    were "bizarre and unsubstantiated and should be treated skeptically."  H    According to Desler, Microsoft has rigorous processes in place duringE    the development of Windows to ensure the security and integrity ofo    source code."  J That sounds just like Microsoft's previous denials of so many things that  turned out to be true; e.g.:  0    o Microsoft's violation of the antitrust laws%    o Hotmail's use of FreeBSD for DNS.?    o Denial of non-MS browsers to MSN.COM sites a few weeks ago   F : For one thing, one need not have terrorists infiltrate Microsoft to 6 : sabotage a product, Microsoft can do that by itself.  = Yes, the interview with Joel Spolsky made that all too clear:o  +      http://www.softwaremarketsolution.com/t5      An Interview with Joel Spolsky of JoelonSoftwarec   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:38:55 +0100P/ From: Nigel Arnot <sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>e5 Subject: re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftl6 Message-ID: <00A06B41.09B9DEA2.6@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>   >  > Jerry Leslie wrote:mH > >   "A suspected member of the Al Qaeda terrorist network claimed thatJ > >    Islamic militants infiltrated Microsoft and sabotaged the company'sI > >    Windows XP operating system, according to a source close to Indiane > >    police. >  >  > This is simply unbleievable. i  K You mean as unbelievable as terrorists mounting a suicide attack on the WTC, using hijacked airliners?t  - > For one thing, one need not have terroristsiN > infiltrate Microsoft to sabotage a product, Microsoft can do that by itself.O > Secondly, Nobody would be surprised if it turned out that Bill Gates was good, > buddies with Osamma.  I Treat it as a joke if you like, but there's a world of difference betweenoN programmer-error bugs with undirected consequences (usually crashes, sometimes@ exploitable weaknesses once a bad guy spots that it's there) andL deliberately-inserted well-concealed backdoors. Sort of like the difference H between a fallen rock on the road, and a remote-control explosive device
 in every car.   M I have no doubt that it's possible. My main doubt is whether Al Quaeda could eO recruit someone with  sufficient skills to pull it off. I'd like to think that -E no sufficiently skilled programmer would fall victim to the Al Quaedae meme, but I fear otherwise.m  H And if it's possible anywhere, it's at MS. Their systems are insecure byE design, and based on past experiences their QA practices are abysmal nJ or nonexistent. And of course, their code base is closed as closed can be.   	Yours,p
 		Nigel Arnoti- 		NRA@MAXWELL.PH.KCL.AC.UK                      7 		"In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."e   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:15:29 GMTrG From: Simon Clubley <simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFP>o5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked MicrosoftC4 Message-ID: <BrGT7.2668$XC5.2305@www.newsranger.com>  J On 18 Dec 2001 03:36:04 GMT, in article <9vmdj4$m7e$3@joe.rice.edu>, Jerry
 Leslie wrote:w >oI >   Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said Afroze's claims about the companyiI >   were "bizarre and unsubstantiated and should be treated skeptically."d >rI >   According to Desler, Microsoft has rigorous processes in place duringwF >   the development of Windows to ensure the security and integrity of >   source code. >e  G Interesting. If security is that tight then how do Microsoft developersC6 manage to insert Easter Eggs into Microsoft products ?   Simon.   -- o@ Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFPK In the task of removing Microsoft from the marketplace, I have discovered anE truly remarkable plan, but this signature is too small to contain it..   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 13:54:55 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)v5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftu' Message-ID: <9vnhrf$ris$1@joe.rice.edu>i  0 Nigel Arnot (sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk) wrote: :sF : You mean as unbelievable as terrorists mounting a suicide attack on # : the WTC using hijacked airliners?   & It was JF that found it unbelievable.   H The History Channel had filmed a show on the WTC earlier this year, and < decided to air it recently, as a tribute to the WTC victims.  J It's very weird to hear one of the WTC's designers claim that the buildingE could withstand the impact of one or more Boeing 707-class airliners.r   :nI : I have no doubt that it's possible. My main doubt is whether Al Quaeda eI : could recruit someone with  sufficient skills to pull it off. I'd like sH : to think that no sufficiently skilled programmer would fall victim to + : the Al Quaeda meme, but I fear otherwise.   M The US has a habit of generating enemies, which isn't helped by the behavior  ? of some US companies' foreign operations, which are sweatshops:y  6    http://www.globalexchange.org/economy/corporations/    Sweating For Nothing   J : And if it's possible anywhere, it's at MS. Their systems are insecure byG : design, and based on past experiences their QA practices are abysmal -L : or nonexistent. And of course, their code base is closed as closed can be.  = Microsoft is also the largest user of H-1B visa holders, per:?  "    http://www.zazona.com/LCA-Data/;    Labor Condition Application (LCA) Database Search Engine9  C which would provide an Al Quaeda programmer with the opportunity toa get hired at MS.  4 --Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:22:26 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftd> Message-ID: <63KT7.17545$Sj1.10261593@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  L "Simon Clubley" <simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFP> wrote in6 message news:BrGT7.2668$XC5.2305@www.newsranger.com...L > On 18 Dec 2001 03:36:04 GMT, in article <9vmdj4$m7e$3@joe.rice.edu>, Jerry > Leslie wrote:  > >sK > >   Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said Afroze's claims about the companyyK > >   were "bizarre and unsubstantiated and should be treated skeptically."p > >cK > >   According to Desler, Microsoft has rigorous processes in place duringnH > >   the development of Windows to ensure the security and integrity of > >   source code. > >w >aI > Interesting. If security is that tight then how do Microsoft developers 8 > manage to insert Easter Eggs into Microsoft products ? >   K Yeah. The Flight Simulator buried within an older version of Excel comes to  mind. In   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 09:59:35 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.524703.killspam.00bd (Wayne Sewell) 5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftg. Message-ID: <IX60pzqiEifL@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  S In article <9vnhrf$ris$1@joe.rice.edu>, leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie) writes:d > ? > Microsoft is also the largest user of H-1B visa holders, per:c > $ >    http://www.zazona.com/LCA-Data/= >    Labor Condition Application (LCA) Database Search Engine  > E > which would provide an Al Quaeda programmer with the opportunity top > get hired at MS.    K Okay, so one of the Al Quaeda boys gets in and puts code into all the billy O systems to make them insecure and totally unusable.  How is that different fromP the current situation?   -- nO ===============================================================================mM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxr: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-) O ===============================================================================rN Sparky (from Bring It On): "In cheerleading, we throw people in the air.  Fat  	people don't go as high."   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:27:57 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftu> Message-ID: <h8KT7.17546$Sj1.10263671@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  6 "Jerry Leslie" <leslie@clio.rice.edu> wrote in message! news:9vnhrf$ris$1@joe.rice.edu... 2 > Nigel Arnot (sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk) wrote: > :2G > : You mean as unbelievable as terrorists mounting a suicide attack onj% > : the WTC using hijacked airliners?o > ' > It was JF that found it unbelievable.i >.I > The History Channel had filmed a show on the WTC earlier this year, ande> > decided to air it recently, as a tribute to the WTC victims. >IL > It's very weird to hear one of the WTC's designers claim that the buildingG > could withstand the impact of one or more Boeing 707-class airliners.m >   F That was one of the design metrics back in the early 1960s. WidebodiedJ aircraft and humongous fuel capacities weren't factored into the equation.J The WTC may well have survived a hit by a B-707, the Empire State BuildingL was relatively unscathed after it had a close encounter with a B-25 in WWII.  K Had cementitious asbestos insulation not been outlawed by the EPA (asbestosnC and cancer) it's conceivable that the WTC steelwork could have beencL encapsulated and may have withstood the impact. The failure of the buildingsI resulted not from the initial impacts, but from structural failure in the  subsequent fires.b   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:39:09 GMTaL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft 8 Message-ID: <00A06B38.B08B58B8@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  S In article <9vnhrf$ris$1@joe.rice.edu>, leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie) writes:h1 >Nigel Arnot (sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk) wrote:y >:G >: You mean as unbelievable as terrorists mounting a suicide attack on w$ >: the WTC using hijacked airliners? >r' >It was JF that found it unbelievable. e >iI >The History Channel had filmed a show on the WTC earlier this year, and k= >decided to air it recently, as a tribute to the WTC victims.m > K >It's very weird to hear one of the WTC's designers claim that the building F >could withstand the impact of one or more Boeing 707-class airliners.  ? Well, you know, the planes that hit them were bigger than 707s,iF and the towers did withstand the _impact_.  What they didn't withstandK indefinitely was the insertion of thousands of gallons of flaming jet fuel.0   -- Alan   O ===============================================================================O0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056tM  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-0210eO ===============================================================================e   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:40:54 +0000n  From: Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com% Subject: Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytesa: Message-ID: <OF28F19F98.F12EC61E-ON00256B26.00507F8A@btyp>  J ISTR a freeware [or similar] package called MATH [could be wrong about theG name] for VMS that allowed you to do 'maths' with DCL. I don't have webIK access at the moment otherwise I would have done a search for it myself andd4 put a link up, but I'm sure it will be easy to find.   Steve Sh        I winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") ons 12/17/2001 09:49:43 PM    To:        Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com cc:aK From:      winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptga-            Mgr"), 17 December 2001, 9:49 p.m.    Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytes    3 In article <3C1E5EF6.5AF747F4@hotmail.com>, BigFishh# <johnsonronald@hotmail.com> writes:v1 >First question, how many VAX blocks equals a Mb?   K A disk block is 512 bytes (.5 k).  A megabyte is 1024k, so 2048 blocks make  a megabyte.e >cG >Second question, I am running Vax version 5.5 on a 4000-90, is there ae3 >way to display disk size in MB rather than blocks.S  G You could write DCL to get the block size and divide it by 2048, but itt would C truncate (rather than round) unless you found an extended-precisionb
 arithmetic package for DCL.   -- Alant    O ===============================================================================w  0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU?  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:y 650/926-3056A  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA 
 94309-0210O ===============================================================================t            F ______________________________________________________________________     [Information] -- PostMaster:D This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) and may beG confidential. If you are not the named addressee, or if the message hasiG been addressed to you in error, you must not read, disclose, reproduce, $ distribute or use this transmission.  H Delivery of this message to any person other than the named addressee isG not intended in any way to waive confidentiality.  If you have receivedVK this transmission in error please contact the sender or delete the message.   
 Thank you.  D Yell Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7PT.; Registered in England and Wales, registered number 4205228.r  I Yellow Pages Sales Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire,nD RG1 7PT. Registered in England and Wales, registered number 1403041.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:51:25 +0000E% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <uibu1ush2qahccu2ceo11pdfmdo6dh7rlp@4ax.com>  4 On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 05:05:29 GMT, "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> wrote:m   >i > F >fork() will create a child process, not a server process.  But under F >UNIX, the child can become it's own parent.  That can not be done on  >OpenVMS presently.   @ Another strange "non-goal" in VMS. TOPS-20 had the "splice fork"F system call (splfk% I think) which could move any process around in an? ownership tree but implementation of TOPS-20 (and Unix for thate@ matter) style processes was a VMS non-goal in the TOPS-20 => VMS? migration document. If you want to see just how many people areoE *still* pissed at DEC for killing TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 just try askingsD in alt.sys.pdp10. Many still won't buy a Compaq product to this day.= God help Compaq/HP if they drop VMS after all the 'promises'.t  D In fact if DEC hadn't killed Richard Stallman's favourite system the@ PDP-10 there *might* never have been a Gnu (he announced the GnuF project four  months after DEC canceled TOPS-20) and therefore never aF Linux. Seriously pissing off Mark Crispin (of RFC822 and general emailB fame) with the same move and then writing VMS mail as an effectiveF cut-down subset of Mark's and Mike's MM program (sort of available forF VMS as part of Multinet and/or PMDF?) but not even supporting SMTP forD many, many years, was another. Richard Stallman allegedly offered toA provide DEC with code to add what he considered to be the missing.C features to VMS back at the time of the PDP-10 murder. DEC were nota@ interested. Strangely over the years many of these features have= slowly been implemented and the last are mostly on their way.e  ? It was common in the PDP-10 world for high level programmers touE contribute code which later became part of TOPS-10 or TOPS-20 - oftennC along with the author joining DEC. But when it came to VMS this was D downplayed - which was incredibly strange as VMS grew from RSX whichC was itself begun by Dave Cutler before he joined DEC I believe. I'm-A not saying there weren't good reasons to tighten up - every otheriD TOPS-10 site building in its own OS extensions led to problems - butA that was no reason for DEC to alienate some of the best. But theye did....o  D Here's what Frank da Cruz says in the following extract from History* of the DECSYSTEM-20 at Columbia University/ http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/dec20.html#finalo  D Excellent reading for those not familiar with DEC prior to VMS and aC warning to Compaq I would hope. Note carefully the reasons ColumbiapA picked Unix over VMS and many, many others did the same. This was  written in 1988 btw. J   ---eE Meanwhile, UNIX was taking over the computing world -- on mainframes,nC minis, workstations, and even PCs. Our major group of instructional E users -- CS students -- were doing most of their work on departmental D ATT 3B2's, but badly needed a centralized, reliable environment withE tolerable performance, backups, service, and all the rest. We alreadya? had been running UNIX on a VAX 750 for some years (for internal D development work), as well as Amdahl UTS on an IBM mainframe, so had developed some UNIX expertise. i  B For these reasons, we decided that it was time to start convertingD from TOPS-20 to UNIX. For financial reasons, we chose a VAX 8650 forE this purpose. The DEC-20 trade in was attractive, and we were able toeB keep our old disk and tape drives. In fact, we figured that over 3E years, buying the VAX was cheaper than keeping the DEC-20. And it was-C more powerful, with a bigger address space, in a smaller footprint,g than the DEC-20 it replaced. c  > VMS was not chosen for several reasons. First, we were feelingF somewhat betrayed by DEC's abandonment of TOPS-20, and did not want toF leave ourselves open to the same treatment in the future. UNIX, unlikeC VMS, does not tie you to a particular vendor. Furthermore, UNIX hasa= networking and communications for all our major requirements: A Ethernet, TCP/IP, DECnet (our initial UNIX was Ultrix-32), BITNETaB (UREP), RS-232 and LAT terminals, Kermit. And UNIX itself has manyB benefits: a very powerful applications development environment forB experienced programmers, a programmable shell, piping of programs, simple but powerful utilities. i  < UNIX, however, is notoriously terse, cryptic and unfriendly,E especially to novice computer users. VMS, though lacking the DEC-20'siF COMND JSYS, is certainly friendlier than UNIX, and verbose to a fault.= So it was not without some misgivings that we embarked on the  conversion.      -- Alan   ------------------------------  ! Date: Tue, 18 Dec 01 11:39:03 GMTl From: jmfbahciv@aol.come@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)+ Message-ID: <9vnh67$cct$1@bob.news.rcn.net>   8 In article <uibu1ush2qahccu2ceo11pdfmdo6dh7rlp@4ax.com>,)    Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:f5 >On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 05:05:29 GMT, "John E. Malmberg"  ><wb8tyw@qsl.network> wrote: >r >> >>G >>fork() will create a child process, not a server process.  But under  G >>UNIX, the child can become it's own parent.  That can not be done on   >>OpenVMS presently. > A >Another strange "non-goal" in VMS. TOPS-20 had the "splice fork"eG >system call (splfk% I think) which could move any process around in anR@ >ownership tree but implementation of TOPS-20 (and Unix for thatA >matter) style processes was a VMS non-goal in the TOPS-20 => VMS-@ >migration document. If you want to see just how many people areF >*still* pissed at DEC for killing TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 just try askingE >in alt.sys.pdp10. Many still won't buy a Compaq product to this day.w> >God help Compaq/HP if they drop VMS after all the 'promises'. >$E >In fact if DEC hadn't killed Richard Stallman's favourite system the A >PDP-10 there *might* never have been a Gnu (he announced the GnurG >project four  months after DEC canceled TOPS-20) and therefore never adG >Linux. Seriously pissing off Mark Crispin (of RFC822 and general email C >fame) with the same move and then writing VMS mail as an effectiveoG >cut-down subset of Mark's and Mike's MM program (sort of available foroG >VMS as part of Multinet and/or PMDF?) but not even supporting SMTP for E >many, many years, was another. Richard Stallman allegedly offered tokB >provide DEC with code to add what he considered to be the missingD >features to VMS back at the time of the PDP-10 murder. DEC were not
 >interested. i  = It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything5; done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.  We wouldn't:: have had such hostility if the idiots-in-charge-of-VMS had! acquired some mature objectivity.e      9 > ...Strangely over the years many of these features haven> >slowly been implemented and the last are mostly on their way.  = Heh.  They had to hire the PDP-10 types when they killed the b: product.  I knew a lot of the good stuff would get in once people started tranferring.    >r@ >It was common in the PDP-10 world for high level programmers toF >contribute code which later became part of TOPS-10 or TOPS-20 - oftenD >along with the author joining DEC. But when it came to VMS this wasE >downplayed - which was incredibly strange as VMS grew from RSX which @ >was itself begun by Dave Cutler before he joined DEC I believe.  $ He had a different attitude problem.   <snip>   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.e   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 14:29:27 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)2 Message-ID: <9vnjs7$2r17$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>  8 In article <uibu1ush2qahccu2ceo11pdfmdo6dh7rlp@4ax.com>,' Alan Greig  <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:cE >In fact if DEC hadn't killed Richard Stallman's favourite system theaA >PDP-10 there *might* never have been a Gnu (he announced the GnudG >project four  months after DEC canceled TOPS-20) and therefore never ad >Linux.?  K I don't think Linux was dependent on GNU. There were other free C compilerstD available: TenDra and the Berkeley compiler were options: while theyM didn't have as wide a following as GCC they were both available. In addition, I Linus could have used parts of the BSD tree for his "super Minix" instead1 of the GNU utilities.T  I While the FSF's code base has certainly been a valuable resource, I don'tQ- think it's as critical as many people assume.5   -- 2@ Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC.	      "Cave cuniculos lagana ferentes"  F "Be conservative in what you generate, and liberal in what you accept" 	-- Matthew 10:16 (l.trans)    ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 15:49:32 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>f@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4sna8oa6b.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>   jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:r  ? > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anythinge1 > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.    J If this is true - why did the company let him, and the VMS group, get away with this attitude?n   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:36:31 -0800 + From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>i@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)V Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.43.0112180626490.29849-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>  , On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:? > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anythings0 > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.  J Hence VMS' demise became my stated goal.  I was one of many who refused toF develop software for VMS, and instead improved UNIX's lead so that VMS would never catch up.   F Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMS/ never was a significant player on the Internet.o  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrciF Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 16:04:22 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4n10go9hl.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  - Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:y  A > > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything=2 > > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.L > Hence VMS' demise became my stated goal.  I was one of many who refused toH > develop software for VMS, and instead improved UNIX's lead so that VMS > would never catch up.T  F ...which is just as immature an attitude as that reported of Hustvedt.  H > Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMS1 > never was a significant player on the Internet.e  L I do believe this has more to do with the lack of an affordable TCP/IP stack0 of good quality early enough than anything else.   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:19:48 -0800k+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)V Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.43.0112180714390.29894-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>  & On 18 Dec 2001, Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:/ > Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:oC > > > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything 4 > > > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.N > > Hence VMS' demise became my stated goal.  I was one of many who refused toJ > > develop software for VMS, and instead improved UNIX's lead so that VMS > > would never catch up.aH > ...which is just as immature an attitude as that reported of Hustvedt.  I Not at all.  VMS, by the expressed attitude of its developers, was a stepnH backwards in software technology with no chance of improvement, and withF its prissy developers fighting against any improvement tooth and nail.  G Consequently, the only rational course of action was to act to kill VMS  and bolster UNIX.   
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrc F Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:33:53 GMT ' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>8@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)/ Message-ID: <3C1F6340.83D0D44@bellatlantic.net>    Mark Crispin wrote:x > . > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:A > > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anythingi2 > > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS. > L > Hence VMS' demise became my stated goal.  I was one of many who refused toH > develop software for VMS, and instead improved UNIX's lead so that VMS > would never catch up.d > H > Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMS1 > never was a significant player on the Internet.r >  > -- Mark -- Mark, = I knew there was a reason I respected you so much!  Attitude,d; schmattitude - the purple plague was brought to new heightsi= with VMS. The reason I used Hunter Goatley et al stack on theuA vms systems was my protest.  Had to use vms for some things but..== I got around it where I could.  The reason for jumping on theLD NetBSD bandwagon was because it ran on Vax systems! And it was BSD..A Hmmm Free20 on a vax..I wonder if that would classify as irony...9 bobB   > ! > http://staff.washington.edu/mrc=H > Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:28:14 -0800n+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>R@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)V Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.43.0112180720020.29894-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>  % On 18 Dec 2001, Peter da Silva wrote:y+ > I don't think Linux was dependent on GNU. K > While the FSF's code base has certainly been a valuable resource, I don't / > think it's as critical as many people assume.n  @ Agreed.  I consider it to be rather presumptious of FSF to claimE otherwise, or to call the result "GNU/Linux".  It's a rather patheticfH attempt to cover up the fact that the GNU operating system project was aE failure.  More accurately, the GNU operating system never got off thep ground.e  C I read the original GNU paper.  Linux is *not* the operating systemo described in that paper.  I It's hard to write an operating system from scratch.  It's pretty hard to H write an operating system using a well-known design that has been testedH for decades, which is what makes Linux such an impressive piece of work.  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrc F Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 15:41:46 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)c@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS), Message-ID: <9vno3q$1t4n$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  2 In article <9vnjs7$2r17$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>,+  peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes: ; |> In article <uibu1ush2qahccu2ceo11pdfmdo6dh7rlp@4ax.com>, * |> Alan Greig  <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:H |> >In fact if DEC hadn't killed Richard Stallman's favourite system theD |> >PDP-10 there *might* never have been a Gnu (he announced the GnuJ |> >project four  months after DEC canceled TOPS-20) and therefore never a
 |> >Linux. |> nN |> I don't think Linux was dependent on GNU. There were other free C compilersG |> available: TenDra and the Berkeley compiler were options: while they P |> didn't have as wide a following as GCC they were both available. In addition,L |> Linus could have used parts of the BSD tree for his "super Minix" instead |> of the GNU utilities. |> e  D I also think RMS's feud over emacs had a lot more to do with it than, the demise of TOPS-20 or anything DEC did.     bill   -- LJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   l   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:57:15 -0600u/ From: Edward Franks <fortrandragon@hotmail.com><@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)5 Message-ID: <MPG.168923526957226598a97d@news.alt.net>1  + My glass typewriter shows Jan Vorbrueggen, 5> <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> pondering... [Snip]L > If this is true - why did the company let him, and the VMS group, get away > with this attitude?t  E 	Because the 'us vs them' + 'chip on shoulder' attitude is prevalent  B in all human organizations?  Also, if DEC's senior management had I decided that VMS was to be _the_ DEC OS going forward then the VMS group e@ became the golden children of the company and could do no wrong.   -- e  
 Edward Frankso <fortrandragon@hotmail.com>r   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:00:06 -0600d/ From: Edward Franks <fortrandragon@hotmail.com>a@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)5 Message-ID: <MPG.168923fc4cb786c598a97e@news.alt.net>l  A My glass typewriter shows Mark Crispin, <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>   pondering... [Snip]K > It's hard to write an operating system from scratch.  It's pretty hard torJ > write an operating system using a well-known design that has been testedJ > for decades, which is what makes Linux such an impressive piece of work.  A 	True, and not trying to diminish in any fashion their work, but rG knowing it can be done and has been done is have the battle.  Having a  1 yardstick to measure yourself with is very handy.y   -- y  
 Edward Franks. <fortrandragon@hotmail.com>f   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:44:41 -0800.+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>-@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)V Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.43.0112180728280.29894-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>  & On 18 Dec 2001, Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:A > > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything 2 > > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.L > If this is true - why did the company let him, and the VMS group, get away > with this attitude?e  F The VMS group was afflicted with what was known as "VAX jealousy": theB knowledge that they had an intrinsically inferior operating systemJ compared to what came before.  The only way they could have their place in? the sun was to destroy the PDP-10 utterly.  And they succeeded.B  D The company let them because they sold many more VAXen than PDP-10s.C Never mind that this was mostly because the PDP-10 was outrageously/I overpriced compared to the VAX, and that as the years went on DEC widenedo the pricing gap.  J The company also let them because at the highest levels of DEC, a decisionJ was made to scrap all its architectures except for one.  "One company, oneB architecture."  First the 18-bitters were killed in 1977; then theI 12-bitters; then the 36-bitters in 1983.  The 16-bitters were killed too,.J although it was done in a much more subtle manner (for all I know they may% still be making some form of PDP-11).'  J The PDP-10 folks bear some of the blame; they allowed themselves to becomeJ aloof and passive.  The disease was well underway by 1977, and by 1980 theJ death knell had started.  We started wearing self-delusional T-shirts withH slogans such as "I don't care what people say 36-bits are here to stay."  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrctF Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:04:28 GMTe' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>e@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C1F6A6B.67BD832E@bellatlantic.net>   Edward Franks wrote: > , > My glass typewriter shows Jan Vorbrueggen,@ > <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> pondering... > [Snip]N > > If this is true - why did the company let him, and the VMS group, get away > > with this attitude?p > M >         Because the 'us vs them' + 'chip on shoulder' attitude is prevalentrC > in all human organizations?  Also, if DEC's senior management had J > decided that VMS was to be _the_ DEC OS going forward then the VMS groupB > became the golden children of the company and could do no wrong. > C IMHO, DEC did decide that or rather central engineering and Chestere Bell.rE Tops group was not allowed to increase the addressing ability, it waso tied at 30 bits - why? Ahem.lH The staff in all of 10 land was not allowed to grow in 81 on, why? Ahem.0 The staff on Vomit and Nebula was how big? Ahem.A ...the decisions of the past, just like those of the future, are ,0 colored and influenced by the human condition...   > -- >  > Edward Franksd > <fortrandragon@hotmail.com>    ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 16:35:05 GMT& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)% Message-ID: <9vnr7p$gvc@web.nmti.com>   V In article <Pine.NXT.4.43.0112180720020.29894-100000@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu>,- Mark Crispin  <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:ME > I read the original GNU paper.  Linux is *not* the operating systemk > described in that paper.  F They actually got Hurd to the point where it would run... I've seen itF at Usenix, but it was years too late to make a difference. Not only isE it hard to write an OS (even with a bootstrap system and a good modela@ at hand), but a microkernel design is doubly hard. Linus chose aE traditional monolithic kernel for Linux rather than a microkernel for)@ a reason: it's very difficult to get adequate performance from a? microkernel design: every server is a potential single-threadedlF bottleneck, so you either have to multithread it, split it into a "topF half" and "bottom half" that buffer and cache uncompleted transactionsF between them, or create a herd (a sub-hurd?) of servers around to take turns handling requests.  N Minix of course was a poster-boy for this problem, but that's not Tannenbaum'sL fault: it was intended to be a teaching tool, and adding all that complexityK would have hurt its utility there. Other pure microkernels have had similareM problesm... for exmaple, on the Amiga the file system was often a bottleneck,vF though they managed to avoid the problem in most of the other servers.  N So the FSF was fighting an uphill battle on all fronts, I don't blame them forL failing given the magnitude of the task they set themselves. I do agree theyM could have been a heck of a lot more diplomatic and statesmanlike about Linuxc right from the start.P   -- d+  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.sE   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."0L                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:29:41 +0000o% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>p@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <jjru1u81gffl4654alh48soo11sa3ieotq@4ax.com>  F On 18 Dec 2001 14:29:27 GMT, peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) wrote:  9 >In article <uibu1ush2qahccu2ceo11pdfmdo6dh7rlp@4ax.com>, ( >Alan Greig  <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:F >>In fact if DEC hadn't killed Richard Stallman's favourite system theB >>PDP-10 there *might* never have been a Gnu (he announced the GnuH >>project four  months after DEC canceled TOPS-20) and therefore never a >>Linux. > L >I don't think Linux was dependent on GNU. There were other free C compilersE >available: TenDra and the Berkeley compiler were options: while they-  C Linus Torvalds has stated that without Gnu there would have been noP9 Linux. Maybe someone else would have done it later but...t  N >didn't have as wide a following as GCC they were both available. In addition,J >Linus could have used parts of the BSD tree for his "super Minix" instead >of the GNU utilities. >iJ >While the FSF's code base has certainly been a valuable resource, I don't. >think it's as critical as many people assume.   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:26:31 +0000?% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <oaou1uo38lkcri51ib47bjl6r24pi6biql@4ax.com>  . On 18 Dec 2001 16:04:22 +0100, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  . >Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes: >iB >> > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything3 >> > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS. M >> Hence VMS' demise became my stated goal.  I was one of many who refused toeI >> develop software for VMS, and instead improved UNIX's lead so that VMS" >> would never catch up. > G >...which is just as immature an attitude as that reported of Hustvedt.r  C You might call it immature but if DEC suddenly killed the operating D system and hardware you loved and earned an income from after making? supposedly irrevocable promises under NDA about the future thendC *added* to that by insisting that certain features would *never* betC ported to VMS, I find it perfectly understandable. I slowly grew tooB really like VMS, after initially hating it and everything DEC postE 1983, and chose to work with it rather than Unix as it slowly evolved-C (file system enhancements, DCL extensions, more TOPS-20 style batchCB and print, better C support, reasonable TCP/IP etc) but many neverD forgave DEC. When was it that VAX Mail finally had the ability addedD to mail user@hostname without some third party binary hack and thirdD party mailers? Around 1995. A decade or two after TOPS-20. No wonderC people like Mark blew a fuse. VMS Mail today is *still* a subset ofM8 Mark's MM or DEC's 'official' MS variant 20 years later.  F I am absolutely sure that if Compaq finally end the last of the livingC DEC OSs a great number will never touch Compaq again. Frank da CruztB says in the Columbia history extract I posted that they picked VMSE over Unix because of DEC's shoddy handling of TOPS-20. Would you call.C the Kermit author and Columbia immature as well? Or for that matterl3 the many other sites which followed a similar path.   F Treat customers like shit and they'll shovel the shit straight back atD you if they can. The immaturity was on DEC's part. I am one of thoseD who date the start of the decline of DEC as the day the canceled theF PDP-10. Sure the real rundown didn't begin until the late 80s or earlyE 90s when the 10s and 20s were finally switched off in droves but thatn% was when the countdown clock started.b  D There was room for VMS and TOPS within DEC. If TOPS-10/.20 had to goC then the very least DEC could have done was added everything to VMSdB which they had but VMS didn't. Not send out all customers a letterC telling them of the "non-goals" which would never be ported as theyh did.  I >> Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMSf2 >> never was a significant player on the Internet.  = Mark, I know you'll never be convinced now but have a look atoF www.openvms.compaq.com, read the VMS Times, read the development work,C especially browse the Freeware CDs www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware,iC check out the DECUS symposium tapes and see how VMS engineering hassE slowly battled internally to enhance VMS and make it a fun OS as well8C as a 'business' one. Then there's the DII-COE work to add effectiveb> Solaris API on top of the virtually bullet-proof VMS kernel atM http://www.openvms.compaq.com/presentations/cets2001/CETS2001-1042_DIICOE.htmoC Add to this VMS's still industry-leading cluster support and VMS oneC Alpha today is a much better successor to the PDP-10/TOPS line thano! early VAX/VMS on 11/780 ever was.d  C The PDP-10 cancellation was wrong of course but you can't blame thetC current VMS team for that and they don't deserve the fate dumped on A the TOPS-10/TOPS-20 DEC development teams any more than they did.k  @ VMS development knows it is fighting for its life and has a last> life-line in the agreement to port to IA64 following the AlphaD termination. I for one don't want to see it go and that's why I stirC things up now. Perhaps if DEC had *fully* realised the bad-will (asiB you prove still as strong after 18 years) in advance that would beC generated by the decision they would never have done it. They can't 5 say they haven't been warned this time as a review oftF comp.os.vms/info-vax will reveal. VMS is still in far more wide-spreadF use than commonly thought and home non-commercal use is available freeE to anyone joining DECUS/Encompass/CUO. I guess you won't be convinceds - commercial over.   >?M >I do believe this has more to do with the lack of an affordable TCP/IP stack 1 >of good quality early enough than anything else.a  C No that was just a symptom of the DEC stupidity of the time. At onemD point the Internet was dominated by DEC then they decide to kill offA these machines and justify the lack of an IP stack by saying "VMS C systems are not normally connected to the Internet" Or do you thinka= DEC just accidentally produced an unaffordable crap IP stack?u  B DEC made the mistake I fear Compaq or HP are about to repeat. TheyF convinced themselves of one thing disregarding the reality of customer? wishes. Way back then they managed to trot out CEOs to back ther9 decisions as well. What does a CEO know about a computer?B     -- Alan   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 17:35:37 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)2 Message-ID: <9vnup9$31br$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>  8 In article <jjru1u81gffl4654alh48soo11sa3ieotq@4ax.com>,' Alan Greig  <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:CD >Linus Torvalds has stated that without Gnu there would have been no: >Linux. Maybe someone else would have done it later but...  I Linus has also said that if Net/2 had been released a year earlier, thereeL would have been no Linux: he would have used BSD instead. He's said a numberK of things about his motivations, and he's never been unwilling to share thet6 credit for his work or to acknowledge the competition.  L But I think he's mistaken. If there was no Gnu, then people who were workingK on GCC wouldn't have just vanished. They would have put their energies into M one of the other compilers out there. If there was no Gnu, the people workingaN on duplicating the UNIX software tools wouldn't have just vanished: there wereM dozens of other groups doing the same thing as the FSF, they just didn't havee Stallman's drive behind them.c  G I don't think that things would have been dire in a world where the FSFgH didn't exist. All the other people would still have been working on freeE software, and would have coalesced around other cores as they reached  critical mass.  J By the time Linus got tired of Minix, and decided to bootstrap his new OS,, there would have been other tools available.   --  @ Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC.	      "Cave cuniculos lagana ferentes"  F "Be conservative in what you generate, and liberal in what you accept" 	-- Matthew 10:16 (l.trans)e   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 18:30:19 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)c@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS), Message-ID: <9vo1vr$21i9$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  V In article <Pine.NXT.4.43.0112180728280.29894-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>,.  Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes: |> nN |>                                             The 16-bitters were killed too,M |> although it was done in a much more subtle manner (for all I know they mayd( |> still be making some form of PDP-11).  J Mentec still makes PDP-11's only I think they can't use that name and thus0 call their newer processors the M1 M11 and M100.   bill   -- sJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   a   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 12:33:41 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)n@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <P9L2svyp0GKk@eisner.encompasserve.org>,  g In article <MPG.168923526957226598a97d@news.alt.net>, Edward Franks <fortrandragon@hotmail.com> writes:a- > My glass typewriter shows Jan Vorbrueggen, D@ > <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> pondering... > [Snip]M >> If this is true - why did the company let him, and the VMS group, get away. >> with this attitude? > G > 	Because the 'us vs them' + 'chip on shoulder' attitude is prevalent tD > in all human organizations?  Also, if DEC's senior management had K > decided that VMS was to be _the_ DEC OS going forward then the VMS group aB > became the golden children of the company and could do no wrong. >   B 	Not only is it prevelant it is actually encouraged.  It is called: 	playing one group off another.  Spirit of competition and- 	all that.  Yes, see it in action first hand.1   				Rob1   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:19:17 +0100 (MET)S9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>D Subject: Re: VMS workstationse; Message-ID: <01KC0JQFYCJ89138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>C  C > Lest we forget, there was the VAXstation 3140 (IIRC) which was a r > four-processor workstation!s   3400?a   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:18:39 +0100 (MET)d9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>v Subject: Re: VMS workstationsn; Message-ID: <01KC0JOZGIA69138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>n  J > > But I would point out that even in the PC world, high end workstationsL > > are often dual processor systems. High end Macs are also dual processor.I > > I havn't checked but I expect that high end Sun workstations are also0J > > at least dual processor, and probably SGI's high end workstations too. > K > High end SGI workstations have a max of two processors, and I believe the3J > highend Sun workstations (Ultra 80) support four processors.  Shoot, you? > could even get a Sparc 20 with four processors at one point. s  A Lest we forget, there was the VAXstation 3140 (IIRC) which was a o four-processor workstation!    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:34:34 +0100i: From: Karl Rohwedder <extern.karl.rohwedder@volkswagen.de> Subject: Re: VMS workstations , Message-ID: <3C1F37DA.7080209@volkswagen.de>   Phillip Helbig wrote:h  C >>Lest we forget, there was the VAXstation 3140 (IIRC) which was a a >>four-processor workstation!. >> >  > 3400?d > F If you mean the 'Firefox', it was the 3520 (2 procs) or 3540 (4 procs)       -- d  - mit freundlichen Gruessen | with best regardsa   Karl RohwedderB iT-Ingenieurteam     | Ellernbruch 11       | D-38112 BraunschweigA Telefon: 0531/515521 | Telefax: 0531/515531 | Mobil: 0172/5434843tE   E-Mail: rohwedder@decus.decus.de           | iT-IngTeam@t-online.dee,           karl.rohwedder@it-ingenieurteam.de DATEX-P: 4505018005::ROHWEDDER   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 09:42:20 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>nC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) H Message-ID: <y4d71cj4wj.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  / JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:a  O > At what time frame would the EV7 designers have been told to drop scalabilityi* > and make EV7 work only at the high end ?  I The EV7 design is clearly oriented towards a multiprocessor machine rightfJ from the beginning: the starting point was "let's take the last version ofM the previous core, and i) put a faster memory interface directly on the chip,:H ii) add four interprocessor links and iii) add directory-based coherencyI hardware basedusing those links also on chip". The last two items are notEK required for a uniprocessor machine, and they are a substantial part of thea< chips real estate (20% eyeball estimate from the die photo).  I Of course, you can still build a uniprocessor machine with it, but you'lliI pay a premium, and it won't be much faster than an EV68 at the same clockaJ speed (hard to say what influence the new memory interface will have - butF it won't be a step similar to the EV5->EV6 transition, where you got a0 performance boost >1.5 at the same clock speed).  > Does IBM offer a uniprocessor system based on the POWER4 chip?   	Jan   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:16:47 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>nC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)o; Message-ID: <01KC0JIJ29UC9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>t  C > Heck, we still support the *first* Alpha workstation the Flamnigot > (DEC3000) a decade later.  ,  B Yep, have one under my desk at work (though soon to get something ( better) and one at home (thanks Chris!).  / > I don't think there will be an issue with the8# > DS10, et al for quite some time. b  
 As I wrote   > In the past,: > support for older hardware has always been pretty good,   C I think at least as late as 7.1, there were only a couple of VAXes 2@ (11/7X0 and Microvax I?), let alone ALPHAs, on which 7.1 wasn't F SUPPORTED (which doesn't necessarily mean it won't run on the others).  : The only concern is due to the change in hardware platform   > but perhaps the I > same thing will happen with ALPHA which is happening with VAX now, i.e. - > not all new features are implemented etc.  l  9 which might affect compilers etc more than the OS itself.d   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:56:59 GMTc* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>C Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)g> Message-ID: <KWHT7.226052$YD.17714995@news2.aus1.giganews.com>  L "Jan Vorbrueggen" <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y4d71cj4wj.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...1 > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:d > E > > At what time frame would the EV7 designers have been told to drop  scalability , > > and make EV7 work only at the high end ? >nK > The EV7 design is clearly oriented towards a multiprocessor machine rightoL > from the beginning: the starting point was "let's take the last version ofI > the previous core, and i) put a faster memory interface directly on the  chip,eJ > ii) add four interprocessor links and iii) add directory-based coherencyK > hardware basedusing those links also on chip". The last two items are notmI > required for a uniprocessor machine, and they are a substantial part ofe they> > chips real estate (20% eyeball estimate from the die photo).  F Then again, Itanic wastes far more real estate than that for any givenI performance level (perhaps with a few FP-style application exceptions)...a   >aK > Of course, you can still build a uniprocessor machine with it, but you'll@K > pay a premium, and it won't be much faster than an EV68 at the same clockaL > speed (hard to say what influence the new memory interface will have - butH > it won't be a step similar to the EV5->EV6 transition, where you got a2 > performance boost >1.5 at the same clock speed).  H Are you sure?  IIRC memory bandwidth doubled with EV7, latency went 'wayF down (don't have a number for that, but I suspect by at least close toF half), and on-chip cache got bumped to 1.75 MB, so anything that isn'tE disk-bound or fully-cache-resident on EV68 should see at least *some*uG healthy speed increase and memory-intensive applications could close to) double their speed.a   - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Dec 2001 16:00:45 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>wC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)hH Message-ID: <y4pu5co9nm.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  , "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:   > Are you sure?   M No. We'll know when Compaq finally publishes SPEC numbers for the processor. iF Hmm, that MPF2001 presentation (available via www.openvms.org) had the numbers. Let's see...s  ' Processor     CINT2000          CFP2000m' EV7-1200           804             1253-' EV6-1000       679/621          960/776e  M This is, as the notes say, based on EV6-optimized binaries for EV7, and it ismL unclear whether this is for a base or a peak run. Nonetheless, I don't see a  factor of 1.5 at the same clock.   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:30:05 -0500b5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>DC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)t0 Message-ID: <lgJT7.66$sK3.4075@news.cpqcorp.net>  J The DS20 is actually pretty small.  Certainly smaller than the first AlphaG workstation - the Flamingo (DEC3000).  It is a bit noisier than I wouldX prefer for a personal system.n    4 "David Mathog" <mathog@caltech.edu> wrote in message% news:3C1E8EFF.875D01E7@caltech.edu...o > Phillip Helbig wrote:bI > > However, something with 2 GB minimum memory, minimum 2 processors etc H > > can't really be called a workstation even if it has a graphics card. > H > It can if it's a PC, where a system like that can be had for less than > $5k.F > The equivalent VMS system would be a DS20 and even with Island doing > their bestE > the 2Gb of memory for that box is going to jack the price up prettyn > high.oJ > Plus a DS20 is going to use up a lot of space - I suppose you could call > it a desktop< > system if your desk is the size of a conference table ;-). >o
 > Regards, >c > David Mathog > mathog@caltech.edu   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:33:49 -0500h5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>rC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) 0 Message-ID: <RjJT7.68$sK3.4008@news.cpqcorp.net>  H There was a uni-processor system concept.  The EV7 designers are not theH system designers.  The engineering manager who would have done it, is noG longer with the company.  Right now, there is no EV7 workstation on theo public roadmap.t  K IMHO, if the Itanium stuff can be done quickly enough, there is no need foro it.S      : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C1EC729.551E3F76@videotron.ca...C > At what time frame would the EV7 designers have been told to dropn scalabilityvA > and make EV7 work only at the high end ? (eg: don't bother withn workstationI> > support, Compaq won't be making Alpha workstations anymore). >a >hI > This might provide insight on when Compaq passed the point of no return0 fore > Alpha's murder.1   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:35:49 -0500t5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> C Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)a0 Message-ID: <JlJT7.69$sK3.3787@news.cpqcorp.net>  I Besides, the EV7 is a EV68 core, with logic for glueless MP.  It would ben cheaper to use EV68.    L "Jan Vorbrueggen" <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y4d71cj4wj.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...1 > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:t >vE > > At what time frame would the EV7 designers have been told to dropl scalability , > > and make EV7 work only at the high end ? >mK > The EV7 design is clearly oriented towards a multiprocessor machine righteL > from the beginning: the starting point was "let's take the last version ofI > the previous core, and i) put a faster memory interface directly on the  chip, J > ii) add four interprocessor links and iii) add directory-based coherencyK > hardware basedusing those links also on chip". The last two items are not I > required for a uniprocessor machine, and they are a substantial part ofe thes> > chips real estate (20% eyeball estimate from the die photo). >rK > Of course, you can still build a uniprocessor machine with it, but you'lltK > pay a premium, and it won't be much faster than an EV68 at the same clockOL > speed (hard to say what influence the new memory interface will have - butH > it won't be a step similar to the EV5->EV6 transition, where you got a2 > performance boost >1.5 at the same clock speed). >I@ > Does IBM offer a uniprocessor system based on the POWER4 chip? >. > Jans   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:54:20 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>C Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)aB Message-ID: <gpLT7.313692$8q.27997692@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  L "Jan Vorbrueggen" <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y4pu5co9nm.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de.... > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes: >m > > Are you sure?  >dC > No. We'll know when Compaq finally publishes SPEC numbers for thet
 processor.H > Hmm, that MPF2001 presentation (available via www.openvms.org) had the > numbers. Let's see...t >t) > Processor     CINT2000          CFP2000t) > EV7-1200           804             1253s) > EV6-1000       679/621          960/776a >bL > This is, as the notes say, based on EV6-optimized binaries for EV7, and it isL > unclear whether this is for a base or a peak run. Nonetheless, I don't see ae" > factor of 1.5 at the same clock.  E Not if you were talking strictly SPEC numbers vs. application-visibleaA performance, which was not clear to me.  I was fairly specific inOL characterizing the kinds of (memory-intensive) work that could well see that" kind of performance boost, though.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:53:13 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>oC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L) , Message-ID: <3C1F9095.ED5C0FC8@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote: > K > Besides, the EV7 is a EV68 core, with logic for glueless MP.  It would beo > cheaper to use EV68.  N Will/should compilers be tweaked to make full use of EV7 capabilities, or willN EV6 binaries run at the most optimal EV7 capability out of the box without any	 changes ?s   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:36:48 +0300'4 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" <laishev@smtp.deltatel.ru>  Subject: WAP gateway for OpenVMS0 Message-ID: <3C1F8CC0.D9D2E4E4@smtp.deltatel.ru>  
 Hello All,> 	I looking for a WAP gateway for OpenVMS, is there something ?   -- v Cheers, Ruslan.iD +---------------------pure personal opinion------------------------+;       RADIUS Server for OpenVMS project - www.radiusvms.comu8         vms-isps@dls.net - Forum for ISP running OpenVMS*                  Mobile: +7 (901) 971-3222A    TKD (WTF) in Russia, St.-Petersburg - www.TaeKwonDo-WTF.SPb.RUt   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.702 ************************