1 INFO-VAX	Wed, 19 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 704       Contents: 1980 Dungeon game walkthrough?" Re: 1980 Dungeon game walkthrough?P 4368           Lose 15 pounds in 30 days.   100% Guaranteed!                  14 Re: backup problems + Re: Compaq's "Enterprise" commercial on CNN   Re: CXX and the Hobbyist license  Re: CXX and the Hobbyist license. DCPS printing problem - shared network printer2 Re: DCPS printing problem - shared network printer$ Re: DEC/X-Windows, VMS and eXcursion$ Re: DEC/X-Windows, VMS and eXcursionP Re: Exclusive Photos of Alpha 21364C EV7 Now Available for Persual at www.openvm Re: help, HP to SEC document - Do you know this ? - II4 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' Re: I would like to lease time on a VAX  RE: IBM to drop PCs ?? Infoworld discovers clusters Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L IQR Released to Public Domain ) 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: MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node ... # Re: More about Alpha and the merger # Re: More about Alpha and the merger ( Re: More DSSI cluster problems/questions2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not. Re: nfsmount missing OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline  Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline # Re: PCSI problem with release notes 0 Solved... 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: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked MicrosoftK TOPS residuals (was: RE: VMS missing features (was how to do deamonson VMS) $ Re: usage of new products on vms axp$ Re: usage of new products on vms axp$ Re: usage of new products on vms axp$ Re: usage of new products on vms axp$ Re: usage of new products on vms axp$ RE: usage of new products on vms axp$ Re: usage of new products on vms axp Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytes Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytes$ VAXstation 4000-90A hardware problem7 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) 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) 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 (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L): Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)$ Re: VMSclusters and network switchesP [OT] US investigating culture, was: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked MicrosoftP Re: [OT] US investigating culture, was: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Micro  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:05:33 +0100 , From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch>' Subject: 1980 Dungeon game walkthrough? & Message-ID: <3C20BACD.BC39B4A5@gmx.ch>    isn't the question in the title?4 Better than the walkthrough, if someone has a map...6 I'm also looking for a plain text version of DTEXT.DAT (1980 version)   Thanks,    D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:27:24 +0000 - From: Roy Omond <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com> + Subject: Re: 1980 Dungeon game walkthrough? 1 Message-ID: <3C20BFEC.ED9403E0@BlueBubble.UK.Com>    Didier Morandi wrote:   " > isn't the question in the title?6 > Better than the walkthrough, if someone has a map...  : Sheesh !  Generate your own map (like we all had to do :-)> Even if we had a map, how do you think it could be transferred8 to you ?  Mine was a whole bundle of hand-written pages.  8 > I'm also looking for a plain text version of DTEXT.DAT > (1980 version)  + My version is a fixed-length 512 byte file:       Marie: dir/fu s:[tools]dtext.dat   Directory S:[TOOLS]   5 DTEXT.DAT;1                   File ID:  (3257,1013,0) 0 Size:          462/464        Owner:    [SYSTEM]" Created:   14-DEC-2000 17:00:53.00& Revised:   28-NOV-2001 17:31:54.31 (4)" Expires:   22-JAN-2002 16:21:07.67" Backup:     1-DEC-2001 00:11:57.53 Effective: <None specified>  Recording: <None specified>  File organization:  Sequential Shelved state:      OnlineF File attributes:    Allocation: 464, Extend: 0, Global buffer count: 0$                     No version limit1 Record format:      Fixed length 512 byte records  Record attributes:  None RMS attributes:     None Journaling enabled: None= File protection:    System:RWED, Owner:RWED, Group:RE, World:  Access Cntrl List:  None    - IIRC, isn't it available on the Freeware CD ?   	 Roy Omond  Blue Bubble Ltd.F (I still think it was the best computer game ever;  my kids look at me as if I've got three heads :-)   ------------------------------   Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:37:14 & From: 3714546travelincentives2@aol.comY Subject: 4368           Lose 15 pounds in 30 days.   100% Guaranteed!                  14 I Message-ID: <AULTSHEXCHm0sFAPyap000018bd@aultshexch.AULTSH.AULTCHINA.COM>   # To unsubscribe, please email us at: ; w368344@yahoo.com with the word REMOVE in the subject line. 4 ====================================================  - Lose 15 pounds in 30 days.   100% Guaranteed! 7 The most successful weight loss plan from Europe is now 8 available to the rest of the world.  Limited Time Offer.   No Exercise.  No Dieting.   100% Herbal Natural Ingredients. No Hormones, No Glandulars. 5 100% Safe, 100% Effective, 100% Money Back Guarantee. 0 Free 1 Month Supply When You Purchase 2 or More.   Just visit us at:  http://meto.81832.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:20:51 -0700 * From: Terry Aardema <taardema@nrcan.gc.ca> Subject: Re: backup problems' Message-ID: <3C20B053.6A5F@nrcan.gc.ca>    John Santos wrote:+ > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Terry Aardema wrote:  <SNIP>= > > You may have to re-run this command occassionally; as VMS L > > extends/truncates directory files the modified date will change. If your > E > It only started doing this as an undocumented side-effect of an ECO 5 > to VMS V7.2-1 (VMS721_F11X-V0200) and VAX VMS V7.3.  <SNIP>  E Absolutely right; I was going to ask Peter what version of VMS he was A using, but I was interrupted and forgot. Thanks for including the - clarification (esp. the *undocumented* part).   
 Terry Aardema    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:58:17 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) 4 Subject: Re: Compaq's "Enterprise" commercial on CNN3 Message-ID: <tIpRNThpZSaC@eisner.encompasserve.org>   g In article <917AA3DFEwarrenspencer1977@207.126.101.97>, wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer) writes: D > Last night CPQ aired a commerical on CNN regarding its enterprise M > abilities, reminicent of recent IBM commericals "strategies you can use".   G > The message was along the lines of: hand all your IT problems to us,  H > because we've got the expertise to do end-to-end enterprise solutions.  ?    Reminds me of their Nonstop adds a couple years ago.  Tandem E    customers assumed it meant tandem and nobody else new what it was.           ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:33:46 +0100 * From: dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons)) Subject: Re: CXX and the Hobbyist license P Message-ID: <Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-y8ltv3orP6O2@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>  K On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:25:59, "Kenneth Block" <krblock@computer.org> wrote:   M > If you have a C++ license and just need the binary kit,  you may be able to @ > use the beta kit. The beta kit is available for download from: > F > ftp://ftp.compaq.com/pub/products/c-cxx/openvms/cxx/beta/ftindex.htm > J > The sanity kit (final beta kit) for V6.5 should be available shortly. WeJ > will annouce this kit in comp.os.vms as soon as it is available. I would= > wait until the sanity kit was available before downloading.  >  >  Thanks for the tip. 5 FYI Just had a look at the site, I can access it with 6 ftp or NS4.61 (OS/2) but not with Mozilla 0.9.6 (OS/2)   Dave   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:17:36 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ) Subject: Re: CXX and the Hobbyist license 3 Message-ID: <4ELSGqjahsa+@eisner.encompasserve.org>   } In article <Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-VUGONGPqYMMp@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>, dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons) writes:   L > 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.  E    Oops, I didn't realize you meant the Hobbyist CD set, someone else -    posted that CXX was accidentally left off.      G    I was thinking in terms of the Hobbyist licnese and the real CD set.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:05:34 -0000 + From: "Tim Jackson" <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> 7 Subject: DCPS printing problem - shared network printer & Message-ID: <3c20bad1$1@pull.gecm.com>  C Using OpenVMS 7.3, DCPS 2.0, network connected HP LJ5Si, PC running  Windows 95.   A I have the following problem.  Power-cycle HP printer, start DCPS F queues, print from OpenVMS, job prints okay, print from PC, job printsF okay, print from OpenVMS, job header prints but then rest of job times out.  G Any thoughts or ideas on what I need to do so that PC and OpenVMS print  jobs can co-exist?   TIA D ------------------ Purely Personal Opinion -------------------------D Tim Jackson                                    tim.jackson@amsjv.com Air Systems Group  Alenia Marconi Systems Ltd.    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 18:12:13 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> ; Subject: Re: DCPS printing problem - shared network printer H Message-ID: <y47krj2kya.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  - "Tim Jackson" <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> writes:   C > I have the following problem.  Power-cycle HP printer, start DCPS H > queues, print from OpenVMS, job prints okay, print from PC, job printsH > okay, print from OpenVMS, job header prints but then rest of job times > out.  L Don't use MS Word. Really. It puts things in the systemdict that break other program's code.    	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:30:58 -0000 + From: "Tim Jackson" <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> - Subject: Re: DEC/X-Windows, VMS and eXcursion & Message-ID: <3c20b2b4$1@pull.gecm.com>  F Thanks for your response but, I have no general problem with the loginH and authentication process.  My problem here is what appears to be a bugH in how logins are processed between XDM(CP) as part of eXcursion, XDM asF part of TCPIP Services, Advanced Server and OpenVMS V7.3 with externalF authentication enabled.  With external authentication enabled and withG the EXTAUTH flag set for a user, the login process does not use the UAF E stored password but hands the authentication off to (in my case) a NT E Server box.  This all works fine for terminal based logins, but fails  with eXcursion and XDM.   9 "Josef Stadelmann" <stadelma@datazug.ch> wrote in message " news:3c1fa9d0@news01.datazug.ch... > No No, > B > OpenVMS has for login purpose a thing called UAF which stays forD > user authorization facility (authentication by password). This UAF facility > getsE > called up on a login to a real VMS system passing the user name and  > password. H > Theere is a purdy value retreived for the user and this purdy value in
 > combination B > with the password is then hashed. The resulting hash is compared
 aginst the > store D > hash. If a match happens your considered authenticated. Then up on that a	 > process F > is setup in the context of the just authenticated user where all the tiny > details are then) > taken from the UAF on a per user basis.  > G > This UAF does not allow anything TO BE PASSED EXCEPT  A to Z, 0 to 9,  $ and  > _ 2 > and I think (GUESS) a letter must come in front. > ; > Anything else, username or password is a nogo in OpenVMS.  >  > Sepp Stadelmann  > 23914 ex DEC.  >  > 4 > "Milton" <mbhewitt@optonline.net> wrote in message4 > news:t2e7vtcc76d6bikqrjcisflpcfv9l0ocd0@4ax.com...5 > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 12:11:38 -0000, "Tim Jackson" " > > <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> wrote: > > A > > >I am running a 2 node Alpha VMScluster VMS V7.3, TCPIP V5.1, 
 DECwindowsH > > >1.2-6, Advanced Server V7.3 (as BDC to a WinNT 4 PDC) and ExcursionB > > >V7.2.177 (on Windows 95).  I have XDM enabled, configured and running,B > > >userids hostmapped to NT usernames and with XDMCP enabled (in	 eXcursion E > > >on the PC) I see the VMS nodes okay.  When I try to logon with a  userH > > >name of the form "xxx.yyyyy" it always fails, but user names of the formB > > >"xxxxxxx" (i.e.. no period) work fine. Am I missing something obvious? > > = > > >Could it be that the period in a username is messing up?  > > F > > It's not conforming to the 8.3 naming convention that I believe NTH > > uses to store the username to the registry or possibly the harddisk. > > Does xxxxxxxx.yyy work?8/ > > If it does then, then you have your answer.a > >!: > > You may be able to change this behavior by editing the& > > NtfsDisable8dot3NameCreation value > >  >bH http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q201/1/29.ASP?LN=EN-US& SD=g7 > n&FR=0&qry=8.3&rnk=2&src=DHCS_MSPSS_gn_SRCH&SPR=NTS40k > > [be aware of word wrapping]a > >c > >n/ > > >Any help or pointers would be appreciated?s > >h > > Just a guess.C > >N > > Cheers,f
 > > Milton >w >p   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:15:00 +0100* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)- Subject: Re: DEC/X-Windows, VMS and eXcursion ( Message-ID: <3c20bd04@news.kapsch.co.at>  T In article <3c20b2b4$1@pull.gecm.com>, "Tim Jackson" <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> writes:G >Thanks for your response but, I have no general problem with the login I >and authentication process.  My problem here is what appears to be a bugDI >in how logins are processed between XDM(CP) as part of eXcursion, XDM asoG >part of TCPIP Services, Advanced Server and OpenVMS V7.3 with externalpG >authentication enabled.  With external authentication enabled and with H >the EXTAUTH flag set for a user, the login process does not use the UAFF >stored password but hands the authentication off to (in my case) a NTF >Server box.  This all works fine for terminal based logins, but fails >with eXcursion and XDM.  J AFAIK, ExtAuth is not yet supported for many things (except terminal basedH logins of course) like FTP, FAL, ... and obviously XDM. I maybe wrong ofH course, but I can't remember getting a "is supported now " or "it works"
 for these.  I All other external authentication support is expected for one of the nextdF VMS versions (ExtAuth[/Login-Hooks] get pulled out of LOGINOUT.EXE andL implemented in new documented system functions). Refer to the VMS roadmap...  I Has anyone a definite answer of support for external authentication now ?k   -- o< Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888V< <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:21:40 -0500g5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> Y Subject: Re: Exclusive Photos of Alpha 21364C EV7 Now Available for Persual at www.openvmo2 Message-ID: <5JMgPD7P15xv1vs+eyp7JkWGRbgh@4ax.com>  E On 15 Dec 2001 17:27:00 -0600, kaplow_r@eisner.encompasserve.org.marss (Bob Kaplow) wrote:   u >In article <02OS7.13258$Sj1.7985007@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes: N >> Oh, the chip I possess is anything but perfect. It's Pass 0 silicon, albeitO >> fully functional. From what I've seen (much of which I cannot discuss due toaO >> NDA) the Marvel program is progressing quite nicely and Compaq possesses theVK >> architectural wherewithal necessary to sustain itself for, say, the nextn >> five years. > @ >Translation: Compaq has screwed itself 6 years down the road... >nA >        You [should] not examine legislation in the light of the E >        benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in thesG >        light of the wrongs it would do and the harm it would cause ifaG >        improperly administered -- Lyndon Johnson, former President ofm >        the U.S.M  9 Interesting quote.  Ironic it came from the man who triedi9 to implement "The Great Society", which failed miserably.s   David R. Beattyo    2 >	26-October, 2001: A day that will live in infamy5 >	Support Freedom: http://www.indefenseoffreedom.org/a   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:02:58 +0100n, From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch> Subject: Re: helpS& Message-ID: <3C20BA32.4C232C0B@gmx.ch>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > $ > stefan.appeltans@banksys.be wrote: > >  > > help >  > Topic?   I resisted, you didn't.n 50 points for Gryffindor!t   :-)a   D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:52:27 -0300V% From: <fabio_compaq@petrobras.com.br> 5 Subject: HP to SEC document - Do you know this ? - IIoL Message-ID: <OF884DA4B5.9912D855-ON03256B27.005C6DDA@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>   Click at  : http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/hp-compaq/hpposition.pdf  I This document informs about HP + Compaq merger. I am sorry if you already  know. I am havingn% problems here to acces the newsgroup.o    & PS: NO SPECIFIC MENTION ABOUT  OPENVMS   Regards    FC   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:06:01 +0000S% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>o= Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europee8 Message-ID: <4an02usp7h569n216rpcqfc8l25v2gs64t@4ax.com>  D On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:13:12 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote: her prices.t >sK >...the author of the below article is making the mistake many writers makemK >when writing about the EU.  They assume the EU system is based on the sameMJ >principles as ours - it is not.  Unlike the US system the focus of the EUI >system is will the merger harm competitors - not will it harm consumers.eG >The focus of the US system is will the merger harm consumers.  The key K >difference being there are mergers that do cause the market to become moretI >efficient thus benefiting the consumer even when competition is reduced.dJ >The EU system is biased against these mergers which in fact means that EUJ >systems will try block mergers that would actually benefit the consumers.  D Well that's the argument used by the proponents of mergers which mayC not actually be in the public interest. It is ridiculous to suggestO= that EU regulations are not designed to protect the consumer.V  D You can certainly argue that the rules could be tweaked or that theyD are somewhat biassed but the argument that the EU protects companies? purely for the sake of it is spurious. Companies, employees andn2 consumers are all taken into account under EU law,  C >Give the heavy involvement of EU governments in industry it is not-C >surprising they would set up a system that protects companies withi  >government ownership interests.  D What the hell does this have to do with HP/Compaq? Are you being fed> this stuff by any chance? In any case EU law itself has forcedE European governments to get out of most industry support which is why D European airlines are in serious trouble. Their national governments can no longer bail them out.  I >US regulators are well aware a major fight is coming with the EU that is M >going to become very ugly unless the EU system changes.  They have zeroed onBM >the fact the US only judges harm to the consumer while the EU judges harm tol
 >competitors.a  D Again crap. Difference in emphasis but it sounds like you would likeC to propose a take-over of the EU by the US to eliminate these peskyiC differences and avoid confusing these poor multinational executives-
 even further.    >'F >Over the long run this will backfire on the EU like all protectionismM >usually does.  Now that it has become clear that being a multi-national withtK >a involvement in the EU runs certain risks you will begin to see companies,F >structure themselves to minimize the risk.  That likely will includes# >minimizing investment in the EU...-  B Hehehehe. Don't you think if they could do that and still trade asD effectively in the EU they would have done so by now? MultinationalsF trade in Europe because it is normally *highly profitable* for them to do so under current rules.  F In case you haven't noticed the European economies have held up better@ in the last year than the US - despite huge closures by US/Other< multinational of European plants. EU legislation only forcesD consultation to try and avoid closures, it doesn't prevent them. NECF announced yesterday they are to close their FAB just outside Edinburgh? with large job losses. Motorola which mothballed a gigantic FAB F facility nearby before it even opened is expected to announce closuresF today which may include the old Edinburgh DEC Alpha FAB which they nowC own. Compaq closed the Scottish PC factory with the loss of several  thousand jobs just recently.  A It is a misconception that US companies can't close down EuropeansD plants *relatively* easily after consultation but I can see why theyB push this in the US: "Why are you making workers redundant at homeF when the European plants are still open. "Well it's those pesky commieF European employment laws." is easier to say than "because we make moreF profit manufacturing over there and we took $ 50 million dollars in EUC grants to open the factory two years ago which we would have to payn# back if we shut within five years."s  - Btw, I work in the UK for a US multinational.a -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:53:02 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>1= Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., Europe.H Message-ID: <y4ellrscq9.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ( "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:  C > When you can no longer drive down the cost of mousetraps through o5 > innovation the next approach is economies of scale.e  E No economies of scale apply at the size of HP and Compaq. Look to the 9 Dailmler-Chrysler merger for a failure of this argument. V  F Incidentally, I do not think the market these two companies are in has5 reached the "no longer...innovation" state quite yet.   A > The US economy had huge productivity gains which unquestionably # > drove down the cost to consumers.*  J That's because the US economy had a lot of catching up to do when compared to Europe and especially Japan.@  M > What made the economy grow was Information Technology advances that allowednJ > companies to become much larger but still be able to effectively manage  > their operation.  F A number of studies show that the way IT is commonly used in companies _lower_ productivity.c  D > Give the heavy involvement of EU governments in industry it is notD > surprising they would set up a system that protects companies with! > government ownership interests.T  F This was only true in a few EC countries, and is no longer true in all of them.  G > Over the long run this will backfire on the EU like all protectionism N > usually does.  Now that it has become clear that being a multi-national withL > a involvement in the EU runs certain risks you will begin to see companiesG > structure themselves to minimize the risk.  That likely will includesy$ > minimizing investment in the EU...  K Over the long run the attitude of the US judicial system will backfire like I all non-compliance with international rules usually does. Now that it has M become clear that being a multi-national with a[n] involvement in the US runskN certain risks you will begin to see companies structure themselves to minimizeG the risk. That likely will include[s] minimzing investment in the US...    	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:54:43 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> = Subject: Re: HP, Compaq Face Antitrust Hurdle In U.S., EuropetH Message-ID: <y4bsgvscng.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ( "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:  N > Nope - why would Dell go along with higher prices?  Since Dell has proven itN > can make a nice profit at the current prices why would Dell raise prices and/ > pass up an opportunity to gain market share? s  A There is no opportunity to gain market share - not significantly.s  H > They only way what you describe would happen would be if no company isF > making a nice profit (not the case here) or one company had achieved@ > commanding control of the market (not the case here either)...  N Dell certainly is making a much less nice profit than even a year or two ago.    	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:42:21 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)-0 Subject: Re: I would like to lease time on a VAX3 Message-ID: <53mF3loEFCdt@eisner.encompasserve.org>j  H In article <3C1E56B9.C560A0E8@home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> writes: > I was right :-)  > Q > There is a /VAX option in the linker. It will produce a VAX image on a Alpha. I R > never tried it, and I don't know if it is possible to compile a C program on theF > Alpha, and link it with the /VAX switch in order to get a VAX image. >   A    The corss linkers were to have been shipped, and should be thesG    current versions of the linkers.  Cross compilers never shipped, but-G    some VAX compilers might be VEST'able.  They would still be programs-6    that read source code and generate VAX object code.  F    Don't know if there's a way to resolve licensing issues for running    VEST'ed compilers.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:35:31 -0000m8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> Subject: RE: IBM to drop PCs ??eN Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF180@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>   MIcrosoft to drop software?j   John  B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk= Post: Denys Wilkinson Building, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKoA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)d   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:52:08 +0100I1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>r% Subject: Infoworld discovers clusters-5 Message-ID: <3C20E1D8.E3E90709@swissonline.delete.ch>0   AtH http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/12/13/011213hncompcust.xml?1G you'll find a special report about clusters.  They make sound like theyu are something incredibly novel.   C There's even an online discussion today (10:00am PST) to discus the  power of clustering.  4 It's exciting stuff ... but about 16 years (?) late.     John McLean    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:57:44 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>i' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20LlH Message-ID: <y4k7vjk2nr.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  7 "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:k  . > Of course, I think the same thing could have6 > been realized by aggresive use of granularity hints.  N Agreed. So when will the VMS linker, the image activator and the MMG subsystem; support granularity hints in process private address space?r  J > The argument is that 2GB as the minimum memory isn't unreasonable in theK > next say, year or two.  But add a nickle, add a dime - eventually you are  > talking real money.h  J The point was, the competition will be in the same position, so there will be no competitive disadvantage.e  M > The real point of bringing up the page size issue, is to point out that thehJ > Alpha strategy was performance - and that has real costs associated with( > it - not just the cost of the silicon.  I Sure. Although with the EV7, much of the glue has moved on chip (I always G liked that about the transputers - a processor, a capacitor and a 5 MHzEG quartz and you have a functional CPU). I see AMD is following suit witho the Hammer series.   	Jan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:07:12 GMT 4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20Lc/ Message-ID: <3C20AC2F.4E168D0@blueyonder.co.uk>u   Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:   K > Sure. Although with the EV7, much of the glue has moved on chip (I always I > liked that about the transputers - a processor, a capacitor and a 5 MHzaI > quartz and you have a functional CPU). I see AMD is following suit with  > the Hammer series. >   A sure, transputers were cute, but see how far Occam skills get youa@ in the job market these days. Sheesh, I spent my transputer daysC avoiding C in preference to Occam but career wise it was a mistake.t   regardes     -- t Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  t  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of t! my employers or service provider.    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 18:07:06 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>r' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20LyH Message-ID: <y4d71b2l6t.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  6 Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:  C > sure, transputers were cute, but see how far Occam skills get you  > in the job market these days.c  J Not occam in itself, but the attitude it requires is exactly what you need0 to write a parallel or a multi-threaded program.   	Jan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:14:51 GMT 4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>' Subject: Re: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L-0 Message-ID: <3C20CA18.A383B747@blueyonder.co.uk>   Jan Vorbrueggen wrote: > 8 > Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> writes: > E > > sure, transputers were cute, but see how far Occam skills get you"! > > in the job market these days.> > L > Not occam in itself, but the attitude it requires is exactly what you need2 > to write a parallel or a multi-threaded program. >   I ok, try telling that to IT agents and HR depts, that was my point really.     s   -- M Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  v  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of  ! my employers or service provider.d   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:15:54 -0600e* From: "Earl D. Lakia" <elakia@hotmail.com>& Subject: IQR Released to Public Domain* Message-ID: <3c20af2d$1@news.netnitco.net>  K IPACT is releasing the IPACT Queue and Router product to the public domain.  This product is very similarJ to BEA MessageQ/PAMS/DEC Message Q.  Its lineage comes from development of the ManufacturingoG Automation Queuing and Routing services for VAX/VMS developed by Inlando Steel when PAMS was L being developed.  Almost all of the services provided by BEA are provided in the IQR product (as well/ as in the MAQ versions for RSX11M and VAX/VMS).n  G The router layer protocol is documented that would allow anyone to senda messages to a queue on theL VMS host using TCP/IP (e.g., Billy Boxes).  The software is implemented as a user written system-J service in C.  Biggest problem in porting to Windows 2000 is a replacement of the lock manager.I Unlike BEA Message Q, this product can have queues that are Cluster wide.t  K To acquire distribution, send me email l a k i a @ I P A C T .C O M (Remove  anti-spam spaces).0 To acquire documentation, visit IPACT's web site3 (www.ipact.com) and look under the products button.3    J The IPACT Queuer and Router Services (IQR) provides a standard Application Programming Interface (API) I for sending messages.  By using IQR, application programmers are relievedo  from trying to develop messaging@ methods between applications on the same node or multiple nodes.  H IQR provides delivery, recovery, and connectivity between multiple nodes using a router installed overlK DECnet or TCP/IP.  IQR services are provided that allow for the addition ofs user supplied routers toE alternate networks.  IPACT has a library of other routers written forc process control devices, SNA,y and other networks.r  G A link library is provided that interfaces the Manufacturing Automationl Queuing and Routinga  Software (available from DECUS).  F The need to deliver transactions and events reliably between different computer systems have beenF identified for most process control computer systems.  DECnet does not guarantee the deliveryF of messages at the application layer.  The IQR router and IQR services provide this end to endnL delivery guarantee.  The use of these two mechanisms provides the ability to deliver informationsI from one computer system to another in applications where such guaranteesi are required (e.g.K the MES environment).  Messages are not deleted or lost until the receiving-	 process aeI cknowledges the message.  This can be thought of in a similar manner as a> database "commit".  K The IQR software is designed to provide guaranteed message delivery betweent twoaD different locations.  This is done by creating a messaging hub which contains message queues.F Each message queue contains actual messages to be read.  Also, the IQR software provides1G a router which will move a message from one hub to another (even acrossC different nodes).k  
 Earl Lakia Senior Staff EngineerA7 l a k i a @ I P A C T .C O M (Remove anti-spam spaces).    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:35:36 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>l2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business modelH Message-ID: <y4heqnsdjb.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ( "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:  L > Compaq's _business model_ is based on technology leadership as I have saidH > that in the past and the article that was the original posting in thisM > thread pointed it out also.  Compaq's current _strategy_ for providing that0C > technology leadership is through enterprise integration services.   I So what and where is that vaunted technology leadership? In consumer PCs?rN All the technology is Intel's. In corporate PCs? Dito. In entry-level servers?L Was some years ago, but now lost. Oh, and those high-end thingies running onB MIPS and Alpha processors? Sorry, Compaq doesn't know it has them.  L And the rampant cutting in the ex-DEC labs also speaks a different language.I DEC was once at least somewhat compareable to IBM in this respect; Compaqe
 no longer is.i   	Jan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:21:06 GMTn' From: ben_myers@charter.net (Ben Myers) 2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model/ Message-ID: <3c2090df.2028404@news.charter.net>u   Jeff,   N Compaq's response  "if I checked I would find the strange drivers were becauseP Compaq brought that technology to the market first but always moved to follow-onE generation that wasn't proprietary." is hogwash, rationalization, andtP revisionist history, at least since 386 days, maybe 12 or 13 years.  Before thatI with the original Compaq luggable and other now-antique boxes, Compaq wasrF something of a first.  But even then Compaq strived from some level ofO compatibility with the de facto IBM standard.  Had Compaq not done so, it wouldaK have had another Rainbow (or Wang PC or Honeywell Level 6/10) on its hands.   N Compaq's bizarre drivers are/were the manifestations of the usual Compaq groupO think that Compaq needed to create something unique, whether or not it gave theuO customer any added value.  Compaq, like every other name brand manufacturer andnN early in the design cycle, gets reference drivers along with chipsets from theP major chip makers.  The reference drivers are an implementation which works withM the manufacturers standard hardware interface, ports, IRQs, DMA channels, etctJ etc.  Compaq's choice to deviate from chip makers' standard interfaces wasM deliberate, stupid, pig-headed, and against customer interests, meant only to A justify higher price tags for Compaq gear.  Compaq's non-standardoP implementations did not increase reliability, speed, or any other useful measureN of value to the customer.  In fact, more often than not the customer lost out.  M Why I remember WAY back when Compaq touted on-board VGA for its DeskPro 386s.UP Of course PR people for the paq touted this VGA as the hottest ever.  I got holdO of one of these boxes, installed a Diamond SpeedStar with Tseng graphics chips, K ran benchmarks which KILLED Compaq's on-board VGA.  No contest.  And CompaqvP engineers undoubtedly spent years "perfecting" the VGA chip used in the DeskPro.  O If Scott Adams hadn't said he worked at PacBell, I would claim that Dilbert wasn a Compaq engineer... Ben Myers  K On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:04:48 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:g  J >If the proprietary technology (really uniqueness of the technology) valueL >add is to achieve something the _customer_ values the customer will buy it.K >If the proprietary value add serves the vendor's value proposition and notlK >the customer's value proposition the customer will seek other solutions ase >soon as they are presented. >oJ >FYI - When Compaq delivered a new unique technology to the marketplace itK >would as a rule adopt the market driven version in the future.  It knew ifeJ >the technology remained proprietary to Compaq it would not survive in theJ >market.  This is why many Compaq WinTel boxes need unique drivers.  TheseJ >were the first boxes on the market to deliver a specific technology.  TheF >follow-on generation is not provided by Compaq and Compaq adopts thatM >follow-on generation in place of its original generation.  After Digital wasmJ >purchased by Compaq one of the first questions I asked their PC folks wasK >why the strange drivers.  Their response was if I checked I would find theaJ >strange drivers were because Compaq brought that technology to the marketH >first but always moved to follow-on generation that wasn't proprietary. >5 >2. >"cjt" <cheljuba@prodigy.net> wrote in message& >news:3C1FB363.DAA13C62@prodigy.net...M >> I'm not sure where this argument fits into the big picture -- CPQ PCs haveqH >> always, AFAIK, been considered more "proprietary" than those of Dell, >whichJ >> tends to use more name brand third party boards.  At least that's how I >see >> it. >>I >> So Compaq's arguments about being "industry standard" actually suggestl >> buying Dell gear, IMHO. >> >> Jeff Killeen wrote: >> >K >> > Well said Ben - marginal engineering advances at best that come at thee >cost 8 >> > of locking someone into an expensive product set... >> >9 >> > "Ben Myers" <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote in messagei. >> > news:3c1f4c4d.1805687@news.charter.net... >> > > Jeff, >> > >J >> > > I agree with your statements about technology leadership.  What has >> > happened atF >> > > Compaq and many other places is that the marketeers corrupt the
 >engineers
 >> > mindsF >> > > into equating technology leadership with highly proprietary.  A >furtherE >> > > corruption of the corporate occurs when collective group thinkn
 >convinces >> > itselfwM >> > > that highly proprietary is truly superior, when, in fact, it is only ay >> > vehicleJ >> > > for locking the customer into expensive technology, not necessarily >betterr	 >> > thansL >> > > well-designed commodity stuff.  Show me the value and the benefits of >> > highly K >> > > proprietary technology, and I'll buy.  More often than not the values >andG >> > > benefits accrue to the manufacturer, not the customer.  And that 	 >explains 
 >> > a lot8 >> > > of failures in the computer industry... Ben Myers >> > >K >> > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:36:32 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>m >> > wrote:. >> > > >> > > >F >> > > >"John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message6 >> > > >news:3C1EE3EE.D4B0450@swissonline.delete.ch...	 >> > > >> I >> > > >> I'm not so sure that our opinions are "uninformed" Jeff, we canr >reade >> > the >> > > >financial L >> > > >> statements and see that Enterprise stuff returns about 10 times as >much  >> > > >income as PCs K >> > > >> for every dollar spent.  Against that we see Compaq making little5 >or no >> > > >visibleb3 >> > > >> attempt to expand that Enterprise market.. >> > > >M >> > > >The "uninformed" part is many portraying Compaq as a company built onsL >> > > >pushing out mass market PC boxes rather than understanding that what >madeoJ >> > > >Compaq successful was engineering leadership in their marketplace. >> > > >K >> > > >It is in Compaq's nature, and as the article pointed out its likelyr >pathd >> > touL >> > > >success, to provide technology leadership.  I believe management has >comea >> > tosJ >> > > >understand the folly of competing with Dell on Dell's terms.  What >CompaqnJ >> > > >will do is return to its business model and position itself as theM >> > > >technology leader in servers.  That is good for Tru64/OVMS/NSK.  Oncea >theM >> > > >QuickBlade and Storageworks technologies are fully implemented in the-	 >> > next-E >> > > >30 months Compaq will be in a very strong position to provides >technologybK >> > > >leadership across all server markets and make money doing it.  Whatm >> > causednJ >> > > >Compaq's current problems is not WinTel but becoming obsessed with >Dello >> > andG >> > > >trying to play Dell's game (which they are weak at) rather thanw >playing >> > > >Compaq's game. >> > > >G >> > > >What that article added to my thinking was this - I have alwaysn	 >believedhJ >> > > >companies that attempt to charge a premium price for technology by >> > providingL >> > > >technology leadership always get into trouble as the market matures.	 >> > WhatsM >> > > >that article correctly pointed out is there an emerging sweet spot in  >theJ >> > > >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 works >in 	 >> > that-G >> > > >sweet spot.  Until that sweat spot becomes commodity technologyM >Compaqr >> > can >> > > >win. >> > > >F >> > > >There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that >article 1)FI >> > > >That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership 2)e >ThatBK >> > > >technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that  >theH >> > > >market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume that >> > technology3I >> > > >leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology)2 >will0 >> > winK >> > > >the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  Ifu >theD >> > > >customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price.
 >Customers	 >> > makecM >> > > >that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis.c	 >> > JusthL >> > > >because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who make >the0 >> > > >business decisions will appreciate it... >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > Ben Myers" >> > > Spirit of Performance, Inc. >> > > 73 Westcott Road  >> > > Harvard, MA 01451 >> > > tel: 978-456-3889 >> > > eFax: 810-963-0412f' >> > > PayPal, MC, VISA, AMEX accepted.: >q >e  	 Ben Myers  Spirit of Performance, Inc.n 73 Westcott Road Harvard, MA 01451n tel: 978-456-3889e eFax: 810-963-0412 o  PayPal, MC, VISA, AMEX accepted.   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 14:39:03 GMT& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model% Message-ID: <9vq8q7$def@web.nmti.com>l  / In article <u2072khhhit20a@corp.supernews.com>, % Jeff Killeen <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote: L > Compaq's _business model_ is based on technology leadership as I have saidH > that in the past and the article that was the original posting in this > thread pointed it out also.   F Proof by repeated vehement assertion is not generally considered to beH particularly compelling. Could you elaborate on exactly what you mean by@ this term, and how it applies to Compaq, with concrete examples?   --  +  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.uE   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything." L                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:54:26 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>e2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model= Message-ID: <CS1U7.64060$pa1.21780123@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>V  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messagea8 news:JAMT7.17784$Sj1.10335026@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net... > L > > Hell, if Compaq had invented Internet 20 years ago we would probably not > be having - > > this kind of online discussion right now.  > >c >n- > Wasn't it Algore who invented the Internet?h    G Nah. He was just the guy in Marketing. He's the guy who created demand.i   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:05:43 -0500a& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model/ Message-ID: <u21b6ihnpr005a@corp.supernews.com>d   Ben...  J My expereince is late 486 and beyond.  The specific expereinces I had wereG related disk controllers (specfically SCSI) and matched what the Compaq1 folks said below...g  4 "Ben Myers" <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote in message) news:3c2090df.2028404@news.charter.net...e > Jeff,  >dH > Compaq's response  "if I checked I would find the strange drivers were becauseeH > Compaq brought that technology to the market first but always moved to	 follow-onmG > generation that wasn't proprietary." is hogwash, rationalization, and,E > revisionist history, at least since 386 days, maybe 12 or 13 years.l Before thatiK > with the original Compaq luggable and other now-antique boxes, Compaq was H > something of a first.  But even then Compaq strived from some level ofK > compatibility with the de facto IBM standard.  Had Compaq not done so, itb wouldeF > have had another Rainbow (or Wang PC or Honeywell Level 6/10) on its hands. >oJ > Compaq's bizarre drivers are/were the manifestations of the usual Compaq group H > think that Compaq needed to create something unique, whether or not it gave the@ > customer any added value.  Compaq, like every other name brand manufacturer andL > early in the design cycle, gets reference drivers along with chipsets from thelG > major chip makers.  The reference drivers are an implementation whiche
 works withK > the manufacturers standard hardware interface, ports, IRQs, DMA channels,  etc-L > etc.  Compaq's choice to deviate from chip makers' standard interfaces wasL > deliberate, stupid, pig-headed, and against customer interests, meant only toC > justify higher price tags for Compaq gear.  Compaq's non-standardeJ > implementations did not increase reliability, speed, or any other useful measuresK > of value to the customer.  In fact, more often than not the customer lostt out. >uI > Why I remember WAY back when Compaq touted on-board VGA for its DeskProe 386s.PI > Of course PR people for the paq touted this VGA as the hottest ever.  Ip got holdJ > of one of these boxes, installed a Diamond SpeedStar with Tseng graphics chips,F > ran benchmarks which KILLED Compaq's on-board VGA.  No contest.  And CompaqI > engineers undoubtedly spent years "perfecting" the VGA chip used in thei DeskPro. > E > If Scott Adams hadn't said he worked at PacBell, I would claim thato Dilbert was   > a Compaq engineer... Ben Myers >.F > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:04:48 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote: >aL > >If the proprietary technology (really uniqueness of the technology) valueJ > >add is to achieve something the _customer_ values the customer will buy it. I > >If the proprietary value add serves the vendor's value proposition andc notQJ > >the customer's value proposition the customer will seek other solutions as > >soon as they are presented. > >oL > >FYI - When Compaq delivered a new unique technology to the marketplace itJ > >would as a rule adopt the market driven version in the future.  It knew ifL > >the technology remained proprietary to Compaq it would not survive in theL > >market.  This is why many Compaq WinTel boxes need unique drivers.  TheseL > >were the first boxes on the market to deliver a specific technology.  TheH > >follow-on generation is not provided by Compaq and Compaq adopts thatK > >follow-on generation in place of its original generation.  After Digitaln was L > >purchased by Compaq one of the first questions I asked their PC folks wasI > >why the strange drivers.  Their response was if I checked I would findi therL > >strange drivers were because Compaq brought that technology to the marketJ > >first but always moved to follow-on generation that wasn't proprietary. > >d > >s0 > >"cjt" <cheljuba@prodigy.net> wrote in message( > >news:3C1FB363.DAA13C62@prodigy.net...J > >> I'm not sure where this argument fits into the big picture -- CPQ PCs haveJ > >> always, AFAIK, been considered more "proprietary" than those of Dell, > >whichL > >> tends to use more name brand third party boards.  At least that's how I > >see > >> it. > >>K > >> So Compaq's arguments about being "industry standard" actually suggestu > >> buying Dell gear, IMHO. > >> > >> Jeff Killeen wrote: > >> >I > >> > Well said Ben - marginal engineering advances at best that come ats theq > >costa: > >> > of locking someone into an expensive product set... > >> >; > >> > "Ben Myers" <ben_myers@charter.net> wrote in messagev0 > >> > news:3c1f4c4d.1805687@news.charter.net... > >> > > Jeff, > >> > >L > >> > > I agree with your statements about technology leadership.  What has > >> > happened atH > >> > > Compaq and many other places is that the marketeers corrupt the > >engineers > >> > mindsH > >> > > into equating technology leadership with highly proprietary.  A
 > >furtherG > >> > > corruption of the corporate occurs when collective group thinki > >convinces
 > >> > itselfmH > >> > > that highly proprietary is truly superior, when, in fact, it is only a > >> > vehicleL > >> > > for locking the customer into expensive technology, not necessarily	 > >better_ > >> > thangK > >> > > well-designed commodity stuff.  Show me the value and the benefits  of
 > >> > highly G > >> > > proprietary technology, and I'll buy.  More often than not theo valuen > >andI > >> > > benefits accrue to the manufacturer, not the customer.  And that  > >explains  > >> > a lot: > >> > > of failures in the computer industry... Ben Myers > >> > >; > >> > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:36:32 -0500, "Jeff Killeen"a <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>f
 > >> > wrote:. > >> > >
 > >> > > >H > >> > > >"John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message8 > >> > > >news:3C1EE3EE.D4B0450@swissonline.delete.ch... > >> > > >>0K > >> > > >> I'm not so sure that our opinions are "uninformed" Jeff, we cane > >readu
 > >> > the > >> > > >financialdK > >> > > >> statements and see that Enterprise stuff returns about 10 timesw as > >much  > >> > > >income as PCsuF > >> > > >> for every dollar spent.  Against that we see Compaq making little > >or no > >> > > >visiblep5 > >> > > >> attempt to expand that Enterprise market.n
 > >> > > >L > >> > > >The "uninformed" part is many portraying Compaq as a company built onI > >> > > >pushing out mass market PC boxes rather than understanding thatt what > >madenL > >> > > >Compaq successful was engineering leadership in their marketplace.
 > >> > > >F > >> > > >It is in Compaq's nature, and as the article pointed out its likely > >path 	 > >> > tosJ > >> > > >success, to provide technology leadership.  I believe management haso > >come 	 > >> > to L > >> > > >understand the folly of competing with Dell on Dell's terms.  What	 > >Compaq L > >> > > >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 > >theK > >> > > >QuickBlade and Storageworks technologies are fully implemented inh ther > >> > nextpG > >> > > >30 months Compaq will be in a very strong position to providep
 > >technologyrG > >> > > >leadership across all server markets and make money doing it.t What
 > >> > caused L > >> > > >Compaq's current problems is not WinTel but becoming obsessed with > >Delli
 > >> > andI > >> > > >trying to play Dell's game (which they are weak at) rather thanr
 > >playing > >> > > >Compaq's game.
 > >> > > >I > >> > > >What that article added to my thinking was this - I have alwaysk > >believedfL > >> > > >companies that attempt to charge a premium price for technology by > >> > providingE > >> > > >technology leadership always get into trouble as the markete matures. > >> > WhatoL > >> > > >that article correctly pointed out is there an emerging sweet spot in > >theL > >> > > >server market and that Dell's business model can't fill it without > >> > breaking.H > >> > > >At least for the next 4-5 years Compaq's business model should work > >in: > >> > thatfI > >> > > >sweet spot.  Until that sweat spot becomes commodity technologyl	 > >Compaqs
 > >> > can > >> > > >win.
 > >> > > >H > >> > > >There are two things that I hope everyone takes away from that
 > >article 1)uK > >> > > >That Compaq's business model is based on technology leadership 2)r > >That H > >> > > >technology leadership _only_ works if you can create something that > >theJ > >> > > >market values.  The mistake that is often made is to assume that > >> > technologyrK > >> > > >leadership by itself (i.e. technology for the sake of technology)r > >will 
 > >> > winI > >> > > >the day.  It only works it the customer values that difference.  If > >theF > >> > > >customer doesn't value it  they won't pay the premium price. > >Customers > >> > makegH > >> > > >that call based upon a business decision and not a engineering basis. > >> > JusttI > >> > > >because the engineers appreciate its doesn't mean the folks who  make > >the2 > >> > > >business decisions will appreciate it...
 > >> > > >
 > >> > > >
 > >> > > >
 > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > Ben Myers$ > >> > > Spirit of Performance, Inc. > >> > > 73 Westcott Roada > >> > > Harvard, MA 01451 > >> > > tel: 978-456-3889 > >> > > eFax: 810-963-0412a) > >> > > PayPal, MC, VISA, AMEX accepted.3 > >A > >@ >d > Ben Myers> > Spirit of Performance, Inc.n > 73 Westcott Road > Harvard, MA 01451v > tel: 978-456-3889  > eFax: 810-963-0412" > PayPal, MC, VISA, AMEX accepted.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:52:23 +0000h% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>a2 Subject: Re: Learn about the Compaq business model8 Message-ID: <kfd12u8i7imffj44m5jo0a5u7dhqrlqi0s@4ax.com>  F On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:54:26 GMT, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:   >e@ >"Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in message9 >news:JAMT7.17784$Sj1.10335026@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...o >>M >> > Hell, if Compaq had invented Internet 20 years ago we would probably not> >> be having. >> > this kind of online discussion right now. >> > >>. >> Wasn't it Algore who invented the Internet? >r >aH >Nah. He was just the guy in Marketing. He's the guy who created demand.  C As nobody's said it yet he should really have claimed to be the guy B who invented the Algorithm - or Al Gore Rhythm to give it its full name :-)  $  Not sure who came up with that one.   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:43:17 +0000c- From: Roy Omond <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com>tD Subject: Re: MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node ...1 Message-ID: <3C206135.23642D7C@BlueBubble.UK.Com>g   Olaf wrote:o  	 > Hi Nic,n >g > Thanks for the responsen > the ... stands for >d) >  mail system_backup.log smtp%"root@hp2"r: > %MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node HP2/ > -SYSTEM-W-NOSUCHDEV, no such device availablee >  > ftp hp2 goes well, > telnet hp2 goes well  G Just for the sake of completeness, a copy of e-mail to Olaf solving his> problem:    -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----3 Van: Roy Omond [mailto:Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com]w, Verzonden: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:23 AM	 Aan: OlafsF Onderwerp: Re: MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node ...     Olaf wrote:   	 > Hi Nic,t >m > Thanks for the responsee > the ... stands for >i) >  mail system_backup.log smtp%"root@hp2">: > %MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node HP2/ > -SYSTEM-W-NOSUCHDEV, no such device available  >e > ftp hp2 goes wellt > telnet hp2 goes well   Olaf,>  < use the fully qualified name instead of the short form "hp2" e.g. smtp%"root@hp2.psb.nl"   E IIRC, MAIL will interpret the "root@hp2" as if it's the equivalent of>> the DECnet address HP2::ROOT.  And you're probably not running DECnet.>  	 Roy Omondt Blue Bubble Ltd.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:14:51 +0000>% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>i, Subject: Re: More about Alpha and the merger8 Message-ID: <g6m02uor5l7c114q5efffl0cae7230m8nd@4ax.com>  4 On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:46:17 GMT, "Terry C. Shannon"" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote:   > L >It's my understanding/presumption that the timing of the Alpha decision wasK >predicated on the visibility of 2FQ01 numbers. The decision supposedly waspE >made when it became evident that 2FQ was gonna be rather squatulent.y >rI >Whether there is any correlation between the IPF decision and the mergerr# >decision remains IMHO speculative.a  E Forgetting conspiracies for the moment, do you think it possible thatoC Compaq could talk to Intel about switching to IA64 and transferringaD developers without Intel's IA64 developer partner HP knowing even if- merger discussions had not been on the table?   F Conversely do you think it possible Alpha developers Compaq could talkE to co-developers of the IA64 HP about a merger without discussing how C this would change the dynamics of the Alpha/IA64 processor wars anda4 this information then feeding to HP's partner Intel?  > To me the events of the last 6 months can only be explained if@ virtually all negotiations between the parties were known to theE senior execs of Compaq, Intel and HP. I don't think it could have allo "come together" otherwise.   >-   -- Alan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:11:12 GMT . From: "Duane Sand" <Duane.Sand@mindspring.com>, Subject: Re: More about Alpha and the merger- Message-ID: <4L4U7.8905$xl6.989393@rwcrnsc54>   ' "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wroter >p7 > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote:iN > >It's my understanding/presumption that the timing of the Alpha decision wasM > >predicated on the visibility of 2FQ01 numbers. The decision supposedly wasfG > >made when it became evident that 2FQ was gonna be rather squatulent.>K > >Whether there is any correlation between the IPF decision and the merger>% > >decision remains IMHO speculative.o > G > Forgetting conspiracies for the moment, do you think it possible thatpE > Compaq could talk to Intel about switching to IA64 and transferring>C > developers without Intel's IA64 developer partner HP knowing evene2 > if merger discussions had not been on the table?  B Yes, Intel could keep secrets for quite some while.  Intel is very= practiced at carrying on 1-to-1conversations under NDA with N A different partners/clients without cross leaks to those partners.0? Happens all the time; it's inherent in their daily business ande  their aversion to more lawsuits.  D Intel could keep totally silent to HP about this Compaq/Alpha stuff.E Up to the point where Intel inserted proposals for new or variant IPF-C core designs from unknown IPF chip design teams into Intel and HP'stA joint chip roadmap schedule.  There would be no time pressure fore; Intel to immediately show such roadmap proposals to HP wheniE Compaq negotiations were still iffy; it could easily wait until theiro9 Compaq deal was definite and on some dependable timeline.s     > H > Conversely do you think it possible Alpha developers Compaq could talkG > to co-developers of the IA64 HP about a merger without discussing howiE > this would change the dynamics of the Alpha/IA64 processor wars andu6 > this information then feeding to HP's partner Intel?   That's much harder to do. < Detail-free discussions by top management would be possible.E Discussions at the level of people who actually know the products anda= who could begin working out a real roadmap of future products > could maybe happen without disclosing the Intel/Alphacide deal* by talking from one of the points of view:: (1) Compaq has Alpha-based products and they are remaining only on Alpha.  Or; (2) Compaq intends to add IPF-based products in parallel to73 some of its Alpha-based products, most of which are<+ continuing for many more Alpha chip cycles.   ? (2) was already widely known to be happening for Unix.  Tellinge= HP (or just Fiorina) that Compaq also wanted to do so for VMSb@ would not have been terribly surprising;  that's exactly what HPA has been working on for five years with their own OS's. This viewa> would have allowed an HP/Compaq merger team to begin exploring= how merged product lines could fit together.  But it would be0C impossible for that team to talk honestly about available chip teamR> and OS team resources, or possible layoffs of redundancies, orB about retention of revenue and customer base, if these discussions< were hiding an already-firm decision to also terminate Alpha; before EV8.  Hiding that large a thing from a suitor duringo@ "discovery" would be grounds for divorce or annulment.  It would= be possible to discuss all those things hypothetically during > earlier informal discussions, as possible post-merger actions.     > @ > To me the events of the last 6 months can only be explained ifB > virtually all negotiations between the parties were known to theC > senior execs of Compaq, Intel and HP. I don't think it could havee  > all "come together" otherwise.  @ No, I think the negotiations with Intel (& others?) could easily> have begun and neared completion without involving HP's board,? HP's merger discussion team, or even Fiorina.  We know that thetA Intel negotiations took many months; Terry indicates Nov/Dec 2000a@ through June 2001.  We know that the detailed merger discussions9 involving more than just Capellas and Fiorina themselves,e; occurred very quickly and intensely in some meetings in Newd3 York, shortly before the merger deal was announced.e6 There was some short overlap in time between those two< things, yes?  HP's merger discussion team likely knew of the Alphacide deal.r  = Whether Intel knew of the HP deal is less obvious.  It didn'te: need to.  There could have been some advantage in Compaq's> dickering, to not let Intel know.  Or an advantage to let them; know.  But you all probably don't care either way; you onlyp6 care about how Capellas made his surprising decisions.  ,   -- Duane Sand, not speaking for Compaq etc   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:03:40 GMTa- From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>a1 Subject: Re: More DSSI cluster problems/questionsv( Message-ID: <3C2087EB.70607@qsl.network>   Robert DiRosario wrote:t  I > None of the 4000 or 3100 systems I have booted from (DIA/DKA/DKB)0 when I > I got them.  I thought that seemed a bit odd.  (I got them from surplush	 > sales.).    G VAXen that booted from SCSI tended to default to the system disk being s DKA300:.  I Have no idea why.c  B But nothing really cares, and people can do what they want in the $ privacy of their own computer rooms.    t= > So I changed the disk configuration to a more standard one:h >  > Bus 0: > ' > (DSSI ID, UNITNUM, NODE NAME, device)r >  > 0, 0, "SYSTEM", RF72 > 1, 1, "D1", RF72 > 2, 2, "D2", RF73 > 3, 3, "HSD1", HSD10i > 5, will be a 4000/105A > 6, will be a 4000/106A > 7, 4000/106A >  > Bus 1i > 0, 10, "D10", RF35 > 1, 11, "D11", RF35 > 2, 12, "D12", RF72 > 3, 13, "D13', RF72 > K > (The HSD10 is inside the 4000/106A.  I disconnected the power cable to ita> > to simplify this configuration, until I get things working.) > K > ALLCLASS is 2 on all disks. I added "ALLOCLASS=2" to modparms.dat and did L > "sys$update:autogen getdata reboot nofeedback".  After the system rebooted# > SYSGEN shows that ALLOCLASS is 2.r > "show dev" gives:u > 
 > $2$DIA0 D10 
 > $2$DIA1 D11g > $2$DIA2 D2
 > $2$DIA3 D13p > L > Still missing drives, and it's not showing them all from bus 0 or all from > bus 1. > E > I noticed "VAXCLUSTER=0" in modparms.dat, so I changed it to 1, rani > autogen and rebooted.l > "show dev" gives:n >  > $2$DIA0 SYSTEM > $2$DIA1 D1 > $2$DIA2 D2 > $2$DIA3 D3    H It is looking like the FORCEUNI and the UNITNUM override are not taking H on the disks that you want them to.  Is is possible that the command to 6 write them was omitted?  It is a common thing to miss.  G As I recall, the FORCEUNI value is also really opposite what you might oI intuitively think it is.  But I do not have a manual handy here for DSSI w- devices.  Maybe someone else can verify this.u   -Johny   wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only3   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:38:46 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)A; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not. 3 Message-ID: <6R8BDP+kGsEF@eisner.encompasserve.org>   \ In article <3C1F8FAC.6B8614F1@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  P > be pulled from Tru64), I would think that anyone stuck on a proprietary CompaqL > system (aka VMS) would think seriously about their position as slaves of a  @    Proprietary system?  Heck, no, they want us all to migrate to    Windoze.   B    Now just what do you pick for the most proprietary OS on Earth?   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Dec 2001 23:30 PST + From: rankin@eql14.caltech.edu (Pat Rankin)t Subject: Re: nfsmount missingo1 Message-ID: <18DEC200123302854@eql14.caltech.edu>>  4 In article <3c1f1d34$0$21092@echo-01.iinet.net.au>,\  "gt" <nospam@enw.cx> writes...mM > I'm trying to mount a NFS share to a VMS v6.2 system running Multinet V3.5A - > I don't have much experience with Multinet.eI > When I try to use NFSMOUNT I get an error saying that the EXE cannot be>7 > found. I've checked and the file isn't in fact there.,E > Now my question is: where can I get it from? Do I need to reinstalleE > multinet? Could it be that NFS wasn't installed in the first place?>  <      NFS support is an option (or possibly a pair of options; for client and server sides) at install time, so perhaps itd; wasn't installed on your system.  It also used to require a>= separate license PAK.  That's not the case any more (the basea> MultiNet license suffices these days; current version is 4.3A,= and 4.4 is supposed to be coming out soon), but it might have0
 been for 3.5.0  2                 Pat Rankin, rankin@eql.caltech.edu   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:38:32 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)s" Subject: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline' Message-ID: <9vpu7o$6j2$2@joe.rice.edu>  Keywords: vms,lifeline  9    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2101120,00.html>8    ZDNet |UK| - News - Story - OpenVMS handed a lifeline  %    06:31 Wednesday 19th December 2001     Martin Veitch, IT Week   F   "Compaq has unveiled its long-term plans for supporting customers of5    its OpenVMS operating system on Itanium processorst  F    Compaq has promised customers a long future for its veteran OpenVMSG    operating system on Intel's 64-bit Itanium processors. The firm alsouF    hit back at critics of its decision to phase out development of itsF    Tru64 Unix, by detailing a long roadmap of upgrades and service and    support guarantees.  H    For many large enterprises, the commitment to OpenVMS on Itanium willE    be most significant. Compaq plans to have OpenVMS available on theaI    64-bit Itanium chips in the first half of 2003. That will be good newssD    to the many firms in telecoms, financial services, healthcare andF    government sectors that rely on this operating system, which Compaq.    acquired with the 1998 purchase of Digital.  H    "We're porting OpenVMS to a new platform, Itanium, and the future for@    VMS customers looks very bright," said Richard George, Compaq     AlphaServer business manager.  I    Over the past four weeks, Compaq has told its customers about plans todG    build high-end features of Tru64 into Hewlett-Packard's HP-UX if thecH    two firms proceed with their proposed merger. Critics have noted thatI    the step will require a porting job for many customers but Compaq saidcE    the plan will make a more powerful product and help build software E    support. Features taken from Tru64 will include clustering, remote H    access services, IPv6 support, performance optimisation, and file and    storage management tools.  H    Compaq is stressing that although the Tru64 plan overrides a previousE    strategy to port the operating system to Itanium, other enterprisetA    plans remain in place. These include enhancements to the Alpha>E    processor family through EV7 and EV79 generations, and upgrades to     Tru64 on Alpha until 2007.a  I    Compaq will offer money-back guarantees and trade-in prices on Itanium>H    servers, as well as tools and porting strategies for customers buyingE    AlphaServers now but planning to follow the Compaq transition path>G    later. Despite the uncertainty, many Compaq enterprise customers areeF    keeping the faith. Early this month, Compaq said it won its biggestD    ever Alpha contract to supply the US government with AlphaServers    running Tru64 Unix.  E    Compaq said that despite the changes in enterprise strategy, it isiE    offering clear directions for customers. "We've laid out our stall.D    very clearly for the next five years and beyond for users to makeI    informed decisions about when they should move," said Compaq's George. F    "When we announced that Alpha on NT support would be stopped we didD    not lose a single customer contract worth more than 100,000."  "    2 The same writer has another interesting article...  <    http://www.zdnet.co.uk/itweek/columns/2001/47/veitch.html    Buyouts bring bother   I   "Merger and acquisition activity remains rife in the computer industry.>G    So, if it is such a great idea, why do IT buyers rarely benefit from     it, asks Martin Veitch.  E    Why do firms merge or acquire each other? It's a question that has8I    been puzzling me for a long time, never more than since September when3G    HP said it had agreed to take over Compaq. I have concluded that thecF    reasons are often infantile, that participants rarely gain from the4    transactions, and that customers almost never do.  F    Is infantile too strong a word to use here? I don't think so. FirmsH    often act out of an emotional desire to be aggressive. The talk is ofA    becoming 800lb gorillas, reaching critical mass, adding scale,nI    bringing together federations of data, or islands of technology. Freud F    would have had a field day with the words and actions of some chief    executives...."      4 --Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:48:40 GMT># From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>h& Subject: Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline= Message-ID: <cN1U7.64058$pa1.21776327@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>M  6 "Jerry Leslie" <leslie@clio.rice.edu> wrote in message! news:9vpu7o$6j2$2@joe.rice.edu...l; >    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2101120,00.html : >    ZDNet |UK| - News - Story - OpenVMS handed a lifeline >i' >    06:31 Wednesday 19th December 2001- >    Martin Veitch, IT Week, > H >   "Compaq has unveiled its long-term plans for supporting customers of7 >    its OpenVMS operating system on Itanium processorst >o ....K >    Over the past four weeks, Compaq has told its customers about plans toNI >    build high-end features of Tru64 into Hewlett-Packard's HP-UX if thetJ >    two firms proceed with their proposed merger. Critics have noted thatK >    the step will require a porting job for many customers but Compaq saidpG >    the plan will make a more powerful product and help build software,G >    support. Features taken from Tru64 will include clustering, remoteeJ >    access services, IPv6 support, performance optimisation, and file and >    storage management tools. > J >    Compaq is stressing that although the Tru64 plan overrides a previousG >    strategy to port the operating system to Itanium, other enterprise C >    plans remain in place. These include enhancements to the Alpha G >    processor family through EV7 and EV79 generations, and upgrades toU >    Tru64 on Alpha until 2007.   " Just a brief comment on Tru64.....  F If the merger does not go thru, Compaq will have to seriously re-thinkH abandoning a port of Tru64 to Itanic. Also, if Tru64's feature set is soD much more advanced/enriched than HP/UX such that HP/UX needs all theK features mentioned above, why hasn't Compaq been presing the superiority of * their product more publicly all this time?  K Compaq should use the opportunity to fund more ISV's to port their products:K to Tru64 and back that up with iron-clad marketing guarantees to the ISV's,7E ie. CPQ will spend $x million in advertising/marketing in each of the"F following market spaces (eg. financial, telco, health, gov't. etc...).  I I know that I keep coming back to this theme time and time again, but howtJ many ISV's have invested time, money, energy on versions of their productsH for Compaq o/s products, only to get burned by CPQ's inability to market* their own products out of a wet paper bag?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:54 +0100 2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender), Subject: Re: PCSI problem with release notes; Message-ID: <3c20d306.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>t   I wrote:G > in the development of the next (hopefully final) release of ht://Dig,dI > I'm putting together a PCSI kit, but hit a showstopper with the releases > notes: ... P > %PCSI-E-OPENIN, error opening <wrong_dir>HTDIG0301-5R5.RELEASE_NOTES; as inputA > %PCSI-I-PKGFIL, packaged [000000]GNU_GENERAL_PUBLIC_LICENSE.TXTa >eM > So other files in AXPMV$DKA300:[...INSTALL_VMS.][000000] get packaged okay,tJ > but it looks for the release notes in the material root mangled with the > *destination* directory. > G > If I comment out the "release notes" clause, the kit gets built fine.  >-( > Bug? Feature? Mental block on my part?  B I have indeed found a bug in PCSI. From the answer out of the PCSI development group:  C     When a file is tagged with the RELEASE NOTES option on the FILEcH     statement, the file is packaged twice in a sequential kit.  One copyB     is placed near the beginning of the .PCSI file so that PRODUCTF     EXTRACT RELEASE_NOTES can fetch the file quickly (in a large kit),E     and another copy is placed along with other files in the order iniF     which they will be copied to the destination disk (to optimize the     installation).  E The code that does the first copy does not respect the SOURCE clause.e   Workarounds areo@ - not to use the SOURCE clause with the RELEASE NOTES clause, orD - not use the RELEASE NOTES clause at all. Then, of course, $PRODUCTC   EXTRACT RELEASE NOTES won't work, but $PRODUCT EXTRACT FILE will.e  % It's to be fixed in a future version.n   cu,    Martin -- IF   OpenVMS:                | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmer3    The operating system   | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de F    God runs the           |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/:    earth simulation on.   | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:27:34 +0800 - From: David B Sneddon <dbsneddon@bigpond.com> 9 Subject: Solved... Problem with proxies on DECnet over IPe* Message-ID: <3C206B96.3040507@bigpond.com>   Gib Copeland wrote:o  B > IMHO, proxies in DECnet-Plus are a mess (V7.3, but been that wayB > for a long time).  Forget about the UCX proxy, it has no bearing > on DECnet.    B I didn't think it had any bearing but since DECnet is running over? UCX it thought it might remotely be involved (no pun intended).hE We are not using DECdns, but after reading Mark's response I recalledoC seeing the use of IP$mumble address format.  All the nodes involveda< are configured to run DECnet over IP and use "local,domain".   > G > Try adding a proxy as below, and when you wonder why it doesn't work, G > replace it with the second, or third..., until you get enough leading  > zeros: > 6 > 1.   UAF> add /prox ip$172.17.2.3::dave dave/default    8 This is exactly what I tried and it worked first time...     > 7 > 2.   UAF> add /prox ip$172/17.2.03::dave dave/defaultg > 8 > 3.   UAF> add /prox ip$172.17.02.03::dave dave/default >    I didn't need any extra zeroes.      > $ > Somebody really ought to fix this.     Won't argue with that.     >  > Gibh     Thanks to all who responded.   Regards, Dave.m -- oI David B Sneddon (dbs)  OpenVMS Systems Programmer   dbsneddon@bigpond.comUI Sneddo's quick guide ...          http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/MI DBS freeware at ...   http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/software.htmeI "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" Lennonl   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:29:38 -0000c8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>5 Subject: RE: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked MicrosoftSN Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF17F@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  G The WTC had a major design flaw which was probably the most significanteG factor contributing to the great loss of life: having all the lifts andoJ stairwells in one central core meant that any major incident in that core,I such as a crashed airliner ( even a 707 would probably have had a similaraF effect ) would cut off all the floors above the level of the incident.  K Having even just one stairwell at each of the four corners of each building 4 would have greatly reduced the number of casualties.  L It was that major design flaw and the fact that the design was ever approvedK by safety regulators which was, for me, the main message from that program.o   John    B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk= Post: Denys Wilkinson Building, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKnA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)h     -----Original Message-----9 From: Michael D. Ober [mailto:mdo.@.wakeassoc.com.nospam]p( Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:45 PM To: John Macallister5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftm    L And the building structures did hold for the design time of at least an hour& before the structural steel collapsed. --
 Mike Ober.  H ""Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"" <winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>C wrote in message news:00A06B38.B08B58B8@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU...pE > In article <9vnhrf$ris$1@joe.rice.edu>, leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerryn Leslie) writes:p3 > >Nigel Arnot (sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk) wrote:h > >:H > >: You mean as unbelievable as terrorists mounting a suicide attack on& > >: the WTC using hijacked airliners? > > ( > >It was JF that found it unbelievable. > >JJ > >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.t > >sD > >It's very weird to hear one of the WTC's designers claim that the buildingH > >could withstand the impact of one or more Boeing 707-class airliners. > A > Well, you know, the planes that hit them were bigger than 707s,aH > and the towers did withstand the _impact_.  What they didn't withstandG > indefinitely was the insertion of thousands of gallons of flaming jete fuel.c >u	 > -- Alan  >t > L ============================================================================ ===D2 >  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUA >  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:" 650/926-3056C >  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA 
 94309-0210 >,L ============================================================================ ===  >T   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:58:55 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> 5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked MicrosoftdH Message-ID: <y48zbzscgg.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  / JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:S  L > Fuel capacity of the 767 is not that much greater than it was for the 707.N > Furthermore, because both planes were on a relatively short trip for the 767H > and were very lightly loaded, its fuel load would have been quite low.  H Both incorrect. Why do you think all four flights were going nonstop to  the west coast?    	Jan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:10:49 GMTE= From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) 5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft 0 Message-ID: <00A06BDC.5E587C7C@SendSpamHere.ORG>  g In article <3C1FFB52.E40A83A8@blueyonder.co.uk>, Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:  >  >o >"Terry C. Shannon" wrote: > N >> As will be CVN-77, the last flattop in the Nimitz Class. And the first--andB >> potentially last--one to sport Windoze Battle Management System >aJ >do you have investigative TV in the US? Surely someone would want to pick	 >this up?:  K Yeah, that's a great idea.  I bet we would get a real thorough and credible@% report from the newshounds at MS-NBC.e   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM             mJ   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery I   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbeso   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:29:07 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)e5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft-' Message-ID: <9vptm3$6j2$1@joe.rice.edu>   > Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- (system@SendSpamHere.ORG) wrote:E : Yeah, that's a great idea.  I bet we would get a real thorough and t0 : credible report from the newshounds at MS-NBC. :   A I used to think that too, but the MSNBC web site has carried someSB less-than-flattering news stories about the Evil Empire; e.g. this, story which documents Gates' lying to Nokia:  '    http://www.msnbc.com/news/664454.aspb    Microsoft's isle of denialh  7    Antitrust settlement changes nothing but perspectivea
    OPINION    By Brock N. Meeks    MSNBC  I   "WASHINGTON, Nov. 28 -- A little noticed confidential e-mail written byN?    Bill Gates and introduced, almost as an afterthought, by thetG    government during the waning hours of its antitrust case against theoB    company, shows that the bruising trial had little effect on theD    Microsoft's penchant for double-dealing and adherence to softwareF    skullduggery to attain competitive advantage. And it's just a smallG    example of why the current settlement offer does nothing to actuallynE    hold Microsoft accountable for having been found guilty of being a     predatory monopoly..."c    4 --Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:14:07 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) 5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft 0 Message-ID: <00A06BE5.365A6551@SendSpamHere.ORG>  S In article <9vptm3$6j2$1@joe.rice.edu>, leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie) writes:r? >Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- (system@SendSpamHere.ORG) wrote: F >: Yeah, that's a great idea.  I bet we would get a real thorough and 1 >: credible report from the newshounds at MS-NBC.o >: > B >I used to think that too, but the MSNBC web site has carried someC >less-than-flattering news stories about the Evil Empire; e.g. thiss- >story which documents Gates' lying to Nokia:F  G Carrying a news story and actually investigating one are two completely  differing beasts.o   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM              J   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery I   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbesc   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:08:18 +0100 (MET)n9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>c5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftq; Message-ID: <01KC21RGJ9OM9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>e  G > I'm no fan of Microsoft, but doesn't such a claim put them in a tightrG > spot? The only way to refute it is to open up the source, at least tot > independent audit. .  D The last 5 words are important.  Note that "open up the source" has G nothing to do with "open source".  Imagine if a terrorist said that he cB has introduced bugs and undocumented (and, by all but terrorists, H unwanted) features into open-source software?  I'm no fan of Microsoft, ( but it would be a more believable claim.  H Of course, Microsoft could come out and say "our software is buggy even  without terrorists".   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:03:50 +0000a% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>c5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftn8 Message-ID: <vh712uoht56oa8743o4t0uq7e3v0phc291@4ax.com>  . On 19 Dec 2001 11:58:55 +0100, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  0 >JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > M >> Fuel capacity of the 767 is not that much greater than it was for the 707.rO >> Furthermore, because both planes were on a relatively short trip for the 767fI >> and were very lightly loaded, its fuel load would have been quite low.a >tI >Both incorrect. Why do you think all four flights were going nonstop to C >the west coast?  D Right I've tried to stay out of this but... According to the WTC web@ site (now offline) and other sources the towers were designed toF survive a hit from a 707-320 (Intercontinental) , the largest airlinerF of the time. The 707-320 was actually very close in size and weight to the planes that hit.   From the Boeing web site:e  D "Boeing quickly developed the larger 707-320 Intercontinental seriesD with a longer fuselage, bigger wing and higher-powered engines. WithE these improvements, which allowed increased fuel capacity from 15,000b6 gallons to more than 23,000 gallons, the 707 had trulyF intercontinental range of over 4,000 miles in a 141-seat (mixed class) seating configuration.  B Early in the 1960s, the Pratt & Whitney JT3D turbofan engines wereB fitted to provide lower fuel consumption, reduce noise and further& increase range to about 6,000 miles."   D I posted full specs from the Boeing web site shortly after Sep 11th.B When people repeat the claim that the 707 was considerably smallerE they are using data for the 707-120 or 707-720 shorter range versions D not the "largest commercial airliner (of the day) 707-320" the tower* was advertised as withstanding a hit from.  > It does seem the key problem was the asbestos specified in the< original design and presumably used for this calculation was9 substantially removed from the actual finished builiding.   E The terrorists have ultimate responsibility but lessons still have to. be learned here by all.      >	Jani   -- Alan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:20:24 GMT14 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft70 Message-ID: <3C20AF47.8AE6F85A@blueyonder.co.uk>  & "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote: > i > In article <3C1FFB52.E40A83A8@blueyonder.co.uk>, Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:  > >N > >K > >"Terry C. Shannon" wrote: > > P > >> As will be CVN-77, the last flattop in the Nimitz Class. And the first--andD > >> potentially last--one to sport Windoze Battle Management System > >rL > >do you have investigative TV in the US? Surely someone would want to pick > >this up?t > M > Yeah, that's a great idea.  I bet we would get a real thorough and crediblet' > report from the newshounds at MS-NBC.X   ! presumably a sarcastic response? h -- r Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk     C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of o! my employers or service provider.    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:24:24 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>s5 Subject: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoft H Message-ID: <y4wuzj2n5z.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ' Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:s  F > "Boeing quickly developed the larger 707-320 Intercontinental seriesF > with a longer fuselage, bigger wing and higher-powered engines. WithG > these improvements, which allowed increased fuel capacity from 15,000u8 > gallons to more than 23,000 gallons, the 707 had trulyH > intercontinental range of over 4,000 miles in a 141-seat (mixed class) > seating configuration.  I If I remember the article I read yesterday correctly, one of the 767s hadcI loaded 36,000 gallons at takeoff and was calculated to have impacted with $ about 31,000 gallons still on board.   	Jan   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:10:04 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>cT Subject: TOPS residuals (was: RE: VMS missing features (was how to do deamonson VMS); Message-ID: <01KC23W6CH0I9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>k  A > Although someone still managed to sneak in TOPS-20's DEFINE andaF > TOPS-10's ASSIGN for logical names. For some reason VMS DCL supports2 > both the TOPS-20 and TOPS-10 argument ordering.    So THAT'S the reason!p  J > VMS also still allows the TOPS-20 syntax of device:<directory>file.ext.v7 > (where v is the version number) as well as its native- > device:[directory]file.ext;v 1  H Perhaps (part of) the original reason, though it is perhaps of interest G that <> is on most keyboards while [] is not on all, or in a difficult 1	 position.a  H Of course, the <>/[] and the ./; are independent; all four combinations 
 are possible./  B This IS documented, by the way (the existence, not the reasoning).   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:47:31 -0000D, From: "Dan Williams" <dan@danwilliams.co.uk>- Subject: Re: usage of new products on vms axpE/ Message-ID: <u21a6croj69642@corp.supernews.com>.  ? Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in messager) news:3C1FF9C5.FD823AE@blueyonder.co.uk...i >t >  > Josef Stadelmann wrote:  > F > > So where can I find some 7.3 VMS for home use as a Hobbyist to try	 something?E > > at home to get know-how in OpenVMS-JAVA and JAVA ORBS, the appach.
 webserver,H > > servlets, EJB's and a JAVA based ORB and maybe you guys know about a veryC > > good robust IDE running on OpenVMS, if not try www.netbeans.com  >cH > my understanding is it would be OK to borrow a VMS 7.3 CD from work to4 > use as the upgrade media for your hobbyist system. > 	 > regardsi > -- > Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.ukn >eD > Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of# > my employers or service provider.d    I I was just looking in to this myself. I thought if you became a member ofoK decus then you got a free license and a discounted software and manuals forC this.e   Dan Williams   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:36:42 GMTo4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>- Subject: Re: usage of new products on vms axpx0 Message-ID: <3C20B318.2F7E0139@blueyonder.co.uk>   Dan Williams wrote:    K > I was just looking in to this myself. I thought if you became a member of M > decus then you got a free license and a discounted software and manuals forr > this./ > J I think the issue is the hobbyist CD's have not been released for 7.3 yet,. thats what the original poster implied anyway.    0 > Dan Williams   -- o Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  c  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of 6! my employers or service provider.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:50:04 -0000h, From: "Dan Williams" <dan@danwilliams.co.uk>- Subject: Re: usage of new products on vms axp / Message-ID: <u21drn4mhnum79@corp.supernews.com>t  ? Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in messagep* news:3C20B318.2F7E0139@blueyonder.co.uk... >t >r > Dan Williams wrote:I >cJ > > I was just looking in to this myself. I thought if you became a member ofK > > decus then you got a free license and a discounted software and manualsg foro	 > > this., > >wL > I think the issue is the hobbyist CD's have not been released for 7.3 yet,0 > thats what the original poster implied anyway. >  >F > > Dan Williams >. > -- > Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.ukc > D > Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of# > my employers or service provider.   J So if you get the license you can legitimately copy the software to use ?,% Sorry I didn't make myself very clearo   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:54:43 +0100 (MET)n9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> - Subject: Re: usage of new products on vms axpn; Message-ID: <01KC25IC87QG9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>w  I > So if you get the license you can legitimately copy the software to useo+ > ?, Sorry I didn't make myself very clear    @ There are some ambiguities about the hobbyist license, and some > restrictions many folks don't understand, but in this case my E understanding is a) that this is officially allowed and b) all think : this is OK.C   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:43:08 +0000A% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> - Subject: Re: usage of new products on vms axpb8 Message-ID: <53d12uc1lu184eqp581vnbr05eqhddf28e@4ax.com>  2 On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:47:31 -0000, "Dan Williams" <dan@danwilliams.co.uk> wrote:   >o@ >Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message* >news:3C1FF9C5.FD823AE@blueyonder.co.uk...  I >> my understanding is it would be OK to borrow a VMS 7.3 CD from work to 5 >> use as the upgrade media for your hobbyist system.b   >nJ >I was just looking in to this myself. I thought if you became a member ofL >decus then you got a free license and a discounted software and manuals for >this.  C If you are a member of DECUS you can use any method you want to get D hold of VMS (well maybe not breaking into Compaq and stealing a CD).E The DECUS CD hobby distributions are just a convenience. You must use-B the license PAKs provided through the DECUS/ENCOMPASS web site. SoD using your employer's CDs is ok but not their PAKs. PAKs are emailed+ on input of valid DECUS membership details.M >o
 >Dan Williamst >    -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:03:15 -0500 * From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>- Subject: RE: usage of new products on vms axp-- Message-ID: <0033000045436513000002L032*@MHS>t  ; =0ASee http://www.montagar.com/hobbyist/ for information on: the licensing program.  : The Hobbyist Program includes lots of software from Compaq: (and there are even some things from third-party vendors).  A As for distributions, there have been Hobbyist CDs available fromu9 Montagar in the past but I'm not current as to if they're: available or what's on them.  / The cheapest way to do documentation is online..# http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/l     Hope this helps  WWWebb   -----Original Message-----/ From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETt+ Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 10:40 AM B To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET- Subject: RE: usage of new products on vms axp      Dan Williams wrote:   H > I was just looking in to this myself. I thought if you became a membe= r ofH > decus then you got a free license and a discounted software and manua= ls for > this.o >oH I think the issue is the hobbyist CD's have not been released for 7.3 y= et,=. thats what the original poster implied anyway.     > Dan Williams   -- Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk   B Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of" my employers or service provider.=   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:57:49 GMT=4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>- Subject: Re: usage of new products on vms axp-0 Message-ID: <3C20C61B.7248464E@blueyonder.co.uk>   Dan Williams wrote:h  .L > So if you get the license you can legitimately copy the software to use ?,' > Sorry I didn't make myself very clears  H yes, that is my understanding, confirmed by recent posts in this thread.   regardsa   -- s Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  i  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of e! my employers or service provider.h   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:48:13 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) % Subject: Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytesg3 Message-ID: <DxBtdIWHtQPQ@eisner.encompasserve.org>-  ] In article <OF28F19F98.F12EC61E-ON00256B26.00507F8A@btyp>, Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com writes:S > L > ISTR a freeware [or similar] package called MATH [could be wrong about theI > name] for VMS that allowed you to do 'maths' with DCL. I don't have web0M > access at the moment otherwise I would have done a search for it myself and 6 > put a link up, but I'm sure it will be easy to find. >   C    A friend of mine put a calculator on the VAX SIG tape years ago.i@    But in the meantime the ability to do integer math has always    been part of DCL:      $ i = 2 + 2    $ show symbol i0      I = 4   Hex = 00000004  Octal = 00000000004   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:07:22 +0000o  From: Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com% Subject: Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytes1: Message-ID: <OFDFEE151B.87702FEF-ON00256B27.005870B6@btyp>  J Oh yes, I agree integer maths has been around, it was just a suggestion in5 light of the original problem, with 'remainders' etc.e   Steve S-        A koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) on 12/19/2001 03:48:13 PMi    To:        Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com cc:SJ From:      koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler), 19 December 2001, 3:48            p.m.c   Re: VAX: Block vs. Megabytes    : In article <OF28F19F98.F12EC61E-ON00256B26.00507F8A@btyp>," Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com writes: >bH > ISTR a freeware [or similar] package called MATH [could be wrong about thehI > name] for VMS that allowed you to do 'maths' with DCL. I don't have web I > access at the moment otherwise I would have done a search for it myself  andt6 > put a link up, but I'm sure it will be easy to find. >d  C    A friend of mine put a calculator on the VAX SIG tape years ago.O@    But in the meantime the ability to do integer math has always    been part of DCL:      $ i = 2 + 2    $ show symbol i0      I = 4   Hex = 00000004  Octal = 00000000004            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 hasaG been addressed to you in error, you must not read, disclose, reproduce,f$ 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.m  
 Thank you.  D Yell Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7PT.; Registered in England and Wales, registered number 4205228.S  I Yellow Pages Sales Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire,eD RG1 7PT. Registered in England and Wales, registered number 1403041.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:13:54 GMT ' From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@zfree.co.nz>f- Subject: VAXstation 4000-90A hardware problem $ Message-ID: <3c20685f$1@zfree.co.nz>  4 The VS4090-A was switched on and the front panel LED codes showed this status:.  L7 L6 L5 L4   L3 L2 L1 L0  ON ON ON ON   of of ON of9 After pressing the restart button, the status changed to:t  L7 L6 L5 L4   L3 L2 L1 L0  ON ON ON ON   ON of ON ON: Any idea what is wrong with the machine, or have a pointer to hardware documentation?   Hans Vlems       http://www.zfree.co.nz   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 10:07:38 +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: <y4ellrk279.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  - Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:y  K > Not at all.  VMS, by the expressed attitude of its developers, was a stepiJ > backwards in software technology with no chance of improvement, and withH > its prissy developers fighting against any improvement tooth and nail.  N Ah yes, I really must have missed the distributed lock manager and the rest of" the cluster stuff in TOPS-20. Not.   I > Consequently, the only rational course of action was to act to kill VMSe > and bolster UNIX.c  oI So because you didn't get the thing you ranked #1 and got #2 instead, you.L cut off your nose and started to use the one ranked #7? Why not go the wholeJ way to #10, aka as the Windows family? I suggest Windows 3.1 for starters.  J Immature, as I said. I expect it from my three year old son, and fuss with0 the six year old when he displays this attitude.   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 10:57:38 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>t@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4pu5bsfal.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  1 Edward Franks <fortrandragon@hotmail.com> writes:e  G > 	Because the 'us vs them' + 'chip on shoulder' attitude is prevalent wD > 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  B > became the golden children of the company and could do no wrong.  G Then senior management was not doing its job properly. But what else is0 new. c   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:28:45 +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: <y4k7vjsduq.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>   "Who, me?" <who@me.com> writes:   K > >> Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMSn5 > >> never was a significant player on the Internet. 0J > > I do believe this has more to do with the lack of an affordable TCP/IP: > > stack of good quality early enough than anything else.M > Well, I think it has a lot to do with the ones in DEC who had "networking" tK > in their job description deciding that OSI mattered a hell of a lot more yJ > than TCP/IP.  I guess we'll always have to wonder what the techno scene K > would be like if DEC had spent the time, treasure and talent in the late n4 > 80's and early 90's on TCP/IP as they did on OSI.   H Yes, I quite agree. But be honest: At the time DEC bet on OSI, would you) have bet that part of the company on TCP?e   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 11:24:52 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>v@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4n10fse17.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ' Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:   D > >> > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything5 > >> > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.AO > >> Hence VMS' demise became my stated goal.  I was one of many who refused tocK > >> develop software for VMS, and instead improved UNIX's lead so that VMSd > >> would never catch up.I > >...which is just as immature an attitude as that reported of Hustvedt.aE > You might call it immature but if DEC suddenly killed the operatingeF > system and hardware you loved and earned an income from after makingA > supposedly irrevocable promises under NDA about the future thentE > *added* to that by insisting that certain features would *never* bea5 > ported to VMS, I find it perfectly understandable.    G Understandable emotionally? Yes. Understandable rationally? Never. That G DEC's management was immature and didn't act rationally has nothing to oL do with it. Otherwise, "he started" would be a valid defense in court, which in almost all cases it isn't.r  F I worked at the time with TOPS-10. Maybe TOPS-20 was soooo superior toI TOPS-10, but the latter certainly wasn't superior to VMS. And what really5F gets me in Mark's original comment was "improve Unix's lead". Come on,I really. I started to have to use Unix a few years later than VMS, but at tJ no time did I consider a contemporaneous Unix having a lead over VMS. Even7 now, I can't say Solaris is so much better than VMS V3.r  = As I said, immature: cutting of your nose to spite your face.a  9 > When was it that VAX Mail finally had the ability added0F > to mail user@hostname without some third party binary hack and third > party mailers? Around 1995.e  K I used VMS daily until 1990. At that time, only universities in Germany hadcK a connection to BITNET (for which VMS support thourhg Joiner Associates wasnL very adequate). At that time, viable third party solutions became available.K Would you rather have had VMS destroy the market for these ISVs by offeringP the same bundled with the OS?n  ! > A decade or two after TOPS-20. M  6 It was irrelevant to almost everybody a decade before.  F > Not send out all customers a letter telling them of the "non-goals" * > which would never be ported as they did.  K Do you have a copy of that letter, or could paraphrase what those non-goalsg were?o  O > >I do believe this has more to do with the lack of an affordable TCP/IP stackt3 > >of good quality early enough than anything else.w > E > No that was just a symptom of the DEC stupidity of the time. At onehF > point the Internet was dominated by DEC then they decide to kill offC > these machines and justify the lack of an IP stack by saying "VMS E > systems are not normally connected to the Internet" Or do you think ? > DEC just accidentally produced an unaffordable crap IP stack?,  D Not at all. Maxim #1: "Never attribute to malice what can adequatelyF be explained by stupidity." In this case, DEC bet on ISO-OSI has beingC the next big thing in internetworking. You do remember the officialjF requirements for government contracts in the US and parts of Europe inH that regard, don't you? And from a technical point of view, it was clearH that TCP/IP, with its design starting point of a network of no more thanI 254 nodes that were implicitly to be trusted, wouldn't be able to supportOH a large "internet" efficiently and safely. (That's not to say that a lotJ of OSI, especially the user-visible stuff, isn't abominable because it wasI designed by idiots, but that's another issue.) Nonetheless, I consider itiK a supportable business decision at the time. What you can criticize is thatdM DEC, and especially the VMS group, didn't notice the wind turning, and didn'toF react quickly enough to the change. And what they then produced (UCX) H certainly suffered from NIH syndrome, because apparently nobody botheredH to consult their in-house TCP experts. And the same happened with VAX C.H (That's a classic example of going by the letter of a (not yet existant,I in the case of C) standard instead of looking at industry practice, IMO.)M   	Jan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:37:36 GMTe' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>B@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C206F57.B292163F@bellatlantic.net>   Jan Vorbrueggen wrote: > 3 > Edward Franks <fortrandragon@hotmail.com> writes:  > M > >       Because the 'us vs them' + 'chip on shoulder' attitude is prevalentnE > > in all human organizations?  Also, if DEC's senior management had L > > decided that VMS was to be _the_ DEC OS going forward then the VMS groupD > > became the golden children of the company and could do no wrong. > I > Then senior management was not doing its job properly. But what else is0 > new. > 
 >         JanD
 Sorry Jan,A but at the time there was internal competition to produce better  @ quality products. There were CPU design competitions even withinB the groups - I don't know how this was in 10 land in the 70s, but < with in 11 and 8 land it was true.  The concept/design stageD versus the production stage was somewhere between 2:1 and 6:1 at anyC given time.  The same was true of periph design, maybe a 4:1 ratio.t  B With the advent of Vax efforts - the result of some years of study? and experimentation that involved competing designs - the sense 6 of constructive friction or competition was ingrained.  A Senior management was doing their job - they grew up in the same dB environment.  Mid 70s or so, the influx of mid level managers fromD other cultures (meaning non-dec) eventually had an impact. I know of@ a number of folks from Honeywell, RCA, IBM, retired Govvies, etc? who did not get the culture and found ways to squash it to the  A deteriment of Dec andthe benefit of Digital - there is a subtletyu= in my use of the two labels that I think others have and can x articulate with great color.  < I have used the term purple plague - that was the term we in; 8 land called the 11 efforts (that spawned vaxen).  It was I> characterized, in my mind, by a large number of troops under a? strict maangement structure, marching to deadlines and promises'= they did not keep.  This is a generallity, and is not true ini? all cases.  There were some exceptional efforts, but we did get-C infested with MBAs and move from a bunch of engineers and techs andr5 software wizards into a model of a dysfunctional IBM.e
 my two cents.s bobm   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:41:02 GMTd' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>m@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C207025.6C951AEF@bellatlantic.net>   "Who, me?" wrote:n > I > Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wroteoE > in news:y4n10go9hl.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de:n1 > > Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:iK > >> Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMS 4 > >> never was a significant player on the Internet. > >DJ > > I do believe this has more to do with the lack of an affordable TCP/IP: > > stack of good quality early enough than anything else. > L > Well, I think it has a lot to do with the ones in DEC who had "networking"J > in their job description deciding that OSI mattered a hell of a lot moreI > than TCP/IP.  I guess we'll always have to wonder what the techno sceneMJ > would be like if DEC had spent the time, treasure and talent in the lateH > 80's and early 90's on TCP/IP as they did on OSI.  I recall DEC reallyJ > seemed to get the "network toaster" concept, unfortunately all the boxesC > spoke the wrong protocol(s).  I remember being in DEC's main Unix/J > development lab in the early 90's (one floor below The Home of VMS (tm))I > and seeing a rack with a funny box the size of a large bread box with apM > funny red-colored drawing of the Golden Gate bridge on it.  I asked what itfL > was, and was told it was a network router.  I asked why they weren't usingK > a DEC networking product and was told "we don't have any products that dowL > what this one does".  Sigh, I really wish I ran out and bought Cisco stock > that day :-( >  > DaveE Truth! DEC, did have at least a smattering of folks working the CCITT:	 committe, G I can not recall the woman's name who was the lead rep, but realize allR of DoDB and USG were pushing the same thing.  When we did AUTODIN II, as a subcontractor,% we had to design that ADCCP stuff.... > SO, Dave, do I give you a couple of millimerrills for lurking? RMSf   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:18:19 +0000D% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>t@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <o1q02u4c0b60br4t5g1q880nr6fsllmolc@4ax.com>  4 On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:29:59 -0500, Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> wrote:r   >Alan Greig wrote:N >> The support to send to user@sitename (which is what most users are going toO >> type at a to: prompt ) instead of transportname%"user@hostname" was added tosP >> VMS Mail only a few years ago. Prior to that you could download an unofficial" >> patch to the Mail binary. Yuck! >yO >Whadayamean, "Yuck?"  The MAILSHR patch back then worked better than TCPIP 5.1aO >does even today.  Ex: try sending to o'reilly@sitename and see what happens on-= >VMS these days.  The patched MAILSHR never had this problem.l  F By ""Yuck!" I meant the fact that you had to patch the binary not thatF the end result wasn't excellent. I recall when Alpha first came out itF took some time for someone to work out a patch for the Alpha binary soD we could do user@host on VAX but not Alpha. Confused the hell out ofB staff and students when we brought the first VMS Alpha system into general use.   > - JB   -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 12:23:31 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>n@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y43d27sbbg.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ) bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> writes:c  C > but at the time there was internal competition to produce better iB > quality products. There were CPU design competitions even withinD > the groups - I don't know how this was in 10 land in the 70s, but > > with in 11 and 8 land it was true.  The concept/design stageF > versus the production stage was somewhere between 2:1 and 6:1 at anyE > given time.  The same was true of periph design, maybe a 4:1 ratio.6  C Internal competition is OK. Declaring on the winner beforehand, andsA allowing them to ignore the state of the art, is not. And that iseG what Mark Crispin has been saying about VAX/VMS development with regard0 to the PDP-10/TOPS-20 effort.f   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 12:27:10 +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: <y4zo4fqwkx.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ' Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:   H > By ""Yuck!" I meant the fact that you had to patch the binary not that" > the end result wasn't excellent.  K While that isn't desirable compared to the supplier doing the job properly,wJ it seems that everywhere outside of VMS, it was considered usual to modifyK components of the OS to suit local needs. Only VMS lovers wanted everythingaM in exactly the form they envisaged from DEC, and better yesterday than today.4L Very strange attitude. I mean, a base MVS system is unuseable for productionG work (no data security to speak of, for one thing; no batch system, forsM another) without thrid-party add-ons (RACF, HASP, ...). Compared to that, VMSf is in El Dorado.   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:37:07 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>f@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <tqt02ugucnqgfukgs22ertku7nsk7ql7vt@4ax.com>  . On 19 Dec 2001 10:07:38 +0100, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  . >Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes: >eL >> Not at all.  VMS, by the expressed attitude of its developers, was a stepK >> backwards in software technology with no chance of improvement, and withtI >> its prissy developers fighting against any improvement tooth and nail.E >aO >Ah yes, I really must have missed the distributed lock manager and the rest ofe# >the cluster stuff in TOPS-20. Not.m  A TOPS-20 had a clustered file system (HSC-50 controllers) slightlyr@ before VMS if I recall correctly. In any case the time frame wasC around  the same time. Much more work was to have been done had not.F the OS been cancelled. How many VMS clusters were in customer hands inE May 1983 when TOPS-20 was sentenced to death? In any case have a read0D of the following paper by Dan Murpy (Tenex and TOPS-20 architect) on TOPS-20 clusters. + http://www.opost.com/dlm/tenex/acmcfs89.txt   > For the complete collection of Dan Murphy's TOPS-20 papers seeD http://www.opost.com/dlm/tenex/ which includes details of the VMS vsB TOPS struggles within DEC in the paper "Origins and Development of TOPS-20" Sample:o-   1  INTRODUCTION - INTERCONNECT TECHNOLOGIESt  C     During the early  1980's,  innovations  in  the  area  of  highn speedrB     interconnects  led  to  new  topologies for operating systems. One ofB     these, known as "Clusters", is implemented by two systems from Digital D     Equipment Corp.  -- VAX/VMS and DECSYSTEM-20.  These two systems sharenB     much of the cluster technology at the hardware level, and some commonF     techniques are also used in several areas of the operating system. InB     one particular area however, the original architectures of the systems =     were  quite  different,  and this led to rather differents solutions in3     the extension of the architectures to clusters.   D     The design and implementation of Clusters on VAX/VMS systems has beenD     extensively  discussed elsewhere[3, 4].  This paper will discuss those D     aspects  of  operating  system  design  which  are   unique   to thenC     DECSYSTEM-20  implementation, i.e.  the file system and virtual0 memory     architecture      J >> Consequently, the only rational course of action was to act to kill VMS >> and bolster UNIX. > J >So because you didn't get the thing you ranked #1 and got #2 instead, youM >cut off your nose and started to use the one ranked #7? Why not go the wholesK >way to #10, aka as the Windows family? I suggest Windows 3.1 for starters.z >oK >Immature, as I said. I expect it from my three year old son, and fuss with_1 >the six year old when he displays this attitude.e >e >	Jan    -- Alan   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 12:08:13 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)2 Message-ID: <9vpvvd$12cp$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>  H In article <y4k7vjsduq.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>,I Jan Vorbrueggen  <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:o  >"Who, me?" <who@me.com> writes:L >> >> Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMS6 >> >> never was a significant player on the Internet.   K >> > I do believe this has more to do with the lack of an affordable TCP/IPh; >> > stack of good quality early enough than anything else.l  N >> Well, I think it has a lot to do with the ones in DEC who had "networking" L >> in their job description deciding that OSI mattered a hell of a lot more K >> than TCP/IP.  I guess we'll always have to wonder what the techno scene eL >> would be like if DEC had spent the time, treasure and talent in the late 5 >> 80's and early 90's on TCP/IP as they did on OSI. I  I >Yes, I quite agree. But be honest: At the time DEC bet on OSI, would youb* >have bet that part of the company on TCP?  N I think a big problem here is that "bet the company" bit. DEC, and now Compaq,N seems to have a habit of tossing bits of the company on the roulette table andN panicking when the ball hits the wrong slot. What's wrong with supporting BOTH stacks?    -- s@ Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC.	      "Cave cuniculos lagana ferentes"  F "Be conservative in what you generate, and liberal in what you accept" 	-- Matthew 10:16 (l.trans)    ------------------------------  ! Date: Wed, 19 Dec 01 10:12:05 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.como@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)+ Message-ID: <9vq0fg$s9s$4@bob.news.rcn.net>   H In article <y4n10go9hl.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>,K    Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:d. >Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes: >oB >> > It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything3 >> > done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.dK >> Hence VMS' demise became my stated goal.  I was one of many who refused   toI >> develop software for VMS, and instead improved UNIX's lead so that VMSU >> would never catch up. >eH >....which is just as immature an attitude as that reported of Hustvedt.  B I disagree.  It was the only decision that could be made.  A largeE part of an operating system's development evolution involves feedbacke> from the field.  Hustvedt would have a fit if a suggestion hadE any smell of PDP-10 land...and that included if the person making the 4 suggestion had sullied his hands by typing at a -10. This guy was just plain nuts.h /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.t   ------------------------------  ! Date: Wed, 19 Dec 01 10:20:01 GMTS From: jmfbahciv@aol.comS@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)+ Message-ID: <9vq0uc$s9s$5@bob.news.rcn.net>h  8 In article <oaou1uo38lkcri51ib47bjl6r24pi6biql@4ax.com>,)    Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:y/ >On 18 Dec 2001 16:04:22 +0100, Jan Vorbrueggen99 ><jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:v <snip>  J >>> Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20, VMS3 >>> never was a significant player on the Internet.e >i> >Mark, I know you'll never be convinced now but have a look atG >www.openvms.compaq.com, read the VMS Times, read the development work, D >especially browse the Freeware CDs www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware,D >check out the DECUS symposium tapes and see how VMS engineering hasF >slowly battled internally to enhance VMS and make it a fun OS as well >as a 'business' one.v  D This only happened after Hustvedt cracked his head open and couldn't nix everything.  v   <snip>  D >The PDP-10 cancellation was wrong of course but you can't blame theD >current VMS team for that and they don't deserve the fate dumped onB >the TOPS-10/TOPS-20 DEC development teams any more than they did. >dA >VMS development knows it is fighting for its life and has a lastj? >life-line in the agreement to port to IA64 following the Alpha E >termination. I for one don't want to see it go and that's why I stirnD >things up now. Perhaps if DEC had *fully* realised the bad-will (asC >you prove still as strong after 18 years) in advance that would bep: >generated by the decision they would never have done it.   > Now go read my writeup (Joe may have it on) about the time DEC? tried to cancel TOPS-10 and the uproar that happened then.  DECn> management had a perfectly good idea what would happen if they< cancelled the -10 product line.  The fucking idiots chose to
 ignore it.   <snip>  C >DEC made the mistake I fear Compaq or HP are about to repeat. TheypG >convinced themselves of one thing disregarding the reality of customera@ >wishes. Way back then they managed to trot out CEOs to back the: >decisions as well. What does a CEO know about a computer?  7 I was surprised that Palmer knew how to spell the word.s   /BAH        ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.d   ------------------------------  ! Date: Wed, 19 Dec 01 10:24:41 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.comh@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)+ Message-ID: <9vq173$s9s$6@bob.news.rcn.net>o  ' In article <3C1FA846.56662CF6@iee.org>,t)    "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> wrote:' >Alan Greig wrote:F >> *added* to that by insisting that certain features would *never* beF >> ported to VMS, I find it perfectly understandable. I slowly grew to >-, >I missed out on TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 (just!)( >but given the plethora of emulators now+ >available, it looks like I'll get a second , >chance. Which features is it that VMS lacks! >but TOPS-10 and/or TOPS-20 has?    8 Throughput.  The ability to get a lot of work done fast.  ; The way the development groups were set up made response to+; software problems (even internal ones) almost impossible too= incorportate.  The VMS product dependencies were a nightmare.e   <snip>   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.g   ------------------------------  ! Date: Wed, 19 Dec 01 10:30:55 GMTn From: jmfbahciv@aol.coma@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)+ Message-ID: <9vq1ip$s9s$7@bob.news.rcn.net>m  H In article <y4sna8oa6b.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>,K    Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:s >jmfbahciv@aol.com writes: > @ >> It was a stated goal by Hutsvedt(sp?) to ensure that anything2 >> done on the PDP-10 would never be done in VMS.  > K >If this is true - why did the company let him, and the VMS group, get awayo >with this attitude?  D Because it meshed with Gordon Bell's and Dave Cutler's attitudes and= all of those people had no contact with people from Marlboro.r@ I am firmly convinced that none of this shit would have happenedA if we had all continued to rub elbows in the Mill.  Remember, thes= original ways we implemented new software was by rotating then@ developers across product lines.  That meant that all good ideas$ migrated and bad ideas were dropped.   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.s   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:08:51 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>b@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <po012ukuhsu16cpjo2t0rifqto1sitjn0d@4ax.com>  . On 19 Dec 2001 10:07:38 +0100, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:    K >Immature, as I said. I expect it from my three year old son, and fuss withd1 >the six year old when he displays this attitude.t Jan,  E Perhaps you had to have been there at the time. If Compaq/HP kill VMS F now I will not make the same mistake twice of going back to another OSF from either. I 'll go Unix but not from Compaq/HP and wish I'd been asF "immature" as Mark in the 80s and saved myself the trouble of fighting7 for years to help save at least some of DEC's heritage.   F If you were to promise your son a new toy and then instead destroy hisD favourite one right in front of him for no good reason then he wouldC be well within his rights to display an "attitude" and you would bet< rightly condemned as a bad father if not actually locked up.   >	Jane   -- Alan   ------------------------------  ! Date: Wed, 19 Dec 01 10:42:48 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.comy@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)+ Message-ID: <9vq294$s9s$8@bob.news.rcn.net>o  2 In article <9vpvvd$12cp$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>,,    peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) wrote:I >In article <y4k7vjsduq.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, J >Jan Vorbrueggen  <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:! >>"Who, me?" <who@me.com> writes:sJ >>> >> Many other people felt the same way; which is why, unlike TOPS-20,  VMSs7 >>> >> never was a significant player on the Internet. d >rF >>> > I do believe this has more to do with the lack of an affordable  TCP/IP< >>> > stack of good quality early enough than anything else. >hB >>> Well, I think it has a lot to do with the ones in DEC who had 
 "networking" eH >>> in their job description deciding that OSI mattered a hell of a lot  more nL >>> than TCP/IP.  I guess we'll always have to wonder what the techno scene H >>> would be like if DEC had spent the time, treasure and talent in the  late o6 >>> 80's and early 90's on TCP/IP as they did on OSI.  >iJ >>Yes, I quite agree. But be honest: At the time DEC bet on OSI, would you+ >>have bet that part of the company on TCP?o >tH >I think a big problem here is that "bet the company" bit. DEC, and now  Compaq,gL >seems to have a habit of tossing bits of the company on the roulette table  and K >panicking when the ball hits the wrong slot. What's wrong with supporting   BOTH >stacks? > < Nothing.  But bean counters don't understand that.  In 1976,< I heard our bean counter make the statement that the company9 would be run the way he thought it should.  And he had no1B idea what an operating system was other than when it was mentioned) on the expense side of the balance sheet.t   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.5   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:50:07 GMTn' From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@zfree.co.nz> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)$ Message-ID: <3c208cfb$1@zfree.co.nz>  H Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:* >bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> writes: >tD >> but at the time there was internal competition to produce better C >> quality products. There were CPU design competitions even withintE >> the groups - I don't know how this was in 10 land in the 70s, but n? >> with in 11 and 8 land it was true.  The concept/design stageHG >> versus the production stage was somewhere between 2:1 and 6:1 at anyoF >> given time.  The same was true of periph design, maybe a 4:1 ratio. >AD >Internal competition is OK. Declaring on the winner beforehand, andB >allowing them to ignore the state of the art, is not. And that isH >what Mark Crispin has been saying about VAX/VMS development with regard >to the PDP-10/TOPS-20 effort. >  >	JanBH I've never used TOPS-x0 in my life and have used VMS for 18 years or so.H I've been following the pdp10 newsgroup for a while and can imagine thatQ an OS (and design team) that is mature has serious doubts about a new competitor.-I VMS 1.x was probably barely functional compared to RSX and TOPS that both 3 had several years of (user encouraged) development.m  M I guess that VMS and the 11/780 were the "hot" projects around 1977, financedeK by revenues of the then current stars of the company: the PDP-10 and PDP-11w product lines. tA The fact that the PDP-10 had support for the CI bus and the HSC50iH always made me wonder how far TOPS was from having its own lock manager.I Perhaps they had a PDP-10 cluster running and decided that was to be soldo as VMS only?   Hans     http://www.zfree.co.nz   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:37:57 +0000n% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <km112u08fresb9ulikvq5nscnnh13n50mj@4ax.com>  . On 19 Dec 2001 11:24:52 +0100, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:    G >I worked at the time with TOPS-10. Maybe TOPS-20 was soooo superior to-J >TOPS-10, but the latter certainly wasn't superior to VMS. And what really  E If you mean that TOPS-10 was not superior to VMS then I have to agreeo9 even if that might upset TOPS-10 folk. The combination of F TOPS-10/KL-10 was superior to VAX 11/780 VMS because it was five times4 as fast and supported about ten times as many users.  D TOPS-20 circa 1983 was superior to VMS circa 1983 in my opinion and,B in the opinion of almost everyone else I know who used both at the' time.  One or two may differ of course.r  C For the record I made extensive use of TOPS-10, TOPS-20 and VMS andnD had "wheel" privs for years on TOPS-20 and SETPRV on VMS since aboutC 1987. TOPS-10 I normally had only user level access to but did do aFB bit of work on the TOPS-10 side when I co-wrote some UK JANET mail2 relaying code between TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 in 1983.   >:D >the next big thing in internetworking. You do remember the officialG >requirements for government contracts in the US and parts of Europe inqI >that regard, don't you? And from a technical point of view, it was clearrI >that TCP/IP, with its design starting point of a network of no more thanr  D Oh, I well remember that but there was no reason for DEC to downplay' TCP/IP when it was so well established.    -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:23:14 +0000>% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <j8812uckj5pd7cbvncj9tb6fl9bfcs44ir@4ax.com>  8 On Wed, 19 Dec 01 10:30:55 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:     >sE >Because it meshed with Gordon Bell's and Dave Cutler's attitudes andn> >all of those people had no contact with people from Marlboro.A >I am firmly convinced that none of this shit would have happened B >if we had all continued to rub elbows in the Mill.  Remember, the> >original ways we implemented new software was by rotating theA >developers across product lines.  That meant that all good ideas % >migrated and bad ideas were dropped.8  ? Although someone still managed to sneak in TOPS-20's DEFINE andsD TOPS-10's ASSIGN for logical names. For some reason VMS DCL supportsE both the TOPS-20 and TOPS-10 argument ordering. VMS also still allowsfB the TOPS-20 syntax of device:<directory>file.ext.v (where v is theB version number) as well as its native device:[directory]file.ext;v  D Also someone got in the undocumented SET WATCH FILE command into VMSE which both TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 had. It seems some effort was made and D I am not sure how things like this got in while other more important; things did not. Or maybe the answer is actually in the lasto sentence...a   >e >/BAH  > ( >Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.   -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:09:01 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <JRP5weWZHPOK@eisner.encompasserve.org>l   In article <y4n10fse17.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:   > H > I worked at the time with TOPS-10. Maybe TOPS-20 was soooo superior toK > TOPS-10, but the latter certainly wasn't superior to VMS. And what reallyaH > gets me in Mark's original comment was "improve Unix's lead". Come on,K > really. I started to have to use Unix a few years later than VMS, but at oL > no time did I consider a contemporaneous Unix having a lead over VMS. Even9 > now, I can't say Solaris is so much better than VMS V3.l >   ? 	I saw that: "improve Unix's lead" and almost bit on the troll.t= 	Giving him the benefit of the doubt on re-read I interpretede: 	it as application availability lead, not technology lead.  F > Not at all. Maxim #1: "Never attribute to malice what can adequatelyH > be explained by stupidity." In this case, DEC bet on ISO-OSI has being) > the next big thing in internetworking. s  ? 	Yeah.. and because of timing, our brilliant* professor gave a a: 	Networking class based on the OSI model.  Nearly "killed"H 	us all as she was way too intense (us poor undergrads).  That was 1988.A 	Unfortunately, had to pick up TCP/IP in bits and pieces over the>B 	years (not a complaint, but it sure would have been nice to spendF 	13-15 weeks on TCP/IP and yes there are conceptual overlaps and other 	things to consider).    					Rob  M * Yes... brilliant.  Satellite algorithms, first female EE PhD from Columbia,y 	etc.l   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:26:10 GMT"4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C20B0A0.1963C6BC@blueyonder.co.uk>   Peter da Silva wrote:a  pP > I think a big problem here is that "bet the company" bit. DEC, and now Compaq,P > seems to have a habit of tossing bits of the company on the roulette table andP > panicking when the ball hits the wrong slot. What's wrong with supporting BOTH	 > stacks?   tB and whats wrong with marketting all OS's in the company portfolio?     -- g Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  t  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of  ! my employers or service provider.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:11:55 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>l@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <87a12uom8c4rpr8hls98lv89psis2od0cc@4ax.com>  C On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:23:14 +0000, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>h wrote:   >oE >Also someone got in the undocumented SET WATCH FILE command into VMS<F >which both TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 had. It seems some effort was made and  D And I shouldn't  forget the good old TOPS-10 TECO make love command.5 dating back to 1969? This on current VMS on an Alpha.   ? $ define teco teco32_tv  ! create logical teco pointing at tecon= $ make :== $teco make !define the foreign command MAKE to DCLi $ make loves Not war?0 *II can still make love using a supported Teco$$ *ht$$r1 I can still make love using a supported Teco*ex$$  $ type love.' I can still edit using a supported Tecoa  > Someone within Compaq still cares enough to fight to keep Teco< supported. Apparently we will see it on VMS on IA64 as well!  C Support for SOS/EDIT was removed from VMS a long, long time ago butm teco lives!H -- Alan   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 15:37:45 GMT From: "Who, me?" <who@me.com>n@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <Xns917C6BE8E5675whomecom@199.125.85.9>d  G Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wroteeD in news:y4k7vjsduq.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de: ! > "Who, me?" <who@me.com> writes: F > Yes, I quite agree. But be honest: At the time DEC bet on OSI, would/ > you have bet that part of the company on TCP?r  J I can't honestly say what I'd do, because that point in time was early in J my career and I didn't have the breadth of knowledge to make that kind of J call.  But DEC's decision was consistant with their corporate culture and G the corporate culture of similar companies like IBM.  Networking was a oK profit center, and they were going to do everything they could to not kill  G the goose laying the golden eggs.  OSI was perfect for this: you could rH claim to have a standards-compliant protocol, yet not interoperate with  competitor's equipment!  i  I I saw the same logic in place at both IBM and DEC.  I was a UNIX network lE developer at IBM then I left and went to DEC in the early 90s.  Both iH companies had large entrenched proprietary (i.e. non-TCP/IP) networking K groups (Raliegh, Littleton) that were very protective of their proprietary hD product lines.  Both spoke of TCP/IP as a toy protocol incapable of I supporting large networks.  I thought DEC was a bit further along in the sF evolutionary path: IBM still though it was a good idea to spend large J amounts of mainframe cycles supporting routing protocols, and would speak F of how many mainframes they sold whose primary purpose was to support G network activities.  DEC seemed to realize that most folks were buying  J their systems to run scientific and business workloads and didn't want to H spend lots of their cycles supporting routing protocols and would offer 6 scaled-down systems to support the network activities.  L Neither seemed to see the TCP/IP revolution breaking, but from what I could E see Raliegh accepted it much earlier and began pulling in all TCP/IP sJ activities that they could get their hands on, wheras Littleton stayed in B denial pretty much right up to the end when they were sold off to 
 Cabletron.   Dave   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 15:40:07 GMT From: "Who, me?" <who@me.com>t@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <Xns917C6C4F44690whomecom@199.125.85.9>o  * bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> wrote in) news:3C207025.6C951AEF@bellatlantic.net:  G > Truth! DEC, did have at least a smattering of folks working the CCITTo > committe,eI > I can not recall the woman's name who was the lead rep, but realize all@ > of DoDD > and USG were pushing the same thing.  When we did AUTODIN II, as a > subcontractor,' > we had to design that ADCCP stuff....v@ > SO, Dave, do I give you a couple of millimerrills for lurking? > RMSe  ' I suppose, but it's more for anti-spam.-  6 AUTODIN II predates my involvement with DEC, though...   Dave   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:36:22 GMTl3 From: sy18889@rabbit.fmr.com (Bradford J. Hamilton)t@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)/ Message-ID: <aiRT7.20$M3.105@news-srv1.fmr.com>t   Hi Jonathan,   I have TCPIP V5.1, and I often send email to username@domain.xxx.  I have not experienced any issues.  Can you give an example oft what happens on your system?   Thanks,- Brad` In article <3C1FD177.24E04E52@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>, Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> writes: >Alan Greig wrote:N >> The support to send to user@sitename (which is what most users are going toO >> type at a to: prompt ) instead of transportname%"user@hostname" was added toVP >> VMS Mail only a few years ago. Prior to that you could download an unofficial" >> patch to the Mail binary. Yuck! >gO >Whadayamean, "Yuck?"  The MAILSHR patch back then worked better than TCPIP 5.1eO >does even today.  Ex: try sending to o'reilly@sitename and see what happens onr= >VMS these days.  The patched MAILSHR never had this problem.G >o > - JB   Bradford J. Hamilton  bradhamilton@mediaone.net	(home) sy18889@rabbit.fmr.com		(work)  ; "All opinions that I express are my own, not my employer's"    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:35:23 GMTh, From: francini1026@mac.com (John J Francini)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)K Message-ID: <francini1026-ya02408000R1912011037160001@news.ne.mediaone.net>t  0 In article <3C20B0A0.1963C6BC@blueyonder.co.uk>,% tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:1    8C >and whats wrong with marketting all OS's in the company portfolio?m >i  G Goes against the mindless "one OS to rule them all" mentality that tooktI hold in Digital during the 80s.  The same mentality lives on at a certain I Redmond company.  It too is trying to make the whole world run one OS, no 9 matter how well or not well it fits with people's needs. t   john   -- a
 John Francinii  # Subtract Ten Twenty-Six for e-mail. P +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+P | "I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace;    |P |  that two or more are called a law firm; and that three or more become       |P |  a Congress.  And by God I have had _this_ Congress!"                        |P |                                                        -- John Adams         |P +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:37:07 +0000e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>d@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)8 Message-ID: <hrc12uglkoi75tts55l75nkrs085fq5inu@4ax.com>  C On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:11:55 +0000, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>s wrote:  2 >I can still make love using a supported Teco*ex$$
 >$ type love..( >I can still edit using a supported Teco  E Following  up on my own post yet again I must point out that teco didk> not substitute edit for make love within the text. That was meA "fixing" the format of a cut and paste and mis-editing it.  Oops.s   -- Alan   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 16:12:56 GMT From: "Who, me?" <who@me.com>i@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <Xns917C71D25C875whomecom@199.125.85.9>   * bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> wrote in) news:3C206F57.B292163F@bellatlantic.net: l5 > There were some exceptional efforts, but we did get E > infested with MBAs and move from a bunch of engineers and techs and 7 > software wizards into a model of a dysfunctional IBM.w > my two cents.c > bobn  J My $0.02 of the DEC I saw in the early 90s after leaving IBM was that the L inmates were running the asylum.  I think DEC needed more MBAs, or at least L the right MBAs.  In that era, IBM was #1 and DEC was #2, and now DEC is now J dead and IBM is still the largest computer company in the world.  IBM had I lots of MBAs that were making sure the techies were building things that sK had a target audience that could and would pay the amount of money it took l  to keep the whole thing running.  K Basically DEC had a totally unreasonable, unworkable business organization sL and no one seemed to notice or care.  Almost everyone involved was a techie F and only cared if they were working on cool stuff instead of actually C working on providing solutions to the customer's current needs and e: providing the teamwork neeeded to keep the company afloat.  L Pretty much all of the folks I worked with who were honest would admit that H DEC's solutions were overpriced, and that the company put the customers J through torture when trying to actually buy a DEC system or get a bug fix D or enhancement, and that we had very little software available that I customers could use to solve their problems.  All those things were just bI someone else's problem.  All they wanted to do was work on cool things.  yI There were no MBAs around to remind them that in the long term that just  
 doesn't work.w  K So, you end up with something like Tru64, which has the best clustering of TJ any UNIX but near-zero market share, which is going to be killed in favor J of HP-UX which doesn't have much technical merit but lots of market share L and applications.  And VMS, which seems to have a business case if you look J at the numbers just right, but can easily be killed by whatever corporate J parent ends up owning it when they decide that it's cooler and cheaper to E just ship whatever Bill Gates calls enterprise software this quarter.x   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:31:52 +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: <y4u1un2mtj.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  * peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:  I > I think a big problem here is that "bet the company" bit. DEC, and now 7N > Compaq, seems to have a habit of tossing bits of the company on the rouletteK > table and panicking when the ball hits the wrong slot. What's wrong with   > supporting BOTH stacks?m  K Nothing at all in principle - it would be buying insurance, and often cheaphN insurance at that. But governments and Real Companies (R) don't buy insurance,C they rather suffer a catastrophic setback when the risk comes true.a  D And besides - offering the customer a choice? What are you thinking!   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 10:33:52 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)o@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <bPdy0bnguswq@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  '  On 18 Dec 2001, Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:2A > > 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?m  G    Having programmed on TOPS-20 for years and finding it's architectureiE    and that of the PDP-10 to be a mjor PITA, I'm glad they succeeded.2  /    I was so happy when I moved to VMS off TOPS.p   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:33:59 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>d@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4r8pr2mq0.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>   jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:s  = > The way the development groups were set up made response tot= > software problems (even internal ones) almost impossible to ? > incorportate.  The VMS product dependencies were a nightmare.m  E As I customer, I can't say I saw a lot of that appear on the outside.p   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:37:09 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>r@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4ofkv2mkq.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ' Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:a  H > If you were to promise your son a new toy and then instead destroy hisF > favourite one right in front of him for no good reason then he wouldE > be well within his rights to display an "attitude" and you would be0> > rightly condemned as a bad father if not actually locked up.  F Oh come on, an OS is a tool to get work done, not a toy that you mightE be emotionally attached to. It's about making irrational decisions intD the face of adversity. As I said, Hustvedt's behaviour (if true) wasD irrational and stupid; but Mark's was just as irrational and stupid.   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:40:06 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>u@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4lmfz2mft.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>   jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:r  M > >If this is true - why did the company let him, and the VMS group, get awayv > >with this attitude?F > Because it meshed with Gordon Bell's and Dave Cutler's attitudes and? > all of those people had no contact with people from Marlboro.c  G That's not really an explanation. Why would any rational person exhibittG such behaviour, as it is basically self-damaging? (NIH always is, IMO.)nD And it's the major job of the upper level of management to stop such kinds of behaviour.    	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:43:30 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>Y@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)H Message-ID: <y4itb32ma5.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ' Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:u  F > Oh, I well remember that but there was no reason for DEC to downplay) > TCP/IP when it was so well established.   L It was? All I had seen in a large environment as heterogenous as you can getM (CERN) was DECnet and BITNET (RSCS). And Apollo Domain, of course. TCP alwaysn- seemed like a cheap take-off of DECnet to me.    	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 10:44:55 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <4g5FfWvUUIHD@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  O In article <3C1FA846.56662CF6@iee.org>, "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> writes:e > - > I missed out on TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 (just!)t) > but given the plethora of emulators nowl, > available, it looks like I'll get a second- > chance. Which features is it that VMS lackst/ > but TOPS-10 and/or TOPS-20 has? I don't doubtt- > that there are some or many, it's just that ) > I have no idea what they are. Or are we 0 > talking mainly features that were missing back > then but are around now?  H    An older, 2 mode, OS design that was popular at about the time it andG    UNIX were invented.  Really painfull API to the OS, unreachable fromoD    many high level languages.  Forks instead of processes.  A loaderF    that really was:  you loaded all your objects into memory, then youF    could run them, or you could dump them back out to an executable inC    a file.  A lot of security holes.  The inability to separate the F    concepts of an authorized user and a disk directory.  No predefinedC    RMS (eventually COBOL and FORTRAN groups realized they were botho:    doing record management and came up with a common RMS).  D    If you were used to thinking this way you might not want to learn8    anything new or different from what you'd been doing.  E    The guys who designed VMS were doing something new and differenet, E    virtual memory and 4 modes, but were willing to base the OS designn'    on a tried and proven concept (RSX).i   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 16:33:50 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)2 Message-ID: <9vqfhe$1ae0$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>  0 In article <3C20B0A0.1963C6BC@blueyonder.co.uk>,6 Tim Llewellyn  <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >Peter da Silva wrote:Q >> I think a big problem here is that "bet the company" bit. DEC, and now Compaq, Q >> seems to have a habit of tossing bits of the company on the roulette table and Q >> panicking when the ball hits the wrong slot. What's wrong with supporting BOTH 
 >> stacks?  C >and whats wrong with marketting all OS's in the company portfolio?e  F Now don't go overboard. Feed them logical thinking one bite at a time.   -- e@ 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)o   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:47:02 +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: <y4g0672m49.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>   "Who, me?" <who@me.com> writes:/  J > OSI was perfect for this: you could claim to have a standards-compliant ? > protocol, yet not interoperate with competitor's equipment!  T  K I'm sure interoperability was a requirement for those government contracts. J And in the early years, TCP/IP was so loosely defined (especially comparedA to DECnet and SNA, which both had a largish number of third-partyrF implementations) that regular interoperability parties were conducted.   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 18:09:36 +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: <y4adwf2l2n.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ' Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:c  A > Although someone still managed to sneak in TOPS-20's DEFINE and F > TOPS-10's ASSIGN for logical names. For some reason VMS DCL supportsG > both the TOPS-20 and TOPS-10 argument ordering. VMS also still allowssD > the TOPS-20 syntax of device:<directory>file.ext.v (where v is theD > version number) as well as its native device:[directory]file.ext;v  C Both of these deviations are part of the RSX legacy, IMO, not TOPS.    	Jan   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:13:54 +0100 (MET)l9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>(@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS); Message-ID: <01KC28B8NCUS9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>h  C > > Although someone still managed to sneak in TOPS-20's DEFINE andoH > > TOPS-10's ASSIGN for logical names. For some reason VMS DCL supportsI > > both the TOPS-20 and TOPS-10 argument ordering. VMS also still allowscF > > the TOPS-20 syntax of device:<directory>file.ext.v (where v is theF > > version number) as well as its native device:[directory]file.ext;v > E > Both of these deviations are part of the RSX legacy, IMO, not TOPS.s  B What is the historical reason for DEFINE and ASSIGN both to exist?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:38:14 -0500m- From: Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C20D086.BF1BBCE2@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>   "Bradford J. Hamilton" wrote:iC > I have TCPIP V5.1, and I often send email to username@domain.xxx.e@ > I have not experienced any issues.  Can you give an example of > what happens on your system?  O The issue is that the DEC version, at least since the C re-write, makes a checkmO for username viability BEFORE it switches transports to TCPIP.  So any username . that is invalid on VMS will yield the dratted:  E %MAIL-E-USERSPEC, invalid user specification 'O'REILLY@SOMEWHERE.COM'i  O despite the fact that this check should not be made at all when sending mail to M remote nodes.  So on my system the mail cannot be sent without specifying thelO longhand smtp%"o'reilly@somewhere.com" address.  I think it also uppercases theI. username, which is another irritating feature.    - JBt   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:38:22 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)2 Message-ID: <9vqjae$1c95$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>  H In article <y4adwf2l2n.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>,I Jan Vorbrueggen  <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:o( >Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:B >> Although someone still managed to sneak in TOPS-20's DEFINE andG >> TOPS-10's ASSIGN for logical names. For some reason VMS DCL supportsyH >> both the TOPS-20 and TOPS-10 argument ordering. VMS also still allowsE >> the TOPS-20 syntax of device:<directory>file.ext.v (where v is thetE >> version number) as well as its native device:[directory]file.ext;vs  D >Both of these deviations are part of the RSX legacy, IMO, not TOPS.  A RSX used DDn:[nnn,nnn]file.ext;v universally. I've never seen anyMF RSX program using <> or a . for the version. The RSX legacy in VMS was8 the mapping from DDXn:[nnn,nnn] to VOL:[nnnnnnnn], IIRC.   -- T@ Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC.	      "Cave cuniculos lagana ferentes"  F "Be conservative in what you generate, and liberal in what you accept" 	-- Matthew 10:16 (l.trans)    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:58:40 -0800a+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>r@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)U Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.50.0112190954370.1815-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>r  & On 19 Dec 2001, Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:P > Ah yes, I really must have missed the distributed lock manager and the rest of$ > the cluster stuff in TOPS-20. Not.  - Yes, you did miss it, because TOPS-20 had it.1  K > > Consequently, the only rational course of action was to act to kill VMSw > > and bolster UNIX.iK > So because you didn't get the thing you ranked #1 and got #2 instead, youO9 > cut off your nose and started to use the one ranked #7?u  H No.  Because I didn't get the thing I ranked #1, I settled for the thing that I ranked #2.   B VMS sucked from its inception, starting with its obnoxious commandG language which seemed carefully designed to do the wrong thing whenevern	 possible.   
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrc-F Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:07:03 -0800 + From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)U Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.50.0112190959130.1815-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>   & On 19 Dec 2001, Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:H > I worked at the time with TOPS-10. Maybe TOPS-20 was soooo superior to; > TOPS-10, but the latter certainly wasn't superior to VMS.0  H So, you worked with TOPS-10, and use that as a claim that VMS was better
 than TOPS-20?    Typical VMSoid nonsense.  A TOPS-20 was a completely different operating system from TOPS-10.0   > And what reallynH > gets me in Mark's original comment was "improve Unix's lead". Come on,J > really. I started to have to use Unix a few years later than VMS, but atL > no time did I consider a contemporaneous Unix having a lead over VMS. Even9 > now, I can't say Solaris is so much better than VMS V3.   E No, Solaris is not "so much better than VMS V3".  It is immeasureably  better.-  " > > A decade or two after TOPS-20.8 > It was irrelevant to almost everybody a decade before.  H Maybe in Germany, but in civilized countries ARPAnet/Internet addressingF was quite important as early as the 1970s.  And even in Germany in theH early 1980s, some people cared about Internet addressing in spite of the1 efforts of the Deutsche Bundespost to prevent it.t  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrcnF Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:10:40 -0800r+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>i@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)U Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.50.0112191008360.1815-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>   # On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, bad bob wrote:h8 > I can not recall the woman's name who was the lead rep  H Are we thinking about the same person?  Her most memorable attribute was her screechy voice.f  J She proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that OSI was doomed and that TCP was the way to go.  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrcsF Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:19:06 -0800n+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>t@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)U Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.50.0112191015540.1815-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>     On 19 Dec 2001, Rob Young wrote:A > 	I saw that: "improve Unix's lead" and almost bit on the troll.o? > 	Giving him the benefit of the doubt on re-read I interpreted < > 	it as application availability lead, not technology lead.  J Not a troll at all.  UNIX was then, and remains today, technologically far superior to VMS.  1 And the market proved it.  UNIX whipped VMS' ass.e  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrceF Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:35:16 GMTr* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <E55U7.324423$8q.28873891@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  5 "Peter da Silva" <peter@taronga.com> wrote in messagel, news:9vpvvd$12cp$1@citadel.in.taronga.com...   ...n  H > I think a big problem here is that "bet the company" bit. DEC, and now Compaq,eL > seems to have a habit of tossing bits of the company on the roulette table andeK > panicking when the ball hits the wrong slot. What's wrong with supportinga BOTH	 > stacks?u  J That's certainly the attitude DEC had until some time around the beginningJ of the '80s.  And the lack of that attitude seems to have characterized itL (and now Compaq) since.  Allowing for inertia (DEC continued to look healthyA from outside until the late '80s), I believe that explains a lot.a   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:26:27 -0800l+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)U Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.50.0112191020470.1815-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>p  + On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, John J Francini wrote:fI > Goes against the mindless "one OS to rule them all" mentality that tookiK > hold in Digital during the 80s.  The same mentality lives on at a certain-K > Redmond company.  It too is trying to make the whole world run one OS, no.: > matter how well or not well it fits with people's needs.  D There's a big difference: the Redmond entity does not sell hardware.G There is also reason to believe that there will be an Office for Linux;oJ the Office developers are in the business of selling copies of Office, not bolstering Windows sales.t  H The Redmond entity may be evil, but they are a lot smarter than DEC was.  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrcSF Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:33:05 -0800v+ From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>-@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)U Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.4.50.0112191029070.1815-100000@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>   & On 19 Dec 2001, Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:/ > As I said, Hustvedt's behaviour (if true) wasnF > irrational and stupid; but Mark's was just as irrational and stupid.  D How is my siding with the winning side (UNIX) irrational and stupid?   Sounds like sour grapes to me.  5 The irrational and stupid thing was to side with VMS.e  
 -- Mark --   http://staff.washington.edu/mrchF Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.   ------------------------------   Date: 19 DEC 2001 18:38:31 GMT+ From: Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov>c@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)2 Message-ID: <19DEC01.18383104@feda01.fed.ornl.gov>  Q In a previous article, Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote:eE > > > Although someone still managed to sneak in TOPS-20's DEFINE and J > > > TOPS-10's ASSIGN for logical names. For some reason VMS DCL supportsK > > > both the TOPS-20 and TOPS-10 argument ordering. VMS also still allowstH > > > the TOPS-20 syntax of device:<directory>file.ext.v (where v is theH > > > version number) as well as its native device:[directory]file.ext;v > > G > > Both of these deviations are part of the RSX legacy, IMO, not TOPS.v >  (D > What is the historical reason for DEFINE and ASSIGN both to exist?  F I once heard that there were 2 parallel efforts.  One was specificallyH oriented toward abstracting device names (which gave us ASSIGN I think).G The other was oriented towards non-device name abstractions (which gavesC us DEFINE.)  By the time someone realized they were really the samen effort we had both commands.   FWIW,s Dave --------------9 Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOVaH Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:43:46 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <Cd5U7.324547$8q.28878786@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  ( "Who, me?" <who@me.com> wrote in message- news:Xns917C6BE8E5675whomecom@199.125.85.9...    ...-  @ > DEC's decision was consistant with their corporate culture andH > the corporate culture of similar companies like IBM.  Networking was aL > profit center, and they were going to do everything they could to not killH > the goose laying the golden eggs.  OSI was perfect for this: you couldI > claim to have a standards-compliant protocol, yet not interoperate withn > competitor's equipment!/  L Depends on how you define 'corporate culture' (and whether what I would callL it had changed by then).  The culture up until the early '80s was definitelyJ *not* anti-interoperation - in fact, interoperation was the cornerstone ofI DEC's networking business, since most people interested in networking had0L some IBM equipment they wanted to include (IIRC this was often how DEC got aB foot in the door and then later some its own systems).  Nor was itL characteristic of the OS portions of the company (how could it be?  they had( to interoperate with each other anyway).  J It did seem to become an element of corporate *strategy* (as distinguishedJ from corporate culture) around the time when the 'one OS to rule them all'G attitude appeared at high levels.  But what I'd call the culture didn'to change at the same time.   - bill   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:43:31 +0100 (MET)n9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>o@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS); Message-ID: <01KC2BFLO23A9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>t  L > Not a troll at all.  UNIX was then, and remains today, technologically far > superior to VMS. > 3 > And the market proved it.  UNIX whipped VMS' ass.   ? By this logic, Windows is much better than unix.  Do you agree?e   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:02 GMTr2 From: Arthur Krewat <krewat@bartek.dontspamme.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)5 Message-ID: <3C20DF93.D97B0D1A@bartek.dontspamme.net>e   Mark Crispin wrote:  > D > VMS sucked from its inception, starting with its obnoxious commandI > language which seemed carefully designed to do the wrong thing wheneverT > possible.e  * I think I got the gist of this thread now:   1) Some people hate VMSn 2) Some people like VMSn+ 3) Some people don't know anything about itr   aakn  C ps: When are people going to realize that they can't change someone3 else's viewpoint?e   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 13:48:30 -0500* From: Dan Riley <dsr@mail.lns.cornell.edu>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <shk7vjgi69.fsf@lnxcu9.lns.cornell.edu>l  I Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes: ! > "Who, me?" <who@me.com> writes: L > > OSI was perfect for this: you could claim to have a standards-compliant A > > protocol, yet not interoperate with competitor's equipment!  l > B > I'm sure interoperability was a requirement for those governmentC > contracts.  And in the early years, TCP/IP was so loosely definedeB > (especially compared to DECnet and SNA, which both had a largishF > number of third-party implementations) that regular interoperability > parties were conducted.t  E It is remarkable how many "things that made me go 'huh?'" you managed- to pack into one sentence.  F IP and TCP have been defined by RFC 791 and RFC 793 since 1981, beforeD DECnet phase IV was released.  I can't remember any time when I knewC of more DECnet phase IV (or later) implimentations than TCP/IP.  Ifu@ there hadn't been many different implimentations of TCP/IP, they wouldn't have needed interops!  C People still hold interops for relatively new (and sometimes not sonC new) protocols.  Even if the spec is perfect, implimentations nevert@ are.  If DECnet didn't have interops, it was because the "right"E behavior was effectively defined by a single vendor's implimentation,e* not because of any attributes of the spec.  A Interoperability testing is simply good engineering practice, andsD interops are a convenient way of testing interoperability among manyA different implementations.  I don't believe the mere existence ofi6 interops demonstrates any deficiency of specification. -- uJ Dan Riley                                         dsr@mail.lns.cornell.eduF  "Mr. Ellison is presently the sole member of the Plan Committee.  TheF   Plan Committee did not meet during fiscal year 2001, and during thatA        same period, acted 46 times by unanimous written consent."u   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:53:02 GMTa2 From: Arthur Krewat <krewat@bartek.dontspamme.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)5 Message-ID: <3C20E133.6C429A1F@bartek.dontspamme.net>s   Mark Crispin wrote:g > G > No, Solaris is not "so much better than VMS V3".  It is immeasureably1	 > better.1 >    Well said...   aak    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:44:00 +0100i: From: Karl Rohwedder <extern.karl.rohwedder@volkswagen.de>C Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)s, Message-ID: <3C204540.3070103@volkswagen.de>  N Wasn't the 1st Alpha the DECaxp150, which ran Vms,OSF and NT? We used it with A VMS and NT and are still using one with VMS to test new versions.c   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:  M > Nope.  The first one was Turbochannel based.  The DEC 2000 did not come outs? > until *much* later, but was the first "PC-like" Alpha system.o >  >  > 2 > "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> wrote in message# > news:3C1FCBC9.F86D7F39@iee.org...  >  >>Fred Kleinsorge wrote: >>G >>>The DS20 is actually pretty small.  Certainly smaller than the firstB >>>l > Alpha. > J >>>workstation - the Flamingo (DEC3000).  It is a bit noisier than I would  >>>prefer for a personal system. >>>r# >>Wasn't the DEC 2000-300 the firstw >>OpenVMS Alpha workstation? >>$ >>(And I assume it's still supported >>nine years on) >>	 >>Antonioy >> >>-- >> >>--------------- / >>Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.orgs >> >  >        -- a  - mit freundlichen Gruessen | with best regards    Karl RohwedderB iT-Ingenieurteam     | Ellernbruch 11       | D-38112 BraunschweigA Telefon: 0531/515521 | Telefax: 0531/515531 | Mobil: 0172/5434843 E   E-Mail: rohwedder@decus.decus.de           | iT-IngTeam@t-online.deh,           karl.rohwedder@it-ingenieurteam.de DATEX-P: 4505018005::ROHWEDDER   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 10:03:22 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>sC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)-H Message-ID: <y4heqnk2ed.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  , "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  G > Not if you were talking strictly SPEC numbers vs. application-visibleiC > performance, which was not clear to me.  I was fairly specific in.N > characterizing the kinds of (memory-intensive) work that could well see that$ > kind of performance boost, though.  I There are some CPU2000 pieces that have a working set of around 200 MB -  G see the paper on the SPEC web site. You might consider just using theirLL performance for a comparison. They might fare better on an EV68 with 8 MB L3= cache than on an EV7 with 1.75 MB L2 cache and no L3 cache...w   	Jan   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Dec 2001 09:33:22 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)oC Subject: Re: VMS workstations (was: RE: Inquirer: OpenVMS on DS20L)u3 Message-ID: <1kIgfXW496tG@eisner.encompasserve.org>>  i In article <3C204540.3070103@volkswagen.de>, Karl Rohwedder <extern.karl.rohwedder@volkswagen.de> writes: P > Wasn't the 1st Alpha the DECaxp150, which ran Vms,OSF and NT? We used it with C > VMS and NT and are still using one with VMS to test new versions.   /   No, we had Alphas when the 150 was announced.-   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:20:30 GMT@" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>- Subject: Re: VMSclusters and network switchesM0 Message-ID: <OT4U7.606$E82.2352@typhoon.bart.nl>  9 DNPG have something called Switch 90 FE, a 10/100 switch.a  5 Rich Jordan <rjordan@mindspring.com> wrote in message , news:9vog9n$h6v$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...J > Our cluster, an MV3100-30 and a DEC 2000-300, are on a thinwire backboneH > from which other hubs (10 and 100Base) are hung.  Although most of theJ > heavy PC based traffic is on one of the 100s, tons of broadcast traffic,D > especially during backups, pollutes the whole LAN.  After numerousJ > problems and complaints, I finally got the go ahead to order a switch to* > segregate the nasty PCs and the cluster. > C > Questions:  given the two fairly old/slow 10Base-T systems in themE > cluster, is there any real advantage in putting each one on its owneH > switched port, as opposed to having a small hub hanging off one switchJ > port with both nodes in that one hub (and hence no switch involvement inJ > intracluster communications)?  Either would presumably keep intracluster. > traffic out of sight of all the other nodes. >VG > :Given individual ports, are there any recommendations for (hopefully.B > not too expensive) switches that will work reliably in a clusterD > interconnect environment?  New would be nice, 10/100 is essential,G > support is essential (unless those <$100 wunderswitches will actuallyt+ > work, in which case spares will be kept).k >w	 > Thanks!, >d
 > Rich Jordanc >m >a >M   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:40:04 GMT G From: Simon Clubley <simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFP>nY Subject: [OT] US investigating culture, was: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked Microsoftr4 Message-ID: <UM0U7.3991$XC5.3926@www.newsranger.com>  J On 19 Dec 2001 11:29:07 GMT, in article <9vptm3$6j2$1@joe.rice.edu>, Jerry
 Leslie wrote:c >t? >Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- (system@SendSpamHere.ORG) wrote:tF >: Yeah, that's a great idea.  I bet we would get a real thorough and 1 >: credible report from the newshounds at MS-NBC.o >: > B >I used to think that too, but the MSNBC web site has carried someC >less-than-flattering news stories about the Evil Empire; e.g. thish- >story which documents Gates' lying to Nokia:0  G [I am speaking here as a Brit looking at your country from the outside,t? so what may be obvious to you, may not be obvious to me... :-)]a  G I am curious about how free your media are to carry out really negative,H investigations of products from large companies. Can such investigationsG be stopped or reduced in scope by, for example, the company in questioncG suggesting that it will pull advertising from the organisation carryingP out the review ?  D Do you have investigative sources that are independent, for example,A television funded by public money, that are considered credible ?   D The reason that I ask this is that I am amazed that Microsoft's moveE into battle management systems is not been heavily investigated based $ on Microsoft's track record to date.  C Note that I am _NOT_ suggesting that Microsoft has done anything tosA suppress reporting, but I am more interested if the investigatingbE culture in the US has developed more along the lines of investigating0C after the disaster has occurred instead of looking at something andV; analysing possible future risks before the disaster occurs.D   Simon.   -- 0@ Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFPK In the task of removing Microsoft from the marketplace, I have discovered a E truly remarkable plan, but this signature is too small to contain it.    ------------------------------   Date: 19 Dec 2001 17:30:55 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)nY Subject: Re: [OT] US investigating culture, was: Re: Suspect Claims Al Qaeda Hacked MicroI' Message-ID: <9vqisf$ptn$1@joe.rice.edu>p  H Simon Clubley (simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFP) wrote: :cI : I am curious about how free your media are to carry out really negative J : investigations of products from large companies. Can such investigationsI : be stopped or reduced in scope by, for example, the company in question4I : suggesting that it will pull advertising from the organisation carryingo : out the review ?  C Many newspapers won't touch a story that deals with problematic carnD dealerships, because of the large amount of revenue that car dealers provide.  G AFAIK, there's only been one TV segment on the H-1B visa program, whichnJ is continuing to bring more immigrant workers, especially in IT, in spite H of the unemployment of hundreds of thousands of American IT workers who K are now unemployed because of the global recession, DOT.COM wrecks, mergers 5 and acquistions, globalization, and the H-1B program.w  @ That was a segment of "60 Minutes" that aired in October, 1993 !! There is a transcript on line at:i  A     http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/Library/Archives/60Minutes.htm1?     CBS News "60 Minutes" October 3, 1993 'North of the Border'n     Lesley Stahl, reportingi  G    "LESLEY STAHL: Those who oppose NAFTA, the North American Free Trade1J     Agreement, argue that it will encourage American companies to go southH     of the border to replace American workers with cheap, foreign labor.H     Fact is, our government is already encouraging American companies toI     do ostensibly that, not south of the border--right here, north of theaI     border, in the good old US of A. At a time when thousands of AmericaniF     computer programmers are having a tough time finding work, some ofH     America's biggest companies are hiring cut-rate, foreign programmers     to take their jobs...."e  ! Nothing's changed since 1993. :-(l  E Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard are the two largest employers of H-1Bs.i  F : Do you have investigative sources that are independent, for example,C : television funded by public money, that are considered credible ?,  F Guess who contributes to our PBS (Public Broadcating Service), besides individuals: U.S. corporations.0  F : The reason that I ask this is that I am amazed that Microsoft's moveG : into battle management systems is not been heavily investigated based1& : on Microsoft's track record to date.  F What track record ?  The puclic thinks everything's normal when a BSODE happens, since it's just like their systems at home and work. Most ofaJ the public thinks Microsoft is wonderful, and don't grasp the significance of the anti-trust violations.   F It's just heretics, like we VMS, unix, and MVS bigots, that know aboutG computer that use a calendar instead of a stop watch to measure uptime.   F The PHBs are buying into snake oil like IBM's "software rejuvenation", that automates server reboots.  E : Note that I am _NOT_ suggesting that Microsoft has done anything touC : suppress reporting, but I am more interested if the investigatinggG : culture in the US has developed more along the lines of investigatingiE : after the disaster has occurred instead of looking at something andh= : analysing possible future risks before the disaster occurs.   E Sadly, such investigations get little notice and few viewers, such as F the episode on The Learning Channel that covered wiring fires in olderD airliners, due to a type of wiring whose insulation breaks down overC time.  That type of wiring is no longer used, but a large number ofiH airliners are older, and have that wiring. You might find tapes of that 5 show for sale on the The Learning Channel's web site.o  G The media prefers stories that generate high viewer ratings, which  :-(eG usually means  dead bodies and large property losses.               :-(s    4 --Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.704 ************************