1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 21 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 707       Contents:  Re: "You must think in Russian."  Re: "You must think in Russian."  Re: "You must think in Russian."" Re: 1980 Dungeon game walkthrough? RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS Re: A mouse friendly OpenVMS RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS Re: A mouse friendly OpenVMS Re: A mouse friendly OpenVMS Re: A mouse friendly VMS. Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both ways2 Re: Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both ways. Contingency Plan for Reboot On Another Machine2 RE: Contingency Plan for Reboot On Another Machine: Re: DCL day of the minute: Inconsistency in date handling?2 Re: DCPS printing problem - shared network printer2 Re: DCPS printing problem - shared network printer( Re: Disable Auditing when startup system1 Re: historical evidence of what went wrong at DEC 1 Re: historical evidence of what went wrong at DEC 0 Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds0 Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds0 Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds0 Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds- Re: Minute Day of the DCL: the 2001 Challenge - Re: Minute Day of the DCL: the 2001 Challenge 2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.2 Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not. Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline  Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline  Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline  OT: HP scanners and Windows 8 Re: PROBLEMS CREATING USER ACCOUNT ON VAX VMS V6.0?????? Re: See you in 2002 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) $ Re: VMSclusters and network switches  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:21:02 +0000 % From: "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> ) Subject: Re: "You must think in Russian." ' Message-ID: <3C22563E.56C34696@iee.org>    Lyndon Bartels wrote: D > patterns. I've seen people customize EVE until it behaves like vi.  . Unless they did this just to prove it could be$ done, then they are clearly sick :-)  G > That's fine for the few weeks on the job... But after a while, you've ! > got to start using EVE, as EVE.   / Nonsense - you should always use EVE as EDT :-)   ' Seriously though, your general point is & well taken. Using cd on OpenVMS or DIR' on Solaris is just plain silly. Setting $ up symbols or aliases might be OK if' you only use one of them once in a blue ( moon, but otherwise you are just storing up problems for yourself.    Antonio    --     --------------- - Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.org    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:48:21 -0500 % From: "Lou Solomon" <lny98@yahoo.com> ) Subject: Re: "You must think in Russian." / Message-ID: <u24ng5bsk4b294@corp.supernews.com>    Antonio:  F Respectfully disagree with you...  everybody winds up with a symbol orG command procedure to replace typing SET DEFAULT.  To me, if youre gonna H abbreviate, you might as well be consistant amount the operating systems your working on.   Lou     0 "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> wrote in message! news:3C22563E.56C34696@iee.org...  > Lyndon Bartels wrote: F > > patterns. I've seen people customize EVE until it behaves like vi. > 0 > Unless they did this just to prove it could be& > done, then they are clearly sick :-) > I > > That's fine for the few weeks on the job... But after a while, you've # > > got to start using EVE, as EVE.  > 1 > Nonsense - you should always use EVE as EDT :-)  > ) > Seriously though, your general point is ( > well taken. Using cd on OpenVMS or DIR) > on Solaris is just plain silly. Setting & > up symbols or aliases might be OK if) > you only use one of them once in a blue * > moon, but otherwise you are just storing > up problems for yourself.  > 	 > Antonio  >  > -- >  > --------------- / > Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.org  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:06:09 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> ) Subject: Re: "You must think in Russian." 5 Message-ID: <3C2260D1.83FDD34F@swissonline.delete.ch>    Lou Solomon wrote: > 
 > Antonio: > H > Respectfully disagree with you...  everybody winds up with a symbol orI > command procedure to replace typing SET DEFAULT.  To me, if youre gonna J > abbreviate, you might as well be consistant amount the operating systems > your working on. >    Lou:  F Respectfully point out that Antonio's comments was in regard to making@ the commands in one operating system look like another operatingF system.  "ls" on VMS, "dir" on some unix.  The problem here is that itE encourages one to think (or continue to think) in the mindset of that C other operating system.  It really is counterproductive to learning 5 about the operatng sysem that you are actually using.      John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:36:04 -0800 0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>+ Subject: Re: 1980 Dungeon game walkthrough? , Message-ID: <3C21F754.1EF30705@Mvb.Saic.Com>   John Santos wrote: > , > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Didier Morandi wrote: >  > > Didier Morandi wrote:  > > > & > > > isn't the question in the title? > > ; > > http://www.inthe70s.com/games/adventure/zork_walk.shtml  > >  > > D. > = > I remember a map in the old DEC Pro magazine (or maybe RSTS > > or VAX Pro), way back when, but it might have been a map for6 > Adventure.  (If DUNGEO is Zork 1, is ADVENT Zork 0?)  G It was DEC Pro and it was a map for DUNGEON.  I still have a copy of it A (the map, I threw the magazine issue away a couple of years ago).   
 Mark Berryman  Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:44:14 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) % Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS 0 Message-ID: <00A06CED.420EBCE6@SendSpamHere.ORG>  \ In article <3C21DE33.28035.17DB09A5@localhost>, "Stanley F. Quayle" <stan@stanq.com> writes:? >On 20 Dec 2001, at 17:05, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:  >> On Mickey$oft Weendoze: >> ====================== E >> Step 2: I click on the {Edit} item at the top of the window which  # >>         causes a menu to appear. * >> Step 3: Then I have to click on {Copy}. > E >> Step 5: I click on the {Edit} item at the top of the window which  % >>         causes a menu to appear.   H >> Step 6: I have to click on {Paste} to place the copied line into the  >>         NOTEPAD buffer. > G >Actually, in Windows, most programs accept Ctrl-C for "copy" and Ctrl-  >V for "paste".  But not all.    WHAT!!!  Keyboard input?       --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 & Hobbes    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:46:45 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) % Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS 0 Message-ID: <00A06CED.9C5200DF@SendSpamHere.ORG>   In article <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF192@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>, John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> writes: K >I'd be interested to know how your little example would look if the editor  >being used was EVE.  & I don't use EVE so it's not a problem.  : > I won't bother to demonstrate how easy the cut and pasteM >operation is in Windows as you've either deliberately made it long-winded or K >are simply unfamiliar with Windows. You might also try cutting and pasting   7 You care to demonstrate how much simpler it could be?      --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 & Hobbes    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:58:38 -0600 + From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com> % Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS L Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF1170E000@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----@ > From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG [mailto:system@SendSpamHere.ORG]  
 > In article  @ > <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF192@ppnt41.physics.ox.acB > .uk>, John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> writes:  < > > I won't bother to demonstrate how easy the cut and paste> > >operation is in Windows as you've either deliberately made  > it long-winded or : > >are simply unfamiliar with Windows. You might also try  > cutting and pasting   9 > You care to demonstrate how much simpler it could be?     I Well, it *could* be simpler, if every windows application handled cut and H paste in a manner that was at all similar to other windows applications.L There are, for instance, key combinations for each.  They don't always work,I though.  Neither does the menu thing, and much less for the "right click" L thing that somebody mentioned.  So yes, it could be simpler, but it isn't ;)   Regards,   Chris   ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");  '       ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:03:30 -0500 ( From: Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu>% Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS B Message-ID: <20011220145933.E86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>  , On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, John Macallister wrote:  K > > The mouse is user interface specific and has nothing to do with the OS.  > M > The user interface is crucial part of any OS and the mouse (or any pointing M > device) is central to the design of all Windows software. Both VMS and UNIX 1 > have yet to make best friends of their mice ...  >   F The GUI is no more Win2K than it is any other OS.  Just like I do withG VMS and Unix I can (and frequently do) telnet into our Win2K server and F do administrative tasks with a command line interface.  It is actuallyK easier to do some things, like addinf users or resetting forgoten passwords I that way.  The GUI is central to most windows applications and that could G be just as true for Unix (which is rapidly moving in that direction, at F least for desktop boxes) and could also be true of VMS if the users so decided.   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:38:29 -0500 ( From: Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu>% Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS B Message-ID: <20011220153049.L86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>  , On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, John Macallister wrote:  L > I'd be interested to know how your little example would look if the editor > being used was EVE.    Wouldn't change at all I think.   O >                      I won't bother to demonstrate how easy the cut and paste N > operation is in Windows as you've either deliberately made it long-winded or% > are simply unfamiliar with Windows.    Yeah, I noticed that too.   L >                                     You might also try cutting and pastingM > some graphics from one DECwindows window to another and compare it with the  > same operation in Windows.  J Ummm..  I am unfamiliar with any ability in Windows to cut&paste graphics.J At least none that is part of the GUI or OS as opposed to the application.J For example, I can cut&paste between Paint windows, but can't cut graphicsJ from say Netscape and paste them into Paint.  Unix and DECWindows graphics apps also support cut&paste.   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:56:16 -0500 4 From: John Malmberg <Malmberg@dskwld.zko.dec.compaq>% Subject: Re: A mouse friendly OpenVMS 4 Message-ID: <3C225070.3080700@dskwld.zko.dec.compaq>   John Macallister wrote:   L > I'd be interested to know how your little example would look if the editor > being used was EVE.     3 With the SET_CLIPBOARD, or SET NOCLIPBOARD setting?    -John  Malmberg@dskwld.zko.dec.compaq Personal Opinion Only    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:06:16 -0500 * From: "Stanley F. Quayle" <stan@stanq.com>% Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS - Message-ID: <3C220C78.30641.304524@localhost>   > On 20 Dec 2001, at 19:44, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:I > >Actually, in Windows, most programs accept Ctrl-C for "copy" and Ctrl-  > >V for "paste".  But not all.  >  > WHAT!!!  Keyboard input?      A Having learned to type, keyboard input feels quite natural to me.   F At one time, the mouse was going to eliminate the need to type.  Just / like the computer was going to eliminate paper.   B I think it's time to go with the flow and require all junior-high B school students learn to type.  We're going to be typing for some  decades to come...    
 --Stan Quayle ! President, Quayle Consulting Inc.   
 ----------G Stanley F. Quayle, P.E.   N8SQ   +1 614-868-1363   Fax: +1 614 868-1671 1 8572 North Spring Ct. NW, Pickerington, OH  43147 = Preferred address:  stan@stanq.com       http://www.stanq.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:12:58 -0600 + From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com> % Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMS L Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF1170E006@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Stanley F. Quayle [mailto:stan@stanq.com]   @ > On 20 Dec 2001, at 19:44, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:   > > WHAT!!!  Keyboard input?     > C > Having learned to type, keyboard input feels quite natural to me.   $ You realize that was sarcasm, right?   Regards,   Chris     ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");  '       ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:03:49 +0000 4 From: Andrew Swallow <andrew.swallow@baesystems.com>% Subject: Re: A mouse friendly OpenVMS . Message-ID: <3C225235.21442CC3@baesystems.com>   Larry Kilgallen wrote: >  [snip]@ > But the result would produce complaints in cases where all the> > constraints on qualifiers are not embodied in the CLD files. > Consider the Backup command.  2 Time to bring the CLD files for Backup up to date?  ' Two other facilities that can be added."  6 1. When editing a .COM file make the options available    as a development aid.  7 2. Make the click facility some sort of library package 7    so that applications programs can use a similar helps
    method. -- S7 _______________________________________________________V+ Andrew Swallow (7605) 2225   Cowes site, UK  andrew.swallow@baesystems.comr   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:18:59 -0800i0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>% Subject: Re: A mouse friendly OpenVMSb+ Message-ID: <3C21F353.268027C@Mvb.Saic.Com>f  H I use EVE quite regularly and Brian's example works exactly the same wayC in EVE as it does in EDT.  I take it from your comment that you are C unaware that EVE allows you (yes, you, the user, not the system) towE decide whether EVE controls the mouse or X-Windows controls the mouse F (actually, it is TPU that has this flexibility but since EVE is just a bunch of TPU routines...)s  A Invoke the EVE editor, press the DO key, type: tpu set(mouse,off)wF then try Brians's example.  If you want to return control of the mouse1 to EVE, press the DO key, type: tpu set(mouse,on)e  8 If you use such a function frequently, bind a key to it.  < Now, which of the "editors" in windows gives me this kind of flexibility?  
 Mark Berryman. Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com     > John Macallister wrote:l > L > I'd be interested to know how your little example would look if the editorN > being used was EVE. I won't bother to demonstrate how easy the cut and pasteN > operation is in Windows as you've either deliberately made it long-winded orL > are simply unfamiliar with Windows. You might also try cutting and pastingM > some graphics from one DECwindows window to another and compare it with thet > same operation in Windows. >  > John > D > Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk? > Post: Denys Wilkinson Building, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKaC > Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)  >  > -----Original Message-----@ > From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG [mailto:system@SendSpamHere.ORG]+ > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 5:06 PMs > To: John Macallister' > Subject: RE: A mouse friendly OpenVMSt >  > In articleJ > <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF191@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>, John7 > Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> writes: L > >> The mouse is user interface specific and has nothing to do with the OS. > >sN > >The user interface is crucial part of any OS and the mouse (or any pointingN > >device) is central to the design of all Windows software. Both VMS and UNIX2 > >have yet to make best friends of their mice ... > >i > >Johnt > K > Let's see...  I want to copy the following line from one terminal sessionm$ > into another terminal/EDT session. > . > The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. >  > What do I do...e >  > On OpenVMS/DECwindows: > ===================== D > Step 1:  I place the pointer over the line and I click MB1 thrice.$ >          This highlights the line. > D > Step 2:  I then move the pointer over the terminal/EDT session and= >          I click MB2.  This places the line in the session.- > 8 > That seems quite simple and very mouse oriented to me. > I > Now, let's do that very same thing on a Billybox.  (Of course, there isu) > no EDT so I'll use the NOTEPAD thingy).e >  > On Mickey$oft Weendoze:e > ====================== > C > Step 1: I have to hold down the mouse button and drag the pointervE >         through the text line that I want to copy.  This highlightsr >         the text.  > C > Step 2: I click on the {Edit} item at the top of the window which " >         causes a menu to appear. > ) > Step 3: Then I have to click on {Copy}.- > G > Step 4: Now I have to move the pointer to the Notepad window and makeM >         it active. > C > Step 5: I click on the {Edit} item at the top of the window whichn" >         causes a menu to appear. > F > Step 6: I have to click on {Paste} to place the copied line into the >         NOTEPAD buffer.- > G > It seems to *this* mouse user that it is far easier to accomplish the-? > cut-and-paste on VMS/DECwindows) than on Mickey$oft/Weendoze.l >  > --4 > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 > VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM > K >   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fieryyK >   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & HobbesL   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 16:52:38 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen).! Subject: Re: A mouse friendly VMSi3 Message-ID: <UU3YVJHPi6ZB@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  e In article <3C225235.21442CC3@baesystems.com>, Andrew Swallow <andrew.swallow@baesystems.com> writes:. > Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> s > [snip]A >> But the result would produce complaints in cases where all thes? >> constraints on qualifiers are not embodied in the CLD files.  >> Consider the Backup command.E > 4 > Time to bring the CLD files for Backup up to date?  H I believe you must ask for considerable enhancements to the CLD language first.  ) > Two other facilities that can be added.t > 8 > 1. When editing a .COM file make the options available >    as a development aid.  D If LSE lacks a DCL capability (I don't know it), you could certainly add one.  9 > 2. Make the click facility some sort of library package 9 >    so that applications programs can use a similar help- >    method.  * I don't know what you mean by that at all.   ========  @ Macintosh has a great graphic help capability called AppleGuide.A In tutorial mode it draws a red circle around the next area where 5 you are supposed to click something or provide input.g   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:49:27 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>7 Subject: Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both ways @ Message-ID: <H1tU7.68658$Zd.6364033@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  G Despite Compaq's public declarations of Alpha's inability to maintain aoL significant performance lead over The Good Ship Itanic, some pesky customersK still aren't convinced about the desirability of the migration.  But Compaq I has a story for them as well, just not a consistent one:  Itanic may be a L pig, but the Alpha team will miraculously transform it into a pig with flies# (er, sorry, a pig *that* flies...).   F Kerry Main floated this rationale the day of the announcement and MarkK Gorham tried to feed it to Alphaman a few days later, but it then seemed to F disappear (I'd like to think in some small part because I spread it toL comp.arch and comp.sys.intel and Intel was not amused - perhaps HP as well).J But it's alive and well out in preferred-customer-persuasion land, as thisH email I answered yesterday demonstrates.  JF may be right:  Compaq isn'tF much interested in new Alpha system business or in many small existingH customers, but cares enough about a few important current clients to say: whatever it takes to keep them on board the sinking liner.  B Anyway, you can be a fly on the wall listening in on our (slightlyJ expurgated, to remove identity clues and one private piece of information)) conversation, and conclude what you will:-    
 > Hi Bill, >a= > ... I told our Compaq account manager in no uncertain termsRI > how I thought about the infamous Itanic move. Of course he replied that I > everyone else was very happy etc. (specially management guys), and that0J > we were the only ones unhappy. That wasn't true of course, but hey he is > a sales person., >iH > But he was very quick to act, and today we had another guy who told usH > what is actually the case, and how it all came to this. He is a former2 > DEC support guy, and he was refreshingly honest.  I He may have believed what he said (a lot of people at Compaq seem to haveEG swallowed the party line as gospel), but the information he imparted ispG dramatically inconsistent with the information I have received from EV8iH developers now at Intel - and on the subject at hand, I know whom I find more credible.   >rH > I told him again my vision on the Itanic (didn't differ very much fromG > your vision with regard to the technical side of things) and he couldX > understand it very well. > C > But then he gave us some more information about the whole matter.o > I > First of all he said that the whole marketing presentation of this moveHH > was done in good old Digital fashion, as stupid as it can be. As if we > didn't know. :-))S >SF > What happened was that the EV8 development team went to Capellas andH > said that without a lot more funding it would be impossible to keep up; > with the X86 class of processors (and possibly Itanium ?)x  H I very much doubt that any such mission to Capellas occurred - it soundsI much more like the spin Compaq tried to palm off as part of the June 25thiJ announcement that the decision had started with the Alpha engineers.  TheyI later amended this to saying that it originated with some of the *server*oH (not processor) designers - and there's an interesting political tensionG between the two groups involving the migration of much of what had beens# server 'turf' onto the chip in EV7.   I There was *no question whatsoever* in the minds of the EV8 team that theyIH would extend, not simply maintain, Alpha's current performance advantage over Itanic.  L Keeping ahead of IA32 processors would have been more difficult but far fromJ impossible, at least for Intel variants (Hammer might be harder to match):J EV7's on-chip memory control (with its dramatically improved bandwidth andJ latency) will hit the streets next year with nothing similar from Intel onL any road map (32-bit *or* 64-bit), and while Intel will debut 2-way SMT soonH in IA32 (again, nothing on any road map for IA64) EV8's 4-way SMT shouldJ have been a more than adequate response.  And in any event IA32 just isn'tL (and shows no sign of becoming) much of a threat to Alpha's bread-and-butter markets.    We aredJ > speaking here in terms of raw processor speed of course, not the qualityF > of the OS. Of course the intellectual capacity is there, but not the
 > funding.  K The funding *was* there, until June 25th, to continue the Alpha performance C road map that has been public for years and showed no sign of beinguG inadequate (or unduly expensive).  Again, I'm reasonably sure that youraK informant was feeding you misinformation, though not necessarily knowingly.s  @  And indeed, the performance of the fastest X86 class processorsI > at the moment is about the same as that of the fastest present Alpha's.,H > Only now we have 1 GHz Alpha's, I had expected them at least 1.5 yearsA > earlier. Development is slowing down, and so is the performance\ > advantage of the Alpha.k  I If IA32 were truly Alpha's competition, that argument might have at least L some merit.  But if a 32-bit architecture were considered sufficient in thatD market, there would have been absolutely no reason for Intel to haveJ developed a 64-bit machine that shows no evidence that it will *ever* comeH even close to catching up with IA32 on simple speed benchmarks (with theJ possible exception of FP-style code, which is not the main source of Alpha income).   > I > It was the EV8 development team who suggested joining forces with Intel  > to design a new processor.  I No, it was not.  I don't know how tightly-knit the European DEC communitySH is, but if you know <name deleted> I think he may have additional insideC information from a source that I don't (he's another person who wasnG initially fed a load of crap but then discovered what it was from otherr sources he trusted).  *  This processor is now known in the CompaqI > presentations as the Itanium 2, and apparently it has almost nothing inp< > common with the present Itanium, but instead is EV8 based.  J More bullshit, I'm afraid.  This is another lie that Compaq tried to floatB to make the decision easier to swallow, but it doesn't stand up toK examination (nor, incidentally, do I believe you will find *any* indicationrG from *Intel* that this is what's planned - so Compaq is asking for yoursI trust - hah! - while ignoring the signals from the architecture's owner).8  L First of all, *if* Compaq recognized that Itanic was the disaster it appearsG to be and that Alpha technology would remain far superior, why on earthoJ wouldn't they have vigorously capitalized on this asset rather than handedF it over to Intel supposedly so that Intel could rescue Itanic with it?K After all, if Itanic *wasn't* destined to change the 64-bit landscape, thennK Alpha would have remained as competitive (with any marketing) as ever, withw8 increased leadership clearly visible in the near future.  G Second, I've received private confirmation from one of the transplanted C Alpha designers that my guesstimate of 2006 as the earliest such angK Alphabetized Itanic could appear is a good one, which puts it about 3 yearshH behind the date when the same technology would have appeared in EV8.  SoL *even after having given the technology away* Compaq will now have to wait 3J more years to make use of it than would have been the case if EV8 had goneI ahead, while POWER4 reaps the rewards of lack of any high-end competitionaF and Hammer may start grabbing large chunks of the mid-range-to-low-end market.   H Whatever Itanic will come after Madison is far more likely to be an EPICJ architecture with Alpha-inspired tweaks than an Alpha architecture running the Itanic instruction set.n    TheF > instruction set will be different of course, but as I understand the0 > overall design will be very much like the EV8.  F One of Alpha's strengths was its instruction set, which was explicitlyG designed to allow performance enhancements.  The design behind Itanic's>J instruction set was based on completely different (EPIC) assumptions whichI are less amenable to using Alpha-style performance approaches even if theC( entire EPIC implementation is abandoned.    Why they still use the.E > infamous name Itanium for that new processor is unclear, but we all 2 > agreed that this again is very stupid marketing. >FB > The Alpha technology has not been sold to Intel, but it has beenI > licensed. The Itanium 2 / EV8 team hasn't moved, but are still at their I > own desks at Compaq. The only difference is they have Intel badges now.s7 > But what's in a badge as Shakespeare might have said.B  K It's not the badge, its the architecture.  Alpha is an eagle, and Itanic isbK a pig.  Compaq has just given Intel the means to streamline the pig and put G wings on it, but in the end it's still a pig:  all instruction sets areaK *not* created equal (just look at IA32 for a cautionary example of how muchg1 more effort it takes to make a poor one perform).b   >iI > So in essence your vision on the Itanium (1) is right, it is a piece ofsD > shit Compaq agrees. In fact Dell has stopped selling Itanium based- > systems as I read in a newspaper over here.n >t; > Compaq however has so much confidence in the Itanium 2...q > (Don't publish this please, * > don't know if this is official already).  I It sounds like the so-called 'golden blanket', and given that even if the H mythical Itanium 2 does appear it won't be before 2006 this is just moreD smoke being blown to try to make an indefensible position palatable.  J It is possible that some of the on-chip memory and multi-processor supportI could be grafted onto the McKinley/Madison core by 2005, and there's somenK indication that this may be what you are referring to as 'Itanium 2' (i.e., J a processor core with absolutely no Alpha technology in it, and hence justF as much a pig as McKinley/Madison will be).  And while Compaq has beenL promoting the fiction that it might appear in 2004, again this does not seemK to be consistent with private information from the transplanted Alpha team.    > G > It seems that at the Los Angeles presentation there were several verynG > important customers that were very unhappy with the way Capellas etc.gB > answered their questions. Only after these customers talked withH > technical staff they were satisfied that the Itanium move was ok. That6 > again proves how poor the marketing is in this case.  + No, it just proves how gullible people are.w   >eD > Compaq ... is visiting all important customers now to explain themG > what is happening. And sure enough there were other customers too whoiF > were planning to leave Compaq because of the Itanium move. But after5 > this guy paid them a visit they changed their mind._  
 See above.   > ...  It seems to be sure nowE > that HP UX and Tru64 will be merged to one Unix, even if the merger J > doesn't go ahead. The best of both (in Unix ?? :-)  ) will be in the new > Unix.B  K Except that it will be big-endian, so even if the amalgamation is performedeI perfectly the little-endian Tru64 people will be faced with a non-trivial L port.  Not to mention that the HP/UX kernel is a large, antiquated monolith,, which bodes poorly for its long-term future.  7 > So maybe things are not as gloomy as I (we?) thought.     H Yeah.  Right.  Thus concludes another small chapter in Compaq's on-goingJ soap opera.  If you know people who, for some reason, are still willing toL trust Compaq's "This time for sure!" promises, you might want to give them aI heads-up about this particular offensive (and 'offensive' certainly seemsmK the proper term):  even Bullwinkle eventually realized that he needed a new  hat.   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 20 Dec 2001 22:29:59 GMT( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren); Subject: Re: Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both waysw0 Message-ID: <9vtop7$lsd$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>  @ In article <H1tU7.68658$Zd.6364033@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,) Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:d >s > [ HEAVILY snipped ]i >wI >Whatever Itanic will come after Madison is far more likely to be an EPIClK >architecture with Alpha-inspired tweaks than an Alpha architecture runningm >the Itanic instruction set. > G >One of Alpha's strengths was its instruction set, which was explicitly H >designed to allow performance enhancements.  The design behind Itanic'sK >instruction set was based on completely different (EPIC) assumptions which-J >are less amenable to using Alpha-style performance approaches even if the) >entire EPIC implementation is abandoned.m >tK >It is possible that some of the on-chip memory and multi-processor supportoJ >could be grafted onto the McKinley/Madison core by 2005, and there's someL >indication that this may be what you are referring to as 'Itanium 2' (i.e.,K >a processor core with absolutely no Alpha technology in it, and hence just G >as much a pig as McKinley/Madison will be).  And while Compaq has beenuM >promoting the fiction that it might appear in 2004, again this does not seemcL >to be consistent with private information from the transplanted Alpha team.  C There is one, extreme, approach to this supersonic swine that Intel'@ may be taking.  That of converting the EPIC instruction set intoD Alpha-like RISC micro-operations and have an EV8-like engine executeE those.  While I can believe that this could be made to work, I cannoti! see that it could be made to fly.   B The whole point of the EPIC design was that compilers could use itC to produce fantastically fast code - and, as some of us said in theiD very beginning would happen, this has not proved possible except forA a subset of HPC codes.  I cannot see that an EV8 engine executing C EPIC micro-operations is going to be worth the effort of designing.o  B However, one really interesting question about this (and the dates< of 2005/6, which I believe) is what happened to the original Madison and Deerfield?  @ Back in 1994, the plan was that Madison and Deerfield would be a@ new design (perhaps two), and that clearly has been cancelled soB thoroughly that it cannot be resuscitated.  To save face, the code? names have been applied to McKinley process shrinks and tweaks. ! Not Intel's traditional practice.p  @ Furthermore, it means that the IA-64 line is currently scheduled@ to have a 4+ year gap between designs, which is further evidence8 of a cancelled design project.  So why was it cancelled?     Regards, Nick Maclaren,* University of Cambridge Computing Service,> New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England. Email:  nmm1@cam.ac.uk/ Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679-   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:31:24 -0500m% From: "Lou Solomon" <lny98@yahoo.com>A7 Subject: Contingency Plan for Reboot On Another Machinee/ Message-ID: <u24q0nriti7e1a@corp.supernews.com>m  K I recently picked up a (used) 4100 for real cheap.  Initially, it was goingHL to 'backup' our 2100, but since it is so much faster (4x400MHZ CPUs, 1GB vs.K 1x200Mhz & 256MB for 2100!!!!), I plan on replacing the 2100 with the 4100.   1 Couple of questions I'd like to run by everybody:o  J 1. Will I have to do anything to get everything to use the mulitple CPU's?H (I don't believe so, but its worth checking).  Also note that its bootedJ perfectly with "restored" boot disk setup of the 2100.   From the show CPUF command, it looks like all CPU's are running.  I thought a licence was? needed to use multiple CPU's... some kind of PAK.  True or not?p  J 2. The storage works array on our 2100 is the DKA*, while on this new 4100H its DKB* (and DKC*, woo hoo!).  I need to have the site specific startupH figure out which machine it is on and mount the non-boot/secondary disks0 appropriately.  What is the best way to do this?  J The ultimate goal is to be able to take out all the disks from one machineK and put them in the other, reboot, and have an exact machine replacement inhJ case of things like memory/motherboard/power supply problems (obviosly not disk crashes).  K * Should I do it in DCL checking some kind of lexical for whether it is the + 2100 or 4100?  Which lexical would be best?   B * Should I put the "mounting" of disks (and other machine specificJ procedures) on a floppy and have that as some part of the boot up process?K (I've noticed all of our Alpha's use the designation DVA0: for the floppy).y& Is using the floppy a reasonable idea?   Thanks in advance.   Lou Solomont Intercounty Clearance Corp   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:55:30 -0500h* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>; Subject: RE: Contingency Plan for Reboot On Another Machine - Message-ID: <0033000045637663000002L032*@MHS>t   =0A-----Original Message-----y/ From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET ) Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 5:44 PMrB To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET7 Subject: Contingency Plan for Reboot On Another Machinei    H I recently picked up a (used) 4100 for real cheap.  Initially, it was g= oingH to 'backup' our 2100, but since it is so much faster (4x400MHZ CPUs, 1G= B vs.lH 1x200Mhz & 256MB for 2100!!!!), I plan on replacing the 2100 with the 4= 100.  1 Couple of questions I'd like to run by everybody:y  H 1. Will I have to do anything to get everything to use the mulitple CPU= 's?pH (I don't believe so, but its worth checking).  Also note that its boote= duH perfectly with "restored" boot disk setup of the 2100.   From the show = CPUrF command, it looks like all CPU's are running.  I thought a licence was? needed to use multiple CPU's... some kind of PAK.  True or not?p  H 2. The storage works array on our 2100 is the DKA*, while on this new 4= 100iH its DKB* (and DKC*, woo hoo!).  I need to have the site specific startu= p H figure out which machine it is on and mount the non-boot/secondary disk= sv0 appropriately.  What is the best way to do this?  H --------------------Use logical names for disks instead of physical dev= ice, names.  H --------------------Use of physical disk names in command procedures sh= ould behH --------------------ascertained systemwide and replaced with logical na= mes.  H The ultimate goal is to be able to take out all the disks from one mach= ineeH and put them in the other, reboot, and have an exact machine replacemen= t inH case of things like memory/motherboard/power supply problems (obviosly = notn disk crashes).  H * Should I do it in DCL checking some kind of lexical for whether it is=  the+ 2100 or 4100?  Which lexical would be best?r   --------------------f$getsyi. H --------------------Use logical names for disks instead of physical dev= icen names.  H --------------------Use of physical disk names in command procedures sh= ould beeH --------------------ascertained systemwide and replaced with logical na= mes.  B * Should I put the "mounting" of disks (and other machine specificH procedures) on a floppy and have that as some part of the boot up proce= ss?tH (I've noticed all of our Alpha's use the designation DVA0: for the flop= py).& Is using the floppy a reasonable idea?  6 ---------------------Using the floppy is a scary idea.H ---------------------Use logical names for disks instead of physical de= vice names.  H ---------------------Use of physical disk names in command procedures s= hould beH ---------------------ascertained systemwide and replaced with logical n= ames.e   Thanks in advance.   Lou Solomoni Intercounty Clearance Corp    ---------------------WWWebb :^)=   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:22:49 -0000g3 From: "Malcolm" <malcolm@neverness.freeserve.co.uk>fC Subject: Re: DCL day of the minute: Inconsistency in date handling? . Message-ID: <9vtoa8$vcr$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>  ; "Syltrem" <syltrem@videotron.spammenot.ca> wrote in messager. news:MvmU7.6222$Q06.35304@tor-nn1.netcom.ca... > I should have added:: > "TODAY+1:30" = TODAY at 1 hour 30 minutes in the morning/ > "TODAY+5" = TODAY at 5 o'clock in the morninge3 > "YESTERDAY-1-" is 2 days ago at 0 hours 0 minutesh! > "YESTERDAY+1-" is in fact TODAY  > and so onh >t  . Not to forget the other useful built-in dates:  H "LOGIN" = time when you logged in. E.g. DIR /SINCE=LOGIN (very useful ;)J "BOOT" = time whent system was booted. Useful for deleting temporary files  J And of course, since VMS is VMS and everything is nice and consistent, you can do:u* "BOOT-2-" - 2 days before your last reboot* "LOGIN+1:00" - 1 hour after you logged in.  I Are there any others line this? I count YESTERDAY, TODAY, TOMORROW, LOGINt	 and BOOT.t  G Nitpick: I notice that HELP DCL_Tips Date_time Absolute doesn't mentionu LOGIN or BOOT.1 It is mentioned in the HELP for DIRECTORY /SINCE.a  	 -Malcolm.    > HTH  > -- >d	 > Syltrem    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:43:15 -0500y0 From: Paul Anderson <paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>; Subject: Re: DCPS printing problem - shared network printern; Message-ID: <201220011543155240%paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>o  
 In articleA <y47krj2kya.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, JanpD Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  / > "Tim Jackson" <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> writes:t > E > > I have the following problem.  Power-cycle HP printer, start DCPS J > > queues, print from OpenVMS, job prints okay, print from PC, job printsJ > > okay, print from OpenVMS, job header prints but then rest of job times > > out. > N > Don't use MS Word. Really. It puts things in the systemdict that break other > program's code.i  E I don't doubt this, as it would explain similar reports from others. oE Do you have any details on this or any ideas how to clean up after or : avoid the Word problems?  Do all versions of Word do this?   Paul   --    Paul Anderson   OpenVMS Engineeringw   Compaq Computer Corporationl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:48:00 -0600i/ From: Chris Scheers <chris@applied-synergy.com>m; Subject: Re: DCPS printing problem - shared network printerl3 Message-ID: <3C224E80.A563560E@applied-synergy.com>f   Tim Jackson wrote: > E > Using OpenVMS 7.3, DCPS 2.0, network connected HP LJ5Si, PC runnings
 > Windows 95.  > C > I have the following problem.  Power-cycle HP printer, start DCPSuH > 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. > I > Any thoughts or ideas on what I need to do so that PC and OpenVMS print* > jobs can co-exist?    H The solution depends on whether you are talking to the LJ5Si with PCL or- Postscript.  I am going to assume Postscript.i  E The cleanest solution may be to use Pathworks to have the PC print tos< the LJ through VMS.  Then all print requests come from DCPS.  H On the Win95 box, under printer properties for the LJ, there should be aH section for Postscript options.  In particular, you want the option thatH specifies whether the header is sent with each job or whether it is sent4 once.  You want the header to be sent with each job.  F You may need to update your Win95 print drivers.  The HP Win9x drivers@ tend to be a bit problematic and HP is constantly updating them.  
 Good luck!G -----------------------------------------------------------------------t$ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  C Voice: 817-237-3360            Internet: chris@applied-synergy.com     Fax: 817-237-3074t   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:25:29 GMTa" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>1 Subject: Re: Disable Auditing when startup systemo0 Message-ID: <ZOrU7.888$E82.3128@typhoon.bart.nl>  ( This is what works for me (VAX/VMS 7.2): $ set accounting/disable=print $ set audit/server=final=purge $ set audit/server=exita   Hans7 Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch> wrote in messageo  news:3C218784.F56F7024@gmx.ch...
 > dodi wrote:w > >l
 > > Dear All,e > >hF > > Kindly need your help, that I'm have some error on system (VMS AXP
 > > v7.1).5 > > The auditing was running while system is startup.tG > > I mean it to make it disable, but haven't clue yet even on the bookr? > > VMS command dictionary or OpenVMS Guide to system security.  > > I > > I did try disable on some access/class system audit and alarm, but it , > > still happen when the system is startup. > >i; > > I do appreciate to all of you whenever you let me know,cE > > or sharing me the experience from you that ever done to solve the  > > above problem. > >s > > MyBestRegardsh > > Dodi >sJ > Auditing is good. If you really want to disable it at startup time, do a8 > conversational boot (>>> b -fl 0,1  for example), thenH > set the P1 parameter to minimum ( with SYSBOOT> set startup_p1 "MIN" )	 then type I > C to continue the boot sequence. You will have a minimum VMS OS runnings with a > minimum of services. >SK > You can also stop the audit server with the SET AUDIT/SERVER EXIT commandpH > (I'm not sure of the syntax, I did not receive my brand new Coffee-VMS machiner. > yet, check the HELP, the DOC and the FAQ :-) >n > D. > --I >   ---------------------------------------------------------------------fG > MORANDI Consulting.  WEB: http://Didier.Morandi.Free.fr/index_us.html G > Pflanzschulstrasse 53, 8004 Zurich, Switzerland. GSM: +41 79 705 4670i1 > 19, chemin de la Butte, 31400 Toulouse, France.c >eJ > Disaster Recovery Plans, Computer Security Audits, DEC OpenVMS ExpertiseJ > On parle franais, Man spricht Deutsch, Habla Castellano, English spoken   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:14:56 GMT.* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: historical evidence of what went wrong at DEC> Message-ID: <QMqU7.241843$YD.18913970@news2.aus1.giganews.com>  5 "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message < news:20011220103759.N86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu...+ > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Edward Franks wrote:l   ...s  D > > Yes, Windows sucks for a lot of things, but the real competition > > was even worse.' >nG > Matter of opinion.  It's just too bad that everyone stopped trying tot
 > compete.  D Which kind of brings the discussion back to the elimination of MIPS,K PA-RISC, and now Alpha as general-purpose 64-bit contenders before IA64 has G achieved *any* industry standing, let alone standing comparable to thath6 which Windows achieved before competition disappeared.  K Gutless wonders can survive only as long as no one else notices the vacuum.wJ If IBM and AMD don't succeed in trashing IA64, someone else will (I'd lookL far to the East, unless I were on the West Coast).  As for Windows, I'd giveD Linux a decent chance to at least fight it back to desktop-only use.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:01:26 GMTl' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> : Subject: Re: historical evidence of what went wrong at DEC0 Message-ID: <3C226F2A.BE1C3755@bellatlantic.net>   Bob Supnik wrote:v > G > With all due respect to the correspondents on this thread, the causesbE > of DEC's demise are substantially more complicated than Ken Olsen'smE > opinions on PCs and UNIX.  At the time Ken made his statement about F > home computers, microprocessors were in their infancy, and computersF > (in 70s dollars) were too costly and too unwieldy and unreliable forG > home use.  By the end of the 70s, when technology had made a personalND > computer feasible, Ken pushed DEC into building personal computers$ > (although not IBM compatible PCs).? At the time KO had the meeting with Tandy, I was working on two = PDP8 efforts - one a hand held, one phoneline powered device.mF There was also an 11 effort to make a device that was in the base of aD phone, with video and keyboard conneciton. I don't recall printer...A the idea was telco being a timesharing system, like TSS or onlinee
 systems... > F > The root causes of DEC's demise lie elswhere, in management responseE > to changing business economics.  The computer industry changed from-B > being a low volume business with high gross margins, to a higherE > volume business with lower gross margins.  DEC was unable to changewG > fast enough as the business models shifted, or to find an appropriate8F > balance point.  Sun exemplifies a company that implemented a tightlyC > focused, higher margin model; Dell a company that embraced a highlF > volume model.  Both have prospered.   DEC tried multiple strategies, > at once, and failed.B I can only provide my analysis at the time, and the impetus for me leaving C dec.  On the hardware side, I percieved that there were two paths -d prior D to PC intro, and after Apple intro - Large systems and chip design. H We had national semi buidling a couple of variants of the 11, and trying to sI take on that market space as a vendor, that failed by the way, and intel  H pushingtheir new chips, moto pushing  theirs, rumors of an INTEL version ofI the pdp11, MOS Technology - not MOSTEK - doing their micro..that sure as /D heck in the 6500 model was an 8bit pdp11 - producing stuff at prices less  C than we could.  The culture was changing, and the path to a single t" product was written on the wall.    D The culture change, the impact of the Business side of what had beenF an engineering enterprise, the impact of more competition - IBM coming@ out with their series1, finally acknowledging minis were real...G and all that contributed to a path that led to the actions that flushedi dec.   > 
 > /Bob Supnike > 2 > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:01:01 -0800, Mark Crispin! > <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:- > > > >The problem at DEC started at the top.  As early as 1974...   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 11:44:17 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)9 Subject: Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceedsn= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0112201144.300ed69a@posting.google.com>g  e Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message news:<amv32u0f8g8eku9pi0ut2cdgl2rph3k2o0@4ax.com>...nA > HP have just sent the following to shareholders. It's a 50 pagetE > document and I got sick at page 5 where it says that not completingoG > the merger will leave "multiple O/S and technology platforms" but nothA > if they complete the merger. The document also makes clear thataB > Himalaya (mentioned by name) is safe. VMS gets no mention in theF > document at all except presumably as part of the "multiple O/S" they > intend to get rid of.o > G > Anyone still under the illusion that HP will not cancel VMS (and thateH > includes VMS engineering) needs their head examined). Feel you've beenE > lied to by Compaq senior management. Then do something about it nowuE > before it is too late. You will not forgive yourselves later if you?H > don't. Capellas is fully aware of this plan which is why he authorizedB > a pretend IA64 port now which HP could then cancel later. Had heG > canceled Alpha, VMS and Tru64 all on the same day all hell would have @ > broken loose and he knows it Therefore he played us for fools. > G > The DII-CE commitments on their own will not save VMS. Don't fall for H > the Compaq lies which have one purpose only. To prevent the sudden andH > catastrophic loss of your money. They need to steal the income to fund@ > the rest of the sinking ship and their own enormous salaries.  > F > VMS either needs a new owner or else Compaq does. And that new owner > can't be HP. >  > Read the whole thing at: > + > http://www.theinquirer.net/hpposition.pdf  >  > Fight this merger!  N Fight the merger yes, but this does not signal VMS demise ... more like tru64,M as their are two many customers and apps running VMS not to mention Intel ... # how would they produce itaniums! ;)    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:58:44 +0000e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>t9 Subject: Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceedsh* Message-ID: <3C2242F3.79875B0F@virgin.net>   Andrew Duane USG wrote:e  ? > I read the document, and can't figure out how you leap from a @ > one sentence bullet of "multiple O/S and technology platforms"  > to "we are going to kill VMS". >t > Total non-sequitor.l >h  8 There is one other way to read it. HP intend to sell it.   >h= > There are many reasons to oppose the merger, but leaping toyA > conclusions based on a paranoid interpretation of one marketing  > bullet doesn't help much.i >s: > Note: I am not in VMS, I'm downstairs in Unix, where the' > handwriting really is on the wall....I >t  ] Has been since they cancelled the IA64 port the first time round. Decision to cancel Alpha inm` principle had been taken by then but known only to a select few. Killing W2K on Alpha when final^ betas were already with thousands of users (we had them) was the biggest public sign. Capellas9 hasn't staggered into all of this in the last few months.a  > Not really a conspiracy. Just a stupid plan to actually do it.    ` > Call me paranoid if you must. But I'd rather that than be trusting as you obviously were. What > good did it do Tru64?  > -- >r; > Andrew L. Duane (JOT-7)                 duane@zk3.dec.comI8 > Compaq Computer Corporation             (603)-884-1294 > 110 Spit Brook Road, > M/S ZKO3-3/U14 > Nashua, NH    03062-2698   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:32:23 +0100r1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>p9 Subject: Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds15 Message-ID: <3C2258E7.F29FE8AA@swissonline.delete.ch>e   Alan Greig wrote:  > : > There is one other way to read it. HP intend to sell it. >  >. .....  > @ > Not really a conspiracy. Just a stupid plan to actually do it. >   H I agree that it looks pretty damn suspicious.  Plenty of mention of UnixA and Himalaya in various places and with no mention of anything inw> between.  And that "in between" is where Compaq positions VMS.  & I can't decide on the best approach ..  H (a)  email directly to Fiorina asking her to state clearly both here andF to the SEC filings exactly what the position of VMS will be in the newE organisation.  (Okay, I'm sure  few of you will say there's no reasonmC for the SEC filing; but this is where the drama seems to be playingt out.)h  D (b)  try to tell IBM and hope (?) that they will step in and take it from Compaqt    G As I've said before, the merger looks like bringing more of the kind ofkC crap that we're been putting up with for years (and at least Bill TtE thinks it bodes something worse).  Moving VMS to a new foster-parent,aE one who knows how to properly look after it, might actually be a good  thing.  G But of course the danger of us hoping for intervention from IBM is thatn there is no plan "B".a     John McLeanr   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:34:02 GMTi4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>9 Subject: Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds-> Message-ID: <KzuU7.21309$Sj1.11722880@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C2258E7.F29FE8AA@swissonline.delete.ch...  >d >e > Alan Greig wrote:- > >t< > > There is one other way to read it. HP intend to sell it. > >p > >e > .....g > >dB > > Not really a conspiracy. Just a stupid plan to actually do it. > >s >mJ > I agree that it looks pretty damn suspicious.  Plenty of mention of UnixC > and Himalaya in various places and with no mention of anything inb@ > between.  And that "in between" is where Compaq positions VMS. >-( > I can't decide on the best approach .. >sJ > (a)  email directly to Fiorina asking her to state clearly both here andH > to the SEC filings exactly what the position of VMS will be in the newG > organisation.  (Okay, I'm sure  few of you will say there's no reasonaE > for the SEC filing; but this is where the drama seems to be playing- > out.)^ > F > (b)  try to tell IBM and hope (?) that they will step in and take it
 > from Compaqo >  >lI > As I've said before, the merger looks like bringing more of the kind ofsE > crap that we're been putting up with for years (and at least Bill TuG > thinks it bodes something worse).  Moving VMS to a new foster-parent,MG > one who knows how to properly look after it, might actually be a goodY > thing. >YI > But of course the danger of us hoping for intervention from IBM is thath > there is no plan "B".1  J Is there any concrete evidence that IBM has a serious interest in OpenVMS?J By and large Big Blue and its proxies seem to prefer to migrate folks from VMS to an IBM platform..   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:06:03 +0100e, From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch>6 Subject: Re: Minute Day of the DCL: the 2001 Challenge& Message-ID: <3C22369B.5AA41ABF@gmx.ch>   Didier Morandi wrote:o  5 > You have until Sunday the 6th of January 2001 ../..r   Let's say 2002, ok?    D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:48:33 -0800H0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>6 Subject: Re: Minute Day of the DCL: the 2001 Challenge, Message-ID: <3C21FA41.6C7BB35A@Mvb.Saic.Com>   Didier Morandi wrote:- > - > Welcome to the 2001 DCL Christmas Challenge1( > "No DEC system should be without one!" >  > Here is a FORTRAN programP > # >         SUBROUTINE TXCRYP(R,LINE)e  >         IMPLICIT INTEGER (A-Z) >         CHARACTER*(*) LINE > Cn >         DO 100 I=1,LEN(LINE) >           X=(R.AND.31)+I2 >           LINE(I:I)=CHAR(ICHAR(LINE(I:I)).XOR.X) > 100     CONTINUE >         RETURN
 >         END  >  > (R is an integer)r > J > You have until Sunday the 6th of January 2001 to write an equivalent DCLK > procedure in DCL using the DCL (real) programming language, I mean: DCL !s > K > I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year (as I'm gone to ski % > tomorrow morning, without Internet)I  G This is the subroutine used to "decrypt" the text in DTEXT.DAT, part ofoF the DUNGEON game.  I have a decrypted copy on-line.  Would you like me to email it to you?n  
 Mark Berrymans Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 18:59:32 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.-@ Message-ID: <oyqU7.67447$Zd.6270765@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  2 "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message2 news:ma142ucp03t4hic7s9rahrifcg41ukchb6@4ax.com...C > On 20 Dec 2001 06:55:55 -0800, bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)n   ...M  F > >Once VMS is ported to Itanium, it will no longer be proprietary ... > G > Wow HP-UX is already available for IA64 so it must not be proprietaryuG > then. Excellent I shall go off and copy the distribution CDs and sellkF > them at a price slightly undercutting HP. And I can't wait until theA > official Windows for IA64 CDs come out. Then I'll really make an( > killing. Thank you for making me rich!  I Bob's a bit weak on understanding details, Alan, and doesn't seem to takeoH correction (or irony) well.  Best just to shake your head and walk away.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:29:01 -0700u+ From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com>e; Subject: Re: Move to an HP OS, most folks would rather not.o' Message-ID: <3C22662D.6060402@mmaz.com>   & --------------0902060507070109070304059 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7biti   Bob Ceculski wrote:   O >>Microsoft is clear about its intentions to grow Windows to conquer the world.oD >>But Compaq has little or no credibility with its treatment of VMS. >> >-D >Once VMS is ported to Itanium, it will no longer be proprietary ... >pH This proprietary crap just drives me nuts! Intel is just as proprietary I as VAX, Alphas, Sparcs, and MIPS chips are and just because Windows sits  D on 98%+ of the desktops of the world, doesn't make that OS any less F proprietary.  Unless people have complete and unencumbered access and G abilities to use and reproduce the technologies on their own, THEY ARE 2E ALL PROPRIETARY!  The definition of 'Proprietary' is 'belonging to a e, proprietor, as under a patent or copyright.'  C VMS has been no more or no less 'Proprietary' than any other OS in .H general public consumption, expect perhaps BSD and Linux, but the major F difference is that for most of the parties on this list, we have been I avid VMS supports for the past couple decades and it pains us all to see   it handled so poorly by Compaq.b  G Proprietary is not the issue.  The question is: Does the hardware, OS,  F and software solve a solution in an economic, reliable, and expedient E manner.  For most of us, VMS on VAX or VMS on Alpha has while at the eH same time we have NT systems slurpin' and burpin' down the hall because ! they can't stay up and running.  o  D We have all talked about VMS on a cheap chip, in particular the X86 G line, and porting efforts that have never left the ground are all over  I the internet.  What is damaging about the killing of Alpha and moving to mI IPF is the manner that the "Bozo's", including the Big C, at Compaq have cH handled this.  Compaq should have ported VMS under NDA, ISV's supported G and their products ported under NDA, and then as 2003 or 2004 and both hC Compaq, the ISV's, and hopefully a half-way decent IPF system that d1 rivals or beats Alpha is ready, then launch it.  e  G No, Compaq instead shot every VMS shop in the head and where before it -I was simply a contention between this proprietary crap and whether VMS is lE better than NT or your favorite *nix pick, now justification must be sB made as to the viability of VMS as an OS and the longevity of the  platforms that it runs.o   Barryr  & --------------090206050707010907030405) Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-asciie Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bitt   <html> <head> </head>  <body> Bob Ceculski wrote:<br>-S <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:d7791aa1.0112200655.26fd3421@posting.google.com">e   <blockquote type="cite">     <pre wrap="">Microsoft is clear about its intentions to grow Windows to conquer the world.<br>But Compaq has little or no credibility with its treatment of VMS.<br></pre>     </blockquote>1e     <pre wrap=""><!----><br>Once VMS is ported to Itanium, it will no longer be proprietary ...</pre>o     </blockquote>oJ This proprietary crap just drives me nuts! Intel is just as proprietary asH VAX, Alphas, Sparcs, and MIPS chips are and just because Windows sits onM 98%+ of the desktops of the world, doesn't make that OS any less proprietary.aN &nbsp;Unless people have complete and unencumbered access and abilities to useP and reproduce the technologies on their own, THEY ARE ALL PROPRIETARY! &nbsp;TheL definition of 'Proprietary' is 'belonging to a proprietor, as under a patent or copyright.'<br>     <br>J VMS has been no more or no less 'Proprietary' than any other OS in generalJ public consumption, expect perhaps BSD and Linux, but the major differenceL is that for most of the parties on this list, we have been avid VMS supportsK for the past couple decades and it pains us all to see it handled so poorly2 by Compaq.<br>     <br>O Proprietary is not the issue. &nbsp;The question is: Does the hardware, OS, andCI software solve a solution in an economic, reliable, and expedient manner. N &nbsp;For most of us, VMS on VAX or VMS on Alpha has while at the same time weJ have NT systems slurpin' and burpin' down the hall because they can't stay up and running. &nbsp;<br>     <br>I We have all talked about VMS on a cheap chip, in particular the X86 line,nN and porting efforts that have never left the ground are all over the internet.Q &nbsp;What is damaging about the killing of Alpha and moving to IPF is the manneraQ that the "Bozo's", including the Big C, at Compaq have handled this. &nbsp;CompaqgK should have ported VMS under NDA, ISV's supported and their products portedwM under NDA, and then as 2003 or 2004 and both Compaq, the ISV's, and hopefully M a half-way decent IPF system that rivals or beats Alpha is ready, then launchw it. &nbsp;<br>     <br>J No, Compaq instead shot every VMS shop in the head and where before it wasK simply a contention between this proprietary crap and whether VMS is better H than NT or your favorite *nix pick, now justification must be made as toH the viability of VMS as an OS and the longevity of the platforms that it	 runs.<br>g     <br>	 Barry<br>o     </body>      </html>o  ( --------------090206050707010907030405--   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 13:17:10 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)h& Subject: Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline3 Message-ID: <E49PlcRjE0sM@eisner.encompasserve.org>l  o In article <FuqU7.174325$C8.12080404@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:e > 7 > "Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in messagee9 > news:d7791aa1.0112200627.17cced0f@posting.google.com...a >  > ...o > M >> EV7 thru EV79 will be viable for longer than 5 years ... you buy Alpha VMStK >> for security and the best 24x7 and clustering OS ("unhackable") and best L >> 64 bit performance now, and in 5-7 years, maybe 10 for smaller companies, > thecJ >> Itanium port will be there with cheaper boxes to be had ... that is theE >> roadmap, it couldn't be any clearer unless it hit you on the head!  > < > Actually, that's not correct:  it could be as clear as theB > equally-'committed' Alpha road map that existed until June 25th. >   A 	Actually, this isn't quite right.  RSX effectively is frozen for > 	ever on the hardware that is no longer being made (or made inB 	tiny quantities?).  VMS made one migration from VAX->Alpha and isB 	promised another Alpha->IPF.  The same can't be said of RSX.  NowD 	we can question that commitment.  Shipping VMS on Itanium and salesD 	of VMS on Itanium (one big CPU manufacturer has to be excited aboutC 	that prospect) would render this argument moot.  We won't know fortB 	sure for 2+ years or VMS gets killed before then.  But recent bigA 	sales of VMS (and contracts that go along with big sales) render)' 	the death of VMS a tired old joke (1).   A 	Finally, there are no longterm Alpha manufacturing contracts but.1 	there are DOD-COE contracts (15 year contracts).t   				Robe   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:36:38 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>o& Subject: Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline5 Message-ID: <3C2259E6.B98024CA@swissonline.delete.ch>l   Bob Ceculski wrote:y >  ...s > L > EV7 thru EV79 will be viable for longer than 5 years ... you buy Alpha VMSJ > for security and the best 24x7 and clustering OS ("unhackable") and bestO > 64 bit performance now, and in 5-7 years, maybe 10 for smaller companies, the > > Itanium port will be there with cheaper boxes to be had ...   G Hmm.  That's an interesting idea.  Buy Alpha now and then don't buy any " new VMS systems for 5 or 10 years.  E Should make HP real happy... Not.   They'll probably dump VMS becausel there are so few customers.r     John   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 16:02:34 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) & Subject: Re: OpenVMS Handed a Lifeline3 Message-ID: <unyBcA1WUlrh@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  a In article <E49PlcRjE0sM@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:m > C > 	Actually, this isn't quite right.  RSX effectively is frozen fore@ > 	ever on the hardware that is no longer being made (or made inD > 	tiny quantities?).  VMS made one migration from VAX->Alpha and is@ > 	promised another Alpha->IPF.  The same can't be said of RSX.   C    Sure it can.  Didn't you ever use the AME on a VAX?  OK, so most C    of the user mode instructions were there at the start, still VMSn#    1.x sure had a lot of RSX in it.h   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:28:59 -0500 - From: Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>t$ Subject: OT: HP scanners and Windows0 Message-ID: <3C22662B.3802B3A3@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:Q > set up for my daughter so she could leave her PC at school during the holidays.gI > No odd hardware beyond an adaptec SCSI card for the HP Scanner.  No oddgM > software.  And yet it crashes to a BSOD 4 or 5 times a day frequently whilee  P I had this problem on my W9x system.  Is your HP scanner turned on?  The drattedJ button manager seems to consume resources when the scanner isn't there and/ eventually prevents anything else from running.y    - JBi   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:50:16 +0000 (UTC)t From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.ukA Subject: Re: PROBLEMS CREATING USER ACCOUNT ON VAX VMS V6.0??????h* Message-ID: <9vtpv8$2g$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>  f In article <9vsrcl$cje$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>, gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de (Christoph Gartmann) writes:r >In article <c28c7d89.0112181338.71c7f417@posting.google.com>, alex.feliziani@space.gc.ca (Alex Feliziani) writes:G >AUTHORIZE expects the files SYSUAF.DAT and RIGHSLIST.DAT to be in yourtH >current default directory. The operating system expects the files to beA >in SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]. What happens is that the two files willeH >be created whenever they are not present when you call AUTHORIZE. Thus,H >you have the files at least twice: the unmodified version in the systemE >tree and the modified version on DKA300:[000000] and perhaps in some7 >other directories, too. >e  M That should be Sys$system (ie sys$common:[sysexe] ) not sys$sysroot:[sysmgr].k  
 David Webb VMS and unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:42:12 -05000- From: Michael Austin <miaustin@bellsouth.net>t Subject: Re: See you in 2002- Message-ID: <3C223F14.547C23F9@bellsouth.net>D  J And a Merry Christmas to you and yours as well as the rest of those who so$ diligently contribute to this forum.  N .... even though it is time for me to look for another contract as my last one4 was suddenly terminated. What a Christmas present...  % Merry CHRISTmas and a Happy New Year.n   Michael Austin DBA Consultant http://www.firstdbasource.comg       Sue Skonetski wrote:   > Dear Newsgroup,m > I > I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for the support in the lastc4 > year, and to wish you health, happiness and peace. >  > Warm Regards,s >a > Suea >hJ > p.s. sorry if the formatting is double spaced it looks fine on my system >uN > ____________________________________________________________________________ > _________y >tM > I have a list of folks I know......all written in a book, and every now andt! > then......I go and take a look.f >,J > That is when I realize these names......they are a part, not of the book3 > they're written in......but taken from the heart.s > L > For each name stands for someone......who has crossed my path sometime,andA > in that meeting they have become......the reason and the rhyme.u >fJ > Although it sounds fantastic......for me to make this claim, I really am( > composed......of each remembered name. >-K > Although you're not aware......of any special link, just knowing you, has 0 > shaped my life......more than you could think. > N > So please don't think my greeting......as just a mere routine, your name was  > not......forgotten in between. >cH > For when I send a greeting......that is addressed to you,it is because3 > you're on the list......of folks I'm indebted to.w >eN > So whether I have known you......for many days or few, in some ways you have% > a part......in shaping things I do.n >rH > I am but a total......of many folks I've met, you are a friend I would > prefer......never to forget. > " > Thank you for being my friend !!   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:10:46 -0500"# From: "Dan Allen" <dallen@nist.gov> @ Subject: RE: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS): Message-ID: <NEBBIALHDHJMJINPGMOAMEDPDPAA.dallen@nist.gov>   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: Bob Koehler [mailto:koehler@encompasserve.org], > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 11:52 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com B > Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) > J >    1) PDP-10 is the only architecture I've worked with which has no userD >    accessable CPU registers.  One tends to use the accumulators onF >    a PDP-10 as one would use registers on other systems, so for thisH >    comment I'll use the generic word register for both:  the PDP-10 isG >    the only system I've used on which one register (accumulator 0) isiF >    sometimes a real register and sometimes ignored.  Tripped up over >    that one many times.n >o  / 	Obviously never did any Compass on a Cyber ;-)e  * 	What is the content of B0 after "SB0 1" ?     	Dan     ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:32:53 -0700o+ From: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>-@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS), Message-ID: <3C223CE5.D65666A5@jetnet.ab.ca>   Bill Todd wrote: > 7 > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message4> > news:20011220103027.I86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu... >  > ...f > - > > Actually, W2K isn't superior to anything.  > J > While it's easy to get a bit carried away in these debates, that's a bitF > extreme:  Win2K is likely superior to at least most previous Windows
 > systems. >  > - bill  E Not everybody wants to upgrade every other year hardware or software.-& A *unhappy windows 95 user on a P166.  -- l' Ben Franchuk --- Pre-historic Cpu's -- t+ www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html , * unhappy with rebooting 3 or 4 times a day.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:36:01 -07001+ From: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS), Message-ID: <3C223DA1.D0CF2A3E@jetnet.ab.ca>   Christopher Stacy wrote: > B > >>>>> On 20 Dec 2001 10:52:13 -0600, Bob Koehler ("Bob") writes:L >  Bob>    2) The use of a conditional skip instead of a conditional branch.C >  Bob>    Assembly language programmers just don't think that way.o > 6 > I think this is the funniest of the things you said.A Well I normally don't think of skipping., but then I never used a  PDP-10.OE Skipping on a PDP-8 made sense as you did not have opcode space for ai branch.n -- a' Ben Franchuk --- Pre-historic Cpu's --  + www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html,   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:25:12 +0000j% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>o@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)* Message-ID: <3C223B18.5ED78B1A@virgin.net>   Bob Koehler wrote:  C > I   But it was good when DEC brought out the 8650 and finally had0C >    something supporting VMS that was an order of magnitude fasterO >    than the 11/780.a  _ And that machine (at least I think it was that one) irritated PDP-10 fans again because it usedtd technology from the cancelled Jupiter next generation PDP-10 and just reminded them what was to have been.r   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:44:18 GMTo* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <mcrU7.284897$uB.30837859@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  3 "Peter da Silva" <peter@abbnm.com> wrote in messagei news:9vt7rn$bed@web.nmti.com...-5 > In article <YsXs9mmG2TYr@eisner.encompasserve.org>,r0 > Bob Koehler <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote:L > >    I don't think so.  IIRC the fastest PPD-11 at the time was the 11/70,E > >    which had a simmilar hardware architecture with the UNIBUS andtB > >    MASSBUS hanging of the SBI, but ran slower than the 11/780. >iG > Our experience was that the 11/70 was faster than the 11/780 for realoH > applications and loads, so long as said applications actually *fit* inI > the 64kw code+data available to the PDP-11. The difference was marginaltI > at low loads, but under high load we could support twice as many users.e >tI > Now if you were using overlays on the 11 then the VAX smoked its 16-bite > tail.   I Not if they were memory-resident rather than fetched from disk (though ifaJ you were touching only a small amount of data in each APR-worth of overlayH then the TKB and system code required to map the APR became noticeable).   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:51:32 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <8jrU7.284907$uB.30841893@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  8 "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:9XnBihzsUzPG@eisner.encompasserve.org... I > In article <20011220103027.I86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>, Billb% Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu> writes:s$ > > On 19 Dec 2001, Rob Young wrote: > >, > >>A > >> It proved it was a better solution for most folks.  Now that B > >> the shoe is on another foot (Windows versus Unix) we will seeD > >> how much ground Windows gains at Unix' expense.  After all, W2K- > >> is technologically far superior to Unix.   H I took that last sentence as sarcasm when I first read it.  I hope I was right.   > >> > >hJ > > Actually, W2K isn't superior to anything. And, it isn't gaining ground onL > > Unix.  It targetted a whole new market that Unix never held, the home PCI > > market.  The number of available Unix system worldwide is even largero nowVJ > > than it was before the introduction of any form of Gatesware.  Can VMS make > > the same claim?? > >p@ > But why are you overlooking W2K Datacenter and W2K Enterprise?  H If you mean in stating that Windows isn't gaining ground on Unix, I mustF agree:  going from zero to a respectable showing in the low-end server- market certainly qualifies as gaining ground.M  E But I don't believe you need to overlook Datacenter and Enterprise to K contend that Unix is still superior technically.  While Win2K may have sometI VMS-like aspects in its core, the amount of cruft that you have to accepto4 along with that core more than compensates for them.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:57:26 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <GorU7.337803$8q.29751030@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  0 "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> wrote in message! news:3C22233A.E83DE356@iee.org...t > Peter da Silva wrote:    ...c  ; > > Everything was in octal in RSX. Groups and members, toon >,1 > I was surprised about the version numbers - but/4 > then that's because I'm used to them being decimal4 > on VMS. [group,member] stayed octal on VMS though.  K I have a vague recollection of making version numbers decimal on POS (which L was a re-packaged version of RSX-11M-PLUS), but I could be mistaken.  I alsoJ think I remember adding POS support for named directories (up to the usualG 9-character filename limit) and at least one additional directory leveln1 (perhaps several more, but it's been a while...).    - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 13:58:35 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)l@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <aBuzhVtpPjiM@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  o In article <8jrU7.284907$uB.30841893@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:a > : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message/ > news:9XnBihzsUzPG@eisner.encompasserve.org...eJ >> In article <20011220103027.I86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>, Bill' > Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu> writes:i% >> > On 19 Dec 2001, Rob Young wrote:  >> > >> >>bB >> >> It proved it was a better solution for most folks.  Now thatC >> >> the shoe is on another foot (Windows versus Unix) we will seeiE >> >> how much ground Windows gains at Unix' expense.  After all, W2Kn. >> >> is technologically far superior to Unix. > J > I took that last sentence as sarcasm when I first read it.  I hope I was > right. >   E 	Yes... after a few years you kind of catch on (even without smileys)d 	when someone is being cheeky.   >> >>  >> >K >> > Actually, W2K isn't superior to anything. And, it isn't gaining groundn > onM >> > Unix.  It targetted a whole new market that Unix never held, the home PClJ >> > market.  The number of available Unix system worldwide is even larger > nowdK >> > than it was before the introduction of any form of Gatesware.  Can VMSn > make >> > the same claim??N >> >A >> But why are you overlooking W2K Datacenter and W2K Enterprise?i > J > If you mean in stating that Windows isn't gaining ground on Unix, I mustH > agree:  going from zero to a respectable showing in the low-end server/ > market certainly qualifies as gaining ground.- > G > But I don't believe you need to overlook Datacenter and Enterprise toYM > contend that Unix is still superior technically.  While Win2K may have somerK > VMS-like aspects in its core, the amount of cruft that you have to accepti6 > along with that core more than compensates for them. >   ; 	Just pointing out that MS does have products and more than ( 	a few are using W2K other than desktop.   				Rob.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:01:09 GMTr* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)> Message-ID: <9srU7.241905$YD.18927782@news2.aus1.giganews.com>  5 "Peter da Silva" <peter@taronga.com> wrote in messager, news:9vtaja$2qrl$1@citadel.in.taronga.com...D > In article <hwpU7.284691$uB.30783564@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,+ > Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:aK > >While it's easy to get a bit carried away in these debates, that's a bit G > >extreme:  Win2K is likely superior to at least most previous Windows  > >systems.h >wE > NT 3.51 has a number of technical advantages to NT4.0 and successorm> > systems, particularly for a server or multiuser environment.  I That's why I said 'most' above.  While Win2K has improved some aspects oftI NT, if nothing else the amount of new code added has impacted elements ofa
 stability.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:12:52 -0500o( From: Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <20011220151137.R86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>    On 20 Dec 2001, Rob Young wrote:  A > 	But why are you overlooking W2K Datacenter and W2K Enterprise?( >y  D Why certainly.  Just look at well W2K displaced Unix at Hotmail when MS took that over.   bill   -- rJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:18:40 -0500(( From: Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <20011220151403.C86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>  % On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Bill Todd wrote:n   >d7 > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message > > news:20011220103027.I86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu... >a > ...h > - > > Actually, W2K isn't superior to anything.- >-J > While it's easy to get a bit carried away in these debates, that's a bitF > extreme:  Win2K is likely superior to at least most previous Windows
 > systems. >r  M Probably depends on your definition of superior.  Windows For Workgroups 3.11>M didn't crash anywhere near as often as Win2K does.  I've got a box upstairs IuO set up for my daughter so she could leave her PC at school during the holidays.nG No odd hardware beyond an adaptec SCSI card for the HP Scanner.  No odd K software.  And yet it crashes to a BSOD 4 or 5 times a day frequently whileiK doing nothing and not even having anyone logged into it.  This same box ranm- BSD for a good year without a single problem.r  ? If Win2k is the answer somebody didn't understand the question.    bill   -- -J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 14:23:16 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <rNgoSTj2N8eE@eisner.encompasserve.org>p  m In article <20011220151137.R86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>, Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu> writes:h" > On 20 Dec 2001, Rob Young wrote: > B >> 	But why are you overlooking W2K Datacenter and W2K Enterprise? >> > F > Why certainly.  Just look at well W2K displaced Unix at Hotmail when > MS took that over. >   ? 	Yes... The Register shows us there are still lingering pockets-D 	of BSD at Hotmail... but just that, a few pockets.  There are a lot 	of myths regarding all OSes.b   				RobC   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:29:56 -0500n( From: Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)B Message-ID: <20011220152514.U86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>  % On 20 Dec 2001, Peter da Silva wrote:i   >$4 > >At its core, aren't QNX and OS/9000 microkernels? >eL > QNX is. OS/9000 comes from an age when the concept of a microkernel hadn't > been really solidified...i  E I have never had a chance to look at OS/9000 but if it inherited muchoG philosphy from OS/9 it is likely to be very microkernel-like.  At leasthL as far as my understanding of what microkernel means.  OS/9 was conceptually; microkernel before CMU even started looking at the concept.r  J It is a style I like so much I still envision using their philosophy for a- free PDP-11 OS.  All I lack is the time.  :-)t   >uD > IBM surely has something, and Unisys is still shipping Univac-1100C > architecture boxen complete with an updated version of Exec-1100.   J Boy, those numbers sure went up fast.  Last time I worked on a Univac-1100- (about 15 years ago!) we were running Exec-8.a   bill   -- dJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:40:57 -0500h# From: "Dan Allen" <dallen@nist.gov>g@ Subject: RE: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS): Message-ID: <NEBBIALHDHJMJINPGMOAMEEDDPAA.dallen@nist.gov>   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:bill@cs.uofs.edu]e+ > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 3:19 PM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComhB > Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) >  > ' > On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Bill Todd wrote:y >  > >e9 > > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in messaget@ > > news:20011220103027.I86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu... > >e > > ...y > > / > > > Actually, W2K isn't superior to anything.h > >iL > > While it's easy to get a bit carried away in these debates, that's a bitH > > extreme:  Win2K is likely superior to at least most previous Windows > > systems. > >o > O > Probably depends on your definition of superior.  Windows For Workgroups 3.11'O > didn't crash anywhere near as often as Win2K does.  I've got a box upstairs ItQ > set up for my daughter so she could leave her PC at school during the holidays.sI > No odd hardware beyond an adaptec SCSI card for the HP Scanner.  No oddeM > software.  And yet it crashes to a BSOD 4 or 5 times a day frequently whiletM > doing nothing and not even having anyone logged into it.  This same box ranm/ > BSD for a good year without a single problem.   I 	I'm a VMS guy all of the way BUT I manage a network with several hundred-G 	Windows NT/2000 workstations as well as several domain controllers andeH 	member servers. They are actively used in a windows network environmentH 	and we rearely get a BSOD and when we do it's usually a bogus driver orH 	hardware failure. If your daughters machine is BSOD'ing even once a day9 	doing nothing it's seriously busted and it isn't the OS!n   	Dan   ------------------------------   Date: 20 Dec 2001 21:24:58 GMT0 From: iglesias@draco.acs.uci.edu (Mike Iglesias)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)/ Message-ID: <9vtkva$go9$1@news.service.uci.edu>   3 In article <QdaytLRYA6HS@eisner.encompasserve.org>,,. Bob Koehler <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote:F >   2) The use of a conditional skip instead of a conditional branch. < >   Assembly language programmers just don't think that way.  C I've done a little assembly language programming on 8086 (back whentC PCs ran DOS), and a lot on Xerox Sigma-7s and DECsystem 10s.  I hadaG no trouble dealing with skips.  Of course, you had your choice of about-F 5 different instructions that all did the same skip, which was kind of fun.  G >   5) The requirement (except on the 2020) to use a PDP-11 in order tooL >   communicate with the outside world.  Typically an 11/40 or 11/60 serial 7 >   and print front end and an 11/34A DECnet front end.g  * Our KI-10 did not have a PDP-11 front end.  F >   8) No support for paging (virtual memory concepts were limitted to >   swapping).  H I seem to remember hacking at the page fault code for TOPS-10 many yearsK ago to make it work a little better.  You were limited to some small amountt? of code in the pf handler so changes weren't that easy to make.y     -- aN Mike Iglesias                          Internet:    iglesias@draco.acs.uci.edu@ University of California, Irvine       phone:       949-824-6926@ Network & Academic Computing Services  FAX:         949-824-2069   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 15:49:09 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)R@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <hN2D+4vCJORv@eisner.encompasserve.org>c  N In article <9vt7rn$bed@web.nmti.com>, peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva) writes:5 > In article <YsXs9mmG2TYr@eisner.encompasserve.org>,a0 > Bob Koehler <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote:K >>    I don't think so.  IIRC the fastest PPD-11 at the time was the 11/70,oD >>    which had a simmilar hardware architecture with the UNIBUS andA >>    MASSBUS hanging of the SBI, but ran slower than the 11/780.o > G > Our experience was that the 11/70 was faster than the 11/780 for realoH > applications and loads, so long as said applications actually *fit* inI > the 64kw code+data available to the PDP-11. The difference was marginalGI > at low loads, but under high load we could support twice as many users.o > I > Now if you were using overlays on the 11 then the VAX smoked its 16-bitt > tail.   >    Didn't have out own 11/70, I'm going from what others said.  H    We were using memory resident overlays on our 11/34 (talk about slow,H    not even an 11/34A like our DECSYSTEM 20's were using as DECnet front    ends) and 11/44.   >    Certainly if your prime app was DECnet you wanted a PDP-11.   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 15:50:36 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <$Wt9qTtZ0mhE@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  o In article <hwpU7.284691$uB.30783564@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:" > , >> Actually, W2K isn't superior to anything. > J > While it's easy to get a bit carried away in these debates, that's a bitF > extreme:  Win2K is likely superior to at least most previous Windows
 > systems.  '    W2K is superior to WME and WXP, too.    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 15:56:02 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)e@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <0iuKWuTzTdcf@eisner.encompasserve.org>a  o In article <GorU7.337803$8q.29751030@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:s  M > I have a vague recollection of making version numbers decimal on POS (whicheN > was a re-packaged version of RSX-11M-PLUS), but I could be mistaken.  I alsoL > think I remember adding POS support for named directories (up to the usualI > 9-character filename limit) and at least one additional directory levelo3 > (perhaps several more, but it's been a while...).   I    P/OS 2.0 on my 350 has named directories, but no subdirectories.  (Is -G    it about time I upgrade?)  IIRC the version numbers include 8 and 9.r   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:13:05 GMTM2 From: Arthur Krewat <krewat@bartek.dontspamme.net>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)5 Message-ID: <3C22621F.A8B80DC4@bartek.dontspamme.net>g   Mike Iglesias wrote: > I > >   5) The requirement (except on the 2020) to use a PDP-11 in order tooM > >   communicate with the outside world.  Typically an 11/40 or 11/60 serialv9 > >   and print front end and an 11/34A DECnet front end.> > , > Our KI-10 did not have a PDP-11 front end.  M Come to think of it, the BOCES/LIRICS KA10 (circa '80) had a PDP-8 front-end.KJ The PDP-8i is still in my friend's basement - it was really a DCA product, serial # 45, about.i  H > >   8) No support for paging (virtual memory concepts were limitted to > >   swapping). > J > I seem to remember hacking at the page fault code for TOPS-10 many yearsM > ago to make it work a little better.  You were limited to some small amounttA > of code in the pf handler so changes weren't that easy to make.o  K Same experience - after getting access to 1,2 I played with a lot of things P just for the hell of it - virtual memory and paging in TOPS-10 6.03 was a blast!   aakt   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:38:38 GMT ' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>e@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C2269D0.88F9A1A7@bellatlantic.net>   Bob Koehler wrote: > b > In article <a5k32u06v0a4ii7u82t4078pf8dvuh8fk9@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:< > > On Thu, 20 Dec 01 08:58:28 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: > >h > >m@ > >>You forgot a fourth.  Some people couldn't get anything done > >>when they used VMS.: > > G > > Yes when VMS first came out it ran on one of the slower systems DECgD > > produced at the time - the 11/780. The KL was much faster and, IE > > believe, even one of the PDP-11 family was faster than the 11/780g > >t > J >    I don't think so.  IIRC the fastest PPD-11 at the time was the 11/70,C >    which had a simmilar hardware architecture with the UNIBUS and,@ >    MASSBUS hanging of the SBI, but ran slower than the 11/780.  < 11/45 model with semi mem was the 11/55, it was the fastest.E The 11/70 was good redesign of the 11/45.  The memory box design gave A it, as well as the 45, a decent compromise (imho) between computefD and i/o capabilities. The 45 was going against SEL (and later Gould) boxes with incredible IO perf. Th> B >    But it was good when DEC brought out the 8650 and finally hadC >    something supporting VMS that was an order of magnitude faster. >    than the 11/780.-E By the time the 8650 came out, and it was late if I recall correctly,nE VMS had been improved, was more stable, and had a bit more features, w' what was that v 4 or something I think.  bobh   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:45:07 GMT3' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>"@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C226B56.F60583C0@bellatlantic.net>   jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: > 3 > In article <3C2183E5.406FBF6C@trailing-edge.com>,.1 >    Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> wrote:e > >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:2 > >>8 > >> In article <4g5FfWvUUIHD@eisner.encompasserve.org>,6 > >>    koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:K > >> >   The guys who designed VMS were doing something new and differenet, K > >> >   virtual memory and 4 modes, but were willing to base the OS designr- > >> >   on a tried and proven concept (RSX).e > >>D > >> Which wasn't timesharing.  Do not confuse a timesharing concept( > >> with a task-based concept in an OS. > >tA > >Yeah, timesharing stuff isn't any good at real-time stuff :-).> > ; > Exactly.  Does it strike you weird that this whole threadg9 > doesn't seem to recognize that both are useful?  It washA > clear to me that the throughput problems of the Unix philosophya@ > stemmed directly from the fact that it was produced on an -11./ > I don't understand why people don't see this..> Ahh! This maybe coverd in the postings I have not read yet butG by the time RSX11D came out, the interrupt latency was rather less thannC spectacular. RT11, and RSX11M were both at least partially aimed at F fixing that.  Don't forget, at that time in computehistory, there wereE 11s being used for everything from real crappy time sharing (rsts) to ? nuclear experiment data collection to credit card processing...iF and the timesharing system par excelance was the 10.  Dec had a set ofB offerings that could fit customer pocketbooks, compute needs, and ? provide some sort of continuity for growth.  Not perfect alwayss but with in some bounds.   >  > >u? > >What "true timesharing monitors" still exist out there?  Was	@ > >MPE/V regarded as "true timesharing" on a HP 3000?  How about; > >MPE/iX (which I assume is still commercially available)?u > B > I don't know.  I've learned that people out there have a strangeA > idea about the definition of timesharing.  Now, it is perfectly ? > possible that it is me who has the strange definition becausec) > I'm firmly TOPS-10 biased out of habit.U >  > /BAH > ) > Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.T   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:50:36 GMTr' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> @ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)0 Message-ID: <3C226CA0.F5EC73D5@bellatlantic.net>   Peter da Silva wrote:  > D > In article <hwpU7.284691$uB.30783564@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,+ > Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote: K > >While it's easy to get a bit carried away in these debates, that's a bit G > >extreme:  Win2K is likely superior to at least most previous Windows- > >systems.- > E > NT 3.51 has a number of technical advantages to NT4.0 and successorb> > systems, particularly for a server or multiuser environment. > E And the design is potentially more capable of being secured/hardened.r3 This statement can not be made about 4.0, 2k or xp.B   > --H > Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC.             "Cave cuniculos lagana ferentes" > H > "Be conservative in what you generate, and liberal in what you accept"$ >         -- Matthew 10:16 (l.trans)   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 17:53:38 -0500- From: Rich Alderson <alderson+news@panix.com>n@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS). Message-ID: <mddy9jxijv1.fsf@panix2.panix.com>  , "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  O > I'm ashamed to admit that I just can't recall the details with any certainty.uL > I do seem to remember that angle-bracketed directories may have been a DECL > standard (including both RSX and TOPS) until DCL came along and decided toM > move to syntax that didn't require use of the shift key, but don't remember2O > dot-delimited version numbers on RSX at all (until we wrote RMS to parse theme > as an optional syntax).h  N (Square) brackets were always the DEC standard; Tops-20, and only Tops-20, gotL angle brackets (AKA brokets) from TENEX, a BB&N alternative operating system= for the PDP-10 that DEC eventually licensed (as Tops-20 v.1).   N I'd been using Tops-20 for several years before I learned that it would accept: [directory.name] as well as the native <directory.name>...   --  N Rich Alderson                                          alderson+news@panix.comL   "You get what anybody gets.  You get a lifetime."  --Death, of the Endless   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:02:56 -0800o0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS), Message-ID: <3C21FDA0.72ECF98B@Mvb.Saic.Com>   david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote:y > b > In article <3C20D086.BF1BBCE2@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>, Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> writes:  > >"Bradford J. Hamilton" wrote:F > >> I have TCPIP V5.1, and I often send email to username@domain.xxx.C > >> I have not experienced any issues.  Can you give an example of_! > >> what happens on your system?u > >:R > >The issue is that the DEC version, at least since the C re-write, makes a checkR > >for username viability BEFORE it switches transports to TCPIP.  So any username1 > >that is invalid on VMS will yield the dratted:t > > H > >%MAIL-E-USERSPEC, invalid user specification 'O'REILLY@SOMEWHERE.COM' > >aR > >despite the fact that this check should not be made at all when sending mail toP > >remote nodes.  So on my system the mail cannot be sent without specifying theR > >longhand smtp%"o'reilly@somewhere.com" address.  I think it also uppercases the1 > >username, which is another irritating feature.b > >	 > > - JB > N > I'm pretty sure that O'Reilly@somewhere.com is illegal according to the RFCsQ > anyway. If the local-part contains certain special characters such as ' then ita > needs to be quoted ie  >  > "O'Reilly"@somewhere.com >   C That would be incorrect.  The ' character is not one of the specialAG characters and, thus, does not need to be quoted.  Here is the relevanto line from the RFC:  E      specials    =  "(" / ")" / "<" / ">" / "@"  ; Must be in quoted-aB                  /  "," / ";" / ":" / "\" / <">  ;  string, to useB                  /  "." / "[" / "]"              ;  within a word.  h  
 Mark Berrymand Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com   ------------------------------   Date: 20 Dec 2001 23:23:38 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)1 Message-ID: <9vtrtq$22r$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>   B In article <20011220152514.U86233-100000@server2.cs.scranton.edu>,* Bill Gunshannon  <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote:& >On 20 Dec 2001, Peter da Silva wrote:5 >> >At its core, aren't QNX and OS/9000 microkernels?a  M >> QNX is. OS/9000 comes from an age when the concept of a microkernel hadn'th >> been really solidified...  F >I have never had a chance to look at OS/9000 but if it inherited muchH >philosphy from OS/9 it is likely to be very microkernel-like.  At leastM >as far as my understanding of what microkernel means.  OS/9 was conceptually-< >microkernel before CMU even started looking at the concept.  L That's what I meant. Real time systems tended to gravitate naturally to thatM kind of design, even if it wasn't formalized. And of course Mach was a prettyiD crummy "micro"kernel... probably because they were trying to build a timesharing system.e  E >> IBM surely has something, and Unisys is still shipping Univac-1100SD >> architecture boxen complete with an updated version of Exec-1100.  K >Boy, those numbers sure went up fast.  Last time I worked on a Univac-1100>. >(about 15 years ago!) we were running Exec-8.  H About ten years for me, and it was already -1100 then. It spent a little1 while as -2200, and now it's ClearPath something.t  K Say what you like about Unisys, they're the only 36-bit action still alive.    -- 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)a   ------------------------------   Date: 20 Dec 2001 23:27:29 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)1 Message-ID: <9vts51$24q$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>e  3 In article <aBuzhVtpPjiM@eisner.encompasserve.org>,s, Rob Young <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote:< >	Just pointing out that MS does have products and more than) >	a few are using W2K other than desktop.m  D Not that putting "Dtaacenter" or "Enterprise" on the name makes it aH Datacenter or Enterprise product. It still fundamentally assumes there'sM only one user instance active, running one significant application at a time,eH and activities like staging new versions of software for testing are not worth providing for.   -- r@ 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: 20 Dec 2001 23:17:23 GMT( From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)1 Message-ID: <9vtri3$1p2$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>.  B In article <mcrU7.284897$uB.30837859@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,) Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:oJ >Not if they were memory-resident rather than fetched from disk (though ifK >you were touching only a small amount of data in each APR-worth of overlayaI >then the TKB and system code required to map the APR became noticeable).d  E Oh man. TKB on an 11/34 was truly a "coffebreak" experience. That was E the best fucking overlay linker ever (just in time for overlays to be G phased out as big jobs moved to larger address spaces) but it sure took I its sweet time about packing those chunks of code into the various holes.    -- r@ 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: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:30:12 +0000 (UTC)y From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)+ Message-ID: <9vtsa4$1j9$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   _ In article <3C21FDA0.72ECF98B@Mvb.Saic.Com>, Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com> writes:n  >david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: >> oc >> In article <3C20D086.BF1BBCE2@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>, Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> writes:-! >> >"Bradford J. Hamilton" wrote:cO >> I'm pretty sure that O'Reilly@somewhere.com is illegal according to the RFCs:R >> anyway. If the local-part contains certain special characters such as ' then it >> needs to be quoted ie >> t >> "O'Reilly"@somewhere.com> >> e >bD >That would be incorrect.  The ' character is not one of the specialH >characters and, thus, does not need to be quoted.  Here is the relevant >line from the RFC:I > F >     specials    =  "(" / ")" / "<" / ">" / "@"  ; Must be in quoted-C >                 /  "," / ";" / ":" / "\" / <">  ;  string, to usefC >                 /  "." / "[" / "]"              ;  within a word.t >  >     K Yes you are correct. Should have checked before posting rather than relyings  on my obviously fallable memory.  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2001 13:36:57 -0800& From: jordan@ccs4vms.com (Rich Jordan)- Subject: Re: VMSclusters and network switches1= Message-ID: <cc5619f2.0112201336.129d5ce0@posting.google.com>m  B Thanks to all who responded here and via email.  All the equipmentC involved has either an AUI or 10Base-T port available; the usage of'B thinwire was to conserve jacks, since the room the computers is inE didn't have enough.  A thinwire was run from the wiring closet (where-D the hubs are, most of which have BNC uplinks) to the computer room. ? The wall jacks are being used by peecees that needed (and couldh actually do) 100base-T.   F With this expected change, the switch in the computer room will becomeE the backbone (with the cluster and the two peecees plugged into portsmD on it, and the hubs in the wiring closet uplinked to it via the wallF jacks).  Not a nice arrangement, but the budget is too tiny to pay for< extra wiring runs and our lease doesn't let me do it myself.  A The reason I'm asking is I have a clear recollection of _someone_,F posting here or in another related newsgroup about known problems withF many network switch codebases that could negatively impact a cluster. ? I haven't been able to locate the posts (haven't had time for aW complete search either).  B I can't cover a managed switch with the available budget; even the? 10Base-T only smart switches I've seen are over.  One respondereF reported good luck with Netgear FS5xx switches, so I'm checking prices	 on those.p  
 Thanks again!f   Rich Jordan    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.707 ************************