1 INFO-VAX	Wed, 26 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 716       Contents:2 Re: Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both ways2 Re: Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both ways* Re: Congratulations for the festive season* Re: Congratulations for the festive season* Re: Congratulations for the festive season* Re: Congratulations for the festive season Re: dump and fopen help  Re: Emulation... Re: Emulation...$ Re: Excitement -- and disappointment0 Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds0 Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds Re: The demise of compaq Re: The demise of compaq Re: The demise of compaq VAX 3900 Free to Good Home" What Goes Around, Comes Around....  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 25 Dec 2001 14:26:25 -0800/ From: Brannon_Batson@yahoo.com (Brannon Batson) ; Subject: Re: Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both ways = Message-ID: <4495ef1f.0112251426.7d17dab1@posting.google.com>   ` nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) wrote in message news:<a07r0o$oja$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>... > [snip] > D > Go and read the rest of my postings.  Both IBM and Samsung claimedA > to be able to produce 1 GHz Alphas in quantity, and IBM are not = > notorious for making claims that they can't follow through.   C Mass-producing chips and mass-producing press releases are two very C different things.  You can argue about the level of committment and > investment from Compaq, but claiming that the 1Ghz delays were, artificial would seem to require more proof.   > UnlikeE > a certain extremely large chip maker that you may be familiar with.    Oh boo-hoo.   @ > And, as I should have thought was obvious, I was not primarilyD > referring to the clock rate, but such things as PCI 64/66 support.A > And there was a chipset available for that nearly a year before  > the ES45 hit the streets.   ; Again, you're implying that this was an entirely artificial D limitation.  Out of curiosity, what would be Compaq's motivation for8 witholding PCI 66 support if not for a technical reason?   Brannon  not speaking for Intel   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 23:49:32 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> ; Subject: Re: Compaq still tries to spin Alphacide both ways , Message-ID: <3C2956DB.8959B182@videotron.ca>   John McLean wrote:H > I believe their attitude of keeping VMS in a shrinking niche market isJ > very bad for the platform.  And it's an attitude that makes little senseG > when Compaq just about need every dollar of income they can get their 
 > hands on  K Not if you believe that VMS has no long term future and will be replaced by N NT. To those who believe this, then any VMS marketing is a waste of money, andK the only money needed is that whichj is absolutely necessary to keep VMS on J basic life support, allowing many limbs to fall off, but keeping a core of0 those customers which generate the most profits.  N Marcello and below understand that VMS needs marketing. But it is their bossesH who won't give them the budgets simply because they don't want to grow a( systems which they don't intend to keep.  L prediction: because Compaq is only interested in basioc VMS life support, itJ problably has no intentions of raison the net value of VMS and thus is notL really intrerested in selling VMS to some other company as a viable product:F read: do an Alpha on VMS: donate its parts for free to some charitable organisation such as Microsoft.    ------------------------------    Date: 25 Dec 2001 18:15:19 -05005 From: pechter@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org (Bill Pechter) 3 Subject: Re: Congratulations for the festive season 3 Message-ID: <a0b1a7$5f8$1@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org>   2 In article <a07m26$265i$1@citadel.in.taronga.com>,) Peter da Silva <peter@taronga.com> wrote: > >In article <d7791aa1.0112230653.6980b812@posting.google.com>,* >Bob Ceculski <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote:E >>My 10 year old son has no problems with the vms security model ...   > > >Your 10 year old son is designing security-critical software? > D >>The unix security model is all or none ... you call that security? > 4 >Have you actually been reading a word I've written? >  >-- A >Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC.	      "Cave cuniculos lagana ferentes"  > G >"Be conservative in what you generate, and liberal in what you accept"  >	-- Matthew 10:16 (l.trans)  @ Actually, the Unix security model can easily be extended through< the use of groups, sgid, suid and ACL's to do all the stuff @ needed for B2 computing which is where VAX/VMS (in the old days)' and most current "secure" systems  are.   @ We had B2 MLS security available back at Pyramid around 93 or soJ on the AT&T MLS SVR base.  IIRC we had something similar on OS/x that was  done in house.  E Magnetic media and tape drive access was controlled through ACL's and G they had to be assigned.  The audit trail was down to the syscall level F if you wanted to log all those...  There was the concept of a securityB admin as well as root and certain tasks were deemed the job of theE secuirity admin.  You could have things that were not doable by root.    Bill     --   --  H   d|i|g|i|t|a|l had it THEN.  Don't you wish you could still buy it now!0   bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@ureach.com   ------------------------------    Date: 25 Dec 2001 20:45:26 -05005 From: pechter@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org (Bill Pechter) 3 Subject: Re: Congratulations for the festive season 3 Message-ID: <a0ba3m$5o1$1@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org>   G In article <a09mat$3ra$1@bob.news.rcn.net>,  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:  > > >Another thing that kiddies aren't learning about is different: >operating systems with skills of evaluating strengths and: >weaknesses of each.  Being able to encounter a new OS and8 >becoming a fairly good user within a day or two is also >key to computing.  E True... but I think most OS's take more than a couple of days to get   comfortable with.   F As a non-programmer, Unix took me months before I felt at home and it D took a couple of years before I could think in Unix without mentallyG translating from DEC equivalents to Unix counterparts.  It must be like F learning a different spoken language -- if you're not native you think= in on language until you're fluent enough to think originally ' in the language you're currently using.    > < >Choosing and changing from one programming language and/or 8 >operating system to another should be the equivalent of9 >one changing their clothes from doing the farm chores to  >dressing for the opera.  # Ah if it was only that easy for me.  Perhaps in another 20 years.   >  >/BAH  >    Bill --   --  H   d|i|g|i|t|a|l had it THEN.  Don't you wish you could still buy it now!0   bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@ureach.com   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 02:38:38 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>3 Subject: Re: Congratulations for the festive season B Message-ID: <OKaW7.232700$C8.16129811@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  J "Wayne Sewell" <wayne@tachysoft.xxx.524703.killspam.00bd> wrote in message( news:RTInl22V47Fp@tachxxsoftxxconsult...= > In article <qhelllvkc3.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>, Eric Smith * <eric-no-spam-for-me@brouhaha.com> writes: >  > [stuff deleted]  >  > > B > > You keep trying to sweep my point under the carpet.  Even real programmers B > > make trivial mistakes, or forget to check bounds, or whatever. > H > Except Bill Todd.  A while back he made the claim that he has *never*, *ever*' > done this once since the Dawn of Man.   H Either your memory or your reading skills need improvement - but no news there.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 04:03:13 GMT 2 From: Arthur Krewat <krewat@bartek.dontspamme.net>3 Subject: Re: Congratulations for the festive season 5 Message-ID: <3C294B0B.562C99A1@bartek.dontspamme.net>    Peter da Silva wrote:  > 7 > In article <3C27B806.A2BF3EBD@bartek.dontspamme.net>, 6 > Arthur Krewat  <krewat@bartek.dontspamme.net> wrote: > > K > >I would vote for a 8088 or lesser to learn beginnings. 8080 was my first E > >immersion into micros. Then 6502... but I see where you are going.  > F > No, I would not vote for any 8080 derivitive. The instruction set isI > horse exhaust. If people are going to be programming in assembler, give = > them one that isn't like building a ship in a klein bottle.   H I don't understand, what's so bad about an 8080? It was a piece of cake.H The fact that you had to use two instructions to do anything of any real0 value may be a setback, but otherwise no biggee.  M > >I was interested enough in LOGO to steal it from some university... I have L > >worked with robotics controllers... Mindstorms? I know about that and wasK > >very interested, although I think my son is a little young for that yet.  > E > No he isn't. I wish it had been available when my son was that age.   G I have a different view on this - the younger they are when they start, H the more apt they are to become distinterested later. But, mindstorms is pretty cool... :)   F Besides, without knowing my son, you shouldn't make the above comment.G Like me, he was born slightly different, basically borderline autistic, I just like me. He is very good with machines and computers and loves them. E I am trying very hard to not put too much in front of him and get him H frustrated. His slight language problems would make the experience a bitH of a problem. Maybe next year ... otherwise, his IQ is at least the same as mine.   aak    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 04:31:12 GMT 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>   Subject: Re: dump and fopen help' Message-ID: <3C295315.99889231@fsi.net>    Deepak Yadav wrote:  > m > "Phil Howell" <phowell@snowyhydro.com.au> wrote in message news:<6luV7.98326$li3.1031441@ozemail.com.au>... 7 > > "Deepak Yadav" <dyadav7@yahoo.com> wrote in message ; > > news:13e80e3d.0112202357.6f848022@posting.google.com... @ > > > "Phil Howell" <phowell@snowyhydro.com.au> wrote in message4 > >  news:<jkxU7.97205$li3.973037@ozemail.com.au>...; > > > > "Deepak Yadav" <dyadav7@yahoo.com> wrote in message ? > > > > news:13e80e3d.0112200646.1b72375b@posting.google.com...  > > > > > Hi@ > > > > >     when i do a dump it shows 3 virtual blocks of 512.E > > > > > the first and third blocks have all 00 and second block has ) > > > > > first 100 byte set and rest 00.  > > > > M > > > > If your dump is showing virtual blocks it is a "raw" dump of the file < > > > > To show the record structure use $DUMP/RECORD <file> > > > >  > > > D > > > Dump/Record showed one record in the file. so that explain the! > > > dump and fopen differences.  > > > > > > > when i copying it into a new file by opening new file by8 > > >    fopen( New_File , "wb" ,"rms=100" , "rfm=fix");% > > > It created a file of this type.  > > > + > > > ( ---- File organization:  Sequential J > > > File attributes:    Allocation: 4, Extend: 0, Global buffer count: 0* > > >                     No version limit# > > > Record format:      Stream_LF : > > > Record attributes:  Carriage return carriage control > > > RMS attributes:     None# > > > Journaling enabled: None -- )  > > > 9 > > > this is not same as the previous file which i want, I > > > how can i convert/( chnage fopen arguemnts) to make the new file as D > > > relative file and fixed 100 byted record as the original file. > > > ! > > First you create your fdl.... > > > Use $analyze/rms/fdl/out=rel.fdl  <your old relative file>, > > Then edit it to apply to your "new file"! > > Here's one I prepared earlier  > > E > > IDENT   "24-DEC-2001 10:47:01   OpenVMS ANALYZE/RMS_FILE Utility"  > > 
 > > SYSTEM+ > >         SOURCE                  OpenVMS  > >  > > FILE% > >         ALLOCATION              0 % > >         EXTENSION               0 . > >         MAX_RECORD_NUMBER       2147483647, > >         ORGANIZATION            relative > > 
 > > RECORD' > >         BLOCK_SPAN              yes 3 > >         CARRIAGE_CONTROL        carriage_return ) > >         FORMAT                  fixed ' > >         SIZE                    100  > >  > > Then > > C > > $convert /fdl=rel.fdl <your stream_lf file> <new relative file>  > > PhilD > > ps. you can get tools at http://www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware/ >  > Thanks a lot. - > The steps given by you worked Really Great. B > Thanks also for promptness as the solution helped in meeting the@ > deadline(today itself which was impossible without your help).@ > Also now i know how to convert files from one type to another.   You might also find:   $ HELP   ...to be rather useful.    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 20:20:52 GMT - From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>  Subject: Re: Emulation... * Message-ID: <3C28E54E.5060700@qsl.network>   [Followups set to comp.os.vms]  G What was not well known is that a registry setting for x86 binaries on  I FX!32 was set to require them to be completely loaded into memory before  H   they would run, as opposed to demand paging which was the default for  native images.  G What this meant is that if you had any memory limitations on the Alpha  A that was running NT, that the emulated image would page heavily.  ? Attempting to start a second image under emulation under these  G conditions would result in virtully all activity on the memory limited   system comming to a halt.   3 John McLean <mcleanj#swissonline.delete.ch> writes:  > B >>How difficult would it be to have unix programs execute in a VMSE >>environment ?  If this was possible, even with considerable effort, F >>then suddenly huge number applications could be run on a RAS system.    F There are quite a few different assumptions that the UNIX programming H API makes on the environment.  Some of these features are not available L unless you are in a container environement such as the former POSIX product.  A To emulate the set of programs that do match the provided OpenVMS < features is a small matter of writing the program loader andE thunking layer.  If the program was designed for a different hardware 4 architecture that translation needs to be done also.    G But consider that almost all the programs that fit this class exist in  E source code available on the wild wild web, and can be with a little  G effort built to run on OpenVMS.  And this allows them to be tweaked to   run even better.   -John  wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 03:06:41 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> Subject: Re: Emulation... B Message-ID: <59bW7.110961$Zd.10583389@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C26569C.8675545E@swissonline.delete.ch...    ...   $ > It may be a dumb question but .... > B > How difficult would it be to have unix programs execute in a VMSJ > environment ?  If this was possible, even with considerable effort, thenA > suddenly huge number applications could be run on a RAS system.   G MuLP was informally looking at how to run Alpha/Linux binaries on VMS a H while ago and last I talked with him hadn't discovered any show-stopping= problems, but I don't know if he's still hanging around here.    - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 04:49:20 GMT * From: "Andy Stoffel" <acs@fcgnetworks.net>- Subject: Re: Excitement -- and disappointment B Message-ID: <kFcW7.336817$uB.34640494@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  7 "Rich Jordan" <rjordan@mindspring.com> wrote in message , news:a08s3q$oki$1@slb5.atl.mindspring.net...N > I got the OpenVMS and Alphaserver certifications in 2000.  Got two pieces ofJ > laser printed paper stating that fact and my company got to keep being a > VAR.  K Well.... I took the tests/got the certification for that reason myself.....    As far as the "goodies" go....  
 > No ID card,   E Odd... they've resisued them several times over the past couple years 4 (to reflect name changes to the ASE program & etc.).   > Condist/Condoc,   6 You have to sign up for that through the ASE web page.  . > gifts, premiums, notices, or CETS discounts,  ; Hmmm.... sounds like you took the tests but didn't fill out ; the bits of paper to become "certified". With the exceptiona1 of the CONDIST, everything else has just shown up  without me asking for it....   -Andy- --   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 03:13:12 GMTo* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>9 Subject: Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceedsnB Message-ID: <cfbW7.389642$8q.33788182@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  K "nic" <junk@127.0.0.1> wrote in message news:3C27B4CE.87636407@127.0.0.1...    ...i  D > I agree that more positive communication and marketing would help,; > but it is also necessary to forgive the sins of the past.-  K Not at all:  multiple alternatives exist.  And when 'the past' is so recent K those alternatives look more attractive, since otherwise additional similarr sins are likely to occur.w   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 05:02:08 GMTm1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>o9 Subject: Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceedsa' Message-ID: <3C295A55.4F7A56AC@fsi.net>S   Hi, Sue,   Sue Skonetski wrote: > D > The only thing that is killing the OpenVMS Customer base is peopleF > complaining and saying that Digital/Compaq/HP are going to kill VMS.  ! Well, that may be a bit extreme.    G Believe me, I understand your frustration. Would you like to try a miletD or two in *MY* shoes, or those of any other OpenVMS professional outG here in the "real world"? ...and perhaps gain a new perspective on what  frustration *REALLY* means?m   > Do youL > realize every time someone posts a sky is falling message we get calls andF > emails from our customers which we then have to work with to keep asC > customers, stopping us from doing other work (like porting work)?r  F As has been stated here repeatedly, is frequently stated almost daily,C often in multiple threads, and as will continue to be stated in theC future:   G There is but a single, sure-fire cure for such "sky is falling" or "skyrG has fallen" posts, and Compaq management has been made abundantly aware  of what must be done.3  F If any of your management team still does not understand this, or whatD "it" is, please e-mail me privately to arrange a conference for yourH management and/or any other interested party(-ies) within Compaq so thatE I can make the presentation(s) en masse, once and for all. I can also.? arrange for one-on-one presentations, if that is more suitable.t   > Every timeJ > a negative stream starts our competition is glad and they can say "see I > told you so."   F Here again, the power to prevent this lies solely in the hands of your? management team. It is beyond the power of the denizens of this ; newsgroup or any other, both individually and collectively.   H The "disaster" paradigm is, unfortunately, only too appropriate: failureB to take pre-emptive action virtually assures the occurrance of theF undesirable. The legal term for that is "negligence", but let's not go there.  ( > No, I do not have my head in the sand,  F This is abundantly apparent. Your efforts and your postings speak most eloquently.i   > but I would prefer toe/ > defend VMS against a foe instead of a friend.o  C With "friends" like OpenVMS/Compaq, many of us out here, especiallyMH those in my position and others still trying preserve their VMS careers,E have no need of any other enemies - OpenVMS/Compaq are doing quite anoG excellent job of destroying our careers and livelihoods, thank you very0 much.   G If it seems that we lash out against OpenVMS/Compaq, perhaps it is besto? to try to understand that some view this as retaliation, albeiteC frequently driven by anger arising from frustration, and not from a  purely anger-inspired source.o    > Lets not loose the war because > of friendly fire.t  F Then, my advice to OpenVMS/Compaq management would be: let's not "piss4 on" our friends (the "OpenVMS faithful"), shall we?   E There is no one more helpful to one's opponent than a friend spurned. E Once spurned, former "friends" are almost impossible to win back with?6 the same level of trust as before the breach occurred.  E My apologies if this post seems not in keeping with the spirit of theeE season. For some of the soon-to-be-former OpenVMS faithful (including C myself), this has been a less than inspiring Holiday Season, not tor mention the year in toto.e   -- r David J. Dachterao dba DJE Systemsn http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/o   ------------------------------    Date: 25 Dec 2001 21:45:52 +0000/ From: pg_nh@sabi.Clara.co.UK (Piercarlo Grandi) ! Subject: Re: The demise of compaqm- Message-ID: <yf3n1076kj3.fsf@home.sabi.co.UK>t  I >>> On 13 Dec 2001 09:47:01 GMT, nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) said:    [ ... ].  G >>> But I am also warning that the world is heading for a disaster, andtE >>> I don't mean the minor glitches that we have seen so far.  We can G >>> only hope that we receive a healthy shock in time to recover.  Yes,eG >>> I really am talking about a potential collapse of civilisation, and|9 >>> most of the other experts in this area agree with me.o  - >> Which disaster? What cause? Which experts?c   [ ... ]-  C nmm1> We are not sure where things will fail first, but the generichG nmm1> reason is that we are seeing increasingly complex software, builtsE nmm1> up of multiple layers, where the precise interfaces between thesE nmm1> layers often make undocumented and untestable assumptions.  AndoD nmm1> each layer may be a million lines of code, written by hundreds- nmm1> of people over several decades. [ ... ]l  E Your argument looks a lot like a variant of the ``Hoare prediction'', 5 and Prof. Dr. C. Antony R. Hoare surely is an expert.o  B However his prediction that there would be a major software causedG disaster with loss of many lives has not happened within the time framee@ he has indicated, and IIRC he is on record as saying that he hasF underestimated the checks and balances used in many projects and human
 adaptability.n  G nmm1> [ ... ] Today, you would install another software system, retraingD nmm1> the controllers and be back within 6 months (after a fashion).E nmm1> But, in 20 years, what if there IS only one system?  After all,gF nmm1> there is in some areas (think Microsoft).  Speak to an economist* nmm1> about this, and get nervous. [ ... ]  D Well, economists worry about systemic fragilities, but they are of a4 somewhat different nature from software brittleness.  B In order to manufacture hi-tech products one needs to set up _two_D chains of supply: one of parts for the products, and one of tools toC make those parts and put together the product. So to make a car one-G needs a supply of doors, seats, windscreens, etc., but also a supply ofm6 conveyor belts, painting robots, presses, moulds, etc.  F The main worry is that _both_ supply chains are becoming long and withH low fanouts instead of short and with high fanouts. This is because of aE drive to efficiency via consolidation and specialization. This can belF risky, consider for example the famous case of an earthquake affectingH the one factory in Japan being responsibile for most of the world supplyF of ceramic essential for IC packaging (or the often amusing search for. low emission lead by some chip manufacturers).  B Again it is not just a parts supply chain: it is also about tools.E Conceivably a lathe could be just about hand-built; but an IC steppert@ cannot. Manufacturing ICs in particular requires a long chain ofC sophisticated tools that can only be built with other sophisticated-@ tools, and there are quite few places where all these are built.  E Modern _hardware_ production systems are amazingly brittle, in parts,fG yet resilient in others. It's fairly scary. The DOD seems to do regular H surveys of these issues, but I would be suprised if they were published.  G You mention in your argument brittleness caused by software monopolies; ? but there are software monopolies, much harder and nastier thanmF Microsoft's, like IBM's almost absolute stranglehold on mainframe OSes> and systems, that have not resulted in obviously less reliableH software. Indeed, IBM seem to have put some of the monopoly profits back> into making those OSes and systems more resilient, as a way of strenghtening the monopoly.o   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 00:25:15 GMT + From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>d! Subject: Re: The demise of compaqe) Message-ID: <uellizv3m.fsf@earthlink.net>I  1 pg_nh@sabi.Clara.co.UK (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:uI > You mention in your argument brittleness caused by software monopolies;kA > but there are software monopolies, much harder and nastier than H > Microsoft's, like IBM's almost absolute stranglehold on mainframe OSes@ > and systems, that have not resulted in obviously less reliableJ > software. Indeed, IBM seem to have put some of the monopoly profits back@ > into making those OSes and systems more resilient, as a way of > strenghtening the monopoly.,  E the other way of looking at it is that a large customer base spanningfF 30-40 some years with large set of business critical applications have: invested huge amounts in making the system more resiliant.  E there is reputed to be some testimony in the gov. legal thing againstlC ibm by somebody from one of the companies no longer in the business C ...  that in the late '50s all the vendors in the business realized F that the single most important thing/characteristic (at that time) forF the computer industry was to have a compatible line of machines acrossF the product offering ..... and that in the '60s supposedly IBM was the= only vendor that actually achieved that single most importantuB requirement (during the late '50s, '60s, and '70s, businesses wereC going thru fairly rapid expansion and growth of their business data1> processing ... frequently needing to upgrade their hardware).   ? There are other tales/books/stories about the 360 line being anxC extrodinary gamble by the ibm company that just happened to pay offvA ... and consistent with the testimony about being the only vendor7B meeting the single most important market requirement ... achieving" significant customer install base.  ? Lots of the stuff with required to current day state of the artlB business strength data processing and business continuity could be@ viewed as much as evolutionary trail & error by a large customer< community over a 30+ year period ... as opposed to any fancy@ purposeful design. Some amount of it could also be attributed toC various business instruments like "service level agreements" (stuff C not often taught in university computer engineering and/or software 	 classes).p  F not too long ago ... person responsible for one of the large financialC data processing infrastructures attributed 100 percent availability  for a six plus year period ton   1) IMS hot-standby 2) automated operator   F ... where "automated operator" is something of a heuristic methodologyF for automating various human interactions (minimizing various kinds ofD human errors/mistakes ... which are starting to become an increasing= serious factor in service availability). Again, a lot of this C technology & methodology is as much evolutionary contributions by a D large customer base focused on business critical operations over 30+ year period.  ? The other comment was that possibly the number one risk to this F operation was that critical staff were 30+ year veterans, mortgage wasD all paid off, kids all thru college and they had little incentive toD not retire (there is a lot of institutional memory acquired over 30+B years about all the possible ways things could go wrong and how toA plan for such contingencies ... which could possibly be lost in a ! relatively short period of time).1   random refs:0 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#2 Schedulers, http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#44 bloatK http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#20 1401 series emulation still running? ? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#23 Fear of Multiprocessing? @ http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#71 High Availabilty on S/3908 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#107 Computer HistoryL http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#128 Examples of non-relational databasesG http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#136a checks (was S/390 on PowerPC?)h< http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#145 Q: S/390 on PowerPC?: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#184 Clustering systemsP http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#231 Why couldn't others compete against IBM?@ http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#22 Computer of the century> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#41 Why trust root CAs ?K http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#45 IBM's Workplace OS (Was: .. Pink) G http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#12 Amdahl Exits Mainframe MarketlN http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#27 Could CDR-coding be on the way back?X http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#33 Where do the filesystem and RAID system belong?X http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#41 Where do the filesystem and RAID system belong?J http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#43 Life as a programmer--1960, 1965?9 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#13 LINUS for S/390dD http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#70 Pentium 4 Prefetch engine?D http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#71 Pentium 4 Prefetch engine?Q http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#44 Where are IBM z390 SPECint2000 results?oQ http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#47 Where are IBM z390 SPECint2000 results?iQ http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#48 Where are IBM z390 SPECint2000 results?t? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#46 The Alpha/IA64 HybridiA http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#8 VM: checking some myths. d http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#41 Withdrawal Announcement 901-218 - No More 'small machines'd http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#43 Withdrawal Announcement 901-218 - No More 'small machines'E http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#16 OT - Internet Explorer V6.0rK http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#23 OT - Internet Explorer V6.0</pre>t? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#33 Big black helicopterse? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#38 Big black helicopterse? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#39 Big black helicoptersmE http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#45 OT - Internet Explorer V6.0d] http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#14 HP-UX will not be ported to Alpha (no surprise)exitw] http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#18 HP-UX will not be ported to Alpha (no surprise)exit-4 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#47 five-nines\ http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#22 Hercules, OCO, and IBM missing a great opportunity6 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#47 Sysplex Info   -- cH Anne & Lynn Wheeler   | lynn@garlic.com -  http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 06:54:12 GMT " From: Art Rice <arice@myhouse.org>! Subject: Re: The demise of compaqa? Message-ID: <oueW7.186403$oj3.31594801@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com>l   Piercarlo Grandi wrote:h <major snippage>   > D > Again it is not just a parts supply chain: it is also about tools.G > Conceivably a lathe could be just about hand-built; but an IC steppermB > cannot. Manufacturing ICs in particular requires a long chain ofE > sophisticated tools that can only be built with other sophisticated-B > tools, and there are quite few places where all these are built. > G > Modern _hardware_ production systems are amazingly brittle, in parts,-I > yet resilient in others. It's fairly scary. The DOD seems to do regular J > surveys of these issues, but I would be suprised if they were published.  K I wonder sometimes, if they even read their own surveys.   And who do they tL survey?  Example:  They still plan to run ships with NT?  (I know, NT isn't 
 hardware.)   > I > You mention in your argument brittleness caused by software monopolies;.A > but there are software monopolies, much harder and nastier thantH > Microsoft's, like IBM's almost absolute stranglehold on mainframe OSes@ > and systems, that have not resulted in obviously less reliableJ > software. Indeed, IBM seem to have put some of the monopoly profits back@ > into making those OSes and systems more resilient, as a way of > strenghtening the monopoly.h >    -- a Art Rice, Tandem Admin Special Data Processing Corp ----------------------------L All opinions are my own and do not reflect the views of the above mentioned 	 employer.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 22:40:56 -0500r. From: Chuck McCrobie <mccrobie@cablespeed.com># Subject: VAX 3900 Free to Good Homec. Message-ID: <3C2946C8.FB3801EF@cablespeed.com>  E As a testament to Digitial engineering, I have a VAX 3900 that's been79 sitting in my garage for 3 1/2 years that just booted up!a   CONDITIONS:i  : Machine must be picked up in its entirety - ALL OR NOTHING3 Local pickup only - I don't want to ship this beaste  	 LOCATION:e   Laurel, MD 20724  F You will need a large sedan, pickup, or similar vehicle.  The externalB frame has been modified to come apart, so loading it will be easy.   PARTICULARS:  3 VAX 3900 - CPU - (Big cabinet)  KA655-AA (M7625-AA) ' 32 MB RAM - MEMORY - MS650-BA (M7622-A)c  DESQA-SA - Ethernet - (M3127-PA)1 CXY08-M - 8 line Terminal controller - (M3119-YA)f4 USD 1108 QBUS->SCSI Controller - in passthrough modeC 	* This is a NON-DISCONNECTING controller - yes, I have the manual!o$ TQK70 - tape controller - (M7559-00) 	* DRIVE IS _BROKEN_/ KDA50 - disk controller - (M7164-00 & M7165-00)e  CMD 200 TM QBUS->SCSI Controller 	* Yes, I have the manualyC RA90 Drive (1.2GB) - Big and slow, but after 3 1/2 years idle time,i still workse TK70 - tape drive - BROKEN   NOTES:  H The CMD 200 TM recognized a newer SCSI CD-ROM and booted VMS 7.1 install kit.    " Machine currently boots VMS 5.5-2.  7 CXY08 and DESQA have NOT been tested, but were working.h   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 21:58:02 -0500n' From: Ken Robinson <kenrbnsn@rbnsn.com>h+ Subject: What Goes Around, Comes Around.... A Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20011225214634.04135760@mail.eclipse.net>u  L I did a search on the phrase "VMS Vs. UNIX"  in the old archives on Google. K What I found was the same arguments on both sides with posts going back to e at least 1982!  C Here is one in particular asking for a truce ... notice the date...l   <begin old post> Newsgroups: comp.os.vmsp Subject: more OS wars claptrap3 Message-ID: <8911291919.AA18963@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDUe Date: 29 Nov 89 13:18:00 GMT" Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 9  Posted: Wed Nov 29 14:18:00 1989  K How about giving us a break already with the VMS vs. UNIX claptrap that is rH cluttering up INFO-VAX? An academic discussion on their relative merits L would be one thing, but we're being subjected to an endless tirade. By now, I I don't really give a d*mn about whether UNIX is better than VMS or vice  L versa - it all comes down to what works for you. I'm glad that both systems G are out there, but let's keep this nonsense from cluttering up what is i* supposed to be a forum on VAX INFORMATION.   <end old post>  5 I didn't include the original poster's name or email.r  I I would urge all those involved in the current debate to look at the old .+ debates and see that nothing has changed...l   Ken Robinson kenrbnsn@rbnsn.comL (over 20 years managing various VMS systems... at least 10 years experience  on  UNIX as a user)    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.716 ************************