1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 19 Jul 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 398       Contents: (no subject), Re: ??== DCPS: Locking trays on a HP4100DTN., Re: ??== DCPS: Locking trays on a HP4100DTN.( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( RE: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate& Re: Compaq FUD and lack of information! Re: Compaq have committed suicide ! Re: Compaq have committed suicide  Creating TK50 imagesI Re: CSWS / Apache 1.1 - how to get Http_cookies in CGI (.com file) - help M Help:   CSWS / Apache 1.1 - how to get Http_cookies in CGI (.com file) - help 	 Landscape 
 Re: Landscape 
 Re: Landscape ! Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3   Re: My final take on the subject  Re: My final take on the subject Re: Oracle dead on VMS?  Re: OT: Dr Who.  Re: OT: Dr Who.  Re: OT: Dr Who.  Re: OT: Dr Who.  Re: OT: Dr Who.  Re: OT: Dr Who. " Re: Penance for Compaq's VMS sins? Printing via Pathworks Re: Printing via Pathworks Re: Remote ConsoleP Re: Reward for the first of the next 50 posts: which company should buy VMS VMSV5 RE: SMS on VMS [was RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.]  SUPRA DBA/ CONTRACT/ MN $ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64 Upgrade to VMS V7.3  Re: Upgrade to VMS V7.3  Re: Upgrade to VMS V7.3  VAX 8250 Console Command Re: VAX 8250 Console Command Re: VAX 8250 Console Command VAX 8250 Console Commands 	 VAX BASIC E Wailing and moaning.... (was: Reward for the first of the next 50...) # Re: What's a DCL kind of guy to do? 	 XAW/XMU ?  Re: Your reply on GSDFULL  Re: Your reply on GSDFULL   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:00:39 GMT  From: TJ <tj_shrews@yahoo.com> Subject: (no subject) ) Message-ID: <3B56E807.1239F5EB@yahoo.com>         ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 08:57:12 +0200 , From: aus@vim.uni-wuerzburg.de (Hans M. Aus)5 Subject: Re: ??== DCPS: Locking trays on a HP4100DTN. D Message-ID: <aus-1907010857120001@wvia48.virologie.uni-wuerzburg.de>  ; In article <180720011236011830%paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>, ! paul.r.anderson@compaq.com wrote:   F > In article <aus-1807011117420001@wvia48.virologie.uni-wuerzburg.de>,/ > Hans M. Aus <aus@vim.uni-wuerzburg.de> wrote:  > N > > Is there an easy way to prevent the input tray switching when the selected > > tray is empty? > > L > > On our new HP4100DTN, we use plain paper in tray 2 and recycled paper inN > > tray 3. The problem is that the HP4100 automatically switches trays to the/ > > other tray when the selected tray is empty.  > > 4 > > Is there a NO_TRAY_SWITCH parameter in DCPS 2.0? > F > No.  Tray switching or linking or failover or locking (whatever it'sI > called on a particular printer) is handled by configuring the printer.  I > This type of setting is not one you'd typically want to set differently A > depending on what OS or software sends the file to the printer.  >  > Paul    J In the HP printer utility program, we can lock a tray by selecting a paperH type (form) other than "plain"; for example, "recycled". Now, however, aI DCPS job won't print because of a HP form mismatch. How do I set the DCPS  queue form to HP "recycled"?  J This, it seems to me, can get very complicated very fast. IMO, it would be@ much easier to turn off automatic tray switching on the printer.   Hans   --  B Cheers, Hans M. Aus, Wuerzburg, Germany,  aus@vim.uni-wuerzburg.de   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:26:49 -0400 0 From: Paul Anderson <paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>5 Subject: Re: ??== DCPS: Locking trays on a HP4100DTN. ; Message-ID: <190720011126494004%paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>   D In article <aus-1907010857120001@wvia48.virologie.uni-wuerzburg.de>,- Hans M. Aus <aus@vim.uni-wuerzburg.de> wrote:   L > In the HP printer utility program, we can lock a tray by selecting a paperJ > type (form) other than "plain"; for example, "recycled". Now, however, aK > DCPS job won't print because of a HP form mismatch. How do I set the DCPS  > queue form to HP "recycled"?  E You can't.  DCPS currently does not specify or select media types.  A E job sent to a specific tray should print from there regardless of the 1 media type selected in the printer configuration.   C I went to the front panel of my HP LaserJet 4050 and changed tray 4 D from PLAIN to RECYCLED.  My DCPS job printed from tray 4 just fine. @ Perhaps the HP utility program is doing something more than justE setting the media type on the tray.  However, the HP LaserJet Utility B on my Mac reflected that I had changed the media type and does not+ imply that any other settings were changed.   L > This, it seems to me, can get very complicated very fast. IMO, it would beB > much easier to turn off automatic tray switching on the printer.  D I agree, although I don't think HP has such a concept on this model.  E Perhaps there is some combination of printer settings that is causing  this behavior.   Paul   --    Paul Anderson   OpenVMS Engineering    Compaq Computer Corporation    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 23:16:33 -0700 + From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate - Message-ID: <9j5u0c$qor$1@nnrp1.phx.gblx.net>   + "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote ... 0 > "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com> wrote ..: > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message ...@ > > > "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com> wrote in message ...3 > > > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote ... B > > > > > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote ...G > > > > > > combination of nearly a decade of marketing malfeasance and I > > > > > > strategic blunders led to an economically unsustainable Alpha 	 > > > > > H > > > > > Terry, Compaq's own numbers prove that the above is a complete > > > > > crock of shit, > > > > H > > > > No, they don't.  Only Bill Todd's fantasy-based self-serving and? > > > > ultimately clueless spinning of those numbers does, and ( > > > > _that's_ the real crock of shit. > > E > > [ ... note that Bill Todd evaded my request for him to provide an N > >   indication that he has any clue at all about Alpha's market status  ...] > H > I didn't evade it:  I rejected it.  When you're in your current state,  8 Oh, and now Bill Todd can read minds over the Internet ?3 Yet another person who claims to be a net.telepath.   ? Clearly, one of Bill Todd's major character flaws is a complete = inability to recognize the limits of his own knowledge.  Hmm, , that's a trait he shares with psychotics ...  H > trying to carry on anything like a rational conversation with you is aH > complete waste of my time (not to mention unpleasant).  For just about3 > anyone else, I'd have been happy to recapitulate.   < Another person also asked.  Where is Bill's answer to them ?  2 I and anyone else keeping track know that Bill has: never posted a credible argument to support his assertions: about Alpha's commercial viability.  Unless Bill really is; psychotic, or is a complete idiot, he knows it too. Puerile ; excuse like "I'm not going to tell _you_ !" aren't going to  change any of that.   = But if Bill's past behavior is any indication, Bill's far too 7 much of a coward to ever admit he was just spouting BS. 4 And that's what he's probably trying to avoid doing.5 I guess he thinks the USENET readership is too stupid 5 to see through his lame attempts to duck the subject.   F > > > > If Bill Todd can't produce those numbers, it would then appearE > > > > that he doesn't know jack. Bill Todd would be exposed as just H > > > > another ignorant, conceited, hate-filled, crackpot USENET poser. > > > M > > > Gee, Dennis - as you've recently stated that you don't post when you're A > > > mad one could reasonably assume from the above that you may : > > > be actively psychotic. [... similar spew elided ...] > > > > > Actually, Bill, only someone who didn't know how to reason= > > from the data available to a supportable conclusion would > > > assume that.  That would be you, Bill.  Perhaps if you had= > > claimed "sociopathic", you might have been more credible.  > K > I think many will find 'psychotic' a reasonable fit if they care to check  > its definition.   C Yet another unsupported assertion from Bill Todd, who is apparently C not only a net.telepath but also a net.psychiatrist.  Can Bill even @ give one tiny example of anything I've written being the product? of psychosis ?  Or is that evidence, like Bill's "numbers" that > prove Alpha was still commercially viable, something that only4 Bill will ever see ?  (Or think he sees, anyway ...)  ? Bill apparently hasn't learned that personal attacks don't have 8 any effect when they are obviously untrue.  An effective8 personal attack has to be based either on something that= is true, or that the target thinks might be true, or that the 2 target is afraid other people might think is true.  5 No one with any knowledge of me is going to think I'm 8 psychotic.  Bill is just making himself look like a fool9 by that line of attack.  Bill is incompetent at  flaming. # One wonders why he does it so much.  --3 Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.com . Vanity Web Page http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:50:16 +0000 (UTC) ' From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb) 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate + Message-ID: <9j6e18$gbj$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   j In article <%wm57.951$rc5.63962@news.cpqcorp.net>, "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes: >   >Brannon Batson wrote in message5 ><4495ef1f.0107171720.77d813d2@posting.google.com>...  > 4 >>Jesus Fred, what the hell are you talking about... > + >I'm not sure this is the place to do this.  > F >>That is the only part of this whole thing that really pisses me off.H >>The fact that I've heard from a dozen different sources that there are? >>people within Compaq saying that "this was initiated by Alpha E >>architects", and "they would not be able to sustain the performance ( >>advantage" is just too much to handle. >  > J >I haven't seen anything that said it was the "Alpha Architects".  Rather,M >what I have been told is that this was the unexpected answer that eventually H >was arrived at to a question asked by a VP to a senior technical personG >(Fellow).  The question wasn't "how do we ditch Alpha", I think it was E >something like "Can we partner with someone to develop/build Alpha".  >     D I am not sure what the unexpected answer to that question would be. N Compaq were already partnering with other people to Build alpha ie they didn't own the FAB anymore.L In any case whether the answer was Yes or No why should that lead to killing Alpha ?       
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 08:03:16 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate ( Message-ID: <9j6i2k$jad$1@pyrite.mv.net>  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in message 6 news:cXg57.3131$N21.1174737@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net.../ > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote ... > > > > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote ...C > > > > combination of nearly a decade of marketing malfeasance and E > > > > strategic blunders led to an economically unsustainable Alpha  > business.  > > > J > > > Terry, Compaq's own numbers prove that the above is a complete crock of > > > shit,  > H > Is that so? I didn't attend a Public School, so please elucidate about yourG > claim. Based on the available evidence it is completely indefensible.   J Now that you seem to have un-kill-filed me, would you care to explain your flame Tuesday night?  H Meanwhile, I'd be happy to elucidate (and I've expanded the distribution- back to its original scope for the occasion):   F The Alpha annual development costs have been aired recently and often:H eetimes estimated them at $150 million (IIRC based on staffing), WinklerK provided a $300 million figure in a context that makes it unlikely to be at K all on the low side (especially considering that it's more than half of the J annual roughly $500 million projected for *all* DEC-related development inI the 1999 annual report, in which at the time storage was considered to be L the dominant feature), and you yourself have estimated them at $250 million.  I An adequate basis for my assertion requires little additional information G beyond VMS's profitability as of a bit over a year ago.  As you're well G aware, Compaq is tight-lipped about exactly where its profits come from J (they don't even seem to have any real 2000 annual report available on theD Web, at least from a quick search), so this is the best fine-grainedG evidence available and - again as you know - these figures come from an L unimpeachable source.  At that point in time, the annual VMS-related revenueL was about $4 billion (I've also heard $3.9 billion elsewhere) and the annual* VMS-related profit was about $800 million.  C Since then, VMS revenues have grown modestly (according to your own J statements) and there's no indication that VMS profits haven't remained atG least similar to what they were (besides, if they had plummeted, Compaq I would have little reason to be making even its current feeble attempts to G retain that customer base).  Even if we assume that this enumeration of I VMS's profits takes the broadest possible view, includes *all* VMS system J revenue and service, and does *not* include Alpha development costs, theseI VMS-related profits alone far more than cover *all* of Alpha development.   I Now, you didn't say that the Alpha business had sub-optimal profitability K (though in the context of the profitability of the rest of Compaq's stable, L save for Tandem, that statement would have been easy to contest as well), orF that the Alpha business had *marginal* profitability (a statement evenC easier to refute):  you said it was "economically unsustainable", a L statement so excessive that characterizing it as a "crock of shit" is richly- deserved even if we look no farther than VMS.   K But I'm not done yet, because of course VMS is not the sole source of Alpha K profits.  And while I don't have the definite figures in other areas that I ? had for VMS, I do have semi-quantitative data - often from you.   G Tru64 large server sales reportedly (I don't remember the citation, but B since Tru64 suffers from merely inadequate rather than effectivelyJ non-existent marketing this is hardly surprising) exceed VMS's, so the VMSG numbers above should (very) roughly double when *all* Alpha revenue and J profit is taken into account (plus at least something from the Alpha Linux contingent).  A And then there's the marketing issue itself - since "economically I unsustainable" clearly implies that Alpha was a dead duck *even if Compaq # had actually tried to make it fly*.   E Unfortunately we must again go back a bit over a year to find a solid K fine-grained figure.  And that figure is a $13 million marketing budget for K VMS.  But there's another figure available in the 1999 annual report:  $385 G million Compag advertising expenditures (seems suspiciously low to me - J perhaps because 'advertising' is only one aspect of 'marketing' - but I'llC use it).  Now, total Compaq revenues in 1999 were $38.5 billion, so K VMS-related revenue accounted for a tad over 10% of that.  And gross Compaq L income in 1999 was $8.7 billion, so VMS-related income (even if it was grossL income without adjustments for sales/administrative/R&D costs) accounted forD a tad under 10% of that.  And of course Compaq benefited from mutualD advertising underwritten by Microsoft and Intel, so had at least theL opportunity to shift at least a bit of that $385 million in the direction ofG its more profitable products (hint:  not the Microsoft- and Intel-based  ones).  K So it's clear that VMS was getting the decidedly short end of the marketing]I stick (if that wasn't clear already) - leaving aside any suspicion that a K fair amount of that VMS marketing money went toward generic or shared Alpha J advertising (the little of that that there was), since it's really hard toH remember seeing any VMS-specific marketing beyond some bouncing, lighted* balls (maybe it just went to salaries...).  C Since VMS has pretty regularly (your figures again, I believe) beenhI replacing something like 15% annual customer attrition with an equivalent J number of new customers *without* the benefit of noticeable marketing - orK convincing support of any kind - from Compaq, it's not much of a stretch tohL imagine that with even modest encouragement a significantly larger number ofH new customers could be attracted (hey, even if VMS accounts for half theH Alphas sold, it doesn't take that much to increase a mere 50,000 systemsL sold annually by a significant amount).  And since Tru64 marketing has been,K shall we say, less than aggressive, one might expect a bounce there as welloI with anything resembling visible 'commitment' (not the word, but the act)n from Compaq.  ! So let's add up the total so far:k  I 1.  VMS's annual profit alone makes the assertion that the Alpha business I was "economically unsustainable" correctly characterizable as "a crock ofc shit".  Q.E.D.  I 2.  The combination of VMS's and Tru64's annual profit (admittedly a less-F well-defined figure, but based on a sales-volume assertion which seemsL credible), plus a tad for Alpha Linux platforms, removes any questions aboutL even the possibly *marginal* nature of Alpha's profitability *even under the- existing not-so-benign neglect of its owner*.s  ; 3.  The fact that Compaq made no effort to market VMS and a G far-from-impressive effort to market Tru64 (and the resulting dampening K effect on customer confidence in the platform and in the vendor) means thatoK Alpha's profit potential was *at worst* significantly higher yet and indeeds" had no well-definable upper bound.  ? I'm beginning to think that "crock of shit" was much too kind apJ characterization, but I'll just let it stand.  And that's most of what wasB in my mind when I said it, though I suspect floating around in theH background was the analysis we did of the 1999 annual report well over a	 year ago.t  E "But wait!  All those figures were from a year ago, and we don't knoweH exactly what they meant even then!"  Kind of sounds like Dennis, who hasJ nothing to contribute to the conversation and apparently intensely resents  the fact that other people do...  G Well, we're really not likely to be able to get much more detail out ofrJ Compaq on this issue that's at all believable, but we can at least look atI associated figures from the same time and more recent ones as well to seen whether they seem consistent.   K The 1999 annual report lists revenue and income figures for 1999, 1998, andbI 1997, bracketing the DEC acquisition.  These figures suggest that the DEC-H portion of the Enterprise Solutions and Services portion of the businessK (DEC, Tandem, and IA32 servers) contributed a little over half of its $20.1eG billion in revenue - so imagining that VMS-related business contributednH about 1/3 of that DEC-related portion is not difficult (especially givenK that Tru64 has been growing faster than VMS in the time since then and thusy3 may have accounted for less than 1/3 at that time).   L [In that report, there's a moving sentiment from Mike Capellas that I'm sureJ will go straight to the hearts of his Alpha customers:  "Above all, we areL passionate about being advocates for our customers.  That means listening toJ them and responding to them.  This is the foundation upon which everything, else is built at Compaq."  But I digress...]  L Enterprise Solutions and Services *income* for 1999 was a mere $2.3 billion,L however.  So while VMS-related sales accounted for only about 20% of the ESSF revenue, they seem to have accounted for about 35% of its profit.  YouJ shouldn't be surprised by this, since IIRC you've always asserted that VMS5 was the high-margin leader in the Compaq product set.e  I What about other Compaq divisions in 1999?  Not so good, I'm afraid:  TheaJ consumer-PC division had $6 billion in revenue and $260 million in income,F while the business-PC division managed to *lose* $450 million on $12.2I billion in revenue.  Oh, dear:  I guess that means that while VMS-relatedhG business accounted for only a bit over 10% of overall Compaq revenue in J 1999, it seems to have accounted for something close to 40% of the (gross)K overall Compaq profit.  As I said, Tru64 may have accounted for a bit less, J but still likely a fairly respectable figure.  Tandem was recently said toK contribute something like $1.3 billion in annual revenue, and I'd guess itseG margins are similar to VMS's even if its gross is far smaller.  And, byeJ George, when you add all those up there's not a great deal left to accountH for, so the numbers in fact seem to be consistent with the VMS numbers II started out with - which isn't hard proof, but would need to be explainedb% away before asserting something else.l  F But one might still suggest that all this is ancient history and meansH nothing (well, some people who had no better objection to offer might, I guess).s  I The only 2000 annual report I could find (in the obvious location) was anaG html fluff piece from Capellas.  But I did find an interesting documentlI entitled Restated_Data.pdf  that contains annual 1999 results modified to K reflect the subsequent separation of Enterprise Solutions and Services intoaF Enterprise Computing and Compaq Global Services and the merging of theJ business and consumer PC divisions, plus quarterly results for all of 2000 using the same new structure.e  L It now becomes clear where the zero-dimensional minds at the Compaq helm gotA the idea that services was the Great New Thing to concentrate on:bK retroactively breaking out services in 1999 yielded $1 billion in income on J $7.4 billion in revenue, and the 2000 totals were similar ($884 million inE income on $7.5 billion in revenue).  Of course, a lot of that service E revenue is there only because the Compaq systems are there, but hey -i they're only accountants."  K On the other hand, Enterprise Computing revenue (now without Services) grewyK by 10% during the year 2000.  And while its 1999 (adjusted) income was onlylC $700 million (a figure that's hard to reconcile with the $1 billionM@ broken-out services contribution, since they don't add up to theL pre-break-up $2.3 billion figure:  I suspect they screwed up) on $13 billionC in revenue, its profits grew like gangbusters during 2000 (seems tomJ correlate with when Wildfire hit the streets) and the year closed out with3 $1.7 billion in income on $14.3 billion in revenue.   % "Economically unsustainable" my arse.a  K What of the combined consumer/business PC division?  Well, it pulled out ofrJ the 1999 hole it was in (the pre-merge figure was about -$190 million, butL the merged figure was -$386 million - go figure) and managed to eke out $240L million in income on $20.7 billion in revenue.  By comparison, it seems like. an awful lot of work for not very much result.  L The otherwise-largely-devoid-of-content annual report confirms this with theL observation:  "In fact, our enterprise businesses represented more than halfL of our revenue and nearly 90 percent of business segment operating profit in 2000."   [Cue 2001 theme]  H 2001Q1 figures also appear in the above document, and they're not good -L except for services, which actually maintained its revenue and increased itsD income by 10%.  Consumer/business PCs dropped back into the red, andL Enterprise Computing returned to its year-previous revenue and only half its year-previous income.n  J So did the bottom really fall out of Alpha after all and justify (as leastL from an extremely short-term perspective) its demise?  Nope:  the supportingD documentation (in a different document) for the Q1 figures says thatK 'storage and enterprise software' (which I guess means NSK, VMS, and Tru64, I since pretty much all the other 'enterprise software' got sold off a long L time ago) were continued strengths but that the main offsetting factor was aJ major slump in industry-standard server revenue and income (an 'aggressiveJ pricing environment', which when the phrase has appeared in other - alwaysJ PC-related - contexts seems to be Compaq-speak for selling below effective cost to maintain market share).c  D So here we are (in the Tijuana jail...):  PCs haven't contributed toL Compaq's profits for years and Intel servers are in a slump - so the obviousI solution is to get rid of the mainstay of Compaq's profits and get a cashhI infusion to prop up those failing low-end businesses until they can drainoL that cash away too.  'Incompetent' doesn't begin to describe it - and that'sH without even considering the effect that it had on customers or the liesA about Alpha's continued ability to lead in performance (which aretG consistently being refuted by the private comments of the engineers whoVK supposedly were the source of that fabrication - but that's another story).   @ Hope that's sufficient elucidation, 'cause I'm going to bed now.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:06:04 -0400d( From: Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com>1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicateE+ Message-ID: <3B56E94C.2453A0F7@bigfoot.com>C   Eric Smith wrote:r > ) > Pigs can fly, given enough thrust.  :-)   G I believe the technical term for that much thrust behind a pig is known. as "bacon".d   :)   HM   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:17:04 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>01 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate., Message-ID: <3B56EBDC.F702849C@videotron.ca>   Bill Todd wrote:K > 1.  VMS's annual profit alone makes the assertion that the Alpha businessyK > was "economically unsustainable" correctly characterizable as "a crock of- > shit".  Q.E.D.  M Accountant's job is to find a way to present the numbers that the board wantseN to see. They will group certain divisions so that the profits of the part theyN don't want will help the part that they want. Or they will shift many costs to- one division to make it appear to lose money.n  L So if Compaq wants to prortray Alpha as losing money, they will succeed with any basic creative accounting.  N Look at how Palmer had managed to hide the fact that the Hudson FAB was losingM 200 million per year for so long, only revealing that fact when Intel took itaJ from DEC in exchange for DEC allowing Intel to use the technologies it hadN stolen from Alpha. During that time, I suspect that many departments had borne? the brunt of that 200 million loss through creative accounting.e    I So if Compaq wants to paint Alpha as money losing, I am sure it can do sorL succesfully. If Compaq wants to paint Alpha as a winner, I am sure it can do so succesfully.C  K All these years, I have heard the argument that VMS was a real cash cow foroM Compaq and contributed most of its profits. Yet, during financial statements,nF Compaq never mentioned VMS and always focused its profit generation on2 industry standard enterprise servers and services.  F If VMS had been a key platform for Compaq with a true long term GROWTHK commitment, don't you think that Compaq would have flaunted VMS as a profitnD generator and marketed VMS so that Wall Street Casino Analysts wouldI understand that Compaq was more than a box maker (eg: start to compare it"! against IBM/HP instead of Dell) ?   E If Compaq tried hard to prevent the fact that VMS was its main profit M generator from becoming public, perhaps it is because Compaq didn't want WalluK Street to start to beleive that Compaq depended on a product with no future-  for a big chunk of its profits.   V I can draw 2 possible conclusions from the omission of VMS from the Compaq financials:D 	-it actually doesn't generate that much profit compared to the rest= 	-VMS doesn't have long term strategic commitment from Compaq.    E Remember when IBM had announced that its financials had been saved by L mainframe revenus that had continued to grow, unaffected by the .com crash ?K Everyone expected Compaq to come out and say that Compaq's revenus had beenaM saved by VMS and TRU64. But no, Compaq found a way to tell the world that its K revenus had been saved by its enterprise servers such as proliant and tru64  and NSK, but no mention of VMS.e    N However, there may be an upside to this hiding of VMS. If one assumes that VMSH actually doesn't generate that much profit overall (for instance, if youK include its share of Alpha development etc etc), then grouping VMS with thefN others, including the enterprise wintel servers may be a good thing. If CompaqM were to make public that VMS wasn't actually making that much money, then the S current VMS customers would know that VMS's death was impending and switch vendors.o  J While Compaq may not want VMS to grow, it is fairly clear that Compaq willK work hard to keep the remaining key customers and let the rest (smaller VMScG shops) go. I beleive that Compaq has statistics that show that previouscM attempts of migrating VMS customers to unix or NT failed with those customerstN going to other vendors. So Compaq knows that until it has a viable alternativeI to VMS, it is best to keep those high yield customers and once acceptableaM solutiosn appear on a core platform, make such a solution appealing enough tomN get these customers to migrate to it on their own (thus not ruling out Compaq,: especially if the software solution is offered by Compaq).  N Note that Tandem had purchased many of the ISVs that had been writing softwareN for NSK, even some which were perenial money losers since overall, the sale of' that software was a big win for Tandem.oN When Compaq bought Tandem, it sold many (if not all) of these companies. (Does Tandem still have Atalla ?).  H So for Compaq to announce it was going to spend 500 million bucks to buyL software and solutions companies is a huge reversal in its strategy comparedI to a few years ago when it dumped such companies from Tandem's portfolio.e  I What remains to be seen is whether Compaq will buy Wintel based solutions'G providers or NSK-VMS-Unix ones or a mix thereof. This will dictate what  Compaq's true intentions are.    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:31:16 GMTv. From: "Duane Sand" <duane.sand@mindspring.com>1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatemA Message-ID: <UaC57.228123$%i7.128623392@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>y   JF Mezei wrote:nJ > ... Tandem had purchased many of the ISVs that had been writing softwareD > for NSK, even some which were perenial money losers since overall,5 > the sale of that software was a big win for Tandem. J > When Compaq bought Tandem, it sold many (if not all) of these companies.( > (Does Tandem still have Atalla ?). ...   Yes, Atalla is still with us.v   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 07:54:34 -0700a+ From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate - Message-ID: <9j6sbv$4no$1@nnrp2.phx.gblx.net>n  + "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote ... : > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote ...1 > > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote ...a@ > > > > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote ...E > > > > > combination of nearly a decade of marketing malfeasance andeG > > > > > strategic blunders led to an economically unsustainable Alphaa
 > > business.  > > > >t= > > > > Terry, Compaq's own numbers prove that the above is ao  > > > > complete crock of  shit, > >e( > > [...] so please elucidate about yourI > > claim. Based on the available evidence it is completely indefensible.l >o- > Now that you seem to have un-kill-filed me,p  : That's an invalid assumption: perhaps Terry Shannon saw my follow-up to Bill Todd's post.  A My commentary below will serve as a primer on how to read through @ typical USENET BS.  In summary, it shall be shown that Bill ToddB took one current cost number, and a revenue and profit figure thatC is over a year (and one dot.com bubble-burst) old (and therefor may J be completely irrelevant to the current market conditions), and then spinsA a bunch of self-serving assumptions and "imaginings" to create aneC argument to support his pre-conceived conclusion.  Really bad form.  Don't try this at home, kids !  A > The Alpha annual development costs [...] eetimes estimated themeH > at $150 million [...] Winkler provided a $300 million figure [...] andE > you [ Terry Shannon ] yourself have estimated them at $250 million.m  	 Problems:w  F 1. Only Winkler is in a position to know these costs (Compaq Exec VP).A   However, even this number lacks the reference to where and when 6   Winkler made this claim, so its credibility suffers.  A 2. This number is, apparently, about current cost levels: it doeso9   not indicate how much Compaq would have to spend in thelA   future to stay competitive, and it could be argued that currenteA   spending levels have not been enough to keep Alpha competitive.i  : 3. This number does not necessarily include other costs of6   bringing Alpha systems to market, such as supporting-   third-part development and other marketing.n  K > An adequate basis for my assertion requires little additional information 9 > beyond VMS's profitability as of a bit over a year ago.o  G 4. "A bit over a year ago" is irrelevant.  Times were good "over a year C   ago": profits were at record levels in the computer industry, andi@   were limited in some cases by production capacity, not demand.  H > [...] Compaq is tight-lipped about exactly where its profits come from5 > so this is the best fine-grained evidence availablet  ? 5. Note that in actuality, Bill Todd has not actually presentedn=   any "fine-grained evidence".  Only the $300million cost forf   present Alpha development is  7 > At that point in time, the annual VMS-related revenuep? > was about $4 billion (I've also heard $3.9 billion elsewhere)v  5 6. Note the mismatch of "Alpha development costs" andt7   "VMS-related revenue".   The former excludes A lot ofa=   VMS development costs, the latter includes a lot of revenue 7   that is not based on Alpha development, like services     sales to legacy installations.   > and the annual, > VMS-related profit was about $800 million.  = 7. As this number is unattributed, it has little credibility.o  A 8. Note that this is "over a year ago", and that industry profits 9   have declined as much as 90% (or become losses even) inn>   the year that followed.  Bill Todd presents no evidence that)   VMS is currently a profitable business.n  9 9. Again, even though these old numbers are irrelevant to <   today's marketplace, Bill Todd does not split them up into?   profit on new hardware versus profit on services and softwaret#   sold to legacy VMS installations.   E > Since then, VMS revenues have grown modestly (according to your owneL > statements) and there's no indication that VMS profits haven't remained at! > least similar to what they wereq  D 9. The assumption that VMS profits have not declined is unsupported,@   it's just a convenient one for the person making the argument.  ) > (besides, if they had plummeted, CompaqfK > would have little reason to be making even its current feeble attempts too > retain that customer base).E  F 10. No reasoning is given for this statement, and there is good reasonG   to believe it isn't true.  A company tries to at least _appear_ to betO   loyal to it's customer base, after all.  And their is considerable investmentnJ   in the processor-agnostic OS's and other software, and in the processor-G   agnostic system-level technologies, that Compaq may want to leverage.o9   Bill Todd is just making more self-serving assumptions.    >  Even if we assume  H 11: Bill Todd is "assuming" (again) because he just plain does not know.   >  that this enumeration ofrK > VMS's profits takes the broadest possible view, includes *all* VMS systemtL > revenue and service, and does *not* include Alpha development costs, theseK > VMS-related profits alone far more than cover *all* of Alpha development.i  C 11. Beyond the fact that these "profits" may no longer exist, since @   they are stale numbers from the dot.com boom times,  this doesC   nothing to prove Alpha is commercially viable.  Alpha developmentlH   only matters to new system sales: if service sales to  legacy accountsB   is the generating the vast majority of VMS-related profits, thenF   those profits do not give Alpha economic viability.  Service profitsH   would, in that case, be subsidizing an unprofitable hardware business.B  However, Bill Todd does not know whether this is the case or not.  B 12. With regard to future system sales supporting service revenue:D   future Itanium-based sales will too.  And since Itanium is used by<   many other hardware vendors, Itanium also gives Compaq theA   opportunity to get service revenue for other vendor's hardware,aA   something Alpha does not, and without having to pay the cost of    developing Alpha CPUs.  L > Now, you [Terry Shannon] [...] said it was "economically unsustainable", aN > statement so excessive that characterizing it as a "crock of shit" is richly/ > deserved even if we look no farther than VMS.   E 13. Note that Bill Todd has conveniently ignored a few possibilities,sC   for example, it may be that future foundry processes available to ?   Compaq will not be the right kinds of processes to keep Alpha)D   competitive.  Not being privy to the future plans of the companies@   currently providing fab service to Compaq, he can't know that.B   If Compaq has to buy into a fab for Alpha (such as by partnering6   with AMD on a fab) then the cost of Alpha skyrocket.  D > But I'm not done yet, because of course VMS is not the sole source > of Alpha profits.a  ; 14.  Note that Bill Todd has not demonstrated that Compaq's A   "VMS-related" business actually _is_ a source of Alpha profits.aA   This is a typical propaganda trick: try to move into a argumentn5   before the reader can find the hole in the old one.   C > And while I don't have the definite figures in other areas that I A > had for VMS, I do have semi-quantitative data - often from you.e  < 15. Note that  Terry Shannon probably has other data, beyond)   those he's made available to Bill Todd.e  E > Tru64 large server sales reportedly (I don't remember the citation,n > [...]   = 16. So, it's possible Bill Todd is just making this stuff up.h  C > And then there's the marketing issue itself - since "economically K > unsustainable" clearly implies that Alpha was a dead duck *even if Compaqc% > had actually tried to make it fly*.p  : 17. Bill Todd apparently assumes that Compaq could make it9   fly without spending a gawd-awful amount of money.  Why0B   does Bill believe that it would take less than, say, a marketingC   expenditure on the level of Sun Microsystems's to "make it fly" ?n>   Because such an expenditure destroys his argument, probably.  = > Unfortunately we must again go back a bit over a year [...]h  ; 18.  Again, year-old numbers are not good indicators of thel4   present, and even poorer indicators of the future.  M > So it's clear that VMS was getting the decidedly short end of the marketing , > stick (if that wasn't clear already) [...]  D 19. This entire paragraph of Bill's had no relevance on the issue of   Alpha's economic viability.i  E > Since VMS has pretty regularly (your figures again, I believe) beeneK > replacing something like 15% annual customer attrition with an equivalentg > number of new customers [...]h  C 20. "Number of customers" isn't a good indicator of market success,oB   especially if your new customers are small and your ex-customers   were big.d    >  it's not much of a stretch toN > imagine that with even modest encouragement a significantly larger number of" > new customers could be attracted  L 21. Like much of Bill's arguments, this one relies on him "imagining" thingsK   that he gives no reason for anyone to believe are true.  And on the basis N   of these "imaginings", he calls other people's statements "a crock of shit".  # > So let's add up the total so far:o >a > 1.  VMS's annual profit alone,  P 22. Bill Todd actually has no clue what VMS-related profits were this past year.  - > makes the assertion that the Alpha business K > was "economically unsustainable" correctly characterizable as "a crock ofe > shit".  Q.E.D.  A 23. By analogy, Bill Todd's argument is equivalent to saying thatdB   the fact the Boeing makes money off of 737's implies that BoeingC   should be developing it's own aircraft engines.  This argument isrG   of course invalid, and Boeing buys its jet engines from the companiesp@   that make jet engines for all the other airline manufacturers.  K > 2.  The combination of VMS's and Tru64's annual profit (admittedly a lessn > well-defined figure, [...]  @ 24. In fact, Bill Todd has not ever presented the current annualA   profit levels of either business.  So how can he combine them ?c  = > 3.  The fact that Compaq made no effort to market VMS and a I > far-from-impressive effort to market Tru64 (and the resulting dampeningbM > effect on customer confidence in the platform and in the vendor) means that M > Alpha's profit potential was *at worst* significantly higher yet and indeede$ > had no well-definable upper bound.  9 25. Bill Todd has offered no support for this conclusion.h?   It may be that VMS sales are saturated (since they apparentlyo@   target specialized markets), and that no amount of advertising   would increase them.  G > "But wait!  All those figures were from a year ago, and we don't knowsB > exactly what they meant even then!"  Kind of sounds like Dennis,  - What _is_ Bill Todd's obsession with me ? :-)-  I > Well, we're really not likely to be able to get much more detail out ofFL > Compaq on this issue that's at all believable, but we can at least look atK > associated figures from the same time and more recent ones as well to see: > whether they seem consistent.   = ... and pretend the recent industry downturn, which AMD's CEO A called "the sharpest he's ever seen", never happened ... armchair D CEO's can "pretend" like that if they like; really CEO's should not.  8 [ ... all Bill Todd's Compaq-1999 analysis deleted ... ]  E 26. Detailed analysis of irrelevant material is a typical smokescreent0   used by people with no really applicable data.  H > But one might still suggest that all this is ancient history and means	 > nothingo  B 27. This is, in fact, the case.  Take any company in this industryB   and compare their Q2-2000 and Q2-2001 financials, and you'll see@    how obviously true it is.  But can Bill prove it isn't ?  ...  F > The only 2000 annual report [...] I did find an interesting documentE > entitled Restated_Data.pdf  that contains annual 1999 results [...]e  @ 28.  More irrelevancies, meant to serve as a smokescreen to hide$   the weakness of the real argument.   > [Cue 2001 theme] >nJ > 2001Q1 figures also appear in the above document, and they're not good -N > except for services, which actually maintained its revenue and increased itsF > income by 10%.  Consumer/business PCs dropped back into the red, andN > Enterprise Computing returned to its year-previous revenue and only half its > year-previous income.a >aL > So did the bottom really fall out of Alpha after all and justify (as leastN > from an extremely short-term perspective) its demise?  Nope:  the supportingF > documentation (in a different document) for the Q1 figures says that# > 'storage and enterprise software'V  9 29. How does Bill Todd figure _software_ sales prove that 8   the bottom did not fall out of Alpha ?  Software sales5   can continue even though hardware sales are _dead_. '   The is a completely invalid argument.   + > (which I guess means NSK, VMS, and Tru64,eK > since pretty much all the other 'enterprise software' got sold off a long $ > time ago) were continued strengths  H 30. Note that "storage and enterprise" may include IA-32/WinNT products.J   Bill Todd self-servingly "guesses" that it doesn't. But he doesn't know.  F > So here we are (in the Tijuana jail...):  PCs haven't contributed to= > Compaq's profits for years and Intel servers are in a slumpa  > 31. Bill Todd dishonestly compares 1999 boom-time VMS business<   to Q2-2001 bust-time IA-32 business.  This is obviously an;   apples-to-lemons comparison, of no relevance to anything.r  8 32. Note that Alpha-based systems may be in a slump, but=   Bill Todd won't even consider that possibility, even though %   he has no data that says otherwise.   B > Hope that's sufficient elucidation, 'cause I'm going to bed now.  ? 33. A we have seen, Bill Todd has only two pieces of hard data:y<   Winkler's "cost" number, and old VMS revenue numbers.  TheA   rest of his argument is self-serving guesses, "imaginings", andV<   assumptions.  He also ignores relevant factors if they are;   inconvenient to his argument (like future fab issues) Hisw@   conclusion remains, therefor, completely unsupported by facts. --3 Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.comh. Vanity Web Page http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:00:11 -0500e+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>h1 Subject: RE: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatesL Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF1170DA37@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Dennis O'Connor [mailto:dmoc@primenet.com]  - > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote ...e  7 > No one with any knowledge of me is going to think I'mr: > psychotic.  Bill is just making himself look like a fool; > by that line of attack.  Bill is incompetent at  flaming.o% > One wonders why he does it so much.   G Your speaking of bill in the third person when replying to his own postm! gives me doubt of your sanity. :)n   Regards,   Chrise  ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developers Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");n 'i  o   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:28:40 GMTC From: "Bill" <billmuy@home.com> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicateo? Message-ID: <cNE57.377319$p33.7568960@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com>w  2 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message" news:9j6i2k$jad$1@pyrite.mv.net... >    [...]r  I > beyond VMS's profitability as of a bit over a year ago.  As you're well I > aware, Compaq is tight-lipped about exactly where its profits come from-L > (they don't even seem to have any real 2000 annual report available on theF > Web, at least from a quick search), so this is the best fine-grainedI > evidence available and - again as you know - these figures come from anoF > unimpeachable source.  At that point in time, the annual VMS-related revenuedG > was about $4 billion (I've also heard $3.9 billion elsewhere) and thes annual, > VMS-related profit was about $800 million. >   K CPQ's FY2K Annual Report exists online.  It's known as a 10-K report and itsE was posted in the SEC EDGAR database in Feb '01.  You can read it at:s  L http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/714154/000089056601000112/0000890566-
 01-000112.txtr   Bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:25:26 -0000o- From: wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer).1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatet/ Message-ID: <tle6068b4br9d1@news.supernews.com>n  5 terryshannon@mediaone.net (Terry C. Shannon) wrote in 0 <_z_47.423$N21.426680@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>:    >dI >I agree, but the combination of nearly a decade of marketing malfeasance B >and strategic blunders led to an economically unsustainable Alpha >business. l  -- snip --   G Either the Alpha architecture would eventually run out of steam and be oI surpassed by IPF, or the Alpha business was "economically unsustainable".d  J Compaq's press release said the former. Terry has now stated the latter.    A I'm no hardware engineer, but if you choke off funding for Alpha h= development, I'm pretty darn sure it won't stay ahead of IPF.w  J So in Compaq-speak, I'm hearing:  "We've decided to shrink our investment I in Alpha in the coming years, therefore Alpha cannot stay ahead of IPF.  lI But tell the customers just that second part - and give it a technical /   engineering spin please"..  F I would assume the only reason we haven't seen the actual engineering L arguments, or financial numbers, is because they're unkown or contradictory G - but either way - not the best supporting docs for a decision of this o scope.   ws   --     Warren Spencer Senior Software Engineer The Associated Press  L ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements - neither do I  **   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:10:49 +0200i& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>/ Subject: Re: Compaq FUD and lack of informatione* Message-ID: <3B571499.2DF74206@dplanet.ch>  E In your statement here you said " a team of engineers here in OpenVMSlD has been performing the initial research and design work for the IPF@ port for roughly thirteen days now."  To my way of thinking thisH suggests that you had no preparation prior to June 24 and hence were "in
 the dark".  F That you have often said that you currently have no answers to many ofD the questions suggests that you have been left in the dark by Compaq management.s  H The arrival of the IPF documentation "tonight" indicates that it is onlyH now that you are obtaining some basic details about the task in front of you.  G To me, this situation shows a lack of proper planning and investigation"= by Compaq.  One would have thought that, at the very least, ayE feasibility study would have taken place and that any major stumblingnH blocks had been resolved, maybe to the point of an in-house demonstrableE system.  (Given that you are a senior engineer, I would have expected D you to be involved in such work and already be familiar with the IPFG documentation.)  One might also have expected that Compaq looked at the H various options, such as IBM's processor or even Mr Palmer's AMD, before making any decision.  E I would certainly not expect a public demonstration of VMS on IA64 at F CETS.  On the other hand I had expected better information from Compaq- as to how they believe the scenario will run.e   For example,G - with the introduction of Alpha we had parallel streams of VMS running H for about 10 years. Is a similar situation planned for the transition to IPF ?tH - are there any thoughts about how long the last version of VMS on Alpha will be supported ?eH - is the most likely scenario a processor swap, a board swap, a complete
 box swap ?  < These are issues that may affect the future plans of many ITH departments.  Sure three years is a long way out at the moment but there? will be sites who see this as a decisive factor in their future.H purchases.  If options were finely balanced now the decision might be toD move to another platform rather than perhaps be forced to do so in 3? years.  The lack of information from Compaq is making the wholes situation very uncertain.n  G Are we in fact looking at the tItanic and the smarter rats should leaven now ?'     John       Hoff Hoffman wrote:n > U > In article <3B55C696.1E9C611E@dplanet.ch>, John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> writes:v > K > :It seems clear from recent postings that Sue S, Hoff, Kerry and Fred aregF > :in the dark as much as we are on this.  I suspect that if they knewK > :anything of substance there would be subtle hints and guidance from one,t > :some, or all of them. > F >   I need an antecedent.  What is "this" that I am in the dark about?E >   (And will this reply itself be construed as an admission to beingo' >   in or at least near "the dark"? :-)d > G >   As I have commented before, a team of engineers here in OpenVMS hasrI >   been performing the initial research and design work for the IPF porttK >   for roughly thirteen days now, given the holiday week and not includingaE >   a barrage of meetings.  While these thirteen days have been quiteaD >   productive -- my printed IPF documentation set arrived just thisE >   morning, some light reading for tonight -- we may not have enoughS >   detail quite yet.  > I >   I do expect we will have additional information and details availablerH >   for and included in the CETS2001 presentations on porting OpenVMS toG >   IPF.  (No, we probably won't have an early demonstration of OpenVMSa% >   bootstrapping on IPF by then. :-)  > P >  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------L >       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comP >  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------N >    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 07:18:44 GMTk. From: "Duane Sand" <duane.sand@mindspring.com>* Subject: Re: Compaq have committed suicideA Message-ID: <oRv57.227374$%i7.128170844@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>t   > |> "mulp" wrote:B > |> > However, two RISC machines were rejected as targets for VMSG > > > because they lacked the required features to allow VMS to be VMS.h   > Duane Sand wrote: @ > |> I suppose one machine was MIPS.  That has only 2 levels for kernel/user,D > |> not the 4 used by VMS.  And the negative half of 32-bit virtual	 addressesaI > |> has a fixed usage.  If those were the problems, they could have beeno: > |> easily fixed by some minor cooperation from Mips Inc.   Bill Gunshannon asked:> > And what would have been the incentive for Mips Inc. to make' > these changes to their architecture??t  = If the changes could be done as optional modes in addition toeD the standard Mips priv arch, and be cheaply done with no degradationA to cycle time, then I'd guess that Mips Inc circa 1992 would havei= gladly added a few minor circuits for their biggest customer.)> I thought Digital was selling far more Mips-based unix systems= than Mips was selling itself.  And Mips was often looking fora; occasional cash infusions; it didn't yet have a steady cash'5 stream from chip royalties.  Talk two architects intoA6 liking your proposal, wave some ready cash, and voila!   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:33:42 -0400d& From: Jerome Fine <jhfine@idirect.com>* Subject: Re: Compaq have committed suicide+ Message-ID: <3B56EFC6.F49630DC@idirect.com>    >Fred Kleinsorge wrote:e  N > Why?  Did the VAX -> Alpha migration mean this?  Do you *really* care if theJ > platform you are running is "Alpha Inside"?  What if we had been able toK > build a VAX as fast as an Alpha?  The commitment is to OpenVMS.  So under L > the covers, it'll be some other architecture - as long as it's VMS *do youI > really care*?  Yes, there are some issues about how to get from here toCM > there, but we are giving you are assurance that our intent is to make it asmL > simple as compile-and-go (no source changes) - and even the possibility ofG > binary emulation for code that cannot be recompiled for one reason ore
 > another. >tM > We're not killing the Alpha any more than the VAX.  Just phasing it out forxL > future systems.  You'll still get support.  New versions.  Mixed clusters. >cL > And we gave you a lot of lead time, and the promise of a new generation ofN > faster, bigger, better systems before new Alpha platform development ceases. >a' > Duncan Macdonald wrote in message ...t< > >By dropping the Alpha in the manner that they did, Compaq> > >have shown that they are not committed to long term support$ > >and development of their systems.   Jerome Fine replies:  D While only time will actually show what Compaq really intends to do,C I suspect that the drop on future VMS sales will be used to justifyu* not completing the port of VMS to the IPF.  C If Compaq had already finished the port to the IPF hardware, as DECi= basically did with the Alpha hardware BEFORE the announcementg= was made that the VAX hardware was not going to be continued,nF then there would be some creditable possibility that VMS will continue to be supported in the future.  A There have been far too many promises in the past by both DEC and J Compaq which have not been carried out.  In many cases, internal decisionsD seem to have been made by upper management as to what the goals wereH going to be.  Then, the customers were led down the garden path a numberK of times as these actual goals were the results rather than the promises, .e  H However, it should be noted that Palmer was probably not the real personJ responsible for the fiasco. Most likely less than a dozen key decisions byE Ken Olsen in the 1980s decade laid the ground work for DEC's eventualaK downfall.  Ken's inability to compete in a high volume/low mark-up industrygB (as opposed to the low volume/high mark-up model developed by IBM)E seems to be the most likely reason as to why only IBM is still aroundnG after all of the other seven dwarfs have disappeared into history.  And E of course the gullibility of so many people who believe the marketingl< and sales people who often will say anything to make a sale.   Sincerely yours,   Jerome Finen   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jul 2001 16:14:31 GMT  From: Cthulhu <cthulhu@rlyeh.it> Subject: Creating TK50 imagesn) Message-ID: <9j7117$6ii$2@kadath.deep.it>t   Is the command:u  2     $ BACKUP MUA0:[000000]*.* MYFILE.BCK /SAVE_SET  F the right way to generate an image of a TK50 (wich I suppose is calledE MUA0:), being able to restore it stright onto another TK50 elsewhere?l   	duplicatingly,5 	   Cthulhua   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:20:32 -0400s+ From: "Rick Barry" <barry@star.zko.dec.com>eR Subject: Re: CSWS / Apache 1.1 - how to get Http_cookies in CGI (.com file) - help2 Message-ID: <EbB57.990$rc5.65776@news.cpqcorp.net>  . "HDC.HHA.DK" <mip@hdc.hha.dk> wrote in message* news:003e01c1101d$b33a8f60$09c9e282@MIP... >  >l! > Running Test-cgi-vms.exe I get:  >e' > getenv(HTTP_COOKIE)       is |(NULL)|  >  > even if a cookie is set. >p( > I set a cookie like always done with : >t4 > $       WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Content-Type: text/html"E > $       WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "set-Cookie: NAME=''some_symbol'; path=/;"o >sI > and had expected to get a symbol (or logical) HTTP_COOKIE ( at least 2.a time >  i call it). >vG > Do I have to include a module (like MOD_ENV) to get it set (and how)?t > I > Hope some can help me - geting away from a very old version of PurveyorsI >  (running ok, but there is a lot of good applications running on apache  > (likeeL >  webmail, IMAP connected to PMDF), and we do use a lot of Our own cookie's > in, >  old .COM files so need to get HTTP_COOKIE >o$ > __________________________________ >  > Mikael Neumann Poulsen
 >  IT Dep.  >  The Aarhus School of Business >  Phone. +45 8948 6502l >e >   < Everything you need for cookies is already available to you.   Try the following CGI script:.   (TEST-COOKIE.COM)e   $! $! This script sets a cookie._ $!0 $    write sys$output "Content-Type: text/plain"% $    if p1 .nes. "" .and. p2 .nes. "" 	 $    thenc; $        write sys$output "Set-Cookie: ''p1'=''p2'; path=/"2 $        write sys$output ""? $        write sys$output "There should be a cookie there now!"x	 $    elser $        write sys$output "". $        write sys$output "No cookie for you!"
 $    endif $ exit 1   In your browser, type the URL:  / http://your.domain.name/cgi-bin/test-cookie?a+bo  > This will set a cookie named "a" to the value "b". If you editC TEST-CGI-VMS.COM to display the value of HTTP_COOKIE (it doesn't byt$ default), you should see the cookie.  
 Rick Barry Compaq Secure Web Server Compaq Computer Corporationf
 Nashua, NH   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 08:40:28 +02009# From: "HDC.HHA.DK" <mip@hdc.hha.dk>_V Subject: Help:   CSWS / Apache 1.1 - how to get Http_cookies in CGI (.com file) - help0 Message-ID: <003e01c1101d$b33a8f60$09c9e282@MIP>   Running Test-cgi-vms.exe I get:   % getenv(HTTP_COOKIE)       is |(NULL)|T   even if a cookie is set.  & I set a cookie like always done with :  2 $       WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Content-Type: text/html"C $       WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "set-Cookie: NAME=''some_symbol'; path=/;"u  L and had expected to get a symbol (or logical) HTTP_COOKIE ( at least 2. time  i call it).  E Do I have to include a module (like MOD_ENV) to get it set (and how)?p  G Hope some can help me - geting away from a very old version of PurveyorsG  (running ok, but there is a lot of good applications running on apaches (like J  webmail, IMAP connected to PMDF), and we do use a lot of Our own cookie's in*  old .COM files so need to get HTTP_COOKIE  " __________________________________   Mikael Neumann Poulsen  IT Dep.  The Aarhus School of Business  Phone. +45 8948 6502o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:13:49 -0400h/ From: "Jason Beaver" <jbeaver@zydecodirect.com>a Subject: Landscape4 Message-ID: <AWB57.264512$Z2.3215243@nnrp1.uunet.ca>   Well,r  J I got my printer working, but now I need to know how to print landscape...  ) TCPWare to HP Laserjet 5si via port 9100.n  5 I can print everything fine, but landscape eludes me.c  % I am using Process Softwares TCPWare.p   Any solutions.   Thanks   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:23:22 GMTw$ From: Scott Vieth <svieth@wi.rr.com> Subject: Re: Landscape) Message-ID: <3B56FC0E.1E80CAA2@wi.rr.com>h  J Create a form for the print queue that points to the 5si that contains the; escape codes to get the printer to shift to landscape mode.D  
 -scott :^)   Jason Beaver wrote:O   > Well,s >-L > I got my printer working, but now I need to know how to print landscape... >d+ > TCPWare to HP Laserjet 5si via port 9100.  >w7 > I can print everything fine, but landscape eludes me.  >t' > I am using Process Softwares TCPWare.a >i > Any solutions. >s > Thanks   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:29:23 -0400f0 From: Paul Anderson <paul.r.anderson@compaq.com> Subject: Re: Landscape; Message-ID: <190720011129233222%paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>,  A In article <AWB57.264512$Z2.3215243@nnrp1.uunet.ca>, Jason Beaver(! <jbeaver@zydecodirect.com> wrote:   L > I got my printer working, but now I need to know how to print landscape...+ > TCPWare to HP Laserjet 5si via port 9100.u  F If you are using DECprint Supervisor (DCPS) to print, select landscapeC via /PARAMETERS=PAGE_ORIENTATION=LANDSCAPE on the command line.  IfdF not, you can include PCL escape sequences or PostScript code to change- to landscape mode in a device control module.i   Paul   -- o  Paul Anderson   OpenVMS Engineeringr   Compaq Computer Corporation    ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jul 01 13:54:56 EDT! From: smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edui* Subject: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3- Message-ID: <M1wUNFrREJ5I@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu>d  M Don't ask why, but I still like to use DECWRITE to edit old documents on the a* workstation rather than MS Word on my Mac.  N However, after upgrading to 7.3 DECWRITE won't open any more due to a missing  file...n  M -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not found MCRC16$DKA100:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB]n XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE  K During the upgrade from 7.2-1 the installation script skipped installing 4 eK files that had to be grabbed off the CD to make VMS work at all (got a bit 7M paniced over that, btw, apparently there was a note on more recent copies of -& the Release notes, but not all, sadly)  N Anyway, XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE isn't on the 7.3 CD and isn't part of the DECWRITE P installation.  I imagine I can go get it from a 7.2 backup tape, but I'd rather I find out what happened in case there is more to do than replace just one 1
 missing file.. -- dL +------------ 8F EF 51 4E 4F 23 22 AF  6A 41 D6 C0 AE 31 B1 82 ------------+L |Ross Smith, Academic Computing (RCR), NYU-SoM, 550 First Ave, NY, NY 10016|L |E-Mail:  SMITHP01@MED.NYU.EDU   Phone:  (212)263-5356:  FAX: (212)263-8139|L +-------------- <http://www.med.nyu.edu/people/P.Smith.html> --------------+   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:35:09 GMT 3 From: "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam> ) Subject: Re: My final take on the subjectA. Message-ID: <1uA57.12925$N97.6893@news.iol.ie>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3B55B0CB.AF39A560@videotron.ca... > Patrick Young wrote:E > > OTOH, if as many here seem to fear, written, or implied, down theeI > > track Compaq decide OpenVMS and Tru-64 go the way of the Alpha then IeH > > will _personally_ see to it our workplace never buys a single Compaq > > product again. >iK > But what if Compaq, through its new software/support growth plan, has theyI > solutions that will allow you to migrate away from VMS to NT and Compaq- has  > the best available solution ?n >eG > What if Compaq gets to know its remaining VMS customers very well andh knowstC > exactly what software/features are needed on NT to convince these  customers to- > move to NT wich may offer better solutions?d  J Doesn't matter.  The safest way to ensure that Compaq never drop VMS is ifG enough of their customers make it clear to them that as far as they are L concerned future business with Compaq is dependent on future support of VMS.  8 I concur wholeheartedly with Patrick on both his points.   Tom Wade   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:21:51 -0400c- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>a) Subject: Re: My final take on the subjectn, Message-ID: <3B56ECFB.811E6EFB@videotron.ca>   Tom Wade wrote:bL > Doesn't matter.  The safest way to ensure that Compaq never drop VMS is ifI > enough of their customers make it clear to them that as far as they arehN > concerned future business with Compaq is dependent on future support of VMS.  J Such a statement obviously would come from a VMS bigot. Corporations don'tE care what OS they use, they care about a cheap solution that providesmL acceptable uptime and more importantly, they care about a platform that runs the software they want.y   They want NOTES ? Not on VMS They want SAP   ? Not on VMS They want Exchange ? Not on VMSeC and the list goes on of the softwrae PHBs are conditionned to want.   L If Compaq beleives that NT is just a few years away from being able to matchN enough of current VMS customers's needs, and just a few years away from havingK enterprise quality software on NT, then it woudl explain very well Compaq's  current actions.   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 07:39:51 +0000 (UTC)i6 From: christian.bauer@akt-infosys.de (Christian Bauer)  Subject: Re: Oracle dead on VMS?M Message-ID: <BF5C8A8C07C90348BFFFE19203D1C6EE062E1E@aktoracle.akt-infosys.de>h   Well, just to be honet,a  H an Alpha (with True64 :-( and Oracle) is the fastest TCP-C non clustered system.c  I 1 Compaq AlphaServer GS320 Model 6/1001 (32-way) 230,533.00 tpmC Oracle9i ) v9.0.1 Enterprise Edition for Tru64 UNIX e  ; http://www.ideasinternational.com/benchmark/tpc/tpccnc.htmle  4 and NO Microsoft Product in the first 10 Top ten....   Christian Bauere* __________________________________________ :a:k:t: Informationssysteme AG     -- t/ Posted from mail.docsphere.de [62.156.166.130]  1 via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORGn   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:15:54 +0100I% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n Subject: Re: OT: Dr Who.8 Message-ID: <dh5dltk3mugkusa1e8opjiiqpkfg6e29kl@4ax.com>  , On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 17:24:38 -0400, JF Mezei% <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:n   >tM >Fauwlty Towers was OK, but too much shouting in it. I was however in a youth O >hostel in New Zealand in the early 90s that was just like that with the coupleeM >arguing etc etc, it was a blast. they even had the water tower on top of theeO >roof and also had had an incident with a dead bird in it. It was when the wifesO >told her husband she was leaving to get some Fags into town that I almost fell-O >off my seat. (little did I know that "fag" in real english means cigarette and   E Don't instantly recall that scene but it may have been an intentionaltA double-meaning as "fag" does have other connotations in the UK as  well.n     >not homosexual !).i   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:01:40 +0010m% From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.aun Subject: Re: OT: Dr Who.5 Message-ID: <01K64LI1QCPE002U22@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>y   Zane Healey wrote:  6 >John Laird <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:H >> From the opposite viewpoint, I don't get Seinfeld or Larry Sanders atI >> all.  Frasier, I would rearrange golf around.  But it often has echoesM > 1 >Frasier is the *only* US sitcom I watch anymore.- >-A >> of West End farces - maybe that's it.  Tell me though, are the-K >> absolutely terrible attempts at British accents some sort of retributionm >> for past crimes ? >-M >In Frasier?  Or elsewhere?  In the case of Frasier himself he's been playingoL >that part for how many years now, I don't remember how many years he playedK >it in "Cheers".  As far as I know he's always talked that way.  If nothingnJ >else you can attribute it to the fact most American's are mindless idiots* >that only know what the media tells them.  - I suppose really I am replying to John Laird.v  J The "West End" farces were the old Brian Rix Whitehall farces.  They were Q televised for BBC on the last night as stage performances.  None of UK, US or AU sR sitcoms are anywhere near the farce level.  Go back to Sheridan and Feydeau.  The / latter produced as a series by Patrick Cargill.v  Q Someone earlier mentioned "'Allo, 'Allo".  I had forgotten this one, brilliantly aI written by Jeremy LLoyd.  Yet another which would probably not have been l9 understood by US was the Hywell Bennett "Shelley" series.e  Q Unlike Zane, I do not see American's as mindless idiots.  I do see that there is uR little understanding of what comedy is all about.  Some very good early comedies, Q but now saturation of the mindlessness that brings in Seinfeld, Sex in the City, 93 Drew Carey and many others that are sold worldwide.   J After all, some of the world's greatest comics from America were actually 1 English:  Charlie Chaplin, Stan Laurel, Bob Hope.    Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:23:40 +0100f4 From: John Laird <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: Re: OT: Dr Who.8 Message-ID: <43ddlt4om6h789rtjg2d3fph1918t1os4m@4ax.com>  1 On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:16:10 GMT, "Zane H. Healy"e# <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> wrote:R  6 >John Laird <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:H >> From the opposite viewpoint, I don't get Seinfeld or Larry Sanders atI >> all.  Frasier, I would rearrange golf around.  But it often has echoese >n1 >Frasier is the *only* US sitcom I watch anymore.o > A >> of West End farces - maybe that's it.  Tell me though, are the K >> absolutely terrible attempts at British accents some sort of retribution* >> for past crimes ? >Y >In Frasier?  Or elsewhere?u  , I was thinking of the Civil War, perhaps :-)  1 >In the case of Frasier himself he's been playingtL >that part for how many years now, I don't remember how many years he playedK >it in "Cheers".  As far as I know he's always talked that way.  If nothingeJ >else you can attribute it to the fact most American's are mindless idiots* >that only know what the media tells them.  F Daphne's brother was my primary target - there have been others.   AllB apparently influenced by Dick Van Dyke's wunnerful cocknee in Mary
 Poppins...     	Johns   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:33:15 +0100w4 From: John Laird <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: Re: OT: Dr Who.8 Message-ID: <3nndlt0b33n2icjhi522a2cml8t47kdo1n@4ax.com>  C On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:01:40 +0010, paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au  wrote:  . >I suppose really I am replying to John Laird. >dK >The "West End" farces were the old Brian Rix Whitehall farces.  They were uR >televised for BBC on the last night as stage performances.  None of UK, US or AU S >sitcoms are anywhere near the farce level.  Go back to Sheridan and Feydeau.  The n0 >latter produced as a series by Patrick Cargill.  E Thanks for the clarification - the word "Whitehall" had been floating B around my subconscious.  There are definite hints of farce in some' episodes of "Frasier", I would contend.y  R >Someone earlier mentioned "'Allo, 'Allo".  I had forgotten this one, brilliantly J >written by Jeremy LLoyd.  Yet another which would probably not have been : >understood by US was the Hywell Bennett "Shelley" series. > R >Unlike Zane, I do not see American's as mindless idiots.  I do see that there is S >little understanding of what comedy is all about.  Some very good early comedies, nR >but now saturation of the mindlessness that brings in Seinfeld, Sex in the City, 4 >Drew Carey and many others that are sold worldwide. > K >After all, some of the world's greatest comics from America were actually  2 >English:  Charlie Chaplin, Stan Laurel, Bob Hope.  H Times have moved on.  In many respects, the standard of British comediesD has declined, and the razor-sharp scripting of the cream of AmericanF output shows this most clearly (regardless of whether you particularlyB like the actual situation or the actors).  The story goes that theG Fawlty Towers scripts went through between a dozen and twenty rewrites,-F whereas it is apparently the norm to see only two or three iterations.D The better American programmes use a technique of mass scriptwritersB which I suppose effectively yields the same thing - lines honed toF perfection and much filler eliminated.  A particular favourite of mine is:i  F Frasier:  *How* can men use sex to get what they want ?  Sex *is* what they want !!     	John5   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jul 2001 14:07:13 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)t Subject: Re: OT: Dr Who., Message-ID: <9j6pih$2h82$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  5 In article <01K64LI1QCPE002U22@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>,6(  paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au writes: |>T |> Unlike Zane, I do not see American's as mindless idiots.  I do see that there is U |> little understanding of what comedy is all about.  Some very good early comedies, iT |> but now saturation of the mindlessness that brings in Seinfeld, Sex in the City, 6 |> Drew Carey and many others that are sold worldwide. |>  D Ah yes, but who is the dumber??  America for making and selling thatD garbage or the rest of the world for paying good money to watch it??   :-).   bill   -- vJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:36:07 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: OT: Dr Who., Message-ID: <3B570C6A.C76CE9B1@videotron.ca>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:F > Ah yes, but who is the dumber??  America for making and selling thatF > garbage or the rest of the world for paying good money to watch it??  H A distinction must be made here. In the rest of the world, we get to seeM perhaps the best of the british shows, and all of the US shows. This is not a L fair comparision since if we were to get to see all of the british shows, we9 might find that they also produce some low quality shows.s  J If you look at a show such as "The West Wing", it is clear that the USA is> very capable of producing a quality show that has mass appeal.  N I have never been a fan of Seinfeld (their music got on my nerves) nor FrasierN although I have watched a few episodes of Frasier now and then. However, I wasN partial to Friends (although it is starting to wear off because it has been onN for so long) and to Darma & Greg. Are they "quality" shows ? I don't know. ButK if they can manage to make me smile and forget about the demise of VMS (and0 mine) then they do their work.  M If you want to talk cops and robbers shows which seem to numerous in the USA,oN you should take a look at the australia show called "River Rats" (I think).  IE watched a few episodes of it in Canada (yes, it makes it here on someNF specialty channel) and was attracted by its style. It seemed much moreK realistic with it being shot in Sydney with no real attempt to fake or hide$K locations. And the whole style and tone of the show are refreshing from all H the Hollywood shows that pretend that they are shot in a different city.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 02:27:55 -0400s' From: Brian Hechinger <wonko@arkham.ws> + Subject: Re: Penance for Compaq's VMS sins?h7 Message-ID: <20010719022755.M1574@wintermute.arkham.ws>k  @ On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 10:37:32PM +0100, antonio.carlini wrote: > P > > 4) My old tech manuals that I have saved from the 1980's would actually have: > > some use; I wouldn't be bugged into throwing them out. > ! > There are people out there with0' > PDPs and VAX-11/7xx systems who woulda > help you here.  ( i'm sure there are quite a few of us. :)  + > At least today's tech manuals come on CDse > so they take less space :-)2  ( but that takes all the fun out of it. :)   -brian   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:55:03 -0400jI From: "Ernie Bisson, MIT Bates Linear Accelerator" <BISSON@AESIR.MIT.EDU>  Subject: Printing via Pathworksr1 Message-ID: <010719115503.20801186@BATES.MIT.EDU>-  O We have an old-PC that requires PATHWORKS for printing. We have Pathworks V5.0CsM installed on a AlphaServer 2100 to handle printing for any clients that stillcM exit here. This system is part of a VMScluster, but another in the cluster istM the actual print server. Recently, the printer this system used was replaced. N The old printer was configured as a LAT printer. The new printer is configuredM as a TCP printer using STREAM protocol to TCP port 9100 via Multinet. The PC  N freezes up when attempting to print via some database software on it. However,L this apparently would happen periodically with the old system as well. AfterL the printer was replaced, but before I had created a new print queue for it,M print jobs did reach the print server and were queued for printing. Naturally1L they never printed since there was no longer a serial connection for the LAT queue communicate with.J   My question is,v  K Does the print share on the PATHWORKS server need any reconfiguration sincen I changed from LAT to TCP?  H Using the PATHWORKS ADMIN utility, I do see the print queue when listingI available printers. I would think once the file being printed gets to theIF PATHWORKS server, that it then funnels to the printer via standard VMSN printing mechanisms. This makes believe the answer to my above question is NO.  E Unfortunately, I'm not very familiar with Pathworks server or client.C   Thanks for any help, Ernie-  P -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ernie Bisson Unix/VMS Systems Administrator M.I.T. Bates Linear Acceleratorc 21 Manning Roadd$ Middleton, Massachusetts  01949-2846  (978) 774-2370 or (617) 253-9218   E-Mail : bisson@mit.eduhP --------------------------------------------------------------------------------   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 12:51:26 -05003 From: malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg)S# Subject: Re: Printing via Pathworksf3 Message-ID: <TvHZmno5NmGP@eisner.encompasserve.org>4  1 In article <010719115503.20801186@BATES.MIT.EDU>,MK "Ernie Bisson, MIT Bates Linear Accelerator" <BISSON@AESIR.MIT.EDU> writes:t >nA > We have an old-PC that requires PATHWORKS for printing. We have D > Pathworks V5.0C installed on a AlphaServer 2100 to handle printing@ > for any clients that still exit here. This system is part of aD > VMScluster, but another in the cluster is the actual print server.  6 > Recently, the printer this system used was replaced.B > The old printer was configured as a LAT printer. The new printerB > is configured as a TCP printer using STREAM protocol to TCP portC > 9100 via Multinet. The PC freezes up when attempting to print via6F > some database software on it.  However, this apparently would happen+ > periodically with the old system as well.-  C Check to make sure that the %temp% environment variable is set to ad# local disk with a lot of freespace.   F > After the printer was replaced, but before I had created a new printE > queue for it, print jobs did reach the print server and were queuednF > for printing. Naturally they never printed since there was no longer9 > a serial connection for the LAT queue communicate with.e >d > My question is,  >pG > Does the print share on the PATHWORKS server need any reconfiguratione" > since I changed from LAT to TCP?  E As long as the queue name is the same, then no reconfiguration shouldhF be needed.  If the new queue has a different name, then you can eitherI reconfigure Pathworks, or in the SYLOGICALS.COM (or local equivalent) youaB can assign a the old queue name as a logical name to the new name.  ' $define/system/exec old_queue new_queuex  B > Using the PATHWORKS ADMIN utility, I do see the print queue when? > listing available printers. I would think once the file being'C > printed gets to the PATHWORKS server, that it then funnels to the F > printer via standard VMS printing mechanisms. This makes believe the$ > answer to my above question is NO.  F Pathworks 5.0 is an old version, and it has been quite a while since II have done that.  The old Admin utility was something I avoided where ever 	 possible.1  G > Unfortunately, I'm not very familiar with Pathworks server or client.   O I would recommend that you look into upgrading to a newer version of Pathworks,n now known as Advanced Server.s  J The management interface has improved greatly, and the licensing terms are much better.  L If you only have one Pathworks Server under V 6.0 or higher, then NO special. software is required on any of the PC clients.   -John  wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Onlya   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 08:55:21 -0400e5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com>i Subject: Re: Remote Console 2 Message-ID: <vtdWOyljtlj9Oyof1KCcQ=L=wHPB@4ax.com>  4 On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 03:05:14 GMT, "Richard L. Dyson" <rickdyson@home.com> wrote:M   >Peter Weaver wrote: >> h; >> "Richard L. Dyson" <rickdyson@home.com> wrote in messagev$ >> news:3B557932.1A2E918@home.com... >> > Kevin wrote:t >> > >M >> > > CA has Polycenter Console Manager, and I'll bet you can find sharewaree >> thata >> > > will do the same thing. >> >M >> > How does a software package connect to the physical console ports?  What 9 >> > would I cable the serial ports of these machines to?a >> > >> -L >> We have one site that is several hundred kilometres from where I site. OnN >> occasion we have to get into the console so we bought AXP 800 machines thatK >> have the Remote Console feature. We have done is setup a DEC90TL and runnM >> cables from it to the Remote Console port on the two Alphas as well as the3' >> HSZ70 controllers used at that site.t >> oL >> Since we could not set up passwords on each port someone came up with the >> solution;5 >>  1 - connect to the server using telnet and logon. ' >>  2 - set yourself to privileged mode_. >>  3 - enable the telnet listener in question; >>  4 - connect to the telnet listener on the port you wantl. >>  5 - when done, disable the telnet listener >-J >	When the telnet listener is used on DS90 or DS900 terminal server ports,( >can't the password feature be used too? >OL >	If these old DECserver boxes can't be configured securely, has anyone usedL >any of the commercial remote console boxes that are available for Linux and >Unix?N >As long as they are RS-232 and can do telnet in with some security, shouldn't >they  >work with DEC equipment?  >  >ricks  F I've not worked at all with the DS900 and it's been so long since I've@ worked with the DS90 I can't say for sure.  At my previous place< of employment, we used DS700s for remote console connections; to both VAXes and HSD controllers across the United States, > Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico, with passwords on the console< ports and a password on the dial-up connection to bypass theA network, in the case of network issues.  The console software was B Polycenter Console Manager.  The initial version from CA still had@ the look and feel of the previous Polycenter product and did not& require the NT Unicenter TNG solution.  = The one thing I can say is you need a fairly reliable network-3 for the Remote Console and Remote System Managemente in general to be effective.    David R. Beattyf   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:58:56 +0100d0 From: andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com>Y Subject: Re: Reward for the first of the next 50 posts: which company should buy VMS VMSVh* Message-ID: <3B56A150.8B23833D@uk.sun.com>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote: > L > A quick check of the source listings seems to indicate that I am.  And theE > hot air you blow seems to be the only indication of what you do ;-)  >   5 Really, I would suggest that since the 25th your own w. contributions have had an element of warm air . polluting what is normally relatively factual - content :):):) hence my re-evaluation of your  role.    Regardst   Andrew Harrisonm Enterprise IT Architecto   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:00:27 +0100l- From: "POWERS, John" <John.POWERS@sema.co.uk>e> Subject: RE: SMS on VMS [was RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.]= Message-ID: <D30A62ABC710D211AEE100A0C9D615EE01529036@REAES2>o  " I think Steve is referring to me..  K Yes, our core product, the SMS, does run on VMS. We do have various add-onseL (the SMTP,SMNP,TNPP gateways + some others) which run on Tru64-Unix, but ourK bread and butter is on VMS. I believe that some years ago - before I joinedo> (and here I must insist that all this is my personal opinions,H interpretations, and beliefs, I am in no way a spokesman for any part ofL Sema) there was a plan to transfer the SMS to unix, but the beta version wasG not popular with the customers, so was abandoned (or maybe not followeddJ through, but still hanging around in the wings in case of emergency). I amJ aware that, with the recent announcements of the the move to itanium, SemaE are keeping their options open, and watching the way things pan out..l  D But, given the level of satisfaction from our customers, their is noJ pressure to move, and I doubt that we will be moving platforms any time in the near future.  L I don't know anything about TANDEM boxes. There are other parts of Sema thatJ do other things, so they may be somewhere in the company, but I have neverH seen one, and I am reasonably sure that we have no SMS running on Tandem (JMPO).h  ( - Not talking for Sema (despite my sig!_  -  (anyway it should be Schlumberger-Sema now!)r    -- Cheers, John  F  - Note  This message represents my opinions and nothing else, not theI   opinion of SEMA, my family, or the cricket club - though my dog Meg didhE   nod in agreement whilst I was typing. If you have any problems thenrD   please complain to her (or me, but not SEMA, my family or the CC).     -----Original Message-----D From: Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com [mailto:Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com] Sent: 18 July 2001 16:53 To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coma: Subject: SMS on VMS [was RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.]    L Contact:   Tel: 3063  -  IS - Infrastructure, 1st Floor, Bridge Street Plaza    I I know from my time there that SEMA sell VMS boxes which do SMS, but ISTRa thatJ they also had TANDEM boxes there - whether they were used for SMS or otherI software they provided I don't recall - it WAS a few years ago, certainlyh	 pre-1998.-  J There is a guy who used to post to COV who still works at SEMA, perhaps he might< be able to correct us on this?   Steve S:        ? young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) on 07/13/2001 08:33:14 PM>    To:        Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com+ cc:         (bcc: Steve Spires/YellowPages) I From:      young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young), 13 July 2001, 8:33 p.m.s    RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.        L In article <OFD65DD502.00A850C3-ON03256A88.005F0CE9@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>,+ fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br writes:tA > What worries me more about the porting from Alpha to Itanium isrG > the possbility of non porting of a hundred of softwares .... and ....t >wB > What was the last product lauched/developed for OpenVMS ? When ? >d  A      From what I understand ... and I am sure I will be correcteddD      if I am wrong ... is that Short Message Service (SMS) (Cellular@      Phone messaging) runs on VMS and VMS only.  That was passedE      on to me in May 2000 and may be a bit of hype.  Apparently, very"<      popular in Europe and driven one segment of VMS growth.  =      When was it developed?  Probably in the last 5 years ;-)                        Rob.            K ___________________________________________________________________________nB This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the H individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions presented are E solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of p Sema. M If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received thislI email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or t- copying of this email is strictly prohibited.t  B If you have received this email in error please notify the Sema UK. Helpdesk by telephone on +44 (0) 121 627 5600.K ___________________________________________________________________________l   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jul 2001 15:45:10 GMT% From: tom gugger <ehutch@norden1.com>u  Subject: SUPRA DBA/ CONTRACT/ MN( Message-ID: <9j6va6$6dq$8@192.153.35.30>  , This is a multi-part message in MIME format.& --------------713734CA671FD78E75FBA920* Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit-   Early August start  & --------------713734CA671FD78E75FBA920! Content-Type: application/msword;   name="SUPRA DBA.doc"R! Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64$ Content-Disposition: inline;  filename="SUPRA DBA.doc"2  H 0M8R4KGxGuEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPgADAP7/CQAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAKwAAAAAAH AAAAEAAALQAAAAEAAAD+////AAAAACoAAAD/////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ///////////////////////////////////spcEARwAJBAAACBK/AAAAAAAAEAAAAAAABAAAH EAcAAA4AYmpiao7ZjtkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJBBYAHhIAAOyzAQDsswEAEAMAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//w8AAAAAAAAAAAD//w8AAAAAAAAAAAD//w8AH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAF0AAAAAALwAAAAAAAAAvAAAALwAAAAAAAAAvAAAAAAAAAC8AAAAH AAAAALwAAAAAAAAAvAAAABQAAAAAAAAAAAAAANAAAAAAAAAA0AAAAAAAAADQAAAAAAAAANAAH AAAAAAAA0AAAAAwAAADcAAAADAAAANAAAAAAAAAA4wEAALYAAAD0AAAAFgAAAAoBAAAAAAAAH CgEAAAAAAAAKAQAAAAAAAAoBAAAAAAAACgEAAAAAAAAKAQAAAAAAAAoBAAAAAAAAqAEAAAIAH AACqAQAAAAAAAKoBAAAAAAAAqgEAAAAAAACqAQAAAAAAAKoBAAAAAAAAqgEAACQAAACZAgAAH 9AEAAI0EAADWAAAAzgEAABUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAvAAAAAAAAAAKAQAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKAQAAAAAAAAoBAAAAAAAACgEAAAAAAAAKAQAAAAAAAM4BAAAAAAAAH LAEAAAAAAAC8AAAAAAAAALwAAAAAAAAACgEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAoBAAAAAAAA9AAAAAAAH AAAsAQAAAAAAACwBAAAAAAAALAEAAAAAAAAKAQAAIgAAALwAAAAAAAAACgEAAAAAAAC8AAAAH AAAAAAoBAAAAAAAAqAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA0AAAAAAAAADQAAAAAAAAALwAH AAAAAAAAvAAAAAAAAAC8AAAAAAAAALwAAAAAAAAACgEAAAAAAACoAQAAAAAAACwBAAB8AAAAH LAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKgBAAAAAAAAvAAAAAAAAAC8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAqAEAAAAAAAAKAQAAH AAAAAOgAAAAMAAAAwBxHvqAPwQHQAAAAAAAAANAAAAAAAAAALAEAAAAAAACoAQAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgH ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBPTU5JIEdST1VQDSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgH ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgNDE5LTg5My02MzM0DSAgH ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgH EyBIWVBFUkxJTksgbWFpbHRvOmVodXRjaEBub3JkZW4xLmNvbSABFGVodXRjaEBub3JkZW4xH LmNvbRUNDSAgT01OSSBHUk9VUCBpcyBjdXJyZW50bHkgc2VhcmNoaW5nIGZvciBhIFNVUFJBH IERCQSANRm9yIGEgZm91ciBtb250aCBjb250cmFjdCBpbiB0aGUgR3JlYXRlciBNaW5uZWFwH b2xpcyBhcmVhLg1Ud28geWVhcnMgb3IgbW9yZSBvZiBjb21tZXJjaWFsIFNVUFJBIERCQSBlH eHBlcmllbmNlDUFyZSBwcmVmZXJyZWQuDSAgVGhpcyBpcyBhbiBlYXJseSBBdWd1c3Qgc3RhH cnQsIHdpdGggYSBtYWpvciBjb21wYW55LiBUaGUNV29yayAgaXMgcm91dGluZSBEQkEgYXNzH aWdubWVudHMuICBXb3JraW5nIGNvbmRpdGlvbnMgYXJlDVNhaWQgdG8gYmUgZXhjZWxsZW50H Lg0gIElmIGludGVyZXN0ZWQsIGVtYWlsIHJlc3VtZSB0byBlaHV0Y2hAIG5vcmRlbjEuY29tH IG9yDUNhbGwgNDE5LTg5My02MzM0LiAgTk8gVEhJUkQgUEFSVFkNDSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgH ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBUaGFuayBZb3UNICAgICAgICAgH ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBUb20gR3VnZ2VyDQAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAwAQAAMEEAADmBAAA5wQAAOgEAAD6BAAA+wQAABAHH AAAA+gDy+u/6AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABDBKDwAADwIIgQNqAAAAAAYIAVUIAQkDagAAAABVCAEACAAEAABDBAAAH iAQAAPwEAAD9BAAAMgUAAG0FAACiBQAAsQUAAOwFAAAmBgAAPAYAAHQGAACXBgAAmAYAANMGH AAAQBwAA/QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD9AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/QAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAP0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD9AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP0AAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAD9AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD9AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH /QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD9AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAAQAAQAAEMEAACIBAAA/AQAAP0EAAAyBQAAbQUAAKIFAACxBQAAH 7AUAACYGAAA8BgAAdAYAAJcGAACYBgAA0wYAABAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAcAB+w0C8gsOA9H IbAIByKwCAcjkKAFJJCgBSWwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM8AAABEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANDJ6nn5us4RjIIAqgBLqQsCAAAAFwAAH ABMAAABlAGgAdQB0AGMAaABAAG4AbwByAGQAZQBuADEALgBjAG8AbQAAAODJ6nn5us4RjIIAH qgBLqQs0AAAAbQBhAGkAbAB0AG8AOgBlAGgAdQB0AGMAaABAAG4AbwByAGQAZQBuADEALgBjH AG8AbQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAASABAACgABAFsADwACAAAAAAAAACQAAEDx/wIAJAAAAAYATgBvAHIAbQBhAGwAH AAACAAAABABtSAkEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPABBQPL/oQA8AAAAFgBEAGUAZgBhAHUAH bAB0ACAAUABhAHIAYQBnAHIAYQBwAGgAIABGAG8AbgB0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACgAVUCiAPEAH KAAAAAkASAB5AHAAZQByAGwAaQBuAGsAAAAGAD4qAUIqAgAAAAAQAwAABQAAEgAAAAD/////H AAQAABAHAAAGAAAAAAQAABAHAAAHAAAAAAQAABAHAAAIAAAAwAAAAOcAAAD6AAAAEAMAABNYH FP8VgAAAAABdAgAAZAIAAAkDAAAPAwAAEgMAAAcAHAAHAAQABwD//wIAAAAKAFQAbwBtACAAH RwB1AGcAZwBlAHIALwBDADoAXABXAEkATgBEAE8AVwBTAFwARABFAFMASwBUAE8AUABcAE4AH ZQB3ACAARgBvAGwAZABlAHIAIAAoADMAKQBcAFMAVQBQAFIAQQAgAEQAQgBBAC4AZABvAGMAH /0ABgAEADwMAAA8DAAB4pnUA6wDrAA8DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEAAAAAAAAAAQAwAAUAAAH CABAAAADAAAARxaQAQAAAgIGAwUEBQIDBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAFQAaQBtH AGUAcwAgAE4AZQB3ACAAUgBvAG0AYQBuAAAANRaQAQIABQUBAgEHBgIFBwAAAAAAAAAQAAAAH AAAAAAAAAACAAAAAAFMAeQBtAGIAbwBsAAAAMyaQAQAAAgsGBAICAgICBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAEEAcgBpAGEAbAAAACIABABxCIgYAADQAgAAaAEAAAAA5JJXZu2SV2YAH AAAAAQAJAAAAcQAAAIYCAAABAAEAAAAEAAMQBQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAhH AwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAClBsAHtAC0H AIAAEjAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABkDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAAA//8SAAAAAAAAAEIAIAAgH ACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgH ACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgACAAIAAgH AE8ATQBOAEkAIABHAFIATwBVAFAAAAAAAAAACgBUAG8AbQAgAEcAdQBnAGcAZQByAAoAVABvH AG0AIABHAHUAZwBnAGUAcgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH /v8AAAQAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAOCFn/L5T2gQq5EIACsns9kwAAAAnAEAABAAH AAABAAAAiAAAAAIAAACQAAAAAwAAANwAAAAEAAAA6AAAAAUAAAD8AAAABwAAAAgBAAAIAAAAH HAEAAAkAAAAwAQAAEgAAADwBAAAKAAAAWAEAAAwAAABkAQAADQAAAHABAAAOAAAAfAEAAA8AH AACEAQAAEAAAAIwBAAATAAAAlAEAAAIAAADkBAAAHgAAAEMAAAAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgH ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIE9NTkkgR1JPVVAAAB4AH AAABAAAAACAgIB4AAAALAAAAVG9tIEd1Z2dlcgAgHgAAAAEAAAAAb20gHgAAAAsAAABOb3JtH YWwuZG90ACAeAAAACwAAAFRvbSBHdWdnZXIAIB4AAAACAAAAMQBtIB4AAAATAAAATWljcm9zH b2Z0IFdvcmQgOC4wACBAAAAAAHbdQQEAAABAAAAAADBgWJ8PwQFAAAAAAKY9mqAPwQEDAAAAH AQAAAAMAAABxAAAAAwAAAIYCAAADAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP7/AAAEAAIAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIAAAAC1c3VnC4bEJOXCAArLPmuRAAAAAXVzdWcLhsQk5cIACssH +a54AQAANAEAAAwAAAABAAAAaAAAAA8AAABwAAAABQAAAIQAAAAGAAAAjAAAABEAAACUAAAAH FwAAAJwAAAALAAAApAAAABAAAACsAAAAEwAAALQAAAAWAAAAvAAAAA0AAADEAAAADAAAABMBH AAACAAAA5AQAAB4AAAALAAAAT21uaSBHcm91cAAAAwAAAAUAAAADAAAAAQAAAAMAAAAZAwAAH AwAAAGoQCAALAAAAAAAAAAsAAAAAAAAACwAAAAAAAAALAAAAAAAAAB4QAAABAAAAQwAAACAgH ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgH T01OSSBHUk9VUAAMEAAAAgAAAB4AAAAGAAAAVGl0bGUAAwAAAAEAAAAAAAAoAQAABAAAAAAAH AAAoAAAAAQAAAFIAAAACAAAAWgAAAAMAAACyAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAKAAAAX1BJRF9HVUlEAAMAH AAAMAAAAX1BJRF9ITElOS1MAAgAAAOQEAABBAAAATgAAAHsANwA0AEEARAA0AEIAQQAwAC0AH NwBCADcAMgAtADEAMQBEADUALQA4ADIAMgBCAC0AOAA0AEYAMwAwADQAQwAxADAAMAAwADAAH fQAAAAAAQQAAAGwAAAAGAAAAAwAAABUAdQADAAAAAAAAAAMAAAAAAAAAAwAAAAUAAAAfAAAAH GgAAAG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAZQBoAHUAdABjAGgAQABuAG8AcgBkAGUAbgAxAC4AYwBvAG0AH AAAfAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAAgAAAAMAAAAEAAAAH BQAAAAYAAAAHAAAACAAAAAkAAAD+////CwAAAAwAAAANAAAADgAAAA8AAAAQAAAAEQAAAP7/H //8TAAAAFAAAABUAAAAWAAAAFwAAABgAAAAZAAAA/v///xsAAAAcAAAAHQAAAB4AAAAfAAAAH IAAAACEAAAD+////IwAAACQAAAAlAAAAJgAAACcAAAAoAAAAKQAAAP7////9////LAAAAP7/H ///+/////v//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H /////////////1IAbwBvAHQAIABFAG4AdAByAHkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWAAUB//////////8DAAAABgkCAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAH AACgacW9oA/BAcCGX76gD8EBLgAAAIAAAAAAAAAARABhAHQAYQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAoAAgH/////////////H //8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKAAAAABAAAAAAAAAxAFQAH YQBiAGwAZQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAADgACAQEAAAAGAAAA/////wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAABIAAAAAEAAAAAAAAFcAbwByAGQARABvAGMAdQBtAGUAbgB0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAAIBAgAAAAUAAAD/////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB4SAAAAAAAABQBTAHUAbQBtAGEAcgB5AEkAH bgBmAG8AcgBtAGEAdABpAG8AbgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACgAAgH/////H //////////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAAAAABAAAAAAH AAAFAEQAbwBjAHUAbQBlAG4AdABTAHUAbQBtAGEAcgB5AEkAbgBmAG8AcgBtAGEAdABpAG8AH bgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOAACAQQAAAD//////////wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAACIAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAEAQwBvAG0AcABPAGIAagAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASAAIA////////////////AAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAD///////////////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAABAAAA/v//////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////H /////////////////////////////////////////////wEA/v8DCgAA/////wYJAgAAAAAAH wAAAAAAAAEYYAAAATWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgRG9jdW1lbnQACgAAAE1TV29yZERvYwAQAAAAH V29yZC5Eb2N1bWVudC44APQ5snEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA( --------------713734CA671FD78E75FBA920--   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jul 2001 13:52:41 GMT& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64A% Message-ID: <9j6on9$nc8@web.nmti.com>A  < In article <Uxu57.4102$N21.1743049@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>,3 Terry C. Shannon <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote:A5 > "Peter da Silva" <peter@abbnm.com> wrote in messageA! > news:9j54rp$105@web.nmti.com...A> > > In article <UM157.564$N21.533596@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>,7 > > Terry C. Shannon <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote:A? > > > "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net> wrote in messageAD > > > news:Ql057.1633$Mi6.161864@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...M > > > > If Alpha was such a dead end, why did Intel offer such concessions toA > > > Compaq > > > > to drop Alpha?  N > > > Hey, Pal... I don't know! But I do know this: Mulpinnh@aol.com no longer > is > > > on my subscription list.  J > > Are you saying you kick people off your list for disagreeing with you?   > Of course not. Doh.A  J Then what do you mean by "Mulpinnh@aol.com no longer is on my subscriptionI list."? Because that's what it sure looks like from here... unless it's aAE completely irrelevant non-sequiter, and I've never seen you engage inAJ performance art before. I mean, while I may disagree with you now and then% you've always seemed pretty rational.A   -- A+  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.AE   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."AL                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:34:38 -0400Q5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>N- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64A3 Message-ID: <66D57.1001$rc5.66217@news.cpqcorp.net>A  A David J. Dachtera wrote in message <3B56442B.75CEFD57@fsi.net>...C >CH >If you lost trust in your {spouse, child, best friend, ...}, that wouldC >be a personal issue, no? Why is a business relationship viewed any2
 >differently?3 >     F I hope this was just very poor rhetoric.  One is not even close to the6 other.  Or maybe I just have my priorities screwed up.  E >> A lot of people have gone out on a limb to sell VMS at all levels.A >A? >...and some of us bet the farm, personally and professionally.AD >Admittedly and in retrospect, poor judgement of the highest degree. >A    K Stop looking at this as some new screw-the-VMS-customer decision.  This hasAJ an even larger impact on Tru64 customers, and a big impact on NSK as well.J We're not abandoning VMS customers.  If you accept the proposition at faceK value that Alpha would not have been a long term survivor (say 10 years outAK from now), then this is potentially the way that VMS continues for the next 	 20 years.A  L The lead time to the switch over is fairly large.  And in between there will@ still be cutting edge Alphas, and afterwards there will be mixedL architecture clusters, and source compatability for user mode code.  Perhaps9 binary translation/emulation for binaries without source.   / You can look at this as an opportunity, or not.A   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:03:55 -0400A' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>A- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64A( Message-ID: <9j776m$6id$1@pyrite.mv.net>  @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message- news:66D57.1001$rc5.66217@news.cpqcorp.net...A   ...A  '   If you accept the proposition at faceAI > value that Alpha would not have been a long term survivor (say 10 yearsA outAH > from now), then this is potentially the way that VMS continues for the next > 20 years.A   ...A  1 > You can look at this as an opportunity, or not.   J Wrong, Fred:  you could have looked at it as an opportunity if the port toL IQ64 had not been accompanied by screwing the Alpha pooch, but not under the current circumstances.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:26:34 -0400A< From: "Symons, Jeff (Innovations)" <jeff.symons-eds@eds.com> Subject: Upgrade to VMS V7.3= Message-ID: <80C532CF88BDD4118DB700508BE326367EBC3B@CAMKM202>A  F Is it possible to upgrade from a VAX cluster, running VMS V5.5-2, to a, OpenVMS V7.3 running on a cluster of ES40's?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:17:55 -0000A- From: wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer)   Subject: Re: Upgrade to VMS V7.3/ Message-ID: <tlduh3jtin4j81@news.supernews.com>A  > jeff.symons-eds@eds.com (Symons, Jeff (Innovations)) wrote in 2 <80C532CF88BDD4118DB700508BE326367EBC3B@CAMKM202>:  G >Is it possible to upgrade from a VAX cluster, running VMS V5.5-2, to aA- >OpenVMS V7.3 running on a cluster of ES40's?A >A  J Yes - Install the ES40's, cluster them, move your software, and throw the $ switch, and de-commission the VAX's.  K But I suspect your question has more to it than that.  Not sure if this is A; what you're looking for, but here's some things to look at:A  <     	- are all (if any) 3rd party apps on the VAX available      	  for OpenVMS Alpha 7.3?AB     	- will your custom code (if any) compile on 7.3 with today's       	  version of the compilers?B     	- Do you have any hardware dongles, widgets, cards, or other ?     	  custom hardware in the VAX's for which you'll need AlphaA     	  equivalents?A  L If you're looking for a transition strategy, perhaps you could start adding I Alpha nodes to your existing VAX cluster - but others in this group more AF qualified that me can tell you if OpenVMS 7.3 will cluster with 5.5-2.   ws -- A   Warren Spencer Senior Software Engineer The Associated Press  L ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements - neither do I  **   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:14:17 -0400A5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com>A  Subject: Re: Upgrade to VMS V7.32 Message-ID: <bPhWO4DXhfs4lnEYecpwFEa8Fs85@4ax.com>  @ On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:26:34 -0400, "Symons, Jeff (Innovations)"  <jeff.symons-eds@eds.com> wrote:  G >Is it possible to upgrade from a VAX cluster, running VMS V5.5-2, to aA- >OpenVMS V7.3 running on a cluster of ES40's?   > Considering that you are also migrating from VAX to Alpha, no.  , Now, what is it you are really trying to do?  A     Are you creating a cluster out of ES40s, then migrating apps?A  <     Are you going to add ES40s to a cluster and then migrate     within the cluster?A  < FYI, mixed-version clusters with V7.3 are compatible back to
 V6.2 only.   More information, please.A   David R. BeattyA   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:57:30 GMTA From: TJ <tj_shrews@yahoo.com>! Subject: VAX 8250 Console CommandA) Message-ID: <3B56E74A.F24ECF1D@yahoo.com>A  F I have a VAX 8250 with all RA81's broken.  I want to make it boot as a@ satellite to another VAX. I need the console command to show the& hardware address of the Ethernet card.G There are no SHOW commands so SHOW ETHER or SHOW CONFIG does not work. AC Nor is it displayed when powered on like the newer VAX models.  TheAC command I think I need to use is EXAMINE.  I know with a VAXII, theAB command >>>E/P/W/N:5 20001920 works, but it doesn't with the 8250.   Looking forward to responses,P STUCK-4-SURE   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:51:15 +0200B= From: Oswald Knoppers <Oswald.Knoppers@contrastmediagroep.nl>A% Subject: Re: VAX 8250 Console CommandA5 Message-ID: <3B56F3E3.4E62E6CC@contrastmediagroep.nl>   	 TJ wrote:A > H > I have a VAX 8250 with all RA81's broken.  I want to make it boot as aB > satellite to another VAX. I need the console command to show the( > hardware address of the Ethernet card.H > There are no SHOW commands so SHOW ETHER or SHOW CONFIG does not work.E > Nor is it displayed when powered on like the newer VAX models.  The0E > command I think I need to use is EXAMINE.  I know with a VAXII, thewD > command >>>E/P/W/N:5 20001920 works, but it doesn't with the 8250.  H I don't know the command, but on your boot member you might see an eventE about an unrecognized load host. This event includes the mac address.A   Regards,   Oswald   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:58:10 -0700A+ From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com>A% Subject: Re: VAX 8250 Console CommandA( Message-ID: <3B5711A2.8EDF7449@mmaz.com>  	 TJ wrote:A  H > I have a VAX 8250 with all RA81's broken.  I want to make it boot as aB > satellite to another VAX. I need the console command to show the( > hardware address of the Ethernet card.  I I do not believe the VAX 8250 can NI boot, I have one that is moth-balledAG I and recall attempting this about eight years ago and was told that itA wasn't possible...   Regards,   Barry    --  ? Barry Treahy, Jr  *  Midwest Microwave  *  Vice President & CIO   A E-mail: Treahy@mmaz.com * Phone: 480/314-1320 * FAX: 480/661-7028A   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:11:41 GMTA From: TJ <tj_shrews@yahoo.com>" Subject: VAX 8250 Console Commands) Message-ID: <3B56EA9D.F6216DED@yahoo.com>A  F I have a VAX 8250 with all RA81's broken.  I want to make it boot as a@ satellite to another VAX. I need the console command to show the& hardware address of the Ethernet card.G There are no SHOW commands so SHOW ETHER or SHOW CONFIG does not work. AC Nor is it displayed when powered on like the newer VAX models.  TheAC command I think I need to use is EXAMINE.  I know with a VAXII, theAB command >>>E/P/W/N:5 20001920 works, but it doesn't with the 8250.   Looking forward to responses,A STUCK-4-SURE   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 18:23:48 +0100A% From: "PMR" <news@technologies.co.uk>A Subject: VAX BASICA Message-ID: <995563191.29868.0.nnrp-07.c1ed299e@news.demon.co.uk>A  K VAX BASIC contractor and permanent staff required for large City based (UK)A! financial systems software house.A  1 Please email your CV to vaxsln@technologies.co.ukA   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 05:56:54 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)AN Subject: Wailing and moaning.... (was: Reward for the first of the next 50...)3 Message-ID: <dgnqbp7JiTMT@eisner.encompasserve.org>A  ] In article <3B56A150.8B23833D@uk.sun.com>, andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> writes:A >  > Fred Kleinsorge wrote: >> AM >> A quick check of the source listings seems to indicate that I am.  And theAF >> hot air you blow seems to be the only indication of what you do ;-) >> A > 7 > Really, I would suggest that since the 25th your own A0 > contributions have had an element of warm air 0 > polluting what is normally relatively factual / > content :):):) hence my re-evaluation of yourA > role.A  G Andrew, given Fred's position, we look to him for authoritative answersAF on what VMS Development engineers want to do.  That is not necessarilyE what the company management will end up doing, but even in the CompaqA6 environment, it is a powerful influence on management.  " That doesn't mean we like golf :-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:50:06 +0100A- From: Peter Harding <harding@herald.ox.ac.uk>A, Subject: Re: What's a DCL kind of guy to do?/ Message-ID: <3B56BB5E.165EA7FF@herald.ox.ac.uk>A  
 Dan wrote:O > Given approximately equal development times, and a run time of 60 seconds forA' > the DCL and 20 seconds for the exe...   D I'm most curious: how much 'computing' would you say these companies> want done? Is it just moving files around and printing them orD something? Are they using bought packages to produce files which youE DCL-wrangle in some way? Do you use DCL open/read to actually processAF data in some way? Are these companies happy to shell out for machineryA which only runs at (by your estimate) 33% of their natural speed?A  D My view is I suppose a bit blinkered by what I've been doing for theE past n years, but I'm quite sure *none* of it could have been done inAF DCL - at least, not if it was going to run within a human lifetime, or' while the customer is on the telephone.A   What do these companies do?A   -- A http://i.am/getting_marriedA, ICQ 40628243 Tel 07092057581 Fax 08707345230   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:29:30 GMTA% From: "P.Lj" <plj@byron.ext.telia.se>A Subject: XAW/XMU ?2 Message-ID: <3B56FCE9.7E4294F7@byron.ext.telia.se>   Hi,A  C Anyone knowns if  there's a working/updated (at least OpenVMS AlphaA" 7.2*)  XAW/XMU package out there ?  	 >>> ^P.LjA   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:36:24 +0200 2 From: "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>" Subject: Re: Your reply on GSDFULL3 Message-ID: <3B56F068.CECF7BA2@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>A  , The problem (GDSFULL) suddenly disappeared.   ? When the user came with the problem. I looked imediately after A= the free_gbl... and the sysgen parameters but found nothing. w? Then I posted the problem, got the hint with GBLPAGFIL checked w> this increased it but didn't reboot, therefore not in effect. @ Then the user showed up again and said, after drinking a coffee  the problem has gone./  # 		System 		Other heavy used systems/ 		concerned	AXP	AXP1	VAX* free_gblpages	142048		 34272	175344	 30924& gbl_pages	300000		200000	400000	100000* free_gblsects	   467		   478	   901	   824& gblpagfil	  1024		  1024	  1024	  2034+ contig_gblpags	141568		 34224	175381	 30772/  5 The System is an AXP. All are running under VMS V6.2./  @ This values look quit sufficient in particular compared with the> other systems. We never got this error before on any system in the cluster.  @ The application was following. On the system runs an scceleratorB control system which has all parameters in an SGA. The user mappedD this SGA to a webserver application. I.e. one trigggers a cgi-script' which maps to the SGA for a short time.A  A Today we tried to reproduce the error, but no chance. Therefore IC don't have any explanation.A   Thanks to all who contributed.   RegardsA   Otto  ,  -------------------------------------------, | Dr. Otto Titze, Kernphysik TUD           |, | Schlossgartenstr. 9, D-64289 Darmstadt   |, | titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de                |, | Tel: +49(6151)16-2916,FAX:16-4321        |,  -------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:27:29 -0400E( From: Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com>" Subject: Re: Your reply on GSDFULL+ Message-ID: <3B56FC60.CB91F63D@bigfoot.com>A   "Dr. Otto Titze" wrote:A > - > The problem (GDSFULL) suddenly disappeared.A > @ > When the user came with the problem. I looked imediately after> > the free_gbl... and the sysgen parameters but found nothing.@ > Then I posted the problem, got the hint with GBLPAGFIL checked? > this increased it but didn't reboot, therefore not in effect.A  B When you increased GBLPAGFIL, did you do a WRITE ACTIVE in sysgen?H If you did, then it DID increase it.  This parameter (at least on 7.2-1)F is a dynamic parameter and does not require a reboot.  If you do a USE= ACTIVE in sysgen, then SHOW GBLPAGFIL, what does it show now?/  A > Then the user showed up again and said, after drinking a coffee/ > the problem has gone./ > : >                 System          Other heavy used systems5 >                 concerned       AXP     AXP1    VAX/8 > free_gblpages   142048           34272  175344   309248 > gbl_pages       300000          200000  400000  1000008 > free_gblsects      467             478     901     8248 > gblpagfil         1024            1024    1024    20348 > contig_gblpags  141568           34224  175381   30772 > 7 > The System is an AXP. All are running under VMS V6.2.w > B > This values look quit sufficient in particular compared with the@ > other systems. We never got this error before on any system in > the cluster. > B > The application was following. On the system runs an scceleratorD > control system which has all parameters in an SGA. The user mappedF > this SGA to a webserver application. I.e. one trigggers a cgi-script) > which maps to the SGA for a short time.A > C > Today we tried to reproduce the error, but no chance. Therefore IA > don't have any explanation.A >   > Thanks to all who contributed. > 	 > RegardsA >  > Otto > . >  -------------------------------------------. > | Dr. Otto Titze, Kernphysik TUD           |. > | Schlossgartenstr. 9, D-64289 Darmstadt   |. > | titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de                |. > | Tel: +49(6151)16-2916,FAX:16-4321        |. >  -------------------------------------------   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.398 ************************