1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 20 Jul 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 399       Contents: Re: A Primrose Path... Re: A Primrose Path... Re: A Primrose Path... Re: A Primrose Path...( 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: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate! Re: Basic quesitons from a newbie  Blast From the Past $ Re: Compaq as a technology leader???& Re: Compaq FUD and lack of information& Re: Compaq FUD and lack of information! Re: Compaq have committed suicide ! Re: Compaq have committed suicide ! Re: Compaq have committed suicide ! Re: Compaq have committed suicide ! Re: Compaq have committed suicide 2 Re: Compaq's Road to IPF: A Twenty-Question Survey Re: Creating TK50 images Re: Creating TK50 images Re: Creating TK50 images Re: Creating TK50 images Re: Creating TK50 images Re: Creating TK50 images Re: Creating TK50 images DCPS Re: DCPS* FS(UK): Alphastation 500/400 + OpenVMS 7.2 Re: IA64 Rocks My World  RE: IA64 Rocks My World  Re: InfoServer% Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3  Re: Oracle dead on VMS? 8 Re: Returning a value from a C program to a DCL variable1 Re: Some thoughts on the recent turn of events... $ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ RE: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64$ Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64 Re: Upgrade to VMS V7.3  Re: VAX 8250 Console Command Re: VAX 8250 Console Command RE: VAX 8250 Console Command Re: VAX 8250 Console Commands 
 Re: VAX BASIC  Zero Quadword Time Poll  Re: Zero Quadword Time Poll  Re: Zero Quadword Time Poll   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:29:31 +0100 1 From: Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>  Subject: Re: A Primrose Path... 5 Message-ID: <3B57513B.60E98E4@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>   = I don't recall Intel being involved with the initial Ethernet 1 development.  I thought it was Digital and Xerox.   G I think the point was badly phrased in the first place though - Digital F produced LOTS of things that were and that became industry standards -@ they just didn't help to DEVELOP all of them in the first place. Steve.   Carl Karcher wrote:  > O > -> No, the ONLY thing DEC EVER produced that EVER became an industry standard  > -> was the VT-100. > O > There's lots more. How about ethernet (jointly with Xerox and Intel was it?)?    --  G "A shadow fell over her face; clear, as if the composure were rent like E a veil.  And her lips parted, but only with a short intake of breath. A Then she said, 'Well, then you are right.  Indeed, we are even.'" % 		Louis, "Interview with the Vampire"    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:56:14 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: A Primrose Path... , Message-ID: <3B57496D.3E86FFBE@videotron.ca>  Q > > -> No, the ONLY thing DEC EVER produced that EVER became an industry standard  > > -> was the VT-100.  M Didn't DEC also design the 105 key keyboard ? (I know that the wintel and MAC J world adopted a slightly different placement of the page up/down/cut/paste keys but still...)   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 13:50:02 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)  Subject: Re: A Primrose Path... , Message-ID: <0ulb04Bj0j0v@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  m In article <13JUL01.16435261@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu>, karcher@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) writes: O > -> No, the ONLY thing DEC EVER produced that EVER became an industry standard  > -> was the VT-100.   > O > There's lots more. How about ethernet (jointly with Xerox and Intel was it?)?      What about DLT?    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:22:47 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: A Primrose Path... , Message-ID: <3B574FA3.8109FCC4@videotron.ca>  Q > > -> No, the ONLY thing DEC EVER produced that EVER became an industry standard  > > -> was the VT-100.  N For all practical purposes, the DEC multinational character set was adopted asS ISO-LATIN-1 international standard (with just a few token changes towards the end).   C Consider that Unix started off on a PDP-8 if I remember correctly.    N Also, if you look through the RFCs for the internet, you'll often find DigitalF employees in the names of the folks who wrote/contributed to the RFCs.  N I would also think that many manufacturing technologies were pionneered by DECM and adopted by others. Didn't Digital develop magneto-resistive head for disk F drives just before Palmer gave the disk drive business to Qantum ? DECK developped a way to clean PCB boards with water instead of freon and it won K awards for this (I assume that this has been adopted by others since then).    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:07:58 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate , Message-ID: <3B5721EB.F9FCCC45@videotron.ca>   Dennis O'Connor wrote:H > 1. Only Winkler is in a position to know these costs (Compaq Exec VP).C >   However, even this number lacks the reference to where and when 8 >   Winkler made this claim, so its credibility suffers.  L Problem: Winkler is the one to have publicly proclaimed that NT was going toM rule the world. Had this statement gone against Compaq's own policies, do you N think he would have been further promoted/elevated inside of Compaq's chain of	 command ?   L If Winkler is the one that weilds the power inside Compaq and feeds whateverI information he wants to his boss Mr Capellas, how can you trust Compaq to N really take actions that will move VMS forwards instead of move customers from VMS to NT ?   C > 2. This number is, apparently, about current cost levels: it does ; >   not indicate how much Compaq would have to spend in the C >   future to stay competitive, and it could be argued that current C >   spending levels have not been enough to keep Alpha competitive.   J Has it ever occured to you that perhaps Compaq was milking Alpha-VMS-Tru64N profits to help the wintel group, instead of reinvcesting such profits to keep Alpha on track and market VMS ?   J Sure, delays in chips are inevitable. But Alpha is an established platformM with incremental revisions. It should be far easier to upgrade Alpha than for K intel to develop a brand new platform which is in fact a merged of multiple  platforms including PA-RISC.  L Where there is a will, there is a way. When Compaq bought Digital, the hopesL were that Compaq would see the value of Digital's assets, realise that theseI assets were underperforming due to marketing and pricing and then fix the 1 problems and make the most of these technologies.   M At the time, Compaq could have decided to push Alpha as a mainstream chip and L push VMS as a mainstream server OS. It didn't. Instead, it chose to call itsR wintel crap "industry standard" to make sure that Alpha wasn't seen as a standard.  F It is very possible that Compaq setup Alpha to eventually no longer beL profitable thus helping its justification to kill it. I have no idea whetherS this is the case or not, but I would not be at all surprised if that were the case.     I > 4. "A bit over a year ago" is irrelevant.  Times were good "over a year E >   ago": profits were at record levels in the computer industry, and B >   were limited in some cases by production capacity, not demand.  N Sorry, but a year ago, companies such as Compaq were already complaining aboutI low margins in the PC arena and already claiming that they would start to 0 transform themselves into an enterprise company.  L Perhaps someone could finally admit what decision Compaq was almost ready to# take a little mroe than a year ago.   F > 9. The assumption that VMS profits have not declined is unsupported,B >   it's just a convenient one for the person making the argument.  L However, consider that the big swing that moved VMS from a big decrease to aJ modest increase was due in large part to a modest marketing campaign whichN included actual advertising in only 13 courntries and those flashing balls andL posters sent elsewhere to only those who had subscribed to Compaq. (a lot ofN VMS customers were unaware of this "subscription"). Also remember that in manyK countries, there is no longer an active user group to maintain a membership L list so Compaq has no way to reach the real customers in many countries (theR only address they have is the billing address for support contract, no email etc).  B Is the modest marketing campaign continuing ? Does anyone have anyL confirmation that this one time budget item was repeated ? Was VMS marketing increased ?   H If the marketing has stopped (which, from where I am, it appears to haveK stopped), what will be the impact on sales. Will they be returning to their L declining mode that was the case prior to the modest marketing campaign last year ?  E > 11. Beyond the fact that these "profits" may no longer exist, since 7 >   they are stale numbers from the dot.com boom times,   N You have mentioned the dot.com boom times many times. However, Sun and Wintel,H CISCO and Nortel were the main suppliers to this bubble, not Alpha basedG systems. I suspect that very few .coms went Alpha.  Yahoo may have gone I Compaq, but I think that the majority of their systems will remain Wintel & based with perhaps a few tru64 alphas.  M There are 2 big sales that Compaq was bragging about during a presentation in N montreal last february: a big alpha-true 64 long term contract with the qubecA government, and a huge alpha workstation with tru64 sale to NASA.   M Don't you think that the qubec government feels it's been screwed royally by J swithing to a new vendor which pulled the plug on their architecture a few% months after the sale was concluded ?     E >   nothing to prove Alpha is commercially viable.  Alpha development J >   only matters to new system sales: if service sales to  legacy accountsD >   is the generating the vast majority of VMS-related profits, then7 >   those profits do not give Alpha economic viability.   N So, to you, someone upgrading from a DS10 to a GS wildfire series doesn't give alpha economic viability ?  M This has bene the problem with VMS/ALPHA: had it been targetted *also* at the J low end, it would have had plenty of small pilot projects started and whenE they became succesful, would have migrated to much bigger Alpha iron.   L Consider also how customers feel once the platform they have invested in hasK been announced "dead". They will start investing in other platforms. Compaq L won't have IA64 for VMS ready for 4 years. Where do you think customers will go ?   >  Service profitsJ >   would, in that case, be subsidizing an unprofitable hardware business.D >  However, Bill Todd does not know whether this is the case or not.  K Ever hear of a symbiosis ? Compilers may not be profitable as an individual N product, but without them, your whole platform cannot be profitable. So if VMSJ is profitable, it is in part because of the compilers. And the cheaper theJ compilers are, the more applications you will have on the platform and the% more succesfull the platform will be.   G The same can be said of the hardware. If Alpha allowed VMS to have very M specialised reliability features and clustering multi/processor features that I were not available on other architectures, that gave a strong presence in R certain niche markets where those features were deemed necessary or very valuable.  G But on IA64, VMS will either lose those features because the chip won't H support them, or support will be added the the chip and then all of VMS'L competitors will also offer the same feature. Either way, VMS will lose some9 of the technological edge it had because it ran on Alpha.         D > 12. With regard to future system sales supporting service revenue:F >   future Itanium-based sales will too.  And since Itanium is used by> >   many other hardware vendors, Itanium also gives Compaq theC >   opportunity to get service revenue for other vendor's hardware, C >   something Alpha does not, and without having to pay the cost of  >   developing Alpha CPUs.    G This paragraph doesn't make much sense. Even Digital was bragging about L supporting multiple vendor's hardware as well as its own Alpha and VAX.  AndM do not forget that just because 2 systems use the same CPU doesn't make the 2 H systems compatible or the same to support. Look at the Ultrix MIPS basedJ workstations versus the Tandem NSK Mips based servers. There is nothing inD common between the two except one chip which is rarely "maintained".    / re: without the cost of developping Alpha CPUs.   M This is perhaps the biggest argument in favour of ditching Alpha. Considering M that Compaq was unwilling to market Alpha to a wide audience, and considering K that IA64 will eventually match today's Alpha performance, it is logical to M assume that Compaq did its math and realised that it could make as much money R paying a lot more for CPUs (IA64) but not spending any R&D money to develop Alpha.  M However, had Compaq decided to widen the market for Alpha, there is no reason N that Compaq could have seen significant royalty revenus from the sale of alphaM chips to many vendors. This is especially true since Alpha supported one very  popular OS: Linux.  ' Where there is a will, there is a way.    N Microsoft was able to grow from a basement operation with a thick glassed geekK to one of the largest corporations in the world. Had that geek decided that F there was no way he could grow to compete against IBM, Digital and the4 "bunch", he wouldn't have bothered with his company.  K You can't make Alpha the de-facto standard overnight. But if you never try, ! you are certain never to succeed.   F >   competitive.  Not being privy to the future plans of the companiesB >   currently providing fab service to Compaq, he can't know that.D >   If Compaq has to buy into a fab for Alpha (such as by partnering8 >   with AMD on a fab) then the cost of Alpha skyrocket.  M The beaty of the Palmer deal to sell the Hudson fab is that Compaq can choose M whom it wants to build the Alpha. Just like toy makers can choose any chinese C toy maker to fab their plastic toys according to their own designs.   K Most fabs do a lot of custom chips. Some semiconductor companies do nothing N but custom chips. And companies such as IBM would welcome additional customersV to use their big expensive fab thus making sure that their fab is used at its maximum.  N That was the big problem under Palmer: internal Digital politics prevented theJ Hudson fab from being used to maximum by making other people's chips, withN Strongarm being the exception). I had heard that Digital had been asked by AMDL to fab its chips but AMD was turned down because Digital wanted to keep someM fab capacity available in case Alpha ever took off. (not sure if this is true . of not, but heard it from an ex-dec employee).  < > 17. Bill Todd apparently assumes that Compaq could make it6 >   fly without spending a gawd-awful amount of money.  M Compaq was handed a fully functioning achritecture for very little money with I only improvements needed to keep pace. Both AMD and INTEL have to develop N their architectures from scratch.  Compaq ditched Alpha because Compaq did notN want Alpha. Period. They used accounting techniques to support their decision.  G Compaq capitulated while on its knees in front of the gods of Intel and ( Microsoft. It never tried to push Alpha.  = > 18.  Again, year-old numbers are not good indicators of the 6 >   present, and even poorer indicators of the future.  L Well, since Alpha is not at its first iteration, and since they were able toG produce new/improved versions of Alpha since 1992, and since Compaq hasrH committed to finishing EV7, one would think that it is quite possible toM continue to upgrade Alpha are reasonable costs. If Alpha had been losing much N money, Palmer would have sold it lock stock and barrel to Intel along with theL fab. But at the time, Palmer stated (bullshitted) that without the burden ofI the FAB, digital and alpha would be far more profitable and Digital couldiG choose any fab it wants while concentrating on designing a better chip.   F > 19. This entire paragraph of Bill's had no relevance on the issue of >   Alpha's economic viability.i  H Yes, it has all the relevance. A product that receives no marketing is aJ product you do not want. A product without marketing is not a product thatN will sell in large quantities. One need not be the size of Intel to sell chips' in sufficient quantities to make money.     E > 20. "Number of customers" isn't a good indicator of market success,eD >   especially if your new customers are small and your ex-customers
 >   were big.i  N But your small customers will grow. And more importantly, your small customersJ enable you to brag about a growing installed base of customers and that isG what ISVs want to see before they decide to port their products to your J platform. If your sales come solely from exsiting customers, the potentialM market for ISV doesn't grow so they continue to view VMS as being too small a   market to make a port justified.  M So in many ways, Compaq really needs those small customers even if they doN'trF generate much profit, simply because they will help to keep the largerM customers on your platform. And also, by increasing the volume, you can lowerh* the per-unit cost and be more competitive.  L Compaq should take a lessons from Airline's yield management techniques thatF decide how many seats on a plane are sold at what price. Some say thatI airlines make all their money on business travellers. But others say that K business travellers pay the costs while the low yield customers provide theaJ icing on the cake (profits). But few realise that by having sufficient lowJ yield passengers to justify a 747 on a route, you also have loads of cargoB capacity and cargo is veryt profitable, also as icing on the cake.  N You have to look at the big picture of VMS/ALPHA/TRU64/NSK to see the value ofN Alpha, you can't just isolate one part from the other. And if Compaq still hadL NT on Alpha and had pushed it big time, you probably wouldn't see IA64 today" being touted as industry standard.    M Compaq has had plenty of opportunities to expand Alpha as well as VMS. And it J was very easy for Compaq to do because the standard established by DigitalN were so low that anyone and his monkey could manage Alpha and VMS to have more success than under Palmer.    R > 22. Bill Todd actually has no clue what VMS-related profits were this past year.  
 Does anyone ?o  M Again, if VMS profits were so important to Compaq, how come Compaq would makem) no mention of VMS during its financials ?p  K And if VMS profits were so low, how can you really trust Compaq not to killy$ VMS whenever it will be convenient ?  C > 23. By analogy, Bill Todd's argument is equivalent to saying that-D >   the fact the Boeing makes money off of 737's implies that BoeingE >   should be developing it's own aircraft engines.  This argument is3I >   of course invalid, and Boeing buys its jet engines from the companieseB >   that make jet engines for all the other airline manufacturers.  J That is incorrect. Boeing does not buy jet engines except for its own testN aircraft. Airlines choose the jet engines and buy directly from the jet engineM manufacturers, with Boeing (or Airbus) installing the engines under contract.2  K Furthermore, Boeing (and Airbus) will work with the engine manufacturers torJ design the engine that will fit just rigth for their plane. In some cases,L such as one version of the 777, Boeing chose to give exclusive rights to oneH engine maker because the market wasn't big enough for 2 engine makers toL compete. So airlines have no choice of engine makers for certain model(s) of the 777 aircraft.j  N The aircrtaft and jet manufacturers live in a symbiosis way. The engine makersK tell Boeing how mucy thrust their new engines might be capable of, and theneK Boeing designs an aircraft that would make use of that thrust, goes back to4B the jet manufacturer and gives them the exact specs needed etc etc  L This is similar to Compaq decising that NSK would go on Alpha. Alpha had theL right power, but then Tandem told the Alpha folks about certain details thatN would need to be added to Alpha to fit under the Tandem hood. Alpha folks wentD to work and designed EV7 that would support the Tandem architecture.  K The big difference is that the end product is sold as a single product by atJ single company. In airline terms, you'd be buying the cabinet and softwareR from Compaq and choosing the 8086 either from Intel or AMD depending on price etc.  A >   It may be that VMS sales are saturated (since they apparentlyrB >   target specialized markets), and that no amount of advertising >   would increase them.  J Yes, of course. But if you release VMS outside of its small "niche" cages,K guess what ? You'd have plenty of oppportunity to grow. VMS is artificially-L restrcicted to those cages because Compaq doesn't want to spend any money to grow VMS outside of thse cages.u  I Compaq doesn't realise that VMS may still be succesfull even with a smallC  market share in various markets.  ? > ... and pretend the recent industry downturn, which AMD's CEOoC > called "the sharpest he's ever seen", never happened ... armchairwF > CEO's can "pretend" like that if they like; really CEO's should not.  H The story of Alpha goes well beyond individual recessions/downturns.  AnU architecture that was designed to grow for 25 years will widthstand a few recessions.h  : >   the bottom did not fall out of Alpha ?  Software sales7 >   can continue even though hardware sales are _dead_.w  H But software sales will stop once you announce the death of the platformK because customers will make any new investments on a new platform. And whenlJ Compaq kills a platform 4 years before its replacemenmt will be available,1 guess where those investments will go meanwhile ?     J > 30. Note that "storage and enterprise" may include IA-32/WinNT products.L >   Bill Todd self-servingly "guesses" that it doesn't. But he doesn't know.  L Correct. To Compaq "enterprise servers" seems to mean primarily wintel stuffH with a sideline of Alpha. When Compaq announced it was going to focus onM enterprise stuff, it was our fault to expect to see Compaq take VMS seriouslyrI , and it was our fault to be disapointed seing those "fly by kite" TV adssJ showing wintel junk only. That is when it started to become quite apparent@ that Compaq would focus its enterprise energies on wintel stuff.  @ > 31. Bill Todd dishonestly compares 1999 boom-time VMS business) >   to Q2-2001 bust-time IA-32 business. q  N But VMS business was declining in 1999 while it grew modestly in 2000. So 1999. business would be lower than 2000 VMS numbers.  : > 32. Note that Alpha-based systems may be in a slump, but? >   Bill Todd won't even consider that possibility, even thougho' >   he has no data that says otherwise.t  J Ever wondered WHY the best CPU in the world that was years (and possible aM decade) ahead of its competitors was never succesful while the world toy crapsM architecture 8086 was able to claim it was the fastest processor in the world G and go unchallenged by Compaq/Digital (Intel was challenged by Apple, aeI company smaller than Compaq, so Compaq could have challenged Intel had its wanted to).r    > >   Winkler's "cost" number, and old VMS revenue numbers.  TheC >   rest of his argument is self-serving guesses, "imaginings", andt >   assumptions. y    I Ask yourself: why does Compaq not release hard numbers on VMS and Alpha ?o  N The easy answer to this is that it would go against Compaq's stated directionsR with those platforms, so Compaq has to burry these numbers along with other stuff.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:30:04 -0700 % From: J Ahlstrom <jahlstro@cisco.com>o1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatea) Message-ID: <3B57353C.B0E0651D@cisco.com>d   Warren Spencer wrote:s       
    -- snip --f  J >   Either the Alpha architecture would eventually run out of steam and beM >   surpassed by IPF, or the Alpha business was "economically unsustainable".a  d    Let me reword this a little:C One or more of the following must be true for theses things to haves	 happened:rA       1. The Alpha architecture would eventually run out of steam $           and be surpassed by IPF or>       2. The Alpha architecture could not be cost-effectively 4           kept competitive with IPF for cost reasons:       3. The Alpha architecture could be cost-effectively .           kept competitive for revenue reasons@       4.  Compaq thought that comparable expenses - engineering,	 marketinga=            manufacturing and sales, in non-Alpha areas would nE            be more profitable (and perhaps better for their customersa            as well.e
  --snip snip d Leading to the conclusion:  pM >   So in Compaq-speak, I'm hearing:  "We've decided to shrink our investmentgK >   in Alpha in the coming years, therefore Alpha cannot stay ahead of IPF.m > 3  I can't comment on the sentence immediately below.r >  > L >   But tell the customers just that second part - and give it a technical / >   engineering spin please".e > I >   I would assume the only reason we haven't seen the actual engineering O >   arguments, or financial numbers, is because they're unkown or contradictoryfJ >   - but either way - not the best supporting docs for a decision of this
 >   scope.  7 I can believe that we think Compaq management was wrongu: in their calculations or had wrong data to work with, but ; I cannot believe that they were wrong in their perceptions i= or their intentions to put their money where it woule produce > the most return.  Which, I believe, Compaq as a non-non-profit< company is required by law to do.  Or at least is liable to 3 shareholder suits if they fail to succeed in doing.    >  >   ws >  >   -- >  >   Warren Spencer >   Senior Software Engineer >   The Associated Press > O >   ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements - neither do Is >   ** >  > --+ > The purpose of software testing is to seet) > if the software is good enough to ship.  >             James B Shearer  >n   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:52:48 GMTd. From: "Stephen Fuld" <s.fuld@worldnet.att.net>1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicateaH Message-ID: <kUG57.10862$gj1.1024903@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>  @ "Kevin Strietzel" <kevin_strietzel@stratus.com> wrote in message% news:3B562285.76989699@stratus.com...       A > A couple years ago I read an article written by an attorney who H > practiced patent law; I don't know whether that's all he did.  He said< > the US patent system's original theoretical purposes were: >oG > 1.  Encouraging people to invent things, which is supposed to be goodsA > for the nation.  They do this by increasing the chance that thei) > inventor's investment will be recouped.a >oJ > 2.  Encouraging people to manufacture newly invented things or use newlyH > invented processes, which is supposed to be good for the nation.  TheyJ > do this by increasing the chance that the manufacturer's investment will > be recouped. >oJ > 3.  Encouraging people to publish their inventions in a public place, soH > they become public knowledge instead of trade secrets.  This knowledgeI > is supposed to make it easier for later inventors and manufacturers andd; > discoverers, which is supposed to be good for the nation.e > C > That's the theory, anyway.  In practice, of course, the system isaF > manipulated for the gain of the individuals and businesses involved. >nA > He went on to claim that the Japanese and European systems have F > different intentions, and that the American system was drifting awayI > from its base and toward those systems.  He claimed that this was a BadoJ > Thing because it benefitted large companies at the expense of individualG > inventors.  That part of the article was clearly an opinion piece andu< > thus presumably slanted, but the first part sounded fairlyD > straightforward, but could have been slanted more than I realized. >o    J You don't need to speculate on the original purpose.  It is clearly stated. in Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution.  L "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limitedF times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"  3 Pretty smart that Mr. Madison and his cohorts.  :-)h     --     -  Stephen Fuld    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:01:21 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>e1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatee, Message-ID: <3B573C76.D1AAF9D0@videotron.ca>   J Ahlstrom wrote:o9 > I can believe that we think Compaq management was wrongs; > in their calculations or had wrong data to work with, butm< > I cannot believe that they were wrong in their perceptions? > or their intentions to put their money where it woule producec > the most return.    N I understand what you say, but I disagree. What you omitted from your logic isK the risk factor. I thik that the potential for profits for VMS and Alpha ishF huge, but Compaq does not want to (or is not allowed to) risk its core business (wintel servers).  C Remember that pushing Alpha against Intel would jeoperdize Compaq's I relationship with Intel and pushing VMS out to the world would jeoperdiseo% Compaq's relationship with Microsoft.l  L So it was far easier for Compaq to just drop Alpha without a fight, get paid= by Intel to replace the Alpha business by (supposedly) wintelhE software/solutions business and get on with the job of being the best % enterprise wintel solutions provider.b  L If Compaq did not wish to risk spending money on ALpha to make it succesful,X ask yourself why Compaq should spend the same type of money on VMS to make it succesful.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:37:42 -0700 & From: name99@mac.com (Maynard Handley)1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatet> Message-ID: <name99-1907011337420001@il0203a-dhcp93.apple.com>  9 In article <3B54D17E.51903BBC@bigfoot.com>, Hamlyn Mootoo  <univms@bigfoot.com> wrote:s   > Maynard Handley wrote:) >  This implies Intel engineers hitting aoL > > roadblock, unable to solve the problem, and coming up with a solution by > > searching patent databases.f > I > I believe that patent infringements more often than not, are the resulttJ > of one company acquiring one or more of another company's key engineers, > so the IP comes with them. > N > > Anyone who has actual patent experience will tell you this is far from how > J > So tell us, do you have actual patent experience?  If so, could you list > them please.  O Yes I have plenty of actual patent experience. Submitting patent applications, g> scrutinizing patents that my company has supposedly infringed,C scrutinizing patents of my company to see if others have infringed.a  L > > it goes, that the reality is that most tech patents are bullshit patentsK > > of the obvious, that which company gets some obvious technique patentedkJ > > first is more a matter of luck (or which company has the LESS talentedK > > engineers who feel that something obvious is actually worth patenting),oJ > > that any competent engineer in SW or HW in the course of a year's workL > > will reinvent twenty or so obvious techniques that have patents attached > G > I think you miss the purpose of a patent.  A patent rewards the FIRSTpJ > ONE who can devise or improve something with (presumably) the protection$ > to realize FINANCIAL gain from it.  J Oh for crying out loud. Spare me the pious talk. What exactly went throughH your mind when you wrote that? "OK, this guy is probably ten years olderE than me, probably has some experience, but what the heck, I'm sure herF doesn't really understand what patents are for so I'll enlighten him."  D Look skippy, I am telling you the way the system ACTUALLY works withC regard to computer tech, and based on substantial experience. Don'tlH believe me, if you want, but don't try to pretend to yourself and othersJ than the system behaves the way it is theoretically meant to behave. Look,D no less than _The Economist_ wrote an article a few weeks ago makingI pretty much exactly the points I am making---that in the tech environment I most patents are for obvious BS, and are filed to wield as a club against E others, not because they represent any deep insight worth protecting.o   Maynarde   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:55:08 -0700i& From: name99@mac.com (Maynard Handley)1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatet> Message-ID: <name99-1907011355080001@il0203a-dhcp93.apple.com>  9 In article <3B558065.63B5DB56@bigfoot.com>, Hamlyn Mootooe <univms@bigfoot.com> wrote:n  K > > > I think you miss the purpose of a patent.  A patent rewards the FIRSTcN > > > ONE who can devise or improve something with (presumably) the protection( > > > to realize FINANCIAL gain from it. > > 0 > > Wrong. US patents aren't anything like that. > G > Care to elaborate, or maybe you didn't because you can't back up thateA > statement. The following is an ACTUAL citation from Barrons Lawe
 > Dictionary:i > PATENT OF INVENTIONlH > A grant of right to exclude others from making, using or selling of anJ > invention during a specified time; it constitutes a ligitimate monoploy. > See 304 F. Supp.357,367. > C > If you need help looking up the legal citation at the end of thisoH > definition, I'll be more than happy to oblige.  Asking for help is not- > necessarily an admission of your ignorance.a  G Look, Hamlyn, when people deal with patents in the real world, they arerH dealing with sensitive legal issues. There are issues of confidentiality= involved, not to mention millions, even billions of dollars. h  F No-one on reading this group is going to pipe up saying "Here's a realH story example: I was was an engineer at Microsoft and I had to deal withH the following BS patent from Oracle...", giving real company names, realE patent numbers and so on. That is just the way it is when it comes to  legal issues.   I Now you can either accept that the people trying to inform you of how youtH are wrong know what they are talking about, or you can act like an idiotE and ignore their experience. However following the latter path simply  makes you lose credibility.p   Maynardt   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:59:10 -0400u' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>e1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatel( Message-ID: <9j7kvq$iqa$1@pyrite.mv.net>  2 "J Ahlstrom" <jahlstro@cisco.com> wrote in message# news:3B57353C.B0E0651D@cisco.com...t > Warren Spencer wrote:  >g >, >    -- snip --e >sL > >   Either the Alpha architecture would eventually run out of steam and be? > >   surpassed by IPF, or the Alpha business was "economicallye unsustainable".  >  >k > Let me reword this a little:E > One or more of the following must be true for theses things to havea > happened: C >       1. The Alpha architecture would eventually run out of steam & >           and be surpassed by IPF or? >       2. The Alpha architecture could not be cost-effectivelyu6 >           kept competitive with IPF for cost reasons; >       3. The Alpha architecture could be cost-effectively 0 >           kept competitive for revenue reasonsB >       4.  Compaq thought that comparable expenses - engineering, > marketing > >            manufacturing and sales, in non-Alpha areas wouldG >            be more profitable (and perhaps better for their customerso >            as well.f  I Your list above doesn't come close to exhausting even the most reasonablesF explanations.  Two primary possibilities are outright incompetence andI internal politics.  A third takes into account Intel's willingness to paynA Compaq for killing Alpha (eliminating a high-profile and at leastsD potentially threatening competitor):  this is certainly in no way anI 'expense' issue (so you don't cover it above), and while (at least in theuH absence of monopoly concerns) it may be considered a legitimate businessG option it hardly reflects the spirit of competitiveness and support foraC one's own products that is generally considered to be an asset wheni selecting a vendor.i   ...   9 > I can believe that we think Compaq management was wronga; > in their calculations or had wrong data to work with, bute< > I cannot believe that they were wrong in their perceptions? > or their intentions to put their money where it woule producea > the most return.  K Why should you think that Compaq would be any more competent in this mattereJ than it has been in most areas since even before the DEC acquisition (when< its PC business was already having its lunch eaten by Dell)?  .   Which, I believe, Compaq as a non-non-profit= > company is required by law to do.  Or at least is liable toe5 > shareholder suits if they fail to succeed in doing.a  I I don't know if shareholders can successfully sue for simple incompetenceeK (as opposed to demonstrable malfeasance).  But they can make their feelingsf known in other ways.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 18:36:35 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicates, Message-ID: <3B5760EB.8F62C0C2@videotron.ca>   Bill Todd wrote:H > explanations.  Two primary possibilities are outright incompetence and > internal politics.  M You forgot "corporate strategy". I do not beleive that Compaq is incompetent.tI They have simply decided on a direction to go and that direction does notc' include certain products such as Alpha.rG It is very possible that they have arrived at that decision because thefN profits would be good enough and the risk very low, whereas staying with Alpha! would not garantee great returns.o  N Lets face it, Compaq allowed the 8086 to almost catch up, and surpass for someK stuff the Alpha chip. Keeping Alpha would mean constant competition againste Intel to keep Alpha faster.i  8 >  A third takes into account Intel's willingness to payC > Compaq for killing Alpha (eliminating a high-profile and at leastp& > potentially threatening competitor):  I I think that this was a solution to Compaq's wish. In other words, CompaqiL found a way to get where it wants to get by selling Alpha to Intel and using, the money to do that 180 day transformation.  I > option it hardly reflects the spirit of competitiveness and support forrE > one's own products that is generally considered to be an asset when  > selecting a vendor.n  L Consider that when Compaq bought Tandem, it kept Tandem as a separate entityL and kept the Tandem name. When Compaq bought Digital, the first thing it didL was drop the Digital brand name because Compaq was under the impression thatL it was poorly viewed brand name by customers. Digital had many more examplesM of a company dropping its own products than Compaq. And there's not much lefte+ of the original Digital for Compaq to drop.d  M > Why should you think that Compaq would be any more competent in this mattersL > than it has been in most areas since even before the DEC acquisition (when> > its PC business was already having its lunch eaten by Dell)?  K Compaq bought Tandem and Digital. Digital was a sick castrated puppy at thesM time and was missing some limbs. Compaq tried to eat something many times itscL own size and that stopped Compaq in its tracks for quite some time. RememberJ that when Pfeiffer was ousted, one of the excuses was that he had not been4 able to consume the Digital acquisition fast enough.  H So I think it would be fair to blame the Digital acquisition in part forJ Compaq's PC problems. Had Compaq remained focused on its core business, it8 would have adapted to Dell and countered Dell's threath.  K > I don't know if shareholders can successfully sue for simple incompetencegM > (as opposed to demonstrable malfeasance).  But they can make their feelings1 > known in other ways.  M Where do you see incompetence ? Compaq shareholders invested in a PC company.aN They are probably very happy to see Compaq return to being a PC company , stopM being distracted by legacy stuff such as Alpha and VMS, and expand its sphere L to wintel software and services where it can compete and be better than Dell5 since Dell won't be offering these software/services.n  I Consider that Compaq is still called a box maker by Wall Street and stillr compared to Dell.  a  K Consider that Compaq's efforts to convert itself into an enterprise companyP> resulted in a focus on wintel servers instead of desktop PCs.   J Why would shareholders think of Compaq in any other way than a box maker ?  J And as long as shareholders invest in a box maker, they want to see CompaqJ focus on being a good box maker. If providing software solutions for thoseI boxes they build adds to the profit , then so be it. Perhaps at one pointn2 Compaq will be seen as a wintel solutions company.  J Compaq had plenty of opportunity to portray itself as a "true" entrerpriseL company with its Alpha, Tandem, VMS and Tru64 as well as wintel servers. ButJ in its ads, it may have had a 2 second shot of some vanilla mainframe, butL only ex-DECies would know that it was an Alpha. The rest probably thought itN was a big wintel server because in the remainder of the ads, only wintel stuff
 was featured.r  M Compaq is doing what it needs to do: focus on its core business which happenstK to be Wintel. It cannot be faulted nor called incompentnt. And I think thatoN they are handling VMS more intelligently than Digital did and as a reward willN probably succeed in keeping a good percentage of them as Compaq customers when they migrate to unix or NT.n  I The mistake was made by Palmer when he sold the remainder of Digital lock J stock and barrell. He should have continued his selling of Digital limb byL limb until all that was left was what Compaq really really wanted. This way,D Alpha and VMS might today be owned by someone who really wants theseN technologies to succeed. Or they may be completely dead with engineers sold to@ Microsoft and Intel. But the pain and uncertainty would be over.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:14:39 -0400n( From: Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com>1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicater+ Message-ID: <3B5785FF.A9B640B5@bigfoot.com>e   Maynard Handley wrote: > ; > In article <3B558065.63B5DB56@bigfoot.com>, Hamlyn Mootoo  > <univms@bigfoot.com> wrote:r > M > > > > I think you miss the purpose of a patent.  A patent rewards the FIRSTGP > > > > ONE who can devise or improve something with (presumably) the protection* > > > > to realize FINANCIAL gain from it. > > >52 > > > Wrong. US patents aren't anything like that. > >oI > > Care to elaborate, or maybe you didn't because you can't back up thatoC > > statement. The following is an ACTUAL citation from Barrons Laws > > Dictionary:i > > PATENT OF INVENTION J > > A grant of right to exclude others from making, using or selling of anL > > invention during a specified time; it constitutes a ligitimate monoploy. > > See 304 F. Supp.357,367. > > E > > If you need help looking up the legal citation at the end of thisyJ > > definition, I'll be more than happy to oblige.  Asking for help is not/ > > necessarily an admission of your ignorance.a > I > Look, Hamlyn, when people deal with patents in the real world, they aresJ > dealing with sensitive legal issues. There are issues of confidentiality> > involved, not to mention millions, even billions of dollars. > H > No-one on reading this group is going to pipe up saying "Here's a realJ > story example: I was was an engineer at Microsoft and I had to deal withJ > the following BS patent from Oracle...", giving real company names, realG > patent numbers and so on. That is just the way it is when it comes to  > legal issues.e > K > Now you can either accept that the people trying to inform you of how you J > are wrong know what they are talking about, or you can act like an idiotG > and ignore their experience. However following the latter path simplyl > makes you lose credibility.e > 	 > Maynarde  @ First of all, I had no idea I HAD credibility in the first placeC (therefore nothing to lose), and secondly, during (pseudo) rationalmD discourse, it is common to ask for supporting facts of an assertion.C If we all were to abandon this method, it would turn into somethingCG completely chaotic, resmbling something rather akin to.... let me thinke% of an example........ A NEWSGROUP!!!!d  F Kidding aside, I really do put a lot of stock in the brilliance of theF ALPHA design team, and from my own experience, know that engineers areH far from created equal, and given the same problem, groups of "ordinary"G engineers will generally attack and solve the problem similarly.  OTOH,j@ within the realm of my own experience, I have seen those certainH "special engineers" (and I belive the ALPHA design team is chock-full ofF them) whose very nature it is to always seem to come up with somethingE out of the ordinary, and far superceding others.  So the IntellectualeH Property of THESE people, is FAR from obvious (Xerox PARC for example). E This would be like calling Newton, "A guy who's good at arithmetic". eB What Newton invented in two years, takes the rest of us 4 years to= learn.  I suppose you could argue that Leibnitz arrived at itpF coincidently, but there is a lot of evidence which shows that he got a5 good look at Newton's work before "inventing it" too.e   HM   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 18:37:42 -0700w+ From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate - Message-ID: <9j821g$155$1@nnrp1.phx.gblx.net>y  - "Christopher Smith" <csmith@amdocs.com> wrotel > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Dennis O'Connor [mailto:dmoc@primenet.com] >p/ > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote ...  > 9 > > No one with any knowledge of me is going to think I'm < > > psychotic.  Bill is just making himself look like a fool= > > by that line of attack.  Bill is incompetent at  flaming. ' > > One wonders why he does it so much.r > I > Your speaking of bill in the third person when replying to his own postm# > gives me doubt of your sanity. :)3  3 Not at all: I was talking _about_ Bill, not to him.16 For all I care Bill can kill-file me: it's the rest of1 the readers of the newsgroup I'm trying to reach. ) If not for that, I would have used email.d --3 Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.coms. Vanity Web Page http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 18:42:23 -0700t+ From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com>n1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatei- Message-ID: <9j82a9$162$1@nnrp1.phx.gblx.net>e  3 "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote ...t > Dennis O'Connor wrote:J > > 1. Only Winkler is in a position to know these costs (Compaq Exec VP).E > >   However, even this number lacks the reference to where and whenu: > >   Winkler made this claim, so its credibility suffers. >uN > Problem: Winkler is the one to have publicly proclaimed that NT was going toN > rule the world. Had this statement gone against Compaq's own policies, [...]  @ JF,  your commentary, though interesting, doesn't refute my main@ point, which is simply that Bill Todd's assertions about Alpha's@ viability are based only on guesses, fantasies, and speculation,< and have no real data or reasoning behind them.  Given that,F I'm just going to let your response stand; it was interesting reading,? and while I  disagree on some of the points you raise, I choosep not to argue them. --3 Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.comr. Vanity Web Page http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:23:33 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>n1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicateh, Message-ID: <3B579620.67E988B6@videotron.ca>   Dennis O'Connor wrote:B > JF,  your commentary, though interesting, doesn't refute my mainB > point, which is simply that Bill Todd's assertions about Alpha'sB > viability are based only on guesses, fantasies, and speculation,2 > and have no real data or reasoning behind them.   N Perhaps. But the whole problem is exactly the lack of information. Compaq madeL a decision (drop alpha) before knowing what the true impact of this decisionN was going to be. This is why the VMS engineers are only now struggling to find0 out what their new task is actually going to be.  I It is this lack of information and the fact that Compaq chose to make itstL announcement before it had sufficient information about VMS' port that leads0 some to wonder about Compaq's commitment to VMS.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:15:22 -0700o+ From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com>i1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicates- Message-ID: <9j87om$1gh$1@nnrp1.phx.gblx.net>   : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3B579620.67E988B6@videotron.ca... > Dennis O'Connor wrote:D > > JF,  your commentary, though interesting, doesn't refute my mainD > > point, which is simply that Bill Todd's assertions about Alpha'sD > > viability are based only on guesses, fantasies, and speculation,3 > > and have no real data or reasoning behind them.h >hD > Perhaps. But the whole problem is exactly the lack of information.  E I agree.  But apparantly, Bill Todd doesn't let a lack of informationc= slow him down.  He just makes up whatever he needs.  And that 
 was my point.c --3 Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.comM. Vanity Web Page http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:54:56 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> * Subject: Re: Basic quesitons from a newbie' Message-ID: <3B579D80.7A2AFC70@fsi.net>r   Nick Paszty wrote: >  > hello. > > > i am new to vms but have worked with unix for several years. > A > question 1.  in unix if i want to delete a directory continaingbF > subdirectories and files, i can force the delete command to do that.F > can this be done in vms.  from looking at help delete, i don't see a8 > similar option is there another command used for this?  H I've got rather a "dirty" DELTREE.COM proc. I thought I had posted it onE the web, but apparently not because I don't really consider it "ready D for prime time", even though I find it useful. So, I've pasted it in# after my sig. Use at your own risk.@   -- . David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemso http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.n    e* SYS$SYSDEVICE:[DDACHTERA.EXE]DELTREE.COM;1  a
 $! SET VER $! $! DELTREE.COM - 18-MAY-1995   $!H $! Delete an entire directory tree, including all files and directories.G $! (There is NO verification! Make VERY certain that you REALLY want to." $!  do this! It cannot be undone!) $! $ SAY := WRITE SYS$OUTPUTu$ $ IF P1 .EQS. "" THEN GOTO DSP_USAGE7 $ IF F$SEARCH("''P1'.DIR") .NES. "" THEN GOTO DELETE_EMs $ SAY "% ''p1'.DIR not found"s $ GOTO EXITs $! $DSP_USAGE:r= $ SAY " Usage: @DELTREE [path]directory_name     Ex: @DELTREEe DISK:[MYDIR]SUBDIR "  $ EXIT 1 $DELETE_EM:e" $ DFLT = F$ENVIRNMENT( "DEFAULT" )6 $ DEVC = F$PARSE( P1, DFLT,, "DEVICE", "SYNTAX_ONLY" )9 $ DRCT = F$PARSE( P1, DFLT,, "DIRECTORY", "SYNTAX_ONLY" )i4 $ NAME = F$PARSE( P1, DFLT,, "NAME", "SYNTAX_ONLY" )- $ NOW = F$CVTI( ,, "TIME" ) - ":" - ":" - "."a $ CTX1 := C'NOW'
 $ CNTR = 0 $! $! Set up the directory path.  $ DIR_PATH = DRCT - "[" - "]"e5 $ IF DIR_PATH .NES. "" THEN DIR_PATH = DIR_PATH + "."t $ DIR_PATH = DIR_PATH + NAME $CNTR_LOOP: & $ ELEM = F$ELEM( CNTR, ".", DIR_PATH ) $ CNTR = CNTR + 1o& $ IF ELEM .EQS. "" THEN GOTO CNTR_LOOP( $ IF ELEM .EQS. "." THEN CNTR = CNTR - 1' $ IF ELEM .NES. "." THEN GOTO CNTR_LOOPf $ INIT_CNTR = CNTR $!5 $! Find the deepest level of subdirectories (max = 8)e $DIR_LOOP_1:! $ SRCH := 'DEVC'['DIR_PATH']*.DIR  $! SH SYM SRCH$ $ FSP_1 = F$SEARCH( SRCH, 11111111 )- $ IF FSP_1 .EQS. "" THEN GOTO EXIT_DIR_LOOP_1i5 $ IF DIR_PATH .NES. "" THEN DIR_PATH = DIR_PATH + ".". $ DIR_PATH = DIR_PATH + "*"h $ CNTR = CNTR + 1 $ $! IF CNTR .GT. 8 THEN GOTO TOO_DEEP $ GOTO DIR_LOOP_1h $EXIT_DIR_LOOP_1:. $DIR_LOOP_2:! $ SRCH := 'DEVC'['DIR_PATH']*.*;*U $! SH SYM SRCH$ $ FSP_2 = F$SEARCH( SRCH, 12121212 ) $! SH SYM FSP_2c $ IF    FSP_2 .NES. ""1 $ THEN  CMD := DELETE/LOG/NOCONF/EXC=*.DIR 'SRCH's $!      SAY "$ ", CMDe
 $       'CMD'  $ ENDIFp2 $! FSP_2 = F$SEARCH( "''DEVC'[''DIR_PATH']*.*;*" )$ $ FSP_2 = F$SEARCH( SRCH, 13131313 ) $! sh sym fsp_2h( $ IF FSP_2 .NES. "" THEN GOTO CANT_GO_ON* $ NAME = F$ELEM( CNTR - 1, ".", DIR_PATH )D $ IF CNTR .GT. 1 THEN DIR_PATH = "[''DIR_PATH']" - ".''NAME']" - "["< $ CMD := SET FILE/PROT=O:RWED 'DEVC'['DIR_PATH']'NAME'.DIR;* $! SAY "$ ", CMD $ 'CMD'i5 $ CMD := DEL/LO/NOCONF 'DEVC'['DIR_PATH']'NAME'.DIR;*p $! SAY "$ ", CMD $ 'CMD'r $ CNTR = CNTR - 1)- $ IF CNTR .GE. INIT_CNTR THEN GOTO DIR_LOOP_2h  $ IF P1 .EQS. "*" THEN GOTO EXIT! $! DIR_PATH = DIR_PATH - ".''P1'"t. $ DIR_PATH = "[''DIR_PATH']" - ".''P1']" - "[", $ LAST_LEVEL := 'DEVC'['DIR_PATH']'P1'.DIR;*3 $ IF F$SEARCH( LAST_LEVEL ) .EQS. "" THEN GOTO EXITt* $ CMD := SET FILE/PROT=O:RWED 'LAST_LEVEL' $! SAY "$ ", CMD $ 'CMD' # $ CMD := DEL/LO/NOCONF 'LAST_LEVEL'  $! SAY "$ ", CMD $ 'CMD': $EXIT: $ EXIT $CANT_GO_ON:F $ SAY "% Failed to delete one or more files in ", DEVC, "[", DIR_PATH, "]"t $ GOTO EXITD   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 23:53:31 -0400c( From: Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com> Subject: Blast From the Past* Message-ID: <3B57AB3B.5909F50@bigfoot.com>  & Anybody remember reading this article?   By Stephanie Miles Staff Writer, CNET News.com  January 26, 1998, 1:00 p.m. PT tD news analysis Some industry observers believe today's acquisition ofF Digital Equipment Corporation by Compaq is the last nail in the coffinF for Digital's Alpha chip, but other analysts are saying that it servesA as a strong placeholder for Digital until Intel's next-generationkC "Merced" processor is released and able to prove itself as a worthy  competitor.   C Alpha, Digital's high-end 64-bit processor used in  its servers and,D workstations, has faced an uncertain future since last October, whenH Digital sold its chipmaking plants to Intel as part of the settlement ofF its patent infringement lawsuit against the processor giant. Under theF terms of the deal, Intel said it would continue making the Alpha chips" for an undisclosed amount of time.  H Many analysts then concluded--and still believe--that the settlement wasG the beginning of the end for Alpha. As part of the deal, Digital agreednG to begin making servers based on Intel's forthcoming Merced technology,aE and many analysts say that it is only a matter of time before Digital H folds its products into a platform based on Merced, the first generation# of Intel's 64-bit chip technology.    H At the time, Ashok Kumar, an analyst for Lowenbaum & Company said, "ThisH will accelerate the demise of Alpha, but it won't happen right away. The" transition has to be done slowly."  F "This will definitely accelerate the demise of Alpha," Linley Gwennap,G vice president of publications for market researchers MicroDesign, saidt? today. "While it's possible that Alpha could have some superiornH performance, it's about how many R&D dollars Compaq wants to invest in a$ technology that's not the standard."  E Compaq could reinforce this transition since it is a company that hasiE always supported the Intel "X86" chip architecture almost exclusively  across its computer products.M  E Nathan Brookwood, an analyst at Dataquest, thinks the Alpha chip williD help Compaq with its high-end corporate computing strategy and has aD couple of years to prove itself before Intel rolls out its competing IA-64 Merced architecture.  H Brookwood says that today's merger should have no effect on the previousE settlement with Intel. A spokesperson for Digital agreed, saying thate( the two deals were "mutually exclusive."  G "The Compaq-DEC deal won't have any effect on the Intel-DEC deal. Let'siH assume that the FTC blesses them," Brookwood said. "Compaq has said thatG they see Alpha as an asset, and I'm willing to accept that statement." a  E Compaq's pronouncements about Alpha's future are upbeat for now. In adG statement today announcing the acquisition, Compaq CEO Eckhard Pfeiffer D said that Compaq is committed to supporting the Alpha architecture.   A Digital Chairman Robert Palmer agreed, saying: "Alpha's future isa8 brighter than ever," in a conference call this morning.   F Such assertions didn't sway Gwennap, who pointed out, "They don't wantG to have people stop buying Alpha systems until IA-64 systems are ready.f& They need to have the deal approved."   @ Brookwood noted that Alpha's enterprise computing niche makes itA especially attractive to Compaq, especially until Intel rolls outnC Merced. "DEC does have products that the [corporate] customers findtE accessible for high-end applications. IA-64 may be there someday, butn it's not today," he said.   ? "We now will have Compaq, IBM, and Hewlett-Packard as the threenD mega-vendors. IBM and HP both already have high-end systems based on@ proprietary architectures" that Alpha can compete with, he said.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:54:11 +0100S1 From: Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk> - Subject: Re: Compaq as a technology leader???n6 Message-ID: <3B575703.2019F402@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>  C Who thought up the idea of having arrays of memory SIMMs, a la RAIDhA Memory?  Rumour has it that Compaq are/were planning to have thisi+ feature shipping in Proliants this year....f Steve.   mulp wrote:v > ; > I'm not questioning Compaq being innovative in marketing.e > 8 > I question whether Compaq is innovative in technology. > I > Is it being innovative to say "I want to build the first legacy PC likehF > Intel and Microsoft have been asking manufacturers to do for years"? > I > DEC folk in Palo Alto wanted to have a way of plug and play human inputsM > devices and came up with the basis for the USB architecture and design.  It N > was offered as an open standard.  But it wasn't adopted generally because itN > wasn't standard.  That Compaq is offering a PC that does what the folk in paD > did for MIPS boxes a decade ago, and that Intel and Microsoft soonD > supported, suggests to me how little power Compaq has over things.   -- mG "A shadow fell over her face; clear, as if the composure were rent likevE a veil.  And her lips parted, but only with a short intake of breath.sA Then she said, 'Well, then you are right.  Indeed, we are even.'" % 		Louis, "Interview with the Vampire"i   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:24:13 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)/ Subject: Re: Compaq FUD and lack of informationr3 Message-ID: <1eI57.1019$rc5.69027@news.cpqcorp.net>   S In article <3B571499.2DF74206@dplanet.ch>, John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> writes:l  F :In your statement here you said " a team of engineers here in OpenVMSE :has been performing the initial research and design work for the IPF A :port for roughly thirteen days now."  To my way of thinking thisaI :suggests that you had no preparation prior to June 24 and hence were "inr
 :the dark"...   M   I find it intriguing that you cite various engineering-related discussions  L   and concerns and you make various assumptions based on these, yet you are L   (very reasonably) asking largely business-related questions.  I will pass M   your questions along to the folks here in OpenVMS that handle the business lI   issues related to OpenVMS and OpenVMS on IPF, as these questions should J   be answered -- various of the OpenVMS business folks have been visiting )   customers, and more visits are planned.h  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 18:11:02 -0400n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> / Subject: Re: Compaq FUD and lack of informationl, Message-ID: <3B575AF0.DD185094@videotron.ca>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:aM >   (very reasonably) asking largely business-related questions.  I will passyN >   your questions along to the folks here in OpenVMS that handle the businessK >   issues related to OpenVMS and OpenVMS on IPF, as these questions shouldsK >   be answered -- various of the OpenVMS business folks have been visitingg+ >   customers, and more visits are planned.e  N You would do many a great favour if you ould ask these "business issues" folksL why they only release the information during visits to the few customers bigJ enough to warrant a visit instead of making the information more public so@ that the rest of us can better understand Compaq's true motives.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 18:11:59 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)* Subject: Re: Compaq have committed suicide3 Message-ID: <PpF57.1011$rc5.67299@news.cpqcorp.net>D  \ In article <190720010101176482%elliott@yrl.co.uk>, Elliott Roper <elliott@yrl.co.uk> writes:G :One small request. (Just in case anyone from Compaq still reads us mobp :of moaning minnies.)o; : Can we please drop the "Open" in time for unobtanium-VMS?dE :It is THE most vomit-inducing marketing stunt in the known universe.rF :(apart from 'industry standard' not being proprietary and 'tru' as in	 :cluster)   M   I'd personally like this, save for all the pain it will cause me -- if you  K   want to call it "VMS", then have at.  But do you want OpenVMS EngineeringdM   off fixing text and off answering the next gazillion questions around "how nJ   do I upgrade from OpenVMS to VMS?" questions we had to answer last time L   'round, or do you want us working on OpenVMS or on porting OpenVMS on IPF?  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:33:10 -0400s- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>e* Subject: Re: Compaq have committed suicide, Message-ID: <3B5727D2.E004269A@videotron.ca>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:eM >   want to call it "VMS", then have at.  But do you want OpenVMS EngineeringpN >   off fixing text and off answering the next gazillion questions around "howK >   do I upgrade from OpenVMS to VMS?" questions we had to answer last timea >   'round,   M Considering that your cutosmer based is much smaller now since the mistake ofoM adding the "Open", you'll be getting much fewer questions. And I suspect thateF most customers justy call it VMS anyways and know that the open causes  confusion and should be renamed.  N And when you consider how Microsoft is able to change the name of its OS everyL two years with the media getting it right, Shirley Compaq could do this name' change properly and without confusion ?m   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:41:11 -0300m) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.brs* Subject: Re: Compaq have committed suicideL Message-ID: <OF04B65B43.BA821937-ON03256A8E.00664201@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>  > I am not worried about the name of VMS, OpenVMS, iVMS, etc ...  G I am worried about the lack of jobs ... I made investments in my careeraI in OpenVMS, but searching in brazilian jobs sites with almost 50.000 jobsh( there is no reference about "VMS" jobs !  ? What I can say is:  "OpenVMS" or "iVMS" is dead here in Brazil.r  : Second..... I am being considered a "legacy" professional.E I have almost 14 years of job in support:  Computer Operator, SupportsB Technician and System Management..... and now they are saying i am, obsolete .... with almost 30 years old ! ! !   Bad ! Too bad !   C I am sending resumes to Europeans companies but with these problemsg3 of "firing people everywhere"  it is not easy ! ! !b   Regardsw   FC        > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> em 19/07/2001 15:33:10  9 Favor responder a JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>d             Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com       * Assunto: Re: Compaq have committed suicide     Hoff Hoffman wrote:tA >   want to call it "VMS", then have at.  But do you want OpenVMS- Engineering-I >   off fixing text and off answering the next gazillion questions around  "howK >   do I upgrade from OpenVMS to VMS?" questions we had to answer last timeD >   'round,$  J Considering that your cutosmer based is much smaller now since the mistake ofH adding the "Open", you'll be getting much fewer questions. And I suspect thatF most customers justy call it VMS anyways and know that the open causes  confusion and should be renamed.  H And when you consider how Microsoft is able to change the name of its OS everycG two years with the media getting it right, Shirley Compaq could do thish name' change properly and without confusion ?o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:10:54 +0100 1 From: Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>e* Subject: Re: Compaq have committed suicide6 Message-ID: <3B573ECE.2DD85F3D@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>  D I think my preferred answer would be similar to that of Hoff - don'tH worry about name changes or thoughts of search and replace to remove the9 term "Open".  Just carry on the work with OpenVMS on IPF.f< Besides, it would remove the idea of VMS with a silent Open.   Steve.   Hoff Hoffman wrote:  > ^ > In article <190720010101176482%elliott@yrl.co.uk>, Elliott Roper <elliott@yrl.co.uk> writes:I > :One small request. (Just in case anyone from Compaq still reads us mob  > :of moaning minnies.)t= > : Can we please drop the "Open" in time for unobtanium-VMS?iG > :It is THE most vomit-inducing marketing stunt in the known universe. H > :(apart from 'industry standard' not being proprietary and 'tru' as in > :cluster)a > N >   I'd personally like this, save for all the pain it will cause me -- if youM >   want to call it "VMS", then have at.  But do you want OpenVMS Engineering@N >   off fixing text and off answering the next gazillion questions around "howK >   do I upgrade from OpenVMS to VMS?" questions we had to answer last timemN >   'round, or do you want us working on OpenVMS or on porting OpenVMS on IPF? -- sG "A shadow fell over her face; clear, as if the composure were rent likeeE a veil.  And her lips parted, but only with a short intake of breath. A Then she said, 'Well, then you are right.  Indeed, we are even.'"A% 		Louis, "Interview with the Vampire"    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:46:38 -0500l1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>e* Subject: Re: Compaq have committed suicide' Message-ID: <3B579B8E.9A58D19B@fsi.net>o  * fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br wrote: > @ > I am not worried about the name of VMS, OpenVMS, iVMS, etc ... > I > I am worried about the lack of jobs ... I made investments in my careerrK > in OpenVMS, but searching in brazilian jobs sites with almost 50.000 jobs]* > there is no reference about "VMS" jobs !  E I've found it useful to search for VMS or OpenVMS or VAX. You can addXD DEC to that, but it can produce some unexpected results, just as VMSB sometimes does. Many of the few job postings I find still refer toE "DEC/VAX", even though the VAX processor line has been EOL'd for someS
 years now.  A > What I can say is:  "OpenVMS" or "iVMS" is dead here in Brazil."  G Sounds Like Chicago (also the name of a music show we did when I worked 1 at the Triton College TV studio some years back).C   < > Second..... I am being considered a "legacy" professional.G > I have almost 14 years of job in support:  Computer Operator, SupportTD > Technician and System Management..... and now they are saying i am. > obsolete .... with almost 30 years old ! ! !  ( I can relate - brothers-in-arms, we are!    > Bad ! Too bad !P   Much!"  E > I am sending resumes to Europeans companies but with these problemsP5 > of "firing people everywhere"  it is not easy ! ! !   ? I hear there's changes coming in U.S. immigration laws, FWIW...I   -- O David J. Dachtera: dba DJE Systems' http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/H  F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.E   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 14:12:18 -07003 From: Eric Smith <eric-no-spam-for-me@brouhaha.com>T; Subject: Re: Compaq's Road to IPF: A Twenty-Question SurveyC0 Message-ID: <qhitgo7he5.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>  - young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:C; > 	Well... EV8 would be pretty pricey.  VMS and Tru64 wouldFB > 	not have the hooks in place to run on EV8 (see associated white> > 	paper that explains how Tru64 was modified to work with SMT > 	simulation).P  $ Where can one find this white paper?   Thanks!  Eric   ------------------------------  , Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:48:22 +0200 (CEST)- From: Freddy Meerwaldt <frederik@freddym.org>C! Subject: Re: Creating TK50 images_K Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107191947210.13150-100000@firewall.freddym.org>,   Hi!   4 >     $ BACKUP MUA0:[000000]*.* MYFILE.BCK /SAVE_SET > H > the right way to generate an image of a TK50 (wich I suppose is calledG > MUA0:), being able to restore it stright onto another TK50 elsewhere?    If you want an Image, try:    $ BACKUP /IMAGE MUA0: MYFILE.BCK   Bye, 	Freddyw  H PS: Be aware that you can restore an image only to a media with the sameD geometry/size, and a normal backup to every kind of Direcotry/Media.   -- sN Geek Code 3.1: GCS s+: a--- C+++ UBOU+++ P-- E--- W++ N w--- V++ PGP- t? 5? tv  J ==========================================================================>  Frederik Meerwaldt           Homepage: http://www.freddym.orgC  Bavaria/Germany              OpenVMS and Unix Howtos and much moreoI  Solaris, HP/UX, AIX, NetBSD, OpenBSD, IRIX, Tru64, OpenVMS, Ultrix, BeOSr   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:12:39 +0100p+ From: "antonio.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org>m! Subject: Re: Creating TK50 imagesi' Message-ID: <3B573127.65B9109A@iee.org>s   Freddy Meerwaldt wrote:g > If you want an Image, try: > " > $ BACKUP /IMAGE MUA0: MYFILE.BCK  3 I doubt that you can make an image backup of a tapew4 (although I admit to never trying this "interesting". idea before). An BACKUP/IMAGE is like a normal2 backup but includes a bunch of filesystem metadata3 i.e. stuff that does not live in conventional filesb0 like boot blocks and so on. BACKUP restores this/ stuff properly to disk and fixes up boot blockss. so they work. It will also defragment files in- the process. For this to work, you need to be,. backing up an ODS disk - a tape is not a disk.  & A BACKUP/PHYSICAL is a block for block+ backup - it will happily backup and restoren any disk (e.g. RT-11).  # There was a product that could copye% savesets from one tape to another, itr) was called something like Saveset Managers) or something equally imaginative. I don'to( know whether it could cope with tapes in+ general or just tapes with backup savesets y on them.  - Head over to http://pdp-10.trailing-edge.com/r) and read about how various different tapel, formats were preserved. If all you are doing% is transferring savesets, you may notu, need to do anything that complicated. If you- are copying bootable tapes, then you may needp something like that after all.    J > PS: Be aware that you can restore an image only to a media with the sameF > geometry/size, and a normal backup to every kind of Direcotry/Media.  3 This is true for BACKUP/PHYSICAL but it is not true 0 of BACKUP/IMAGE. /IMAGE is bright enough to know1 how to "fix up" the restore so that booting stille. works. It can cope with different size disks -) although it works best if the target disku( has sufficient capacity for the restored data :-)   -- s   ---------------A- Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.orgt   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:52:15 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>q! Subject: Re: Creating TK50 imagese, Message-ID: <3B573A55.3E0B51BF@videotron.ca>   Freddy Meerwaldt wrote:  >> If you want an Image, try:r > " > $ BACKUP /IMAGE MUA0: MYFILE.BCK  N Remember that a backup tape is usually mounted foreign, so would /IMAGE reallyH work ? The help states that you need read/write access to indexf.sys andJ bitmap.sys files, and if the tape was created as a foreign tape (as is the5 case for BACKUP savesets), it won't find those files.o  - I think that the original poster had it rightC  0 BACKUP MUA0:*.*  mydisk:[mydir]mybackup.sav/save   then  . BACKUP  mydisk:[mydir]mybackup.sav/save  MUA0:  L You would probably have to add /LABEL= on both commands to specify the tape.  L I know that BACKUP MUA0:*.* would catch all files of a foreign mounted tape.K But what about a tape that was inited as an ADS tape with a VMS file systemnE (eg: not mounted foreign) would BACKUP MUA0:*.* work on such a tape ?-   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:29:54 +0200m" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>! Subject: Re: Creating TK50 imagesa( Message-ID: <9j7fpc$8op$1@news.IAEhv.nl>  E Aren't you asking whether a copy of a save set from tape is possible? H If that is the case then the answer is yes. I'm somewhat confised by the term "generate an image".i  J If the TK50 contains the saveset MYFILE.BCK , then I'd mount the TK50 with OVER=IDu( (not foreign) and copy the file to disk:  $ copy MUA0:*.* []/logw3 The save set may be copied to another tape or disk.i   Hans  + Cthulhu <cthulhu@rlyeh.it> wrote in messageg# news:9j7117$6ii$2@kadath.deep.it...a > Is the command:f >u4 >     $ BACKUP MUA0:[000000]*.* MYFILE.BCK /SAVE_SET >dH > the right way to generate an image of a TK50 (wich I suppose is calledG > MUA0:), being able to restore it stright onto another TK50 elsewhere?p >s > duplicatingly, >    Cthulhu >e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:37:36 -0400s- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>c! Subject: Re: Creating TK50 imagesf, Message-ID: <3B5744F2.6CA5388E@videotron.ca>   Hans Vlems wrote:r > G > Aren't you asking whether a copy of a save set from tape is possible?rJ > If that is the case then the answer is yes. I'm somewhat confised by the > term "generate an image".l  K A tape may contain more than one saveset, or could contain different files.m   Consider the following:-   $MOUNT/FOREIGN MUA0: MYTAPEu $SET DEF [HIS] $COPY LOGIN.COM MUA0:LOGIN.COM7 $BACKUP *.* MUA0:MYFILES.SAV/SAVE/NOREWIND/LABEL=MYTAPEk $SET DEF [HER]8 $BACKUP *.* MUA0:HERFILES.SAV/SAVE/NOREWIND/LABEL=MYTAPE $DISMOUNT MUA0:4  I The tape would now contain 3 files, LOGIN.COM, MYFILE.SAV, HERFILES.SAV. r9 You could copy the tape by creating a temporary directoryV $CREATE/DIR [.TEMP]i $SET DEF [.TEMP] $MOUNT/FOREIGN MUA0: MYTAPE  $COPY MUA0:*.* []g  $ This will put the 3 files in [.TEMP]   $DISMOUNT MUA0:e $MOUNT MUA0: NEWTAPE $COPY *.* MUA0:o  - This will copy the 3 files onto the new tape.   8 COPY doesn't do much checking, this is why you could use BACKUP *.* MUA0:   instead of COPY *.* MUA0:a   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:35:17 GMTg2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)! Subject: Re: Creating TK50 images 3 Message-ID: <poI57.1021$rc5.69129@news.cpqcorp.net>r  L In article <9j7117$6ii$2@kadath.deep.it>, Cthulhu <cthulhu@rlyeh.it> writes:  3 :    $ BACKUP MUA0:[000000]*.* MYFILE.BCK /SAVE_SETt  ;   I'd use the Freeware TAPECOPY tool or other similar tool.-  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 01:31:35 +0100i0 From: "Adrian Birkett" <adrian.birkett@ic24.net>! Subject: Re: Creating TK50 imagese- Message-ID: <rYK57.2600$Bp3.54283@news2-hme0>o   Hi,m  J Can I suggest that normally, you would only make an image backup of a disk; device. This can be directed to a tape: $BACKUP/IMAGE disk:p# tape:saveset.sav/save  (generally).s  J If you were wanting to make copies of this tape, and had another availableK on another drive, I suppose you 'might' be able to copy from one to anotheruL using a combination of the copy command preceded by a $MOUNT/OVER=ID on eachF tape (initialize the second one) command provided that you have used aH /BLOCK=32256 (or less) qualifier (RMS doesn't like any thing greater for
 tape copies).k  L As I suggested, the norm would be to restore the image backup on the tape to a disk:u<     $BACKUP/IMAGE/INIT tapedrive:saveset.ext/save diskdrive:  J One last point, a normal image backup to a TK50 tape (95 MB capacity each)H would probably take a long time. I hope they are paying you at over-time	 rates :-)o   Regards,   Adec  J My opinion guarateed -- "When Dream and Day Unite" (Dream Theater -Electra Records (now))      - "Cthulhu" <cthulhu@rlyeh.it> wrote in messagea# news:9j7117$6ii$2@kadath.deep.it...  > Is the command:t >"4 >     $ BACKUP MUA0:[000000]*.* MYFILE.BCK /SAVE_SET >-H > the right way to generate an image of a TK50 (wich I suppose is calledG > MUA0:), being able to restore it stright onto another TK50 elsewhere?n >y > duplicatingly, >    Cthulhu >t   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:57:57 -0700y. From: Hank Vander Waal <hvanderw@novagate.com>
 Subject: DCPSn; Message-ID: <000201c1109d$df7bffc0$9c96a8c6@manufact5l8vs8>f  3 Is there a place I can down load DCPS from the net?mL Would like to start using it since we are adding more and different types of printers   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:12:32 -0400 0 From: Paul Anderson <paul.r.anderson@compaq.com> Subject: Re: DCPSq; Message-ID: <190720011612322634%paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>-  G In article <000201c1109d$df7bffc0$9c96a8c6@manufact5l8vs8>, Hank Vander # Waal <hvanderw@novagate.com> wrote:-  5 > Is there a place I can down load DCPS from the net?1  > Not typically.  Compaq distributes DCPS like all other OpenVMSF products, which means it's on the quarterly layered product CDs and by5 distribution if you have the proper support contract.V  G Those who participate in field testing DCPS have network access to thatxE version's field test and final kits, but there is no public site fromu% which you can download DCPS software.w   Paul   --    Paul Anderson   OpenVMS Engineering    Compaq Computer Corporationh   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:18:19 +0000 (UTC)e) From: jon@eoin.demon.co.uk (Jon Laughton)o3 Subject: FS(UK): Alphastation 500/400 + OpenVMS 7.2 0 Message-ID: <9j7iqr$c09$3@INDY.eoin.demon.co.uk>! Keywords: Alphastation, VMS, salel  * I would like to sell the following system:  @ DEC Alphastation 500/400 / 128 Mb RAM / 4 Gb HD / 6x CD / floppy- ZLXp-L1-24 graphics (3D accelerated / 24 bit)- DEC 21" Diamondtron monitor  DEC keyboard	 DEC mouse1 All signal and power cableso- OpenVMS 7.2 / DECwindows / NAS /etc installeda   Good working and cosmetic orderD   1200 ukp   (Located N Bucks).   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:51:50 -0500 ' From: Greg Pfister <pfister@us.ibm.com>o  Subject: Re: IA64 Rocks My World* Message-ID: <3B574866.74EF4613@us.ibm.com>   Chris Ruemmler wrote:i > 4 > In article <seY47.836$rc5.60878@news.cpqcorp.net>,6 > Fred Kleinsorge <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote:J > >OK.  I'm, not a database expert, but why is this a bad thing?  If TPC-CI > >truly measures relative performance that could be expected in the realuJ > >world - and if partitioning the system gets you this performance - thenI > >what's the big deal?  Tru64 clusters do provide a single system image,n+ > >making it relatively easy to administer.t > >pL > Yes, the system might be easy to administer (although all of the flags youI > need to set to get things like replicated text working might be more of F > a hassle than for a non-NUMA box) but the database side is not givenG > you need to setup partitions and have multiple instances.  It is muche> > harder to maintain the database than with a single instance. > F > Also, most workloads are not as partitionable as TPC-C.  In order toG > scale to larger and larger workloads, TPC-C had to almost be designed D > to be easily partitionable.  It needed to scale up the workload asL > performance increased.  The easiest way to do that was to scale everythingD > by "warehouses."  Once you do this, however, it becomes trivial toH > partition the entire setup based on "warehouse."  This could have been@ > busted with a lot of cross warehouse communication/queries butA > the amount of this type of traffic in TPC-C is extremely small.  > E > The only companies that use the TPC-C "cluster" hack are those that J > don't have a machine big enough or fast enought to compete in the singleH >  instance area (where customers care).  This has been mainly MicrosoftN > supporters (IBM PC group and Compaq) and Compaq/Sequent due to the poor NUMA > design of their systems. > ! > >On the other hand, if TPC-C iseN > >just another meaningless benchmark number - then lets stop talking about it, > >altogether - or define a meaningful test. > > D > Actually, for single instance, TPC-C is one of the best benchmarksB > out there.  It stresses the system greatly for a single databaseC > instance.  Its only problem is that vendors took advantage of theRE > partitionability of the workload to generate huge numbers when theynF > could not do so with a single box.  This made it appear they were inC > the game when they really were not.   The TPC fixed this somewhatmD > by creating a "clustered" list of results and "non-clustered" listL > of results.  Unfortunately, the GS320 number is considered "non-clustered"D > because the OS is single instance even though the database is not. > I > So, the real problem is the misclassification of the GS320 (and Sequent E > numbers previously) as non-cluster results when in fact they used aq > clustered database.  > 	 > --Chrisf > My own views.S  B I fully agree. Let me add a bit to this, perhaps explaining more.   A In what's below, RAC = Oracle's version of their cluster databasee> (multiple Oracle instances) that has been (re-)designed to run2 under a single OS instance with better management.  : As said, TPC-C is based on a warehouse model; it has order? transactions for parts, payment transactions, etc. You can have : multiple warehouses, and when you do, it is built into the= benchmark that separate warehouses don't communicate much. Bye@ measurement, only 7.5% of the data accesses are cross-warehouse.? (You have to dig into the benchmark's spec of the random number: generator to find this out.)  ? So, with RAC (or a cluster), you just arrange things so that not? warehouse is split among the instances of Oracle running on theS@ box. Result: There's so little communication, you may as well beA running N copies of the benchmark at the same time, and adding upt- what each does to get the TPC-C tpmc rating. X  < It scales like crazy; you can get 85% to 90% efficiency on a> cluster of, for example, 16 separate nodes connected by 10Mbit? Ethernet. For all practical purposes, the total TPC-C rating isn: limited only by how many systems the vendors can afford to< assemble in one place and can keep working for the benchmark= duration (often a limit due to disk failures; *lots* of disksi needed).  = There is *nothing* illegal about doing this; it's part of thei@ benchmark definition. Every company publishing a "cluster" TPC-C4 result uses this. In fact, I do know that every last? not-in-a-box, on a cluster, OPS benchmark that's been publishede; has used this partitioning trick, and I also know that somer> pre-RAC cases of OPS used in a single system have used it. The- same is true for other databases than Oracle.t  @ Nevertheless, very few customers have workloads that divide that2 precisely and evenly with so little communication.  A Note that use of RAC alone is not *proof* that this technique wasp< in fact used. RAC (or any use of OPS) makes doing this trick@ convenient. It's harder with a single instance; I don't know anyA case were it was used with a single database instance. But use of > RAC doesn't prove it was used. They could have distributed all@ the warehouses uniformly across the Oracle instances. Since that? would give lower performance numbers, I tend to doubt that they-5 did (as you said, it's the benchmark game), but it isr theoretically possible.p  A That's why I asked if anybody knew for a fact that this technique-= was used. I've since had offline feedback that it in fact waso used.o   Greg Pfister' <not necessarily my employer's opinion>E   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 23:18:29 -0400p+ From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com>p  Subject: RE: IA64 Rocks My WorldR Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4AD7F1C@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Chris,  C >>> People do use Oracle's OPS, but they use it for reliability not8I performance.  Typically the other "node" is just a hot standby incase theRE main system goes down.  This allows the downtime to be minimal and is03 absolutely needed technology to run a 24x7 shop.<<<K  I The Oracle hot standby option is a totally different config than OPS. HotiL Standby is a replication scheme that does not do load balancing and requiresK server HW to be standing by waiting for something to happen on the primary.P  K The following is feedback from an Oracle Consultant on where you might want  to use Oracle OPS:  G 1)	Load Balancing - Balancing the application requests across availableeJ servers and database instances, increased scalability and use of available" hardware resources is obtainable.   E 2)	Parallel Query Support - OPS allows the customer to take advantageeH of Oracle's Parallel Query feature.  In a parallel server environment, aL single parallel query can spread the workload across all instances connected to the database.  @ 3)	Decision Support - OPS is very well suited to query intensiveJ applications that only occasionally modify data. An example is a financialH transaction that is queried most of the time and has new data added only
 occasionally.   J As can be expected, there are down sides as well and there are cases where% Oracle OPS is not a good strategy ie.c  E 1)	OPS is not advantageous when there is contention between instancessB on a single block in the database as performance can be impacted.   E 2)	OPS is not advantageous when there is a significant amount of datalE synchronization overhead (network traffic and CPU processing) between G systems with hardware that is inadequate to meeting the traffic and CPUw requirements.   I So, the point is that there are numerous examples of where Oracle OPS areDL used today for very solid business and technical reasons. There are benefits@ and trade-off's that need to be considered with each application
 requirements.r  A Running Oracle OPS on a SINGLE server that was designed to use HWaH partioning, shared memory between partions etc is imho, not a trick, butH rather maximizing the HW and SW technology in the way they were designed for.  G >>> TPC-C numbers are very meaningful for single instance databases and  OSes.<<<  H I disagree. With respect to the TPC-C numbers, imho, it is a vendor gameL that has lost many Customers interest because of the huge numbers / low cost1 per TPC that bear little resemblance to reality. y  E As an example, the top single system TPC numbers from all the vendorseK literally use over 1,000 disk drives with many fast local SCSI adapters andaL almost no RAID strategies in place. Disks used - Compaq 1,600, Fujistu 2,0000 (with 112 local adapters), IBM 1,400. Reference:K http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp?resulttype=nonclusterI  H Now, if you want to talk real games, look at the 400K-700K clustered TPCK numbers on NT (both IBM and Compaq) - over 6,000 disk drives with up to 250-I local scsi adapters and NO RAID .. cost $15M - now there is an example of- real life config's.e   :-)1  I There is almost ZERO SAN HW in any of these config's and yet that is whatuH many Customers are planning / implementing today. So, how many Customers@ would view these config's as bearing anything close to reality?   H Imho, it is time for TPC to be updated to something that closer reflects& Customer config and pricing realities.   Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultanta Compaq Canada Inc. Professional Servicess Voice: 613-592-4660p Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----B From: ruemmler@cello.hpl.hp.com [mailto:ruemmler@cello.hpl.hp.com] Sent: July 17, 2001 4:58 PMr To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com   Subject: Re: IA64 Rocks My World    2 In article <UUZ47.856$rc5.60905@news.cpqcorp.net>,4 Fred Kleinsorge <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote:F >Then explain to me why TPC-C numbers have any meaning at all.  Or why OracleD >would waste good money developing such a thing - if nobody uses it. >m? TPC-C numbers are very meaningful for single instance databases-C and OSes.  Whoever has the fastest single instance number will havemB the best "cluster" number with enough money.  Right now, I'd claimA the leader for single instance is Fujitsu followed closely by IBM E and HP.  Compaq "appears" to be the leader given the GS320 number at sB 1GHZ, but that was a "cluster in a can" and does not really count.! Sun and Compaq bring up the rear.i  ? People do use Oracle's OPS, but they use it for reliability not > performance.  Typically the other "node" is just a hot standby? incase the main system goes down.  This allows the downtime to  B be minimal and is absolutely needed technology to run a 24x7 shop.  B Notice that there are ZERO SAP OPS numbers.  There is a reason for@ this.  The SAP benchmark does not easily partition, thus it does> not run well with OPS.  In this sense SAP actually represents B real life better than TPC-C.  However, there are other issues that; make SAP benchmarks probably less reliable of a performance  predictor than TPC-C.3   --Chrisr My own views   >e >pG >Alexis Cousein wrote in message <3B546A8F.8090608@brussels.sgi.com>...5 >>Fred Kleinsorge wrote: >>A >>> OK.  I'm, not a database expert, but why is this a bad thing?a >> >>E >>Because in real life, no-one will actually run a database this way,'F >>because it lacks flexibility and is an administrative nightmare, andG >>that you cannot predict a workload like you can in a TPC-C benchmark.d >>F >>At least that's what my totally unrepresentative sample of customers2 >>(and some Sun customers I know) seem to tell me. >> >>--A >><these messages express my own views, not those of my employer>A( >>Alexis Cousein Senior Systems Engineer/ >>SGI Belgium and Luxemburg al@brussels.sgi.com, >> >. >,   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:41:25 -0500V% From: "Rich Jordan" <rjordan@mcs.net>] Subject: Re: InfoServerT5 Message-ID: <KHN57.16438$j02.250401@news.goodnet.com>n   Hoff Hoffman wrote in messageUL >In article <BCO47.10$1w.72760@e3500-chi1.usenetserver.com>, "Zane H. Healy"$ <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> writes:& >:Rich Jordan <rjordan@mcs.net> wrote:K >:> We wait with  breathless anticipation... please don't make us wait tille the,# >:> ipf port is finished though! :)f >:H >:The *WHAT* port!!!!!!  Are you saying that they're going to add NAT to
 >:OpenVMS? >IF >  This is a reference to some OpenVMS LAD server discussions and someB >  related engineering work that is (was) underway here in OpenVMSG >  Engineering -- LAD is the InfoServer disk protocol.  (Not NAT.)  ...o > ... 5 >   Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering  ...e >t  G Actually, to clarify my bit of the above misconception, it was based onOC early hopes that Hoff might manage to squeeze loose the Inforserver-J additional function licenses (tape/CD-R, etc) in time to make Freeware V5;D they didn't make it but in Hoff's previous post he mentioned gettingJ permission (but not yet the code) to release them.  I just express my hopeL that getting these released won't have to wait behind the VMS IA64 port (2-3: years! Nyet!  Sooner, please!  I want my Infoserver tape!)   Eagerly waitingy   Rich Jordana rjordan@mcs.netp   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 14:42:51 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)t. Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.33 Message-ID: <FDCKCwGx4xj1@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  Q In article <M1wUNFrREJ5I@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu>, smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu writes:bO > Don't ask why, but I still like to use DECWRITE to edit old documents on the t, > workstation rather than MS Word on my Mac. > P > However, after upgrading to 7.3 DECWRITE won't open any more due to a missing 	 > file...  > O > -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not found MCRC16$DKA100:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB]e > XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE  ? Display Postscript was dropped from VMS V7.3 due to contractualM requirements from Adobe.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 22:04:08 +0200* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER). Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3* Message-ID: <3b573d38$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  o In article <FDCKCwGx4xj1@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes:PR >In article <M1wUNFrREJ5I@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu>, smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu writes:P >> Don't ask why, but I still like to use DECWRITE to edit old documents on the - >> workstation rather than MS Word on my Mac.  >> CQ >> However, after upgrading to 7.3 DECWRITE won't open any more due to a missing 0
 >> file... >> nP >> -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not found MCRC16$DKA100:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB] >> XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXEv >f@ >Display Postscript was dropped from VMS V7.3 due to contractual >requirements from Adobe.w  E DPS was dropped with DECwindows-MOTIF V1.2-6, which is new, is on the-G OpenVMS V7.3 CDs and which you appearantly installed with OpenVMS V7.3.   F You can however install MOTIF V1.2-6 on VMS V6.2 to V7.2 and introduce& this DPS problem/behaviour there, too.  = On the other side, MOTIF V1.2-5 is not supported on VMS V7.3.VL Maybe this is not a technical reason, but the cited contractual requirement.   Just to nitpickn   --  < Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888 < <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:31:52 GMTf2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman). Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.33 Message-ID: <clI57.1020$rc5.68999@news.cpqcorp.net>-  Q In article <M1wUNFrREJ5I@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu>, smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu writes:. ..L :During the upgrade from 7.2-1 the installation script skipped installing 4 L :files that had to be grabbed off the CD to make VMS work at all (got a bit N :paniced over that, btw, apparently there was a note on more recent copies of ' :the Release notes, but not all, sadly)-  F   The kit installed the files, then (due to a bug in certain ECO kits)B   deleted them.  One fix is to reinstall V7.3 onto itself, another@   is to purge the files that track these older versions, and the/   (documented) approach is in the Cover Letter.-  2 :Anyway, XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE isn't on the 7.3 CD...  J   This image was explicitly removed from DECwindows V1.2-6, as it is part H   of Display Postscript.  This removal was obligated due to contractual G   requirements with Adobe.  Please check the search engines for some ofoK   the existing discussions of the removal of Display Poscrscript in V1.2-6. H   (This topic should also be covered in the installation documentation.)  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:50:20 -0300o) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br   Subject: Re: Oracle dead on VMS?L Message-ID: <OF578E9A1D.CD3DD2F5-ON03256A8E.00675F70@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>  
 Just click   http://www.vosinitiative.com  / There is not a http://www.oQinitiative.com ....a     Regardss   FC        C Matthias Dolder <matthias.dolder@compaq.com> em 19/07/2001 06:06:41e      )       fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.brd        Assunto: Re: Oracle dead on VMS?    ? don't be too sure about that. After Sun started to compete with B Oracle in the application/portal space with its Netscape products,+ the 'big love' has cooled down quite a bit.hB In our country, Oracle is working way closer with Compaq than withA Sun. Or consider the UK, Compaq UK doubled its Oracle marketshare J over the last 18 months and got named 'Oracle Partner of the year', takingB away this award from Sun which got it for the last 8 years before.F Or consider the Oracle-Compaq engineering agreement which makes OracleD license Tru64 cluster code to be integrated with the 9i RAC product,> making Tru64 both, the lead development and reference platform for the 9i RAC product. $ Oracle *was* Sun's closest friend...   M.D.@ ----------------------------------------------------------------+ Compaq Computer (Schweiz) GmbH, Switzerland  Matthias Dolderi ..speaking for myself...  * fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br wrote:  ; > Oracle is Sun's closest friend.... dont forget this ! ! !s >l	 > Regardss   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:18:45 +0200 , From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch>A Subject: Re: Returning a value from a C program to a DCL variablea& Message-ID: <3B572485.FBE0FC34@gmx.ch>   Peter wrote: > G > Has anyone any idea how to return a value from a C program and out to ! > a DCL symbol/variable such as :2 >   > $ testprogram :== $testprogram > $ test = 0 > $ test = testprogram > $ sh sym testa >   TEST == "10" > $o > 1 > where the C program consists of the following :0 >  > int main() > {r >    return 10;n > }u  7 write it into a temporary file then read from the file.e3 or use $status if it will always be a return status.2 or use lib$set_symbol if its length is not too big   D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:33:02 +0100 1 From: Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>n: Subject: Re: Some thoughts on the recent turn of events...6 Message-ID: <3B57520E.2B24C14D@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>  D Which would presumably provide the revenue for Sun to turn Cachegate into Cashgate ???w :-)o   Terry Shannon wrote :eL > You have a good point. CPQ may have placated the Cerners of the world, butK > they haven't done much for Mr. or Ms. Average Customer. Either CPQ startshC > placating the customer base and educating the marketplace, or the)J > competition will do the job for them. The "Guinea Pig" announcement from, > Scott "Cachegate" McNealy comes to mind...   --  G "A shadow fell over her face; clear, as if the composure were rent likeuE a veil.  And her lips parted, but only with a short intake of breath.eA Then she said, 'Well, then you are right.  Indeed, we are even.'"o% 		Louis, "Interview with the Vampire"l   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:18:29 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>i- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64s, Message-ID: <3B572462.3FDCE9A4@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:' > We're not abandoning VMS customers.    > N > The lead time to the switch over is fairly large.  And in between there willB > still be cutting edge Alphas, and afterwards there will be mixedN > architecture clusters, and source compatability for user mode code.  Perhaps; > binary translation/emulation for binaries without source.   B All of the above is correct. And I have no problem beleiving this.  J From a technical point of view, this is just another VAX->Alpha transition without the 32-64 bit worries.  G But from a strategic point of view, the lack of information provided bynH Compaq, the fact that they broke commitments made to customers about theI future of Alpha, and the lack of any hard money assigned to improve VMS'soN fortunes and visibility will lead one to wonder what Compaq intends to do with VMS in the long term.   K Remember that VMS isn't exactly healthy. It is restricted to a small marketeM niche, a mere shadow of what it used to be. Customers gave Compaq a chance tocN fix the problems inflicted by Palmer. But time is running out before customersK decide that Compaq is just going to let VMS run by itself without any majorb( fixes to its image/marketing/visibility.  F All Compaq has announced is that even though Alpha was dead, VMS wouldK continue business as usual on IA64. The problem is that "business as usual"sI isn't enough, especially when you consider the uncertainty due to the way8N Compaq made the announcements (lack of info etc) as well as the fact that utilF VMS is fully available on IA64, getting customers to invest in new VMSE installations will be next to impossible, unless Compaq targets small L customers. Spending a few thousands on a machine isn't so bad if it performsK well even though you know you'll have to ditch it later. But when you ask aiI customer to choose to invest a few million on a dying platform or another<N platform that has the full support if its vendor, where do you think they will	 lean to ?s   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 13:42:22 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)h- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64b, Message-ID: <DPf4dxu5lHUA@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  4 In article <66D57.1001$rc5.66217@news.cpqcorp.net>, :    "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:   > N > The lead time to the switch over is fairly large.  And in between there willB > still be cutting edge Alphas, and afterwards there will be mixedN > architecture clusters, and source compatability for user mode code.  Perhaps; > binary translation/emulation for binaries without source.  >   N     If binary translation/emulation is just a "perhaps" that doesn't bode willH for products such as FMS which exist on Alpha only as vested VAX images.  N     We have source code for all our VMS applications but most of them use FMS,I so if it's not going to be ported the source code is worthless in an IA64o environment.  1 > You can look at this as an opportunity, or not.d >   P    Only when Compaq can commit that the tools we use on Alpha will all be portedL can we begin to see this as an opportunity. Otherwise it's a massive rewrite/ (unlikely) or a switch to a different platform.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:07:32 -0400g- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>q- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64n, Message-ID: <3B574C12.224A09CD@videotron.ca>  < >    "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:P > > architecture clusters, and source compatability for user mode code.  Perhaps= > > binary translation/emulation for binaries without source.r   Malcolm Dunnett wrote:P >     If binary translation/emulation is just a "perhaps" that doesn't bode willJ > for products such as FMS which exist on Alpha only as vested VAX images.    I Lets be fair here. Unless Compaq has made a written commitment for such aiE translator/emulator, any Compaq employee has to make it clear what is-M "perhaps" and what is "fact". If a written commitement is broken later, it isa# Compaq's fault, not the employee's.e  M If the engineers were only told of this project 13 days ago, you have to give N them some time to figure out how they will implement Compaq's surprise requestK to port VMS to a new/unknown platform that was not designed to support VMS.i  M I would think that they would have to define what the target operating systemeF will be like before they can even get to discuss wether an emulator orN translator can be implemented. What if the memory models are different enough,+ perhaps a translator might not be possible.   M As far as FMS is concerned, are you 100% sure that it was just vested ? Since L it is used extensively by ALL-IN-1, I would have though that they would have4 recompiled it on Alpha as part of the all-in-1 port.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:40:35 -0400C, From: "Michael L. Umbricht" <mikeu@osfn.org>- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64e( Message-ID: <3B5753D3.A355C020@osfn.org>   Brian Tillman wrote: > $ > >Click on the Alpha Tomorrow Link! > > > Can't find an "Alpha Tomorrow" link at www.alphapowered.com.  B Now that you mention it, tomorrow is not the only thing missing...F Where is the "Alpha Today" link?  or the "Alpha is everywhere" banner?E You might want to grab a copy of the Alpha / IA-64 white paper beforer it, too, disappears.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 18:24:50 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)o- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64m, Message-ID: <1ix3Bmne3Dby@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  - In article <3B574C12.224A09CD@videotron.ca>, g3     JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:    > Malcolm Dunnett wrote:Q >>     If binary translation/emulation is just a "perhaps" that doesn't bode williK >> for products such as FMS which exist on Alpha only as vested VAX images.  >  > K > Lets be fair here. Unless Compaq has made a written commitment for such aaG > translator/emulator, any Compaq employee has to make it clear what isaO > "perhaps" and what is "fact". If a written commitement is broken later, it isi% > Compaq's fault, not the employee's.y >   K    I realize that. I didn't mean to put Fred on the spot, just to point outtJ that things that may seem unimportant ( eg no binary compatibility for VAXM or Alpha images ) could be a show stopper for large numbers of applications. a  J     OTOH I don't know what the deal with VESTing FMS was. Did Digital loseG the source code, was it written in a language they didn't have an AlphatK compiler for, or was VESTING it just the easy way out. Maybe in the processe7 of producing iVMS they'll give us a native mode FMS :-)s   > O > As far as FMS is concerned, are you 100% sure that it was just vested ? SincepN > it is used extensively by ALL-IN-1, I would have though that they would have6 > recompiled it on Alpha as part of the all-in-1 port.  G    I'm 99.9% sure it's vested ( or at least major portions of it are ).e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:39:05 -0400d+ From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com>y- Subject: RE: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64TR Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4AD7F1B@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   re: vesting FMS ..  E Perhaps I have missed something here, but FMS is available on Alpha. s  
 Reference:. http://www.compaq.com/info/SP4506/SP4506PF.PDFI "FMS is upported on all hardware configurations referenced in the OpenVMS>A Operating System for Alpha and VAX, Version 7.2, Software product1 description (SPD 25.01.xx)"    Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior ConsultantS Compaq Canada Inc. Professional Services@ Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----B From: nothome@spammers.are.scum [mailto:nothome@spammers.are.scum] Sent: July 19, 2001 9:25 PMr To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coma- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64t    - In article <3B574C12.224A09CD@videotron.ca>,  3     JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:'   > Malcolm Dunnett wrote:L >>     If binary translation/emulation is just a "perhaps" that doesn't bode willK >> for products such as FMS which exist on Alpha only as vested VAX images.e >  > K > Lets be fair here. Unless Compaq has made a written commitment for such apG > translator/emulator, any Compaq employee has to make it clear what isiL > "perhaps" and what is "fact". If a written commitement is broken later, it is% > Compaq's fault, not the employee's.i >   K    I realize that. I didn't mean to put Fred on the spot, just to point out J that things that may seem unimportant ( eg no binary compatibility for VAXL or Alpha images ) could be a show stopper for large numbers of applications.    J     OTOH I don't know what the deal with VESTing FMS was. Did Digital loseG the source code, was it written in a language they didn't have an Alpha K compiler for, or was VESTING it just the easy way out. Maybe in the process:7 of producing iVMS they'll give us a native mode FMS :-)K   > I > As far as FMS is concerned, are you 100% sure that it was just vested ?4 SincenI > it is used extensively by ALL-IN-1, I would have though that they wouldt have6 > recompiled it on Alpha as part of the all-in-1 port.  G    I'm 99.9% sure it's vested ( or at least major portions of it are ).t   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:16:46 -0400t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> - Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-646, Message-ID: <3B579489.955717B2@videotron.ca>   Malcolm Dunnett wrote:Q > > As far as FMS is concerned, are you 100% sure that it was just vested ? Since-P > > it is used extensively by ALL-IN-1, I would have though that they would have8 > > recompiled it on Alpha as part of the all-in-1 port. > I >    I'm 99.9% sure it's vested ( or at least major portions of it are ).K  M FMS isn't that big. Is it possible that the run-time was recompiled, but thataN the FMS development (the editor, compiler and library management) was vested ?  M Performance on the development environment wouldn't be that critical, but ford the run time , it would.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:28:36 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>g- Subject: Re: Terry Shannon Tech Talk on IA-64 ' Message-ID: <3B579754.83096E6C@fsi.net>M   Fred Kleinsorge wrote: > C > David J. Dachtera wrote in message <3B56442B.75CEFD57@fsi.net>...r > >lJ > >If you lost trust in your {spouse, child, best friend, ...}, that wouldE > >be a personal issue, no? Why is a business relationship viewed anyi > >differently?n > >7 > H > I hope this was just very poor rhetoric.  One is not even close to the8 > other.  Or maybe I just have my priorities screwed up.  F Well, that phraseology is a bit strong, but I'd say yes, since I don'tC see how the two can be divorced. Business entities do business withcH business entities, that's true. In the final analysis, however, it comesF down to people interacting with people - unless we are indeed "living" "inside" The Matrix.  G > >> A lot of people have gone out on a limb to sell VMS at all levels.a > >iA > >...and some of us bet the farm, personally and professionally.,F > >Admittedly and in retrospect, poor judgement of the highest degree. > >) > M > Stop looking at this as some new screw-the-VMS-customer decision.  This has@L > an even larger impact on Tru64 customers, and a big impact on NSK as well.L > We're not abandoning VMS customers.  If you accept the proposition at faceM > value that Alpha would not have been a long term survivor (say 10 years outeM > from now), then this is potentially the way that VMS continues for the nexto > 20 years.c  @ I think this comes down to intent vs. outcome. "Screwing the VMSE customers" (not to mention partners, both official and otherwise) maye> not have been the explicit intent; however, the result remains inescapable.  e4 > The lead time to the switch over is fairly large.   ? Which makes the other Alpha-related pronouncements all the moreXC incomprehensible. As many others have said, it would have been muchDH better for the OpenVMS community-at-large (what of it that survives) had4 this been conducted ala the VAX to Alpha transition.   > And in between there will B > still be cutting edge Alphas, and afterwards there will be mixedN > architecture clusters, and source compatability for user mode code.  Perhaps; > binary translation/emulation for binaries without source.c   Preaching to the choir again.-  1 > You can look at this as an opportunity, or not.V  $ A very bittersweet opportunity, yes.  H True, in the years to come, we may actually see an OpenVMS platform that@ is priced competitively with the alternatives of the day. RemoteH possibility, I grant you, but still a possibility. The down-side is thatF by then attempting to sell OpenVMS vs. the competition by then will beB tantamount to offering organ donations from those dead and buried.  C I can't seem to get the point across to those who still find a goodeF livelihood in OpenVMS that outside of the "Ivory Palace" niche marketsD which can actually afford it, and outside the protected walls of theH Compaq Castle (crumbling though they may be), the OpenVMS market is deadE and buried. I don't know what it would take to make that point stick,uF short of inviting all the current OVMS engineers and related people to8 come to Chicago and explore the Job market for yourself.   You might start with:y  y http://jobsearch.monster.com/jobsearch.asp?cy=US&brd=1&lid=417&lid=888&lid=889&lid=890&fn=&q=vms+or+openvms+or+vax+or+decr   (Long URL - probably wrapped)   f http://www.chicago.computerjobs.com/job_results.asp?s_kw=vms+or+openvms+or+vax+or+dec&s_jcid=&x=24&y=7  % (Another Long URL - probably wrapped)   H There are essentially two OpenVMS SysAdmin jobs that remain open. One isF at a concrete supply company who wants their VMS person to also be theD help desk, network guru and telecom monkey for well below market payH with hours of 05:00 to 15:00 (that's a 9-hour day, folks!). The other isE Abbott Lab.'s, and they're still holding out for Steve Hoffman (who IiF doubt they'll get, and I'll doubt they'll find a suitable substitute).   -- r David J. Dachteras dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/i  F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:08:01 -0500t1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>   Subject: Re: Upgrade to VMS V7.3' Message-ID: <3B57A091.222617E2@fsi.net>n  # "Symons, Jeff (Innovations)" wrote:t > H > 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?  E Umm, well, yes - however, understand that you're talking about moving H from VAX (CISC) to Alpha (RISC), which probably means a recompile/relinkD of all your applications programs. Hardly a trivial undertaking, but9 definitely possible, given sufficient time and resources.m  - E-mail me privately if you need assistance...e   -- n David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemsw http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/h  F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged..   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jul 01 12:46:55 MDT" From: ivie@cc.usu.edu (Roger Ivie)% Subject: Re: VAX 8250 Console Commande% Message-ID: <jHiE1UIJBD$5@cc.usu.edu>n  J In article <3B56E74A.F24ECF1D@yahoo.com>, TJ <tj_shrews@yahoo.com> writes:H > I have a VAX 8250 with all RA81's broken.  I want to make it boot as aB > satellite to another VAX. I need the console command to show the( > hardware address of the Ethernet card.I > There are no SHOW commands so SHOW ETHER or SHOW CONFIG does not work.  E > Nor is it displayed when powered on like the newer VAX models.  The E > command I think I need to use is EXAMINE.  I know with a VAXII, thesD > command >>>E/P/W/N:5 20001920 works, but it doesn't with the 8250.  D Does >>>T 50 work? It's been a number of years, so I don't recall if# that's supposed to work on an 8250.  --  N -------------------------+----------------------------------------------------3 Roger Ivie               | Ben Stein for president!n ivie@cc.usu.edu          | http://cc.usu.edu/~ivie/ | -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----  Version: 3.18 GP dpu s:+++ a C++ UB- P--- L- E--- W- N++ o-- K-- w--- > O M+ V+++ PS+++ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t++ 5++ X-- R tv++ b+++ DI+++ D-  G-- e++ h--- r+++ y+++ m ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------l   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:02:59 +0100 + From: "antonio.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org>l% Subject: Re: VAX 8250 Console Commande' Message-ID: <3B572EE3.87BCF302@iee.org>    "Barry Treahy, Jr." wrote:K > I do not believe the VAX 8250 can NI boot, I have one that is moth-balledeI > I and recall attempting this about eight years ago and was told that itu > wasn't possible...  $ The VAX 82x0/83x0 can most certainly' NI boot - however I do not believe thatA( it can *successfully* NI boot. (A subtle& distinction to be sure, but mine could* get as far as the secondary bootstrap IIRC( and then it would drop dead. I never dug) deep enough to see whether it was becausel, I had failed to type the correct incantation( or whether noone had ever implemented a  boot driver for the DEBNT).S  ) To answer the original question, there isn) AFAIK no inbuilt command to find ethernetd& adapters and display information about) them. (I think the console is implementedk, on the V chip in microcode). If you know the) BI slot (or UNIBUS slot?) of your adapterw) and you know enough about your adapter tol* understand its registers, you can probably' concot a series of E/P commands to dump & the inof you need. It's easier to boot% an OS and let its driver do the work.   ' If you want the address so you can booth( over the network (which I think will not) work anyway) then you can just try to usel& BOOT58 to boot off the network and use" a sniffer to discover the address!     Antoniol   -- e   ---------------w- Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.orgr   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:21:00 -0500s+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>t% Subject: RE: VAX 8250 Console CommandtL Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF1170DA3B@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----2 > From: antonio.carlini [mailto:arcarlini@iee.org]  & > The VAX 82x0/83x0 can most certainly) > NI boot - however I do not believe thata  J I read that to be: "The VAX 82x0/83x0 can most certainly NT boot..." which> not only sounds very german, but nearly impossible as well! :)   Regards,   Chris     ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developera Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");t '       ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:13:45 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)& Subject: Re: VAX 8250 Console Commands3 Message-ID: <JjG57.1014$rc5.67692@news.cpqcorp.net>e  J In article <3B56EA9D.F6216DED@yahoo.com>, TJ <tj_shrews@yahoo.com> writes:G :I have a VAX 8250 with all RA81's broken.  I want to make it boot as aiA :satellite to another VAX. I need the console command to show theu' :hardware address of the Ethernet card.rH :There are no SHOW commands so SHOW ETHER or SHOW CONFIG does not work. D :Nor is it displayed when powered on like the newer VAX models.  TheD :command I think I need to use is EXAMINE.  I know with a VAXII, theC :command >>>E/P/W/N:5 20001920 works, but it doesn't with the 8250.      The network boot command is:     >>> B ETab  G   Where ET is the device, a is the adapter, and b is the BI bus number.r  E   DEBNT (T1032) or DEBNA (T1034) or some other BI network controller?a  E   The hardware address would probably be out on some chunk of the BI  C   memory, but I don't recall off-hand if you can directly view the uB   hardware address (which is what you are viewing within the DEQNAE   and DELQA controllers on that MicroVAX), or if you have to ask the     controller nicely.  G   You could B/R5:100 ETab off the Ethernet controller, and specify the  E   loadfile image name READ_ADDR.SYS.  This file downloads, and (if itm-   works right) displays the Ethernet address.e  D   You could also B ETab and look at the OPCOM messages on any of theE   local MOP servers, as these nodes usually blather about MOP traffici=   and particularly details of the hosts requesting the loads.o  D   That said, the Scorpio series (VAX 8200, 8250, 8300, 8350) is not C   supported as a cluster satellite -- it almost works for ISLs fromrF   InfoServer (using a DEBNA), as the VAXstation 8000 was a target for G   ISLs.  But I do not recall it ever working for a satellite bootstrap,lE   because the typical VMB doesn't really have the drivers for it.  (AaB   tertiary VMB -- with support for the DEBNA -- would be required.G   I've also heard of a customer that has used a floppy to convince the oA   system to network boot -- the Scorpio series had the old-style      DEFBOO.CMD VAX console stuff.)    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:09:58 -0500I1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>t Subject: Re: VAX BASIC' Message-ID: <3B57A106.BC81A604@fsi.net>n  
 PMR wrote: > M > VAX BASIC contractor and permanent staff required for large City based (UK) # > financial systems software house.e > 3 > Please email your CV to vaxsln@technologies.co.uka  G Might telecommuting from the U.S. or some other form of co-operation be 
 an option?   -- f David J. Dachteray dba DJE SystemsI http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.t   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:47:24 GMTc2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)  Subject: Zero Quadword Time Poll3 Message-ID: <0sJ57.1022$rc5.70029@news.cpqcorp.net>e  B   The following is a trial balloon, and NOT something that we have   immediate plans to change.  G   One of the local engineers has suggested changing the interpretation sE   of a OpenVMS quadword time containing a zero from its existing to a-E   new interpretation; from an absolute time (17-Nov-1858) to a delta     time ("now", basically).  E   (Some folks here may remember seeing evidence of an existing tweak 4G   within OpenVMS, a tweak that will convert a calculated delta of zero  &   into a delta of a very small value.)  B   Anybody here directly using a quadword zero as an absolute time?   Supporters?  Detracters?  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jul 2001 20:33:03 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)y$ Subject: Re: Zero Quadword Time Poll3 Message-ID: <zoP1Gb+Wy3qL@eisner.encompasserve.org>6  h In article <0sJ57.1022$rc5.70029@news.cpqcorp.net>, hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes: > D >   The following is a trial balloon, and NOT something that we have >   immediate plans to change. > I >   One of the local engineers has suggested changing the interpretation gG >   of a OpenVMS quadword time containing a zero from its existing to atG >   new interpretation; from an absolute time (17-Nov-1858) to a delta i >   time ("now", basically).  : That might break programs that depend on a zero time field8 to mean that "this record has not been initialized yet",9 possibly doing a character substitution for "17-NOV-1858"t1 after conversion.  That is ugly, but not illegal.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:39:17 -0400p- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> $ Subject: Re: Zero Quadword Time Poll, Message-ID: <3B578BC4.A33EC7FE@videotron.ca>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:aH >   One of the local engineers has suggested changing the interpretationG >   of a OpenVMS quadword time containing a zero from its existing to auF >   new interpretation; from an absolute time (17-Nov-1858) to a delta >   time ("now", basically).  N When debugging a program, having a non initialized quadword makes the resulktsN very obvious. If a current time is assumed, the fact that the quadword has not) been initialised would not be so obvious.o  M This would have interesting effects in case of a file has bad dates. DIR/FULL2K would reveal current time every time one would DIR that file. (so the datesTK would change all the time without the file actually having been touched). I>M know this doesn't happen often, but I think I have had a few files in my lifehM that were dated 17-nov-1858. (perhaps because they had been created at a time / where the system clock was wrong or something).i  L In programs, I can see it avoiding a $GETTIM() followed by a time math (add,K subtract) to calculate a delta time. It would make it less obvious. Also, IeN would probably still use $GETTIM() to gt the current time and store it becauseM it is often needed not only to calculate one delta time but poerhaps also usee- as a time stamp for the transactions etc etc.   M Since in almost all time routines one passes a pointer to a quadword, why not0= change the time routines to use "NOW" when the pointer is 0 ?i  K Also, perhaps $BINTIM could up updated to support the text "NOW" as input ?3   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.399 ************************