1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 28 Jun 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 356       Contents:1 Re: 3 Reasons why VMS is alive and probably well+  Re: A few questions 7 Alpha's (Itanium Clones) Get 'Em Whilst Vey're 'Ot!!!!! 8 Alpha-Intel politics (was: Full port of VMS to Itanium.) Alpha/IA64 - I had to do it.I Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves their incompetence) I Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves their incompetence) I Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves their incompetence)  RE: BACKUP listing []  RE: BACKUP listing []  Re: BACKUP listing []  RE: BACKUP listing [] 5 Re: Carbon dating DEC/VMS users, was: Re: V7.3 backup  RE: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms. $ Re: Compaq proves their incompetence$ Re: Compaq proves their incompetence$ Re: Compaq proves their incompetence Re: Compaq switches to IA-64< RE: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 (was: Alpha de< Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 (was: Alpha deK Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 (was: Alpha design   team...) ( Re: Compaq's Alpha design team for sale?( Re: Compaq's Alpha design team for sale? Re: DCPS 1.8 with LEXMARK T616 Re: DCPS 1.8 with LEXMARK T6163 Re: Free Rdb [was Re: VMS applications on the web?] 3 Re: Free Rdb [was Re: VMS applications on the web?]  Re: FreeVMS  Re: FreeVMS  Re: FreeVMS  Re: FreeVMS  Re: FreeVMS  Re: FUD  Re: FUD  Re: FUD  Re: FUD  Re: FUD  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium   RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.  Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. Re: Future support of VAX-VMS $ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ RE: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft$ Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft Re: Hobbyist OpenVMS on IA64 Re: IA64 Rocks My World ) IPF VMS for Hobbyists as a marketing tool - RE: IPF VMS for Hobbyists as a marketing tool - Re: IPF VMS for Hobbyists as a marketing tool 0 Re: IPF? (was Re: An Engineer's Perspective ...) Re: Itanium HW REF MAN% RE: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail % Re: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail % Re: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail % Re: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail % RE: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail % RE: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail  iVMS Re: iVMS Re: iVMS Re: iVMS LCD Screen on VMS Workstation?" Re: LCD Screen on VMS Workstation? Re: little help please Re: little help please% lsedit or whatever xwindow on my pc ?  More Fortran issues. Re: More Fortran issues.) Re: One more dreadful thought to consider  Re: OpenVMS on MicroVAX? Re: OpenVMS on MicroVAX?) Porting VMS (was Itanium, non-issue, ...)  Power consumption rates 6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry ShannonP Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon (andsomegeneral comments)
 Re: Rdb troll 
 Re: Rdb troll  Re: Read other user's mail Re: Read other user's mail Re: Read other user's mail Re: Read other user's mail Re: Req VMS Tutorial Re: Salt in the Wounds% Sending command to programs with pipe ) Re: Sending command to programs with pipe D Re: SRM Auto_action: what's the difference between BOOT and RESTART?D Re: SRM Auto_action: what's the difference between BOOT and RESTART?D Re: SRM Auto_action: what's the difference between BOOT and RESTART?5 Re: Standalone Teco (was Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)) 5 Re: Standalone Teco (was Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)) 1 Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated 1 Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated 1 Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated : Re: Two Phase Commit (2PC) on VMS - the nature of the fuss: Re: Two Phase Commit (2PC) on VMS - the nature of the fuss: Re: Two Phase Commit (2PC) on VMS - the nature of the fuss Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)  Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)  Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)  Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)  Re: VMS on IA64 (technical) < Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)< Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.) Re: Wailing and moaning.... # Re: What about performance issues?? ; Re: what it mean "exbytlm..." (was: Re: little help please)   Where is Samsung in this story ?% Re: Which group for VMS hardware ads? % RE: Which group for VMS hardware ads? % Re: Which group for VMS hardware ads? % Re: Which group for VMS hardware ads? % RE: Which group for VMS hardware ads? + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either + Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either & Re: www.openvms.compaq.com unreachableP Re: [OT] IBM Slow and sclerotic?  ( Was Re: Compaq's Alpha design team  for sale  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:30:51 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> : Subject: Re: 3 Reasons why VMS is alive and probably well+) Message-ID: <3B3B237B.73B7CBEA@gtech.com>    Chuck Viau wrote: / > 3 Reasons why VMS is alive and probably well+  > J > 1. VMS is firmly entrenched in our Military , Financial , Scientific and > Medical industries. G > That is an undisputable fact, and is not likely to change in the near  > future. There are billionsM > of lines of hard earned, expensive debugged code running on these Vax's and  > Alpha's and most of G > these users will not fix what is not broken.  That alone will drive a  > successful port to the IA64.  + I am sure that VMS will be ported to IA-64.   ( [I am much more doubtfull about Tru64 !]  > It is many years since VMS was big in scientific environments.  ? VMS has its huge niches and it will definatetly staty alive for ; many years. VMS runs a lot of critical system that will not  be replaced overnigth.  = But more customers will drop VMS and more ISV's wil drop VMS. ( Which will start a bad spiral downwards.  M > 2. In my experience, even on it's worst day, a machine(s)  running VMS will  > be an order ofJ > magnitude more reliable than on ANY NT or W2k server in it's class.  You > just have to work < > for a .com relying on IIs for a few years to realize this.  < The people having the problems are not the people making the
 decisions.  L > 3. With the industry support that the IA64 will inherit, then so VMS reaps > the support it did > not get from the Alpha.   E I have never heard of a VMS sale lost because Alpha was not standard.   @ VMS sales was lost because Compaq did not even try to sell it or/ because the software was not availabel for VMS.   ' Any reasons to think that will change ?    Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:48:14 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>  Subject: Re: A few questions) Message-ID: <3B3B278E.E78A4438@gtech.com>    Sharkonwheels wrote:7 > I cross-posted, because it encompasses a few systems.  >  > First question:   > What's the difference between:	 > -Ultrix 
 > -Ultrix UWS  > -Ultrix-32  B I think they are the same (even though I am not an Ultrix expert).  	 > Second:  > What the heck is MicroVMS?   Same as VMS.  A VMS some versions around 4.x shipping on VAXstations in a special + tailored configuration was called MicroVMS.    The concept was later dropped.   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:56:12 -0400 8 From: "Island Computers US Corp" <dbturner@islandco.com>@ Subject: Alpha's (Itanium Clones) Get 'Em Whilst Vey're 'Ot!!!!!/ Message-ID: <tjma1e36lo7ref@news.supernews.com>    In stock NOW  J Itanium Clone - code named Alpha - from the Clever PC people at Compaq !!!  H 64Bits and starting at only US$679 - whats more - it will run WIndows NT !!!!  L We ship everywhere - except Nigeria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, and other "forbidden territories"     -- We sell Alpha's !  -- Island Computers US Corporation  2700 Gregory Street 	 Suite 150  Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622  Fax: 912 201 0096  sales@islandco.com www.islandco.com' http://www.islandco.com/legal-email.htm    ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:26:45 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) A Subject: Alpha-Intel politics (was: Full port of VMS to Itanium.) 3 Message-ID: <RiBOyhlXggE0@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <a71mjt0f185di54hnm6b6t32linbruqumq@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:  F > And you know that I expected until recently Compaq to EOL VMS at theH > same time as Alpha. They didn't. Maybe we didn't open their eyes but IB > like to think we poked them with a sharp stick. Even if all userD > feedback did was scare Compaq into not killing VMS quickly I still> > think this isn't quite the worst case scenario many feared.   B I don't think Compaq was affected by comp.os.vms kvetching so muchD as by real sales to big time purchasers who require VMS reliability.E Compaq could not afford to do without the profits from VMS customers, D although some of that may not be from sales of software but sales of the matching hardware.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:34:41 -0500 3 From: "Jay E. Morris" <morris@thorin.brooks.af.mil> % Subject: Alpha/IA64 - I had to do it. , Message-ID: <9hffoh$kku$1@leo.brooks.af.mil>  . http://www.epsilon3.com/images/alphainside.gif   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:44:19 -0400   From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com>R Subject: Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves their incompetence)6 Message-ID: <1010628034125.61768A-100000@Ives.egh.com>  ( On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Hoff Hoffman wrote:  b > In article <9gvjjtcj43jm4k6elk96j5eja9cqetc6t2@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes: > .. [...]  > G >   I do not know of any specific IPF microprocessors that are (or are  C >   not) targets for the port, and the same holds for specific IPF  E >   system targets.  AFAIK, none of that has been decided, and little # >   of it has even been considered.  > F >   OpenVMS Engineering is presently examining the existing Intel IPF  >   documentation.  B Hoff, you've used the acronym IPF at least a few times now.  CouldC you please tell us what it means?  Is it the generic term for IA-64 8 family CPU's?  Is it standard Intel terminology or what?   TIA.   --   John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:59:11 -0700 1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> R Subject: Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves their incompetence)3 Message-ID: <3B3AAB8F.1E6CF6B8@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>    Robert Deininger wrote:   J > But Compaq will have saved the vast sum that continued alpha developmentI > would have cost.  That investment might have killed them off.  Probably H > would have, given how poorly Compaq leverages their technology assets.  N   What vast sum?  The number that's been posted on this group is $150 million.   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:34:30 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> R Subject: Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves their incompetence)8 Message-ID: <hs8mjt4gusf60vtpac2u8tfj5qvve1h7rj@4ax.com>  E On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:44:19 -0400, John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> wrote:   ) >On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Hoff Hoffman wrote:  > c >> In article <9gvjjtcj43jm4k6elk96j5eja9cqetc6t2@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:  >> ..  >[...] >>  H >>   I do not know of any specific IPF microprocessors that are (or are D >>   not) targets for the port, and the same holds for specific IPF F >>   system targets.  AFAIK, none of that has been decided, and little$ >>   of it has even been considered. >>  G >>   OpenVMS Engineering is presently examining the existing Intel IPF   >>   documentation.  > C >Hoff, you've used the acronym IPF at least a few times now.  Could D >you please tell us what it means?  Is it the generic term for IA-649 >family CPU's?  Is it standard Intel terminology or what?   & I think it is Itanium Processor Family   >TIA.    -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:07:05 +0100   From: steven.reece@quintiles.com Subject: RE: BACKUP listing []H Message-ID: <OF3DAD2783.0775B07B-ON80256A79.0036C866@qedi.quintiles.com>  H What I'd be tempted to do here is verify that the subsitution in the ba= ckupH command is correct.  In similar cases where I have needed to be sure of=  H what I was getting before I carried out the command I've done something=   like :  A $ CMD=3D"BACKUP/IMAGE/NOALIAS/IGNORE=3D(INTERLOCK) SYS$SYSDEVICE: ( DISK$USER:[000000]"+"''date'"+".BCK/SAV" $ SHOW SYMBOL CMD  $ 'CMD  3 (The wrapping in the first line is not intentional)   H If you could do something similar here then you would be able to verify=    that it's doing what you expect.   Steve.   Ingemar Olson wrote: >>> < Sure. Although I don't think there are any weirdnesses here.  H $=A0 BACKUP=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=  =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -J =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /IMAGE=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=  =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -I =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /NOALIAS=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=  =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 - I =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /BLOCK=3D65534=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=  =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 - H =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /RECORD=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=  =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -E =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /IGNORE=3D(INTERLOCK,LABEL)=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 - J =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /NOASSIST=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -J =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /NOREWIND=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -H =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /MEDIA_FORMAT=3DCOMPACTION=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -=  A =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /LIST=3DBKUPLOGS:'DEVICE'-FUL-LOG.'TDATE' -uD =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /JOURNAL=3DBKUPJNLS:'DEVICE'-FUL-BJL.'TDATE' -! =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 'DEVICE': - 1 =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 'DLTG3''TWDAY''count'.BCK -t& =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 /LABEL=3D'WDAY6'  4 DEVICE is a symbol that contains the name of a DISK.> DLTG3=A0 is a symbol that contains the name of the tape drive.$ the other symbols are just literals. <trim> <<<=   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:28:41 +0100 8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> Subject: RE: BACKUP listing []N Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE4@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  F The []xxx.xxx files are perfectly normal: they're simply files createdJ without a directory spec. Such files are usually temporary files e.g. whenL printing from mail it creates a file mail.lis (or similar) which normally isD deleted on succesful completion of printing. Other such files may beH temporary files created by packages which get placed in a directory onceG they're complete which explains why you find them in a directory later:lJ while backup was running they were being created but were completed before you went to look for them.  = Don't worry about the [] files: "every active disk has them".s   John  B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukH Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)o   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 07:44:55 -0700- From: afeldman@gfigroup.com (Alan E. Feldman)  Subject: Re: BACKUP listing []= Message-ID: <af1e4ce6.0106280644.5e40d456@posting.google.com>r  b Ingemar Olson <IOLSON@dairyworld.com> wrote in message news:<01K585U7CDES8ZE80I@dairyworld.com>...B > I had occasion to actually *look* at one of our backup listings.J > At the end there were a large number of files which were listed as being  > in directory "[]" (ie: blank).A > When I check the disk I find they *are* in an actual directory.S > F > This is happening for 2 of our disks, the system disk and one other.O > The files from the system disk that show up on the listing as in "[]" appear lP > to be those in the aliased common directories. Although this is a bit hard to I > say definitively since I haven't memorized all the files in that tree. u( > And there are more than 10000 of them.C > The directory VMS$COMMON does not appear on the listing, however.d  < According to the VMS V6.2 Release notes, this is due to yourD SYSCOMMON.DIR and VMS$COMMON.DIR not being properly aliased. It evenD says to look at a backup listing and if you see the VMS$COMMON files9 not listed in any directory -- instead listed in the formoD []filename.typ -- then you have the bad-alias problem. I find this aC bit strange, because one of my disks recently had that problem, butoA the backup listing looked fine. But if I looked at any batch jobsf. running a "common" file the file was listed as: [SYSCOMMON.whatever...], which also indicates the problem.   Anyhow, the cure is        $ SET DEFAULT disk:[000000]P1     $ SET FILE/ENTER=SYSCOMMON.DIR VMS$COMMON.DIR($     $ SET FILE/REMOVE VMS$COMMON.DIR)     $ RENAME SYSCOMMON.DIR VMS$COMMON.DIRi  E I did this on a live, but quiescent test system and it worked fine. I,7 think it should work fine even on a busy system becauset  (     SYS$COMMON = disk:[SYSn.SYSCOMMON.]   F and you're not messing with *that* alias. IOW, SYS$COMMON still pointsF to VMS$COMMON.DIR via its file id. Also, by using the above fix you'reE actually creating and removing a *new* alias.  ( Well, it should workxC fine so long as you don't access anything directly via [VMS$COMMON]eD during application of the fix).  So, the above fix may also fix your+ "BACKUP/LIST shows []common-files" problem.i   > N > On the "other" disk we do not have any aliased directories, nor files, that O > I'm aware of. In fact I listed out the file-id of every file on the disk and sI > the sample file's (from the backup listing) file-id appeared only once.c > N > It would appear that the backup *is* doing all the files ok, but the listing& > is confusing / misleading at least.   C I suspect that a restoration of this backup will not restore the [](D files in their proper directories because BACKUP walks the directory@ structure and checks off files it backs up in a copy it makes of= INDEXF.SYS. Then any files that are not checked off after thet@ directory walk-thru are backed up in []. If it had the directoryF information for those [] files, I'd think it would have listed them as< such. (This is based on an old post [c. 1993] explaining theB difference between /IMAGE and /FAST backups -- I can dig it up andC re-post it if anyone desires. The explanation there is quite good.):  E Therefore, I think there is an overflow/bug problem like you say in ah later post in this thread.  hF Have you tried restoring this save set to a scratch disk? If so, or ifC you do, what are the results of where the [] files are restored to?    [...ending stuff omitted...]   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldmanm afeldman&gfigroup.coma   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:18:26 +0100s8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> Subject: RE: BACKUP listing []N Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE5@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  D >I suspect that a restoration of this backup will not restore the []" >files in their proper directories  K My experience is that the [] files get restored to the [SYSLOST] directory.nG If [] has arisen as a result of alias problems and you know the correct:C directory you can rename the file from [SYSLOST] to the appropriateo
 directory.   John  B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukH Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax).   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:01:10 +0100t% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> > Subject: Re: Carbon dating DEC/VMS users, was: Re: V7.3 backup8 Message-ID: <6gsljtkl4th5crjbrfr72of5co685bnb67@4ax.com>  E On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:20:05 +0100, steven.reece@quintiles.com wrote:x   >. > ( >The "OpenChequebook" rides again.......E >Last time I asked I got a quote of over 4000 pounds GB to move threecH >ESA10000 sized racks (two full of disks, one with a pair of AlphaServerH >4100s and TL892s in) about 60 feet - out of one computer room, down theJ >corridor and into the other computer room.  It wasn't much more to move aE >pair of Turbolasers with an SW800 each the half mile down the streeth >between two buildings!!!A  A Lucky you got a quote. As you know I found a request to Compaq topA quote for some computer room re-organization got subcontracted toA Compelsolvee   >Steve.q >n >Jon Morgan wrote:1 >>Oh yeah, I'm ordering a DECmove soon as well...    -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:17:13 +0100-8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>  Subject: RE: Changing platforms.N Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE0@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  < >I hate to bring up a technical nit in a politics newsgroup,C >but mine are black on boot (with white letters).  Alphastation 250n >and DEC 3000-400.  L All the PCI-based systems I've come across start with a black background andL then change to blue during a reboot, probably when the PCI bus is activated.E Even my Intel-based PCs have this black->blue->Windows phasing during J reboots. My guess is that the reboot colouring scheme will remain the same
 with iVMS.   John    B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukH Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)a   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 08:43:00 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)   Subject: Re: Changing platforms.3 Message-ID: <bXowo4HM2H8M@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  \ In article <3B3A10F2.B7F8E359@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > Bob Koehler wrote:I >> DEC like?  No, Compaq's doing exactly the kind of things DEC needed to  >> do and failed.  > N > The problem for us is that Compaq doesn't have a focus on VMS it has a focus+ > on NT. So it will build solutions for NT.    D Compaq's actions over the last few years has shown they know there's* little money in the high volume PC market.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation = NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupaE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyinga   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 06:40:11 -0400 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>   Subject: Re: Changing platforms.9 Message-ID: <gMD_6.3906$pd1.303859@news20.bellglobal.com>e  2 <paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au> wrote in message/ news:01K59HC7G1B600208E@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au...t > JF Mezei wrote:d >e > >Alphaman wrote: > >>  DECwrite > >>  Datatrieve	 > >>  Adah	 > >>  FMSf > >>  Notese	 > >>  VTXi > >>  DECintact  > >> > >> Any other ideas?y > >t > >ALLIN1 (Aka Office Server). > >iC > >I think that Mailbus400 will also disapear. Not sure about X.500.
 directory. >r > GKSr >dJ > This and FMS (above) are my main worries for my applications.  Both have been  > in maintenance for many years. >e [snip]  K I hope they port FMS, but I think Compaq wants the programming community to J move to CompaqForms (which allows us to use WebConnect to dynamically open forms into web browsers).l  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,e Ontario, Canada.! http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/n   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 04:13:03 -0700d1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>   Subject: Re: Changing platforms.3 Message-ID: <3B3AAECF.31E14C91@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>f   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > i > In article <eKt_6.22278$l45.2301969@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes:1 > 3 > > From: "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>d > N > >> Also consider that most Compaq servers come with a default blue screen ofG > >> death console. Will the VMS engineers provide a graphical OPA0: onn > > servers, > > orI > >> will they find a way to provide character cell OPA0: on a non-serialt > > consoles > >> port ?y > >EL > > All Alpha machines already have a VGA graphics card which is used as the5 > > default console. And yes, it is blue during boot.  > = > I hate to bring up a technical nit in a politics newsgroup,eD > but mine are black on boot (with white letters).  Alphastation 250 > and DEC 3000-400.   J   Another minor nit... this is an aspect of the graphics card.  When I putO a 3D30 and later a 4D20 in place of the original ZLX-E1 in an Alphastation 200,s& the backround went from black to blue.   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/o   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:44:49 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)h  Subject: Re: Changing platforms.3 Message-ID: <EeHvv0IvmqAu@eisner.encompasserve.org>r  e In article <gMD_6.3906$pd1.303859@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes:9  M > I hope they port FMS, but I think Compaq wants the programming community to L > move to CompaqForms (which allows us to use WebConnect to dynamically open > forms into web browsers).>  D I think they have learned their lesson with Alpha about forcing suchE choices on customers.  They know the goal is for customers to be able E to recompile and relink at a minimum, and that some VEST or emulationk would be desired also.   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:45:41 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)(  Subject: Re: Changing platforms.3 Message-ID: <13HQ0XX96LTu@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  g In article <3B3AAECF.31E14C91@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>, Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> writes:  > Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> tj >> In article <eKt_6.22278$l45.2301969@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes: >> s4 >> > From: "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> >> gO >> >> Also consider that most Compaq servers come with a default blue screen of H >> >> death console. Will the VMS engineers provide a graphical OPA0: on
 >> > servers,- >> > or-J >> >> will they find a way to provide character cell OPA0: on a non-serial >> > console >> >> port ? >> >M >> > All Alpha machines already have a VGA graphics card which is used as thec6 >> > default console. And yes, it is blue during boot. >> o> >> I hate to bring up a technical nit in a politics newsgroup,E >> but mine are black on boot (with white letters).  Alphastation 250n >> and DEC 3000-400. > L >   Another minor nit... this is an aspect of the graphics card.  When I putQ > a 3D30 and later a 4D20 in place of the original ZLX-E1 in an Alphastation 200, ( > the backround went from black to blue.  @ That explains my experience -- I don't use fancy graphics cards.   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 08:59:05 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)0  Subject: Re: Changing platforms., Message-ID: <wS9NLv5ijl4P@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  : In article <gMD_6.3906$pd1.303859@news20.bellglobal.com>, /     "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes:n > M > I hope they port FMS, but I think Compaq wants the programming community to L > move to CompaqForms (which allows us to use WebConnect to dynamically open > forms into web browsers).< > X    Sure, they've wanted that for years. The effort in doing so is non-trivial. If they'dP really wanted it they should have included an FMS emulation mode in the product.  X    Forms is typical of the old Digital arrogance. They got us all to use FMS, saying howX wonderful it was, and then a couple of years later told us it was obsolete and we neededQ to convert to Forms ( a new product with new license requirements and no backwardm] compatibility - though I understand there is a tool which helps translate form definitions ).e  W    Of course these days everyone who's dealt with a Microsoft product expects that sortt of attitude.  [    They've been trying to kill FMS ever since, but so far it won't die. Let's hope the IA647# port isn't what finally does it in.l  X    More to the point - if they *don't* intend to port FMS they should be telling us thatZ today - it's not the sort of thing you want to find out only after you've signed the order' for that new iVMS box 5 years from now.a   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 01 10:58:14 MDT" From: ivie@cc.usu.edu (Roger Ivie)  Subject: Re: Changing platforms.% Message-ID: <CB82gppI6fXB@cc.usu.edu>E  R In article <9he72b$crh$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:< > "Bob Koehler" <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote in messageG >> Now Compaq, originally doing nothing but assembling hardware with nofI >> software of their own sees that they are making a great profit selling> >> great software. > M > What evidence can you present that Compaq has the slightest appreciation of= > VMS?  K And _that_ is the best argument for porting VMS to IA64 being a good thing.=F Once the port is done, a third party which appreciates VMS can take on) VMS without also having to take on Alpha.   % Assuming IA64 works out, of course...= -- =N -------------------------+----------------------------------------------------3 Roger Ivie               | Ben Stein for president!A 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+++ A ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------0   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:56:00 +0100A% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>A- Subject: Re: Compaq proves their incompetenceA8 Message-ID: <133mjt4hdk26pt9mqstnfv1q8hg04cg88g@4ax.com>  B On 27 Jun 2001 04:05 CDT, carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) wrote:  E >Since this is not a merger or acquisition are you certain that thereAD >is a quiet period? After all, the way they arranged it to avoid FTC  D In the webcast Capellas himself stated this was a legal quiet period@ and thus he couldn't answer certain questions. Could have been a= convenient half-truth I suppose but he said it several times.-  H >complications makes it "just another deal",a s afar as I can tell. TheyF >licensed a bunch of stuff to Intel and are allowing Intel to activelyH >poach their employees from certain groups (chip design and compiler, atG >least). What sort of "quiet period" is required by law for a licensingc >deal? None that I know of.p  C Perhaps we need to read the small print. Compaq and Intel both saidlD that this was only the beginning and to expect more announcements in* future regarding Intel/Compaq partnership.   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:51:39 +0100e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>o- Subject: Re: Compaq proves their incompetencep8 Message-ID: <qq2mjt413kqbegh4adof49nl1alpd3jq2a@4ax.com>  E On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:00:35 -0400, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>y wrote:    F >I've got to ask (really, not just rhetorically):  was there really noK >strategy at the time of the purchase, or was there a strategy but one thatf* >turned out not to be to the BoD's liking? > H >My impression before Pfeiffer got booted was that he was in fact fairlyL >bullish on DEC technology - especially Alpha - and there really wasn't time< >for him to have done that much with it before the axe fell.  D Could also be the case. Pfeiffer has never really spoken publicly as@ far as I know. Btw Agent spellchecker just suggested "perisher",B "periphery" and "peddler" as some suggestions for Pfeiffer which I found amusing...   >  >- billu >r >    -- Alan   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 15:14:58 GMT2 From: mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog)- Subject: Re: Compaq proves their incompetence , Message-ID: <9hfhli$428@gap.cco.caltech.edu>  b In article <3B3A0ED5.169B8378@hiyall.zko.dec.com>, John Reagan <reagan@hiyall.zko.dec.com> writes: >Bob Koehler wrote:g >> sE >> I wonder how closely the language the GEM back end reads resemblese >> either of these?u >> n >hG >The GEM CIL (Compact Intermediate Language) does have some resemblanceeC >to an assembler's input.  There are ADD, SUB, LABEL, BRANCH, CALL,eA >FETCH, STORE, etc. tuples.  The current GEM CIL manual lists 276p2 >different tuples that a front-end could generate.  " Is this manual on line somewhere?    Thanks,i     David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu? Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech bJ **************************************************************************J *                       RIP VMS & ALPHA                                  *J **************************************************************************   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:36:52 -0400E- From: John Reagan <reagan@hiyall.zko.dec.com>O% Subject: Re: Compaq switches to IA-64E2 Message-ID: <3B3AFAB4.2915BA51@hiyall.zko.dec.com>   Robert Deininger wrote:s > H > It seems that the interfaces to this mystical thing called GEM are notH > terribly well defined.  I've certainly never seen a hint that they areK > public.  The IA64 port is a good chance to remedy that.  It's in Compaq's J > interest to do so, since language-uniformity is a strength of VMS, and a > boon to the OS port itself.i >   C Quite the contrary.  The GEM interfaces are very well defined.  Fors
 Pascal, I cantC switch from one baselevel to another in about a day at most.  As anf
 experiment, I H actually looked the Pascal frontend to an IA-32 GEM about 6 months ago. 	 Moving to H a hardware platform I've never seen before took me about a week.  No, it wasn't produceE quality since GEM only implemented a subset of the datatypes on IA-32h that Pascal wouldiH use (in particular, bitvectors used by Pascal SETs).  However, I did run; about 70% of the Pascal Validation Suite after just a week.d  F In the case of Ada, the rumor is that they took "short-cuts" and oftenH peeked around GEM's APIs and made assumptions about the implementation. % I have not looked at the Ada frontendsA directly, but thats what I've been told by those who have looked.    --   John Reaganf Compaq Pascal Project Leader   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:35:58 -0500s* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>E Subject: RE: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 (was: Alpha deb- Message-ID: <0033000027809562000002L022*@MHS>   ? =0AI've been through 4 employers in five years while sitting ate! the same desk doing the same job.e   WWWebb   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETd' > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:10 AMkF > To: Webb, William W - Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETH > Subject: RE: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 (was: Alpha de=   >a >  > Jordan Henderson wrote:- >-: > > I've had this happen to me at a company once.  You are > terminated fromM; > > the old employer and the new employer offers you a job.C > You fill out all< > > the new employee paper work at the new place to get your > pay started, etc.s >t >a9 >   Something like this just happened to me.  The group Il > worked for was movingo? > to another institution.  The transfer would have been as if IY > terminated from = > my job and was a new employee at the new place, even though  > my "boss" would 7 > have been the same.  No incentives though... a salaryo > increase not enough to= > cover the cost of living, loss of 100 hours of vacation andk > 700 hours of sicks< > time and vacation days per year would have been reset to a > lower amount.  This : > became part of the reason why I sought other employment. >-? > > I wouldn't be surprised if there were some incentives being< > offered by8 > > Intel, especially to ensure they get the key people. >.- >   Especially if they have any self respect.c >5 > --D > Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US# > Tucson, AZ                    Webq# http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/=e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:44:20 -0500e1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>aE Subject: Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 (was: Alpha de ' Message-ID: <3B3B50D4.6523D1D4@fsi.net>m   WILLIAM WEBB wrote:m > > > I've been through 4 employers in five years while sitting at# > the same desk doing the same job.b  F In the past five years, I've had five employers and eight desks in ten9 locations, but always doing the same job - OVMS SysAdmin.s   -- a David J. Dachterav dba DJE Systemsn 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.l   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 04:29:15 -0700t1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> T Subject: Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 (was: Alpha design   team...)3 Message-ID: <3B3AB29B.6B67F7F6@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>v   Jordan Henderson wrote:t  H > I've had this happen to me at a company once.  You are terminated fromK > the old employer and the new employer offers you a job.  You fill out allBL > the new employee paper work at the new place to get your pay started, etc.    M   Something like this just happened to me.  The group I worked for was moving M to another institution.  The transfer would have been as if I terminated from8K my job and was a new employee at the new place, even though my "boss" wouldjL have been the same.  No incentives though... a salary increase not enough toM cover the cost of living, loss of 100 hours of vacation and 700 hours of sickvN time and vacation days per year would have been reset to a lower amount.  This8 became part of the reason why I sought other employment.  H > I wouldn't be surprised if there were some incentives being offered by6 > Intel, especially to ensure they get the key people.  +   Especially if they have any self respect.s   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/h   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 02:25:53 -07009 From: martin.kevin@partner.commerzbank.com (Kevin Martin) 1 Subject: Re: Compaq's Alpha design team for sale?n= Message-ID: <91d7e898.0106280125.7cb3bd07@posting.google.com>u  = Any idea when OpenVMS will be sold to Computer Associates ;-)    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 19:57:19 +00102% From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.auz1 Subject: Re: Compaq's Alpha design team for sale?05 Message-ID: <01K5B98ENC0I001I0D@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>   > >Any idea when OpenVMS will be sold to Computer Associates ;-)  N The sheer idea of you suggesting this in our troubled times.  Will you invite  me to your parent's wedding :-)e   Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:10:27 +0200.% From: "Fred Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@KVI.nl>)' Subject: Re: DCPS 1.8 with LEXMARK T616 . Message-ID: <9hesa4$naj$1@info.service.rug.nl>  5 "Craig Gunhouse" <craig@hsc.mb.ca> wrote in message =q7 news:8629bcd1.0106271056.3e9a4de1@posting.google.com... A > I get the following messages whenever I print long reports (200w	 > pages):) >=209 > %DCPS-F-CONTERMINATED, Connection abnormally terminated. >=20 > and. >=20H > %DCPS-I-RELEASE, $SET QUEUE/RELEASE/ENTRY=3D2516 ANSI_851 to release = for:
 > printing >=20 >=20< > I do NOT get this problem with shorter reports (10 Pages). >=20 >=20E > I think that it is a timing problem, maybe with the network bufferse > and/or timeout settings. >=20 > Craig Gunhouse  2 Isn't this what is described in the release notes:  8         2.2 Connection Terminations for Raw TCP/IP Queue  G               You may get CONTERMINATED errors for long print jobs wheneF               using raw TCP/IP connections. For jobs that consist of aF               single file or only use the native PostScript capabilityG               of the printer (for example, they do not use native PCL), E               these errors are most likely to occur at the end of the F               job, with job trailer pages (if specified for the queue)E               and print job accounting (if enabled) being lost. For =u otheraD               jobs, these errors may occur in the middle of the job,D               with subsequent documents as well as the trailer pagesF               and accounting information being lost. DCPS requeues theB           terminated jobs, placing them in a Holding state so that?           you can reprint them once you resolve the terminationn           problem.  A           Some network devices, including the HP JetDirect cards,-C           drop a TCP/IP connection if they do not receive any inputmA           from the host system within a specified amount of time.:@           This is a feature, meant to prevent host software from?           monopolizing the device. DCPS, however, waits for theoD           printer to acknowledge that previous documents are printed?           before switching from PostScript to some other nativeoB           printer language and also before printing a trailer page?           and gathering accounting information. Even though thehE           printer may be busy, the NIC may not receive any more inputn2           from DCPS before the timeout is reached.  A           If your NIC allows you to alter the TCP/IP idle timeouteA           value, you can work around this problem by disabling or0A           increasing the timeout. Check your NIC documentation tol?           determine if this is possible, and how to do it. Then6@           release any requeued jobs for which desired output was3           lost, and delete the other requeued jobs.s  C           Note that it is the length of a job in time (versus size)6A           that is important. For example, a very small PostScriptmB           program can take a very long time to print. Hence, it is?           difficult to predict how large a timeout is adequate.m   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 08:30:23 -0700& From: craig@hsc.mb.ca (Craig Gunhouse)' Subject: Re: DCPS 1.8 with LEXMARK T616i= Message-ID: <8629bcd1.0106280730.59edbbed@posting.google.com>c  [ "Fred Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@KVI.nl> wrote in message news:<9hesa4$naj$1@info.service.rug.nl>...s6 > "Craig Gunhouse" <craig@hsc.mb.ca> wrote in message 9 > news:8629bcd1.0106271056.3e9a4de1@posting.google.com...aC > > I get the following messages whenever I print long reports (200r > > pages):t > > ; > > %DCPS-F-CONTERMINATED, Connection abnormally terminateds > >  > > andh > > G > > %DCPS-I-RELEASE, $SET QUEUE/RELEASE/ENTRY=2516 ANSI_851 to release l >  for > > printing > >  > > > > > I do NOT get this problem with shorter reports (10 Pages). > >  > > G > > I think that it is a timing problem, maybe with the network bufferse > > and/or timeout settings. > >  > > Craig Gunhouse > 4 > Isn't this what is described in the release notes: > : >         2.2 Connection Terminations for Raw TCP/IP Queue > I >               You may get CONTERMINATED errors for long print jobs whencH >               using raw TCP/IP connections. For jobs that consist of aH >               single file or only use the native PostScript capabilityI >               of the printer (for example, they do not use native PCL),eG >               these errors are most likely to occur at the end of theyH >               job, with job trailer pages (if specified for the queue)F >               and print job accounting (if enabled) being lost. For  > otheroF >               jobs, these errors may occur in the middle of the job,F >               with subsequent documents as well as the trailer pagesH >               and accounting information being lost. DCPS requeues theD >           terminated jobs, placing them in a Holding state so thatA >           you can reprint them once you resolve the termination  >           problem. > C >           Some network devices, including the HP JetDirect cards,sE >           drop a TCP/IP connection if they do not receive any inputiC >           from the host system within a specified amount of time.hB >           This is a feature, meant to prevent host software fromA >           monopolizing the device. DCPS, however, waits for theiF >           printer to acknowledge that previous documents are printedA >           before switching from PostScript to some other nativeRD >           printer language and also before printing a trailer pageA >           and gathering accounting information. Even though theoG >           printer may be busy, the NIC may not receive any more input 4 >           from DCPS before the timeout is reached. > C >           If your NIC allows you to alter the TCP/IP idle timeoutgC >           value, you can work around this problem by disabling or C >           increasing the timeout. Check your NIC documentation to A >           determine if this is possible, and how to do it. TheniB >           release any requeued jobs for which desired output was5 >           lost, and delete the other requeued jobs.  > E >           Note that it is the length of a job in time (versus size)-C >           that is important. For example, a very small PostScript D >           program can take a very long time to print. Hence, it isA >           difficult to predict how large a timeout is adequate.   C We disabled timeouts to test if this works and it does, but I don't+A know how this will impact other thing like network traffic and NT @ queues to the printers.  I'll leave that problem for the systems people.    Thanks for you help!   Craig    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:48:15 +0200t= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>g< Subject: Re: Free Rdb [was Re: VMS applications on the web?]) Message-ID: <3B3B197F.3C3A2D7E@gtech.com>a   Malcolm Dunnett wrote:J >    You can get a "development only" version of Rdb for free from Oracle.T > Go to http://technet.oracle.com/ and click on "downloads" then select "Oracle Rdb"T > from the select list. Note the download size is 53MB for Alpha or 27MB for VAX, so/ > you'd better have a good internet connection.  > U >    Development only versions of Oracle are also available from the same site, but IcD > don't see a VMS version there - only Linux, NT, Solaris and Tru64.  # Is the RDB kit a true RDB kit now ?g  , A few weeks ago it was just an upgrade kit !   Arne   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:10:48 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) < Subject: Re: Free Rdb [was Re: VMS applications on the web?], Message-ID: <ng1nUw1+yutM@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  ) In article <3B3B197F.3C3A2D7E@gtech.com>,-@  Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> writes:   > Malcolm Dunnett wrote:K >>    You can get a "development only" version of Rdb for free from Oracle.jU >> Go to http://technet.oracle.com/ and click on "downloads" then select "Oracle Rdb"dU >> from the select list. Note the download size is 53MB for Alpha or 27MB for VAX, so 0 >> you'd better have a good internet connection. >> hV >>    Development only versions of Oracle are also available from the same site, but IE >> don't see a VMS version there - only Linux, NT, Solaris and Tru64.a > % > Is the RDB kit a true RDB kit now ?l > . > A few weeks ago it was just an upgrade kit ! > Z      I'm not willing to download the 53MB kit to try it, but nothing on the site indicatesG it's only an upgrade. The license agreement you have to click on says :e  Y DEVELOPMENT ONLY LIMITED LICENSE:  Oracle grants Customer a nonexclusive, nontransferablemR limited license to use the Programs for development purposes only in the indicatedU operating environment identified by Oracle. The Programs may be installed only on onecW computer and used by one person.  Customers may not use the Programs in connection with T any classroom activity, internal data processing operations, or any other commercial or production use purposes.o  E     That certainly suggests it's a full kit for development use only.e   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 06:31 CDTn' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)b Subject: Re: FreeVMS- Message-ID: <28JUN200106310468@gerg.tamu.edu>   6 rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) writes...K }The front-ends of the compilers are all written.  A single, versatile backiG }end will have to be written for IA64, and every front-end plugged intohE }it.  Then, compile till the smoke starts coming out of the GS-320s.  ; }Whatever the language, the smoke will be the same color...* }  }--  }Robert Deininger  }rdeininger@mindspring.com  C For debugging purposes, I would suggest that they implement a color*I coded smoke scheme at the very least - an error smoke-signaling mechanisme would be even better.6   --- Carl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:49:53 -0400s+ From: Brendan Welch <brendan_welch@uml.edu>y Subject: Re: FreeVMS' Message-ID: <3B3B27F1.8ACAF17F@uml.edu>a  A > This is music in my ears but I don't have the chance to get they> > source because it's not available for someone without credit > card.   D I hear that the source code of VMS, on microfiche, is up for auction) on Ebay.  (Some older version, I presume)i --E Brendan Welch, system analyst, Univ. of Massachusetts - Lowell, W1LPG    ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 12:46:36 GMTB From: bertrand@perceval.cnam.fr (BERTRAND =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jo=EBl?=) Subject: Re: FreeVMS6 Message-ID: <slrn9jm9os.vno.bertrand@perceval.cnam.fr>  " Le Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:55:34 -0400- Joshua Harding <jharding@sscc.org> crivait :aM >FreeVMS could and _never_ would take off because VMS was engineered from theeJ >beginning, instead of evolving, such as Linux or Windows. The Open SourceL >community seems eminently capable of developing 1,000 Mp3 players, web mailI >interfaces and screensavers, but are clearly not capable (or wanting) toy1 >write an operating system comparable to OpenVMS.P  @ 	Why ? OpenVMS is a good system, but only used on VAX and Alpha.F But the alpha processor is dead (maybe Intel will make an EV8 in placeL of their IA64's ?), and the port on IA64 is not done. I know the Unix world,L and I'm sure that rewrite a VMS clone is easier than write an OS such Linux.I The great problem is the filesystem and the kernel, but a lot of work hasI" been done with all GPLed projects.  	 	Regards,0   	JKB   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:48:47 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)W Subject: Re: FreeVMS3 Message-ID: <7DIzcpLG3uOx@eisner.encompasserve.org>   U In article <3B3B27F1.8ACAF17F@uml.edu>, Brendan Welch <brendan_welch@uml.edu> writes:N > B >> This is music in my ears but I don't have the chance to get the? >> source because it's not available for someone without credits >> card. > F > I hear that the source code of VMS, on microfiche, is up for auction+ > on Ebay.  (Some older version, I presume)p  0 Perhaps the poster wanted to acquire it legally.  D We buy it from Compaq without a credit card, in case the credit card& phrase was not an allusion to pricing.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:54:59 -0400s+ From: John Eisenschmidt <jeisensc@aaas.org>  Subject: Re: FreeVMS# Message-ID: <sb3b0d0d.080@aaas.org>t  J Oh I want it. That's really cool - it'll look swell next to my 8" floppy = disk and my RLL hard drive.   B Where did that come from? Was the common practice in days of yore?  C >>> Brendan Welch <brendan_welch@uml.edu> 06/28/2001 8:49:53 AM >>>a  A > This is music in my ears but I don't have the chance to get thef> > source because it's not available for someone without credit > card.e  D I hear that the source code of VMS, on microfiche, is up for auction) on Ebay.  (Some older version, I presume)  --E Brendan Welch, system analyst, Univ. of Massachusetts - Lowell, W1LPG    ------------------------------  / Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:41:08 +0200 (MET DST)e& From: Rudolf Wingert <win@fom.fgan.de> Subject: Re: FUD6 Message-ID: <200106280636.IAA02082@sinet1.fom.fgan.de>   Hello,  L I don't understand Compaq announcement. At this time EV68 1GHz Alpha is muchI faster then the IA64 in integer and a little bit faster in floating pointtJ arithmetic. IMHO normaly this would be in 2004 the same, if Compaq did notJ stop Alpha. But my feeling is, that this announcement was planed long timeG before. Now all makes sence, first the stop of NT for Alpha, second thewD roadmap strech (long time between Alphas with more MHz), so that theH Intel performance comes in the near of the Alpha Performance. Now CompaqJ said, that there is no sence to have Alpha. That's like breaking the knees1 of a hors and to say the horse is to slow to run.    Regards Rudolf Wingert   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:01:23 -0400o' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>, Subject: Re: FUD( Message-ID: <9hekho$oc7$1@pyrite.mv.net>  3 "Rudolf Wingert" <win@fom.fgan.de> wrote in message90 news:200106280636.IAA02082@sinet1.fom.fgan.de... > Hello, > I > I don't understand Compaq announcement. At this time EV68 1GHz Alpha is  muchK > faster then the IA64 in integer and a little bit faster in floating pointwL > arithmetic. IMHO normaly this would be in 2004 the same, if Compaq did notL > stop Alpha. But my feeling is, that this announcement was planed long timeI > before. Now all makes sence, first the stop of NT for Alpha, second thedF > roadmap strech (long time between Alphas with more MHz), so that theJ > Intel performance comes in the near of the Alpha Performance. Now CompaqL > said, that there is no sence to have Alpha. That's like breaking the knees3 > of a hors and to say the horse is to slow to run.t  I I'm not normally inclined to conspiracy theories, but I think that may bes% the most sensible one I've heard yet.   I This thought is not original, but it's really hard to know which would beoL worse:  Compaq management so incompetent that all this just happened kind ofF by accident, each stage simply reflecting a reluctance to fund much ofK anything anywhere but in Wintel-land, or Compaq management so MachiavellianvK and secretly intertwined with Intel that it really *was* all planned out aty least 2+ years ago.s   - bill   >  > Regards Rudolf Wingert >o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:04:49 +0100n% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n Subject: Re: FUD8 Message-ID: <rk3mjtoqgk4gotdkqjtinjrod5j597lram@4ax.com>  @ On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 17:03:05 GMT, system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) wrote:n  a >In article <1rrjjt8hvt219ejm1c80eiq28l0mhasjou@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:0  A >>But Compaq did listen to customers. Capellas said he had talkedRB >>personally to lots of major Alpha customers and the response was8 >>"unbelievably positive". I loved that choice of words. >eE >... and you believe him?  Sheesh, he could be a law(lie)yer with alli9 >of the untruths unleashed since the digital acquisition.n  F Note his words "UNBELIEVABLY positive" and my comment that I loved the choice of WORDS...   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:10:35 +0100X% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n Subject: Re: FUD8 Message-ID: <7u3mjt4rjvjmbmi79rok4vp0heit94sjuu@4ax.com>  # On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:46:00 -0300,t* fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br wrote:  ) >Customers no ? CEO x CEO conversations !   B Yep, again back at the analyst briefing Winkler used exactly thoseE words. He said (from memory) "CEOs of many of our customers have beenD telling me to simplify..."  @ Winkler was present at the Compaq/Intel webcast you might not beE surprised to know. Other than the financial guy he was the only othere9 member of  Compaq management other than Capellas present.g   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:13:40 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>  Subject: Re: FUD8 Message-ID: <q74mjtktagafmobf3hfpmi7of6pi8mpgqm@4ax.com>  E On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:01:23 -0400, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>o wrote:   t. > J >This thought is not original, but it's really hard to know which would beM >worse:  Compaq management so incompetent that all this just happened kind ofhG >by accident, each stage simply reflecting a reluctance to fund much of,L >anything anywhere but in Wintel-land, or Compaq management so MachiavellianL >and secretly intertwined with Intel that it really *was* all planned out at >least 2+ years ago.  C "Microsoft and Intel are the two most important partners to Compaq"l. said Winker and "don't forget that" he warned.   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:59:38 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)( Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to ItaniumL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2806010959380001@user-2iveapn.dialup.mindspring.com>  B In article <1010627231414.51014C-100000@Ives.egh.com>, John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> wrote:r    D > The old DEC SPR forms used to have a box "Could this SPR have been- > prevented by better or more documentation?"   J Sometimes I think there should be an additional box:  "Could this SPR haveJ been prevented if I had read the existing documentation?"  I would have to check that box a lot.t  B > I think what is lacking is a tutorial guide to ncl that explainsC > the concepts and organizes them coherently.  For example, all the C > commands relating to ethernet interfaces should be together, neariC > all the commands relating to other kinds of interfaces, and other.) > sections about MOP commands, dtss, etc.e > @ > The existing documentation seems to be in two classes:  How to< > use NET$CONFIGURE.COM (simple and advanced), and a commandA > reference to NCL that is almost as confusing as the help and isi > organized the same way 6  C These both contain some introductory material, though not organized F exactly as you suggest.  I suspect many "experienced" folks skip theseE when starting with DECnet-plus, as I did.  They are worth looking at.o  6 DECnet-Plus for OpenVMS Introduction and User's Guide:>   http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/73final/6501/6501pro.HTML   DECnet-Plus Planning Guide:e>   http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/73final/6495/6495pro.HTML  ; I think these manuals were written/upgraded around VMS 7.1.n   --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.coms   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:29:20 +0100 8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>) Subject: RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.rN Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE1@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  K > Could someone please post some link to an official Compaq statement about0B > that iVMS thing and what it will actually do that VMS won't do ?   The URL:  = http://www.compaq.com/hps/ipf-enterprise/download/webcast.pptS    H gives you the Powerpoint presentation of the actual announcement. You'llK need Powerpoint to view it. One day you may even be able to view Powerpointn/ presentations on iVMS at the click of a button.w  K I'd guess it's too early for anyone to give much detail but Compaq ought to'F post as much detail as they can as speedily as they can about iVMS. IfH nothing else it will help to reduce the stress levels of many people whoI cannot yet appreciate the positive aspects ( potential aspects ? ) of the/L recent announcement. Something along the lines of "an open letter of intent" may do the trick.s   John  B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukH Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)p   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:22:45 -0700d1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> ) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. 3 Message-ID: <3B3A94F4.6E38A31E@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>l   Robert Deininger wrote:  > L > EV8 is the opposite.  Compaq saw the need to spend billions more to finishF > the project, and they apparently became scared of Intel's well-hyped > shadow CPU.  m  I   Billions?  Are they going to pay each designer multiples of $5 million?e  F > I suspect porting VMS, and Tru64, and NSK, will cost a lot less thanK > finishing EV8 would have. Once Compaq decided or realized that they would H > finish EV8 badly, late, or not at all, continuing would have been slow > suicide. v  E   Both things are mostly intellectual activities.  However, from whatrL I've read, it appears that some features of EV8 will not be able to transferK to IA64.  If the EV8 team are not able to finish EV8, how are they going toR be good enough to help Intel?a   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/y   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:32:10 -0700e1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>l) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.a3 Message-ID: <3B3A972A.7704C7FF@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>    Robert Deininger wrote:e  - >  They will also benefit by the removal of a F > competing product, but evidently alpha was already in trouble inside& > Compaq. We just didn't know it yet.   D   Plenty of us knew it, from the beginning it was dubious that AlphaF was not in trouble at Compaq with its "Industry Standard" blinders on.F In fact when Compaq bought Digital, it was a major topic of discussionG and I believe that forces within Compaq fought hard over the last three  years to get Alpha dropped.   K > You come close to making my point.  IA64 has been in trouble.  Intel knewrH > it, and everyone else knew.  Intel needed a shot in the arm. This shotJ > seems likely to significantly improve the IA64 product line, in terms of > both time and features.h  B   So it makes perfect sense to bet your business on a processor in trouble C from another manufacturer?  If the help coming from Compaq can savev IA64,g$ it certainly could keep Alpha going.   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US( Tucson, AZ                    Web       " http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:43:04 -0700o1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>s) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.f3 Message-ID: <3B3A99B8.103309CC@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>o   Christof Brass wrote:   8 > But there are some problems with IA63 (IntelAlpha63?):> > - Heat - we will (probably) never see a VMS laptop with that > CPU.: > - Speed - SMT isn't compatible with EPIC. EV8 would have > probably blown IA63 away.t > @ > By this move of Compaq you lose a lot: EV8 Alpha will never be< > released and you will have to migrate which will costs you? > money, time and nerves, trust me. Compare this situation withi! > continued enhancement of Alpha.n  @   I think you have something there.  Perhaps Intel realized that> EV8 would make Alpha more scalable than IA64 could ever be and> had to kill it now before it got too far along.  Use FUD of an? unstoppable Intel to get Compaq to capitulate.  What better wayt< to make sure massive SMT never happened or could happen than> insisting on having the EV8 team work for Intel.  Now, if IA64? falls on its face, Compaq will have no way to turn back to EV8.    --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:19:47 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. 8 Message-ID: <711mjtorbdiuem3f3ijcoos0f03j4g1q4a@4ax.com>  , On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:08:23 -0400, JF Mezei% <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:E     >NN >Compaq will quietly pull out of VMS over a long period of time and attract as$ >little attention to it as possible.  D What if there are 1 million plus IA64 systems with a DECUS hobby VMS& license on them four years from today? -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:01:15 +0100r% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>o) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.i8 Message-ID: <5mvljt4td1eg15h9t20ln05hmrua5072pr@4ax.com>  E On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 17:44:46 -0400, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>e wrote:    K >If IA64 should really hit a brick wall, having Alpha on the shelf might beeC >worth something to Intel.  But since process technology guarantees4M >performance improvements even if the architecture doesn't change at all, theTL >need to take Alpha off the shelf or even to incorporate significant aspectsL >of its technology (which in the opinion of people who know a lot about suchM >hardware is not felt to be easy) is not at all apparent - now that Intel has A >available the option to *keep* Alpha on that shelf and avoid itse
 >competition.n  @ One other thing about the webcast I thought interesting was thatD Capellas did not *absolutely* rule out EV8 when asked about it. IIRC@ he pointed out that the deal with Intel was non-exclusive and ifD anyone fancied bankrolling Compaq to do it they could still go aheadB with EV8. No he did not suggest this was likely by any means and IA don't believe it will happen Unless there's some critical defence C application we don't know about which might be expecting it.  InteliD would not have a veto on this according to Capellas as Compaq retain intellectual ownership.n   >o >- bill  >f >> >> --  >> Robert Deininger  >> rdeininger@mindspring.com >    -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:10:30 +0100-% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>G) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.N8 Message-ID: <jb0mjt0edfi3juki0k473fmd0ppdbi0ljf@4ax.com>  F On 27 Jun 2001 09:53:36 -0500, koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:  ] >In article <3B38AFED.31B0476B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:a >> MO >> In terms of VMS on IA64, will Compaq provide the >>> prompt on all its Inteld% >> machines from now on ? I doubt it.e >eI >Piece of cake.  In the tradition of using obsolete technology as consoleeD >front ends, the first IA-64 to ship with VMS will probavkly have an= >Alpha EV5 front end.  Alpha already knows how to prompt >>>.d  B Initially how about a simple console boot CD? Just stick the CD inD your  IA64 system and boot the VMS console. No need to fiddle aroundF with new boot ROMS or learn how to use native hardware BIOS support at least initially.   >sG >---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ >Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation> >NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupF >                                | please remove ".aspm" when replying   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:13:34 +0100r% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>7) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.l8 Message-ID: <ll0mjtsvtllutvtm6bvj2sev1749tchl7t@4ax.com>  B On 27 Jun 2001 04:20 CDT, carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) wrote:   >oG >In case you didn't notice, NT on ALpha used a different "console" thann >VMS and True64. >rH >- Will VMS-IA64 use the same BIOS as NT rather than somthing a lot like  >  the current console software?  D As I;ve suggested elsewhere an IA64 VMS console could be booted from' CD even on currently shipping hardware.   : >- Will VMS-IA64 function without some PALcode-like stuff?  A As some Compaq engineers have pointed out PALcode like support is:= available on the current IA64 systems and can be used by VMS.   D >If both of these are "yes", then you may be able to run VMS-IA64 on >commodity IA64 hardware.  > I >If either, or both, are "no", then you will only be able to run VMS-IA64cG >on specially constructed motherboards which will almost certainly onlyn >be available from Compaq. >h	 >--- Carl    -- Alan   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:52:35 +0000 (UTC) ' From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb) ) Subject: RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.o+ Message-ID: <9hf29i$ris$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>l  x In article <OF1264170C.4C097B90-ON03256A78.00610561@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>, fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br writes:6 >I dont know the reasons you are allways condening M$.A >Without them I can imagining  everybody using IBM 3270 terminals 4 >over  X-25 , reading Videotext  at home (1200 bps). >  >Regards >z >FCa >  >h   You are joking aren't you ?e  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:29:30 +0100e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.f8 Message-ID: <a71mjt0f185di54hnm6b6t32linbruqumq@4ax.com>  E On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 17:08:59 -0400, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>  wrote:    M >You if anyone know that my expressions here are 100% consistent with beliefseF >I've held for a long time - including a significant period when I wasF >working hard with the rest of our group to try to open Compaq's eyes.  D And you know that I expected until recently Compaq to EOL VMS at theF same time as Alpha. They didn't. Maybe we didn't open their eyes but I@ like to think we poked them with a sharp stick. Even if all userB feedback did was scare Compaq into not killing VMS quickly I still< think this isn't quite the worst case scenario many feared.    > M >No, SUN isn't paying me:  I'm just overcome with wholly-justifiable disgust,oK >as should be anyone with anything like an objective outlook on the matter.dH >I used to suspect that a lot of the people clinging to their hopes thatM >support by its owner for VMS would eventually come around might be more than L >a bit soft in the head, and their reaction to this latest betrayal seems to >confirm that suspicion. >t >- billf >e >>
 >> >- bill >> > >> >>q
 >> >> John >> >>eH >> >> Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukG >> >> Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1n >3RH,UKhG >> >> Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)  >> > >> > >> >> --r >> Alanu >t   -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:14:47 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler),) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.t3 Message-ID: <sL+N151P1FQa@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <jb0mjt0edfi3juki0k473fmd0ppdbi0ljf@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes: > 0 > Initially how about a simple console boot CD?   C Remember we're looking for obsolete technology.  I suppose an RRD40e	 would do.u  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation = NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupiE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replying8   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:15:42 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)t) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. 3 Message-ID: <3wQbPtN+mUpS@eisner.encompasserve.org>i   In article <rdeininger-2706012300580001@user-2ivecak.dialup.mindspring.com>, rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) writes:a= > In article <3B3A653B.8FA5C938@infopuls.com>, Christof BrassV > <brass@infopuls.com> wrote:h >  >  dA >> BTW what happens with NSK? Will lockstep find another way into-
 >> some IA63?, > L > A Tandem NSK person has already told this newsgroup that IA64 has an extraF > signal to support lockstep now.  This was in the works before Compaq > bought Tandem. > L > He also hinted that off-the-shelf CPUs tend to require extensive debuggingJ > before they support NSK's needs.  So the details may take quite a bit ofB > work, but the architecture is already in the right neighborhood.  E For that matter, first try Alphas take some debugging before they runtF VMS.  My DEC 3000-400 has a "pass 3" EV4 chip.  I think that is one ofD the major difference between VMS and other operating systems -- theyF wait until they cannot break it.  There is at least one Alpha on whichD Tru64 is supported but not VMS.  It may have been a system issue andE not a chip issue, but VMS can pound certain aspects harder than other72 operating systems (and I am sure NSK can as well).  > > He also said IA64 has something vaguely like to PALmode now. > I > In light of this, I think it's possible limited-functionality, in-house = > examples of VMS could be built on the current itanium chip.i  G And that might make good publicity, especially coupled with a statementh/ that it is not yet up to VMS release standards.o   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:17:03 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)g) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. 3 Message-ID: <Jw64d4dVR$8H@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  \ In article <3B3AAC72.2E1EE619@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > Keith Brown wrote:N >> > Could someone please post some link to an official Compaq statement aboutE >> > that iVMS thing and what it will actually do that VMS won't do ?m >> > >> o; >> http://www.compaq.com/newsroom/pr/2001/pr2001062501.htmlJ > % > That page has no mention of "iVMS".h  ; Perhaps because "iVMS" is a name made up in this newsgroup.n   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:15:09 -0300 ) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.brP) Subject: RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.iL Message-ID: <OFABCDAC68.4DEA1C0A-ON03256A79.0048A8CF@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>   No I am not ....  > The IT world which we are living was impulsed by Microsoft....  ; IBM was / is too academic ... and academic  people dont usee to be open minded ! ! !    Regards,       Fabio C.        8 david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb) em 28/06/2001 07:52:35  3 Favor responder a david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb)i             Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com       ) Assunto: RE: Full port of VMS to Itanium.     
 In articleA <OF1264170C.4C097B90-ON03256A78.00610561@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>, + fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br writes:h6 >I dont know the reasons you are allways condening M$.A >Without them I can imagining  everybody using IBM 3270 terminalso4 >over  X-25 , reading Videotext  at home (1200 bps). >  >Regards >t >FCk >  >o   You are joking aren't you ?r  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 08:28 CDTw' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)4) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.i- Message-ID: <28JUN200108284973@gerg.tamu.edu>D  1 koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes...-a }In article <jb0mjt0edfi3juki0k473fmd0ppdbi0ljf@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:p }> s1 }> Initially how about a simple console boot CD? m } D }Remember we're looking for obsolete technology.  I suppose an RRD40
 }would do. } G }---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ }Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation  > I guess they could make it so you could load in the console byD hand from the front panel switches. The megabyte (or whatever it is), of code might take a while to key in though.   --- Carl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:14:28 -0400k2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2806011014280001@user-2iveapn.dialup.mindspring.com>  C In article <3B3A94F4.6E38A31E@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>, Vance Haemmerlen" <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> wrote:   > Robert Deininger wrote:  > > N > > EV8 is the opposite.  Compaq saw the need to spend billions more to finishH > > the project, and they apparently became scared of Intel's well-hyped > > shadow CPU.  k > K >   Billions?  Are they going to pay each designer multiples of $5 million?:  B Hundreds of millions per year.  With probable delays and unforseenJ problems, EV8 wouldn't have shipped until 2004 or maybe 2005.  There wouldG be pressure to add staff to combat the delays.  Maybe "billions" is too 3 pessimistic, but "billion" seems entirely possible.u    H > > I suspect porting VMS, and Tru64, and NSK, will cost a lot less thanM > > finishing EV8 would have. Once Compaq decided or realized that they wouldyJ > > finish EV8 badly, late, or not at all, continuing would have been slow
 > > suicide. y > G >   Both things are mostly intellectual activities.  However, from what4N > I've read, it appears that some features of EV8 will not be able to transferM > to IA64.  If the EV8 team are not able to finish EV8, how are they going ton > be good enough to help Intel?u  H I gather that intel needed help.  They need people and technology to getJ their chip family where they need it, when they need it.  They are gettingF very good people, including some of the best compiler expertise on theI planet.  They are also getting good HW technology, some of which they can G use, and some of which they probably can't.  The deal isn't perfect for , either party, but it can still benefit both.  G EV8 could have been finished, but would the return be enough to justify0@ the cost?  It's entirely possible that the EV8 team will be moreH productive working on another project.  If world-class people (they are)E are working on a world-class project (alpha is/was) that for whateveryI reason isn't going to turn a profit, it may be better for those people to F work on a lower-quality project like IA64.  I guess that's part of the% reasoning that lead to this decision.i  9 Could EV8 have stomped IA64 into the dirt, given a betterrE management/marketing environment?  Many folks think so.  Could CompaqmF provide that environment?  Many folks, I guess including Compaq, think not.   -- e Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:29:50 -0400r2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.iL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2806011029500001@user-2iveapn.dialup.mindspring.com>  C In article <3B3A972A.7704C7FF@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>, Vance Haemmerle " <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> wrote:  ?M > > You come close to making my point.  IA64 has been in trouble.  Intel knewhJ > > it, and everyone else knew.  Intel needed a shot in the arm. This shotL > > seems likely to significantly improve the IA64 product line, in terms of > > both time and features.- > D >   So it makes perfect sense to bet your business on a processor in	 > troubley > from another manufacturer?    H You never saw "perfect sense" and "Compaq" in the same sentence from me!  @ It could make sense if IA64 was in much less trouble than alpha.    ) > If the help coming from Compaq can save( > IA64, & > it certainly could keep Alpha going.  $ Suppose the situation last week was:  J Troubled alpha + good engineers + bad compaq management = likely disaster.   and...  I Troubled IA64 + good intel engineers + better intel management = possiblec	 disaster.s     Now, perhaps we have:v  E Troubled IA64 + good intel engineers + good compaq engineers + betterp% intel management = hoped-for success.e  H ... where "success" means a good CPU capable of supporting many OSs withB good performance, and capable of turning a large profit to supportH continued developemnt.  (Notice the absence of compaq management in this
 equation.)    * Another possible solution would have been:  F Troubled alpha + good compaq engineers + good intel engineers + better. intel management = successful alpha from intel  C ... this would have meant intel dumping IA64 and carrying the alphaeG banner.  It might have been the best solution technically, but intel isv/ too proud, and wall street would have hated it.-     Two points:   J 1.  Separating the talent from Compaq's poor management and lack of visionF MIGHT result in one very successful product, instead of two (alpha and IA64) at risk.  G 2.  Compaq still has the opportunity to succeed or fail with their OSs,vI and their overall strategy.  They WILL fail if they continue to choke theoJ life out of their best products.  Optimists will hope that management willH improve now that they have fewer things to worry about.  Pessimists willH assume that the choking-to-death will become more energetic, since there> are fewer throats to choke.  I'm not making any predictions...   -- @ Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.como   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 15:07:04 GMT2 From: mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog)) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.4, Message-ID: <9hfh6o$428@gap.cco.caltech.edu>  _ In article <9heb08$7pqm$1@poknews.pok.ibm.com>, "Paul Nankervis" <paulnank@au1.ibm.com> writes:oL I suspect that if half the effort of writing notes critizing Compaq for this	 >decisionlM >was spent on telling other people, especially managers, about how Compaq areyL >**investing** in VMS, then VMS would regain some portion of its popularity.  I What makes you think that they are investing in it?  My  understanding isoH that all of the $$$ for this port came from Intel.  Compaq is incrediblyI reluctant to part with its own cash when it comes to development issues. nG They'll usually take the VMS customer's money - but most of it is goinga" elsewhere, and not back into VMS.    Regards,     David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu? Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech hJ **************************************************************************J *                       RIP VMS & ALPHA                                  *J **************************************************************************   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 08:41:20 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)m) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.-, Message-ID: <2cjDlQFqo92n@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  - In article <3B3AB68A.3222E975@videotron.ca>, c4      JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:   > L > You see this an an investment in VMS. Technically yes. But politically no.G > Compaq is spending a bit fo dollars in order to allow the sale of thevL > architecture that will give it a whole wad of money. The whole impetus forN > this move is not to push VMS but rather to get rid of Alpha. The Port of VMS1 > is a necessary evil to allow the sale of Alpha.e > M       The fate of Alpha was sealed years ago. If Microsoft had actually giventM a d**n about producing an OS not tied to a single processor ( as they claimedrK when they first announced NT ) they would have given some decent support toDF NT on Alpha and would have pushed much harder to have a 64 bit WindowsH released on Alpha by now. Neither of these things happened. In fact fromI an outsiders point of view it appears MS deliberately dragged their heels-J on 64 bit Windows so as to not embarass Intel by having a product shipping> several years before Intel had a processor that could run it.   I       Without a volume market for Alpha there's no way Compaq ( or anyoneoJ else ) could afford to put the dollars into research necessary to maintainG technical superiority for Alpha. Without that lead Alphas current glorytH in tht HPTC market would be short lived ( number crunchers have no brand? loyalty - they'll always buy the fastest box they can afford ).g  I       As I've mooted here recently, it's not impossible at this point forLJ Intel to drop IA64 and adopt Alpha as their 64bit platform, but it appearsJ there's little chance that will happen. There are strong political reasonsF to stay the IA64 course. There *may* even be good technical reasons toG do so ( I'm not an engineer and those whose seem to be in a position toAG comment intelligently on such things seem divided on which architectureh has the most potential ).e  K      Given that Intel isn't likely to adopt Alpha, and that Compaq couldn't F afford to keep up, it seems that moving VMS to IA64 is the best way to insure it has a future.    > M > Porting VMS isn't enough. It needs to be marketed especially in a period ofp > uncertainty. e  L     Precisely. I have every confidence that OpenVMS engineering can pull offG this port, given adequate time and support. I have less confidence that2G Compaq will provide that support or that they will manage the marketing K of VMS and the IA64 port in a way that convinces customers their investmenta< in VMS will be protected through the transition and beyond.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:07:25 -0400 - From: John Reagan <reagan@hiyall.zko.dec.com>i) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.y2 Message-ID: <3B3B1DFD.48AB32B6@hiyall.zko.dec.com>   Christof Brass wrote:0 >  > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > >  > > F > > And a compiler language group would certainly not want bug reportsF > > from someone running their front end against a version of GEM they > > had not tested.  > ? > This is a bogus answer. If they did it according to the specstB > there is no problem. If the target platform uses a different GEM > version, fix that. > B > Basically the GEM interface is not to blame for not implementing > something.  H I hate to break it to you, but Larry's reasons are exactly why we didn'tE make a GEM shareable image.  It is done internally from time to time,i but make sure NEVER to ship it.p  G We didn't want to "version" the API such that new front-ends would havelB to deal with old back-ends (and visa versa).  The testing (or lackB thereof) scared us away.  You could get into a situation where youG install a new Pascal compiler and break your Fortran and C compilers byiC providing a new/different GEM shareable that didn't work right witho
 Fortran or C.    -- N John Reaganp Compaq Pascal Project Leader   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:34:57 +0100n% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>u) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.n8 Message-ID: <ckjmjtkv2ato1dlaoigviim8ske4totlss@4ax.com>  @ On 28 Jun 2001 09:17:03 -0500, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) wrote:  ] >In article <3B3AAC72.2E1EE619@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  >> Keith Brown wrote:>O >>> > Could someone please post some link to an official Compaq statement about>F >>> > that iVMS thing and what it will actually do that VMS won't do ? >>> >  >>> < >>> http://www.compaq.com/newsroom/pr/2001/pr2001062501.html >>  & >> That page has no mention of "iVMS". > < >Perhaps because "iVMS" is a name made up in this newsgroup.  # But first used by Hoff I believe...v -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:45:37 -050011 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>m) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.a' Message-ID: <3B3B5F31.2A792C6A@fsi.net>    John Reagan wrote: >  > Christof Brass wrote:  > >b > > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > > >o > > >IH > > > And a compiler language group would certainly not want bug reportsH > > > from someone running their front end against a version of GEM they > > > had not tested.  > >GA > > This is a bogus answer. If they did it according to the specs D > > there is no problem. If the target platform uses a different GEM > > version, fix that. > >aD > > Basically the GEM interface is not to blame for not implementing > > something. > J > I hate to break it to you, but Larry's reasons are exactly why we didn'tG > make a GEM shareable image.  It is done internally from time to time,v! > but make sure NEVER to ship it.n > I > We didn't want to "version" the API such that new front-ends would have@D > to deal with old back-ends (and visa versa).  The testing (or lackD > thereof) scared us away.  You could get into a situation where youI > install a new Pascal compiler and break your Fortran and C compilers by E > providing a new/different GEM shareable that didn't work right witht > Fortran or C.o  
 How 'bout:  G GEM012$SHR.EXE for GEM V1.2, for example (fictitious, made-up version -n6 I'd have no such idea) to gaurd against such problems?  @ ...or PAS_GEM$SHR.EXE for a PASCAL-specific shareable? (Could beG multiple langauge-specific images, but hey - with disk capacities goinga' the way they are, should be no biggie)?   B I'm thinking that if a shareable is built, it may be built from anE object library. GEM.OLB and related doc.'s could be sold as part of auH SDK for compiler developers, no? Object code is more easily de-compiled,' I know, so there could be a risk there.   # Dunno - just thinking "out loud"...u   -- a David J. Dachterae dba DJE Systemst http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/o  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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:18:39 GMT:4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.M: Message-ID: <PFJ_6.795$Bp5.471640@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  > "Malcolm Dunnett" <nothome@spammers.are.scum> wrote in message& news:2cjDlQFqo92n@malvm5.mala.bc.ca.... > In article <3B3AB68A.3222E975@videotron.ca>,6 >      JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: >t > >VJ > > You see this an an investment in VMS. Technically yes. But politically no./I > > Compaq is spending a bit fo dollars in order to allow the sale of themJ > > architecture that will give it a whole wad of money. The whole impetus fornL > > this move is not to push VMS but rather to get rid of Alpha. The Port of VMS 3 > > is a necessary evil to allow the sale of Alpha.l > >tI >       The fate of Alpha was sealed years ago. If Microsoft had actuallye giventG > a d**n about producing an OS not tied to a single processor ( as theys claimed J > when they first announced NT ) they would have given some decent support toH > NT on Alpha and would have pushed much harder to have a 64 bit WindowsJ > released on Alpha by now. Neither of these things happened. In fact fromK > an outsiders point of view it appears MS deliberately dragged their heels:L > on 64 bit Windows so as to not embarass Intel by having a product shipping? > several years before Intel had a processor that could run it.o  H Of this there is absolutely no doubt. Recall Balding Ballmer's statementG about "not wanting to give an unfair advantage to one processor (Alpha,eK which existed) over another (IA-64, which did not)? A statement which was a > 180-degree change from what he said at the June 97 API launch.   >eK >       Without a volume market for Alpha there's no way Compaq ( or anyone8L > else ) could afford to put the dollars into research necessary to maintainI > technical superiority for Alpha. Without that lead Alphas current gloryDJ > in tht HPTC market would be short lived ( number crunchers have no brandA > loyalty - they'll always buy the fastest box they can afford ).t >rK >       As I've mooted here recently, it's not impossible at this point foreL > Intel to drop IA64 and adopt Alpha as their 64bit platform, but it appearsL > there's little chance that will happen. There are strong political reasonsH > to stay the IA64 course. There *may* even be good technical reasons toI > do so ( I'm not an engineer and those whose seem to be in a position toaI > comment intelligently on such things seem divided on which architecturet > has the most potential ).  >-D >      Given that Intel isn't likely to adopt Alpha, and that Compaq couldn'tH > afford to keep up, it seems that moving VMS to IA64 is the best way to > insure it has a future.r >n > >-L > > Porting VMS isn't enough. It needs to be marketed especially in a period of > > uncertainty. >UJ >     Precisely. I have every confidence that OpenVMS engineering can pull offoI > this port, given adequate time and support. I have less confidence that I > Compaq will provide that support or that they will manage the marketing'B > of VMS and the IA64 port in a way that convinces customers their
 investment= > in VMS will be protected through the transition and beyond.y   Yep. There it is!e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:45:31 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>y& Subject: Re: Future support of VAX-VMS) Message-ID: <3B3B26EB.A5B05CD6@gtech.com>    JF Mezei wrote:oM > With the rumoured impending death of Alpha and rumoured migration of VMS tolN > IA64, this will put quite a but of strain on the Compaq VMS engineers havingL > to port VMS to a platform which was not designed to support VMS. And then,' > having to support VMS on 3 platforms.i > O > Will Compaq take this opportunity to say that 7.3 will be the last version oft > VMS for VAX ?f   Maybe.  D But they have already practically stopped adding new features to VMS VAX,& so the difference may not be that big.  B I guess they wil stop the day, when VMS VAX revenues cannot longer financem, the testing required (testing is expensive).   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:22:17 +0200t= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>w- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoftb) Message-ID: <3B3ADB29.3BE11E27@gtech.com>i   Jack Peacock wrote:sJ > It's obvious MS knows the main issue with their OS is stability, witnessI > the effort in Win 2K.  With development budgets that make the VMS grouplG > look like a garage outfit they can accomplish quite a bit in the nexttD > three years. If NT 2004 is as dependable as VMS V5.x then VMS willF > shrink to the customer base size of IBM mainframes, a few large richG > customers to sustain it but essentially irrelevant to the mainstream.s  
 Two comments:s  : 1)  I see no indications of Windows getting more reliable.>     3.5->4.0->2000 has added a ton of features, but to my best#     knowledge not more reliability.m  : 2)  I think Compaq would be extremely happy, if VMS did as=     well as IBM mainframe. Because that would mean 5-10 timess     as much revenue !-   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:50:58 -0400n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>l- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoftn, Message-ID: <3B3AE1E0.581E1BF8@videotron.ca>   Arne Vajhj wrote:< > 2)  I think Compaq would be extremely happy, if VMS did as? >     well as IBM mainframe. Because that would mean 5-10 timesi >     as much revenue !e  N There is a big problems with this.  In order to grow VMS, Compaq would have toL expland its market and market the darned product, and that would cannabaliseF Microsoft sales and make Microsoft unhappy, thus jeoperdising Compaq's position in the PC market.  M And if VMS sales don't pickup as fast as Compaq's relationship with Microsoft K sours, then Compaq will have some bad quarters , thus jeoperdizing Compaq'sk management job security.  J Winkler, who seems to have much power inside of Compaq has made statements; stating that NT would rule the IT industry in all markets.    N You can dream about Compaq becoming a mainframe company and dropping its tightJ relationship with Microsoft and Intel, but in reality, this isn't going toM happen. They are convinced that NT will grow and rule ever bigger data centreu5 applications and are not about to try to change that.s  M VMS is nice to have because it helps fund Compaq's pC endeavours and provides F a soft landing cushion whenever the PCs don't do well. But it is not a strategic product for Compaq.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 19:52:12 +0010i% From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.aue- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoftg5 Message-ID: <01K5B922GI1U001I0D@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>n   Arne,e   [snips]e  ; >2)  I think Compaq would be extremely happy, if VMS did asn> >    well as IBM mainframe. Because that would mean 5-10 times >    as much revenue !  @ I am probably one of the doom-sayers.  Mathog, Mezei and others.  K I think that Compaq would be less than happy if VMS succeeded.  They would  H not want to acknowledge revenue from something they disdained -- why, I ? dunno.  It's already making them money, but they don't want it.i  > [Shrug of shoulders with total lack of comprehension emoticon]  M I started (work/computing) life on IBM.  It's been a while, but I might look .K at going back there for a couple of years.  I do not want nightmares in my t4 retirement of trying to work with silly billy stuff.   Regards, Paddy   Paddy O'Brien, Transmission Development, 
 TransGrid, PO Box A1000, Sydney South,  NSW 2000, Australia-   Tel:   +61 2 9284-3063 Fax:   +61 2 9284-3050& Email: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au  M Either "\'" or "\s" (to escape the apostrophe) seems to work for most people,u; but that little whizz-bang apostrophe gives me little spam.$   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 05:07:46 -0700 1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> - Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsofts2 Message-ID: <3B3ABBA2.4BD20CD@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>   Main, Kerry wrote: >  > Jack,m > I > >>> If NT 2004 is as dependable as VMS V5.x then VMS will shrink to them* > customer base size of IBM mainframes <<< >  > Something to consider -g > I > The above statement assumes that Customer availability, scalability andeJ > security requirements in 2004 will be the same as today. Given that mostM > Customers have less than 5-10% of their business on the Internet today, butoM > are expected to have about 60+% of their business in 2004, do you not thinkaJ > that matching tomorrows requirements with todays technologies is a risky > approach?h  I   If Sun is good enough for Ebay and it's 100% on the Internet, then it's K probably good enough for the rest of the companies who use the Compaq model*9 of "It might be crap, but everyone else is using it too."*   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/l   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:44:47 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>j- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsofto) Message-ID: <3B3B18AF.1B6CAD9C@gtech.com>a   JF Mezei wrote:c > Arne Vajhj wrote:> > > 2)  I think Compaq would be extremely happy, if VMS did asA > >     well as IBM mainframe. Because that would mean 5-10 timest > >     as much revenue !t  P > You can dream about Compaq becoming a mainframe company and dropping its tightL > relationship with Microsoft and Intel, but in reality, this isn't going toO > happen. They are convinced that NT will grow and rule ever bigger data centrel7 > applications and are not about to try to change that.   < I am not dreaming. I am just arguing that the "then VMS will? shrink to the customer base size of IBM mainframes" in the posts? I quoted is not a paricular black picture. I am not saying thatm= it can happend or that Compaq wants it to happend - just that C what apperently was intended to be a black picture was in fact not.    Arne   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 08:14:56 -0400/ From: jordan@lisa.gemair.com (Jordan Henderson)h- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsofta* Message-ID: <9hf740$aeg$1@lisa.gemair.com>  ) In article <3B3ADB29.3BE11E27@gtech.com>,l? Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?=  <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote:w >Jack Peacock wrote:K >> It's obvious MS knows the main issue with their OS is stability, witnesstJ >> the effort in Win 2K.  With development budgets that make the VMS groupH >> look like a garage outfit they can accomplish quite a bit in the nextE >> three years. If NT 2004 is as dependable as VMS V5.x then VMS willrG >> shrink to the customer base size of IBM mainframes, a few large richgH >> customers to sustain it but essentially irrelevant to the mainstream. >  >Two comments: >A; >1)  I see no indications of Windows getting more reliable.a? >    3.5->4.0->2000 has added a ton of features, but to my best $ >    knowledge not more reliability. >p  ? Actually, I've found W2K to be far more reliable, on my desktops at least, than NT4.  YMMV.  ; >2)  I think Compaq would be extremely happy, if VMS did ase> >    well as IBM mainframe. Because that would mean 5-10 times >    as much revenue ! >d >Arnea   -Jordan Henderson  jordan@greenapple.com,   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:08:52 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)k- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoftc3 Message-ID: <zNw8d6wadnn$@eisner.encompasserve.org>p  \ In article <3B3AE1E0.581E1BF8@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > Arne Vajhj wrote:= >> 2)  I think Compaq would be extremely happy, if VMS did as:@ >>     well as IBM mainframe. Because that would mean 5-10 times >>     as much revenue ! > P > There is a big problems with this.  In order to grow VMS, Compaq would have toN > expland its market and market the darned product, and that would cannabaliseH > Microsoft sales and make Microsoft unhappy, thus jeoperdising Compaq's > position in the PC market.  4 But VMS sales are much more profitable (for Compaq).   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:10:46 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)g- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoftt3 Message-ID: <I6B4h48MeWcV@eisner.encompasserve.org>M  f In article <3B3ABBA2.4BD20CD@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>, Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> writes: > Main, Kerry wrote: >>   >> Jack, >> rJ >> >>> If NT 2004 is as dependable as VMS V5.x then VMS will shrink to the+ >> customer base size of IBM mainframes <<<o >> e >> Something to consider - >> tJ >> The above statement assumes that Customer availability, scalability andK >> security requirements in 2004 will be the same as today. Given that most N >> Customers have less than 5-10% of their business on the Internet today, butN >> are expected to have about 60+% of their business in 2004, do you not thinkK >> that matching tomorrows requirements with todays technologies is a riskyt >> approach? > K >   If Sun is good enough for Ebay and it's 100% on the Internet, then it'soM > probably good enough for the rest of the companies who use the Compaq model ; > of "It might be crap, but everyone else is using it too."o  A eBay is in the enviable position of not having viable competitionCA and easily being able to make amends for outages by extending thea
 deadlines.  / Stock brokerages are in the opposite situation..  0 For that matter, so is the health care industry.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:17:16 -0500e+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>o- Subject: RE: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft-L Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0D9D2007@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----* > From: Tom Linden [mailto:tom@kednos.com]  G > They should be so lucky.  You underestimate the size of the mainframef > market.  Maybe compaq = > could license Microsoft's DLL's, at least the ones without n > memory leaks.   J I'm completely skeptical that there could ever be more than one, and there) certainly won't be one for a long time.  e   Regards,   Chriss  ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developerc Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");a '   a   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 07:27:59 -0700 * From: "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com>- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft 4 Message-ID: <ZbH_6.4538$Ib.481363@news1.primary.net>  ? "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messagedF news:rdeininger-2706012340590001@user-2ivecak.dialup.mindspring.com...E > In article <amr_6.4512$Ib.479694@news1.primary.net>, "Jack Peacock"rG > > Gee, I wonder if that's why your VMS sales are in decline.  What do  you H > sell?  Maybe I've been needing a copy all these years, and didn't know > about it.  > G Casino accounting systems (US and Mexico), time and attendance systems,  or Anything For A Buck..   Jack Peacock   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 10:34:25 -0400/ From: jordan@lisa.gemair.com (Jordan Henderson)A- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoftn* Message-ID: <9hff9h$lhh$1@lisa.gemair.com>  4 In article <ZbH_6.4538$Ib.481363@news1.primary.net>,) Jack Peacock <peacock@simconv.com> wrote:u@ >"Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messageG >news:rdeininger-2706012340590001@user-2ivecak.dialup.mindspring.com...cF >> In article <amr_6.4512$Ib.479694@news1.primary.net>, "Jack Peacock"H >> > Gee, I wonder if that's why your VMS sales are in decline.  What do >youI >> sell?  Maybe I've been needing a copy all these years, and didn't knowg >> about it. >>H >Casino accounting systems (US and Mexico), time and attendance systems, >or Anything For A Buck.  C Hey, I've been needing a lot for Anything for some time now!  Wheref
 you been??   >  Jack Peacocko >e   -Jordan Hendersond jordan@greenapple.comu   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 07:48:14 -0700-* From: "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com>- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsofte4 Message-ID: <YuH_6.4542$Ib.481484@news1.primary.net>  7 "Arne Vajhj" <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote in messagel# news:3B3B18AF.1B6CAD9C@gtech.com...c> > I am not dreaming. I am just arguing that the "then VMS willA > shrink to the customer base size of IBM mainframes" in the postzA > I quoted is not a paricular black picture. I am not saying thati? > it can happend or that Compaq wants it to happend - just thatpE > what apperently was intended to be a black picture was in fact not.  >hG I think the Compaq VMS strategy is in line with IBM mainframes, a small E number of large wealthy customers.  I'm sure if it works it will makerE them a tidy profit and will function as a cushion against unstable PC H sales.  Problem is, that doesn't leave room for smaller software vendorsH to supply apps.  There just aren't enough customers to sell to, and whatE opportunities do exist are characterized by extremely long sales leadv5 times and a whole lot of corporate politics mixed in.e  E We dabbled in that market but found it not worth the effort.  When we H did get the odd customer it was very profitable, but the toll of dealingF with corporate drones left everyone demoralized and disgusted.  CompaqG has the PHBs (pointy-haired bosses, a reference to a US comic strip) to < deal with that, but as a small company we aren't interested.  E At one time VMS was a good fit for the larger small business, someonetC that needed a bigger machine than a PC but didn't want the IT staff B overhead.  Aside from custom applications that's our service nicheE market.  VMS made a lot of support money for us, but customer demandseB have changed.  That's not in Compaq's marketing strategy any more.H Unfortunate, but we have to live with it and look elsewhere.  Looking atA options today, right now, NT is the way to go.  Granted technicaldG reasons are weak, but in spite of technical shortcomings MS targets therE right market, the one we want to be in.  Compaq does not.  So we willxA work our VMS accounts for as long as possible while developing MSs- replacements for them.  Just like Compaq.  :)d    Jack Peacockt   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:48:16 +0100t% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>l- Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Microsoft*8 Message-ID: <qlgmjtcvq6616ividnntjikti2oqnp5mp3@4ax.com>  / On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:22:17 +0200, Arne Vajhja <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote:    >s >e; >1)  I see no indications of Windows getting more reliable. ? >    3.5->4.0->2000 has added a ton of features, but to my besta$ >    knowledge not more reliability.  D If you are using W2K as a better NT it definitely crashes less oftenA than NT 4.  Security and newer server features are another matterm though.s   >l; >2)  I think Compaq would be extremely happy, if VMS did ash> >    well as IBM mainframe. Because that would mean 5-10 times >    as much revenue ! >i >Arnes   -- Alan   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:06:24 +0000 (UTC)n' From: Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.jyu.fi> % Subject: Re: Hobbyist OpenVMS on IA64t, Message-ID: <9hevj0$a5t$1@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>  * Nikita V. Belenki <public@kits.net> wrote:3 > But will OpenVMS IA64 work on commodity hardware? @ Why not?  Like OpenVMS Alpha does now.                       /OK   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:45:57 +0000s1 From: bengtl.net@telia.nospam.com (Bengt Larsson)w  Subject: Re: IA64 Rocks My World1 Message-ID: <3b3b4181.30126558@enews.newsguy.com>l  B In comp.arch, Eric Smith <eric-no-spam-for-me@brouhaha.com> wrote:  Q >Casper.Dik@Holland.Sun.Com (Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engineer) writes:eA >> Engineers shouldn't blame everything on marketing; Digital hase; >> made serious mistakes when it came to building hardware.t > 	 >Such as?     - Not building large enough SMPs3 - Not focusing on memory performance (esp. latency),? - Aversion to obsoleting their own systems (esp. the 8200/8400)    ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:22:23 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)-2 Subject: IPF VMS for Hobbyists as a marketing tool3 Message-ID: <1hH3OmpoSNsX@eisner.encompasserve.org>j  ` In article <711mjtorbdiuem3f3ijcoos0f03j4g1q4a@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:. > On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:08:23 -0400, JF Mezei' > <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:b >  >  >>O >>Compaq will quietly pull out of VMS over a long period of time and attract as % >>little attention to it as possible.m > F > What if there are 1 million plus IA64 systems with a DECUS hobby VMS( > license on them four years from today?  D I think Alan has hit upon the key.  The VMS hobbyist program is goodB as far as it goes, but it starts with acquiring a used machine for% most people, and that is some effort.i  E If IA64 machines are plentiful due to Windows or Linux, there will ber' an opportunity for hobbyists to try it.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:51:24 -0500s* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>6 Subject: RE: IPF VMS for Hobbyists as a marketing tool- Message-ID: <0033000027811611000002L012*@MHS>   2 =0AYeah, but Fred K. is gonna have to morph one of) those "create your own virus" kits into ao5 "create your own VMS driver for video card X" kit....v   WWWebb   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET ' > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:37 AMtF > To: Webb, William W - Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET4 > Subject: IPF VMS for Hobbyists as a marketing tool >v >oE > In article <711mjtorbdiuem3f3ijcoos0f03j4g1q4a@4ax.com>, Alan Greiga= > <a.greig@virgin.net> writes: > On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:08:23d > -0400, JF Mezeii) > > <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:d > >p > >  > >>= > >>Compaq will quietly pull out of VMS over a long period ofw > time and attract ase' > >>little attention to it as possible.e > >bH > > What if there are 1 million plus IA64 systems with a DECUS hobby VM= S * > > license on them four years from today? >nF > I think Alan has hit upon the key.  The VMS hobbyist program is goodD > as far as it goes, but it starts with acquiring a used machine for' > most people, and that is some effort.  >pH > If IA64 machines are plentiful due to Windows or Linux, there will be=  ) > an opportunity for hobbyists to try it.a >=   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:51:01 +0100a% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>e6 Subject: Re: IPF VMS for Hobbyists as a marketing tool8 Message-ID: <4fkmjtcpm3j8auoh7scn4dmefd5q0i9gbu@4ax.com>  0 On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:51:24 -0500, WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov> wrote:   >R0 >Yeah, but Fred K. is gonna have to morph one of* >those "create your own virus" kits into a6 >"create your own VMS driver for video card X" kit....  E Initially you support the basic modes which any card supports and youuA support a small number of specific cards with full functionality.t     -- Alan   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:27:16 GMTp2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)9 Subject: Re: IPF? (was Re: An Engineer's Perspective ...)u1 Message-ID: <UNJ_6.253$rc5.6938@news.cpqcorp.net>t  Y In article <1010628034125.61768A-100000@Ives.egh.com>, John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> writes:r ../ :Could you please tell us what it [IPF] means? i :...  ?   IPF is "Itanium Processor Family".  Intel terminology, AFAIK.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, 28 Jun 2001 14:09:34 +0200g= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>- Subject: Re: Itanium HW REF MAN:) Message-ID: <3B3B1E7E.874B53BB@gtech.com>t   Neil Rieck wrote: L > AFAIC, x86 emulation for Alpha might be the better way to go (smaller die,/ > lower power, lower cooling requirements, etc)    Technically.  A The business and management people apperently saw it differently.m   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:35:07 +0930 : From: "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" <Chris.Barratt@fmc.sa.gov.au>. Subject: RE: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mailN Message-ID: <07103702F27FD411ACA30000F808545257C72F@sagemshs001.fmc.sa.gov.au>   I heartily agree....  J The technical information on this group/list server is very useful (as areI the news of new releases etc), but the rest, while sometimes interesting,nJ gets to be very wearisome and tends to be the same points of view repeatedJ over and over again. I would prefer to see a separate group for people who/ have the time and necessity to let off steam...t   Chris Barratt.   > -----Original Message-----; > From: Michael D. Ober [mailto:mdo.@.wakeassoc.com.nospam]s# > Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2001 2:49  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comc0 > Subject: Re: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail >  > F > Actually, the question of having two NGs is valid.  One would be for8 > technical issues and the other for General issues.  I  > frequently find this> > NG gets overloaded with non-tech stuff, making it difficult 
 > to use as a: > technical group. > -- > Mike Ober. > H > "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam> wrote in message/ > news:opIzcsOup6rJ@eisner.encompasserve.org...oH > > In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIIENGCNAA.tom@kednos.com>, Tom Linden > <tom@kednos.com> writes: > > > > > > This has consumed altogether too much bandwidth, i wish  > we had 2 lists,T > oner& > > > for serious stuff and one for BS > >cE > > But that is not an issue for comp.os.vms, only for those who haveIE > > chosen to receive it via email.  I would suggest switching to usei" > > a regular newsgroup interface. >  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 06:43:30 GMTo+ From: "Darren Peacock" <daz005@hotmail.com> . Subject: Re: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail@ Message-ID: <mmA_6.165901$ff.1278735@news-server.bigpond.net.au>    Absolutely agree on both points.  J Everybody is going to be doing the same conversion , HP announced eOL, SunI is holding out but will announce shortly. Big Blue will go with the pack.e  H So EVERYbody will be doing ports, i would rather my team taking the high2 ground and working with the guy who owns the ball.  H The Application code we use on VMS today will work onVMS tommorow, shesh- what is the big deal. Change is a good thing.t  J The Profit line on VMS is extremely good, repeat the profit line on Vms is good.i  ? Look at the new TCP for VMS it was just a recompile from Tru64.   J I would rather have the Compaq management Team lead than have the lemmings we had in the short past.    Get over IT!    . "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message3 news:CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIIENGCNAA.tom@kednos.com...tK > Almost the only people effected are us poor compiler writers, the rest of  > you won't seeoH > anything, thanks to us.  Who cares what the underlying processor is as long > as it works well, J > and I have to believe that it will.  Don't cry for the loss of alpha, itL > wasn't that great anyway, but then none of you knew that anyway, thanks to > the compilers. >e@ > So what if you have to recompile your applications.  Big deal. >-I > This has consumed altogether too much bandwidth, i wish we had 2 lists,e onen
 > for seriouss > stuff and one for BS >j   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:43:33 -0400r- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>1. Subject: Re: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail, Message-ID: <3B3AE023.7BA83503@videotron.ca>   Darren Peacock wrote: L > Everybody is going to be doing the same conversion , HP announced eOL, SunK > is holding out but will announce shortly. Big Blue will go with the pack.m  M But in the other cases, the OS that are being ported have the full support ofdJ their owners who are not affraid to market it. And in the other cases, theF port was begun a long time ago while the previous chip was still being= developped and the first iteration of IA64 supports their OS.q  N In the case of VMS, Compaq has announced this at the last minute, warns it mayE take 4 years to get done with the possibility that IA64 might require J additions to support VMS, has broken a commitment to the Alpha platform itG contined to make until just now (thus killing Compaq's credibility withe. regards to the other commitments it has made).  N In the case of HP, since they participated in the design of IA64 and have been@ nvolved for a long time, the EOL of its old chip is no surprise.    E Serious customers do not like the type of surprises Compaq just made.mM Serious customers who have invested millions in a platform do not like Compaq4 to break its commitments.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 19:35:47 +0010e% From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.auo. Subject: Re: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail5 Message-ID: <01K5B8HOXOWI0021JY@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>i  * To the suggestion of having two newgroups.   NO!!!!!!  , I receive stuff from VMS mail from Info-VAX.  N I can pick subjects that I do not want, etc. and just delete the whole damned 2 lot, much as newsgroup readers can choose threads.  K We (mail-list people) are serviced very well by Mark on his Info-VAX and I i: would hate to lose it.  Would Mark want to set up two?  A + comp.os.vms.technical and a comp.os.vms.ot.   K No, I'm happy with the way things are, some read via newsgroup access, and h: some of us have no other access other than by mailservers.  H With regards to Larry K's comment on some other thread -- get newsgroup K access.  Well, I cannot, company will not allow.  I read comp.lang.fortran 8G and sci.math.num-analysis now via mailgate.  No backward access (i.e.,  M ability to reply), but that's all I'm allowed.  And in our organisation, I'm  . one of the privileged handful in this respect.   Regards, Paddy   Paddy O'Brien, Transmission Development,'
 TransGrid, PO Box A1000, Sydney South,  NSW 2000, Australiae   Tel:   +61 2 9284-3063 Fax:   +61 2 9284-3050& Email: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au  M Either "\'" or "\s" (to escape the apostrophe) seems to work for most people,o; but that little whizz-bang apostrophe gives me little spam.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:33:26 +0100-8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>. Subject: RE: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mailN Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE2@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  L >No, I'm happy with the way things are, some read via newsgroup access, and ; >some of us have no other access other than by mailservers.r  J I too am happy with the list as it is. Two lists would be confusing anywayJ and there would often be the problem of which list to use. It's trivial toI delete mail which you want to ignore and just as easy to ignore newsgroup' threads.  I I often find that there are snippets of useful technical information evene among the rantings.n  F Receiving postings via mail enables one to read (scan first page ) andI ignore ( delete ) unwanted postings in one operation allowing one to findA those snippets.l  K There's an extra benefit of receiving postings via mail. The volume is muchnJ lower with mail as those postings not providing a reply address in a validD format do not get transmitted. Some of the ranters may be talking to themselves ...   John    B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukH Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)y   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 11:55:28 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)a. Subject: RE: Itanium, non-issue, stop the mail3 Message-ID: <PBPi80ZtaRQZ@eisner.encompasserve.org>r   In article <07103702F27FD411ACA30000F808545257C72F@sagemshs001.fmc.sa.gov.au>, "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" <Chris.Barratt@fmc.sa.gov.au> writes:- > I heartily agree.... > L > The technical information on this group/list server is very useful (as areK > the news of new releases etc), but the rest, while sometimes interesting,.L > gets to be very wearisome and tends to be the same points of view repeatedL > over and over again. I would prefer to see a separate group for people who1 > have the time and necessity to let off steam...i  C Although you might want that, I believe it could never be enforced. C Even DECUServe has had announcement politics issues introduced into & the DECUServe Organization conference.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:55:05 +0100 8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>
 Subject: iVMSaN Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE3@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  F I found a mention of iVMS at the following URL and have extracted someJ detail below. I wonder if this iVMS will prevent Compaq calling the portedH VMS "iVMS" as it's also being used in a computing context unlike VAX the$ computer and VAX the vacuum cleaner. John2 ==================================================  3 http://www.ttz-sh.de/cebit2000/halle6/plato_uk.htmlr  
 PLATO GmbH- iVMS: industrial ImprovementManagement SystemyG iVMS is a workflow driven system for optimizing error related costs and A improving products and processes by utilizing existing knowledge.sK iVMS was developed in cooperation with several project partners, to achievea7 a most flexible tool with a broad field of application.tB Features include acquisition, analysis and definition of measures.G Configurable sensors allow for automated success control and reporting.a* Clients access iVMS through a Web Browser.    B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukH Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)n   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 12:07:06 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)  Subject: Re: iVMS 3 Message-ID: <IT+qm94M7FVp@eisner.encompasserve.org>l   In article <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE3@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>, John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> writes:-H > I found a mention of iVMS at the following URL and have extracted someL > detail below. I wonder if this iVMS will prevent Compaq calling the portedJ > VMS "iVMS" as it's also being used in a computing context unlike VAX the& > computer and VAX the vacuum cleaner.  D Has there been the slightest hint that anyone at Compaq would _want_ to use the name "iVMS" ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:47:14 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>u Subject: Re: iVMSr' Message-ID: <3B3B5F92.F9A76637@fsi.net>n   Larry Kilgallen wrote: >  > In article <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE3@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>, John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> writes:eJ > > I found a mention of iVMS at the following URL and have extracted someN > > detail below. I wonder if this iVMS will prevent Compaq calling the portedL > > VMS "iVMS" as it's also being used in a computing context unlike VAX the( > > computer and VAX the vacuum cleaner. > F > Has there been the slightest hint that anyone at Compaq would _want_ > to use the name "iVMS" ?  E iPAQ is not sufficient precedent? (...as opposed to aPAQ, if an Alpha/! product could be made that small)-   -- e David J. Dachtera1 dba DJE Systemsr http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/s  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, 28 Jun 2001 14:02:52 -0300l) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.brp Subject: Re: iVMStL Message-ID: <OF134BE036.AAE37BB8-ON03256A79.005C93E3@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>   I forgot  a name:-  ' VMS ===>  TruIQ  (Intel / CompaQ) ! ! !   ) But in portuguese it sounds like  "trick"y Forget ....    RegardsF   FC          B "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> em 28/06/2001 13:47:14  = Favor responder a "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>m             Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comw       Assunto: Re: iVMS2     Larry Kilgallen wrote: >  > In articleH <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BEFE3@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>, John5 Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> writes:aJ > > I found a mention of iVMS at the following URL and have extracted someG > > detail below. I wonder if this iVMS will prevent Compaq calling the  portedH > > VMS "iVMS" as it's also being used in a computing context unlike VAX the,( > > computer and VAX the vacuum cleaner. >fF > Has there been the slightest hint that anyone at Compaq would _want_ > to use the name "iVMS" ?  E iPAQ is not sufficient precedent? (...as opposed to aPAQ, if an Alpha-! product could be made that small)    -- David J. Dachtera  dba DJE SystemsB http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/1  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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:16:59 +0100;, From: Ted Allwood <support@leva.leeds.ac.uk>' Subject: LCD Screen on VMS Workstation?l3 Message-ID: <009FE376.389F2825.10@leva.leeds.ac.uk>g  = Is anyone using an LCD flat panel monitor in conjunction witheC a VMS workstation?  I'd appreciate any information on makes/models dC of monitor that are compatible, plus setup hints (nowt in the FAQ).t  @ Specifically, I have an Alpha 255/233 with ZLXP-L1 graphics cardA running VMS 6.2-1H3 and Open3D 3.6.  A conventional monitor takes  up too much space.       Regards, Ted    --  K Support@leva.leeds.ac.uk                                Tel:  0113 233 2167e+ www.mech-eng.leeds.ac.uk/support/index.htmlrG School of Mechanical Engineering,  University of Leeds,  Leeds  LS2 9JTl   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 16:11:25 GMT3 From: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de (Christoph Gartmann)u+ Subject: Re: LCD Screen on VMS Workstation?-0 Message-ID: <9hfkvd$1ev$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>  b In article <009FE376.389F2825.10@leva.leeds.ac.uk>, Ted Allwood <support@leva.leeds.ac.uk> writes:> >Is anyone using an LCD flat panel monitor in conjunction withD >a VMS workstation?  I'd appreciate any information on makes/models D >of monitor that are compatible, plus setup hints (nowt in the FAQ). > A >Specifically, I have an Alpha 255/233 with ZLXP-L1 graphics cardrB >running VMS 6.2-1H3 and Open3D 3.6.  A conventional monitor takes >up too much space.  o  N I have an Eizzo L66 where I am typing this right now connected to an Alpha 255H and various other VMS workstations. No problem at all. LCDs have a fixedO resolution, therefore your graphics card should support this resolution, that'sF all.   Regards,    Christoph Gartmannu  H -- --------------------------------------------------------------------+H | Max-Planck-Institut fuer      Phone   : +49-761-5108-464   Fax: -452 |H | Immunbiologie                                                        |H | Postfach 1169                 Internet: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de     |H | D-79011  Freiburg, FRG                                               |H +--------- http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/english/menue.html ---------+   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 07:53:53 GMT3 From: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de (Christoph Gartmann)  Subject: Re: little help please-0 Message-ID: <9henqh$j2j$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>  d In article <kTr_6.2005$z11.158366@news.infostrada.it>, "wright" <wright.patterson@libero.it> writes: >from the following lines: >1M >----------------------------------------------------------------------------a >--- >$ Set NoOnr0 >$ VERIFY = F$VERIFY(F$TRNLNM("SYLOGIN_VERIFY")) >g0 >accept: non-translatable vms error code: 0x2A14- >%system-f-exbytlm, exceeded byte count quotae >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^- [...]-  : >what does it mean " exbytlm, exceeded byte count quota" ?  L Exactly what it tells. A look into the "OpenVMS System Messages and Recovery* Procedures Reference Manual: A-L" reveals:  # "EXBYTLM, exceeded byte count quotam! Facility: SYSTEM, System Services.H Explanation: The requested operation failed because the byte count quotaJ of the process is not large enough. This can occur if excessive concurrentO buffered I/O is outstanding, if a large number of mailboxes is created, or if a E large number of windows needs to be created to completely map a file.wF Failure on window creation can occur on a $CRMPSC system service call,I the DCL command RUN, or an Access or Create of a file. In this case, thissN message indicates that the specified file is very fragmented or the byte limit) quota of the process should be increased.oJ Failure can also occur on a disk read or write operation indicating that a prior E extend operation on the file has caused it to become very fragmented.qH User Action: Compress the file by copying the volume with BACKUP, or ask2 the system manager to increase the BYTELIM quota."   Regards,    Christoph Gartmann   H -- --------------------------------------------------------------------+H | Max-Planck-Institut fuer      Phone   : +49-761-5108-464   Fax: -452 |H | Immunbiologie                                                        |H | Postfach 1169                 Internet: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de     |H | D-79011  Freiburg, FRG                                               |H +--------- http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/english/menue.html ---------+   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:50:16 +0100e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>- Subject: Re: little help please18 Message-ID: <iugmjt4ubobvkars86kdl914u58616v9oe@4ax.com>  * On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 21:04:16 GMT, "wright"# <wright.patterson@libero.it> wrote:7   >frw >e: >what does it mean " exbytlm, exceeded byte count quota" ?  > Go into AUTHORIZE and check the BYTLM quota for the account in" question. Double it and try again.  # >Thank You very much for your help.h >a >Marco SalaE >o >w >  >d >g >r   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:54:43 +0100e4 From: "Chris Sharman" <chris.sharman@ccagroup.co.uk>. Subject: lsedit or whatever xwindow on my pc ?@ Message-ID: <993722070.1981.0.nnrp-08.9e989e7e@news.demon.co.uk>  I For my sins (apparently multitudinous) I have a new desktop, owing to theM@ need to read/write Office compatible documents & browse the web.  J What's the best (cheap/free) way to run an xwindow on my PC, running, say, lsedit, or perfmeter.T  9 Or would there be a better place to ask these questions ?N  J Of course, it may all be immaterial - I was planning to place an order for  new Alpha/VMS boxes next week :(   Thanks,o
 Chris Sharmant   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:31:35 -0400 - From: Michael Austin <miaustin@bellsouth.net>t Subject: More Fortran issues.s, Message-ID: <3B3B4DD7.7347FA7@bellsouth.net>   How do I correct this?  F It appears that this math library has a problem with the new version..& is there a new math library available? (original code ported from PDP)o: (result of search in a "stubs.for" library of suborutines)%         INCLUDE '($SYSSRVNAM)/NOLIST'-"         INCLUDE '($SSDEF) /NOLIST'"         INCLUDE '($IODEF) /NOLIST'"         INCLUDE '($TRMDEF)/NOLIST'"         INCLUDE '($TT2DEF)/NOLIST'!         INCLUDE '($TTDEF)/NOLIST'3!         INCLUDE '($DCDEF)/NOLIST'r#         INCLUDE '($RMSDEF) /NOLIST'i5         INCLUDE 'FLACS_INCLUDE:FLACSDEFS.INC /NOLIST'S#         INCLUDE '($RMSDEF) /NOLIST'e         INCLUDE '($fabdef)'t         INCLUDE '($rabdef)'h         INCLUDE '($RMSDEF)'n         INCLUDE '($SYSSRVNAM)'         INCLUDE '($IODEF)'         INCLUDE '($fabdef)'          INCLUDE '($rabdef)'s         INCLUDE '($RMSDEF)'t         INCLUDE '($SYSSRVNAM)'         INCLUDE '($fabdef)'e         INCLUDE '($rabdef)'          INCLUDE '($RMSDEF)'o         INCLUDE '($SYSSRVNAM)'"         INCLUDE '($SSDEF) /NOLIST'& >>>        INCLUDE '($FORDEF) /NOLIST'& >>>        INCLUDE '($MTHDEF) /NOLIST'&         INCLUDE '($SYSSRVNAM) /NOLIST'  G $ fortran/noi4/nooptimize/warn/align=common=natural/list=[.list]/nowarne	 stubs.fort  .         PARAMETER MTH$_SQUROONEG = '001682A4'X$ ...................................^> %F90-E-ERROR, This is an illegal octal, hexadecimal, or binary character; or, thtB e value of the constant is too large or too small.   ['001682A4'X]3 at line number 74 in module $MTHDEF of text library  SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]FORSYSDEF .TLB;1  .         PARAMETER MTH$_INVARGMAT = '0016828C'X$ ...................................^> %F90-E-ERROR, This is an illegal octal, hexadecimal, or binary character; or, thjB e value of the constant is too large or too small.   ['0016828C'X]3 at line number 71 in module $MTHDEF of text libraryf SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]FORSYSDEF .TLB;1( $ dir SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]FORSYSDEF*/date   Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]d  7 FORSYSDEF.TLB;1                  1-DEC-2000 10:08:23.68c  &                 image name: "F90$MAIN"<                 image file identification: "FORT V7.4A-1588"B                 image file build identification: "PCSI-0070411584"7                 link date/time: 30-APR-2001 14:04:14.86 /                 linker identification: "A12-01"d   Michael Austin 704-947-1089   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:13:38 -0400 , From: Steve Lionel <Steve.Lionel@compaq.com>! Subject: Re: More Fortran issues.,8 Message-ID: <ouomjts5jjkbee353tpicfb6rsqcae3836@4ax.com>  2 On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:31:35 -0400, Michael Austin <miaustin@bellsouth.net> wrote:,   >How do I correct this?. >nG >It appears that this math library has a problem with the new version..c' >is there a new math library available?r  >(original code ported from PDP); >(result of search in a "stubs.for" library of suborutines):  ' >>>>        INCLUDE '($FORDEF) /NOLIST' ' >>>>        INCLUDE '($MTHDEF) /NOLIST' ' >        INCLUDE '($SYSSRVNAM) /NOLIST'o >)H >$ fortran/noi4/nooptimize/warn/align=common=natural/list=[.list]/nowarn
 >stubs.for >p/ >        PARAMETER MTH$_SQUROONEG = '001682A4'Xh% >...................................^o? >%F90-E-ERROR, This is an illegal octal, hexadecimal, or binarya >character; or, thC >e value of the constant is too large or too small.   ['001682A4'X]t4 >at line number 74 in module $MTHDEF of text library >SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]FORSYSDEFu >.TLB;1   C This has nothing to do with the math library, but I can't reproduce F the problem with Fortran 7.4A, which you say you are using.  Would youA please send me a sample source file that demonstrates the problemrE (your excerpt seems to be pieces of multiple routines) and the outputr& of FORTRAN/VERSION?  I'll take a look.  E At first glance, I thought that the /noi4 was causing the value to bea? treated as an INTEGER*2, but that shouldn't happen to "typeless < constants" and I can't reproduce the error with an example I constructed.    - Steve Lionel (mailto:Steve.Lionel@compaq.com)t Fortran Engineeringn* High-Performance Technical Computing Group& Compaq Computer Corporation, Nashua NH  6 Compaq Fortran web site: http://www.compaq.com/fortran   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:13:35 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-).2 Subject: Re: One more dreadful thought to consider0 Message-ID: <009FE332.B14A4D55@SendSpamHere.ORG>  a In article <9hebaa$k3u@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog) writes:5H >A horrible trend popped into my mind this evening.  Here it is for your
 >unenjoyment:i > B >1.  Rather than compete with Oracle in databases, sell RDB to it.O >2.  Rather than compete with Quantum in storage, sell the disk business to it.sB >3.  Rather than compete with Intel in CPUs, sell the Alpha to it. >- >and the sickening conclusion: > @ >4.  Rather than compete with Microsoft in OS's, sell VMS to it.  E I'm outta there then!  Even if M$ would keep it alive and nurture it.rD It's that foul taste that anything M$ leaves on my palate.  There isE pandemonium in the top brass at the Q and it wouldn't surprise me onetF bit if your prognostication was right on the target.  I can only hope > and pray that David "Nostradamus" Mathog's vision is occluded.   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COME            iO city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.:   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:18:37 +0000 (UTC)i, From: Pawel Krawczyk <anti_kravietz@ceti.pl>! Subject: Re: OpenVMS on MicroVAX?u, Message-ID: <9hespd$1fk$1@druid.ceti.com.pl>  . JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:  M >> Hello, I've just got a MicroVAX 3600 with VMS 5.x. The machine is equipped G >> with Ethernet adapter, two disks of 600 MB each and a tape drive. Isc5 >> this hardware enough to install hobbyist OpenVMS? =P > Yes it is enough. You didn't mention how much memory you have though, but I amO > able to run 2 machines each with 16 mb of ram (but large page files). One hastO > TCPIP services and DECwindows running, and the other has ALLIN1 and plenty oft > my own software running.  F Thanks to all of you for detailed replies. I guess this machine has 32H MB of RAM, but I'll check all its parameters when I get back to my placeJ this weekend. I think the easiest way will be to do the upgrade from tape,H I only wonder how to write the tape in proper format. If my PC SCSI tapeE drive will be able to handle the DEC tapes, then I probably can writelF the image under Linux, but I'd probably need some knowledge on format, filenames etc.   -- ,4 Pawe Krawczyk *** home: <http://ceti.pl/~kravietz/>3 security: <http://ipsec.pl/>  *** fidonet: 2:486/23    ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 04:58:22 -0700' From: Doran167w@aol.com (Doran Werling) ! Subject: Re: OpenVMS on MicroVAX?e= Message-ID: <6038ddea.0106280358.68bd6773@posting.google.com>2  p steven.reece@quintiles.com wrote in message news:<OF84EC6C5A.ADF823E7-ON80256A78.005270AC@qedi.quintiles.com>...	 > Untrue.tM > There was, IIRC, a Q-bus variant of the RRD40 CD drive, although the drivesM3 > themselves were pretty slow by present standards."M > There are third party SCSI adapters for Q-bus, just as there is Compaq (neeVL > Digital's) KZQSA which will support SCSI CD-ROMs and SCSI tapes (but would- > not be supported for SCSI disk operations).-I > Then there's the potential for hooking a drive up to the backplane of am' > BA350 with an HSD05 in the top of it.n > I > There may not be a cheap option for connecting a SCSI CD-ROM to a Q-busg5 > system like the MicroVAX 3600, but there are option0  D Your right about the SCSI adapter, in a past life one of the systemsF that I managed was a 4300 Microvax that was connected to a NKK opticalF juke box as part of a engineering drawing system. One other method forE remotely accessing a CD-ROM that was not mentioned in this thread was ' to use SLS (Storage Library Subsystem).V/ This is how I serve CD's with my current setup.   
 Doran Werlinge RW/SCS Inc.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:24:30 GMT . From: "Duane Sand" <duane.sand@mindspring.com>2 Subject: Porting VMS (was Itanium, non-issue, ...)@ Message-ID: <2TI_6.137820$%i7.92199956@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>   "JF Mezei" wroteL > But in the other cases, the OS that are being ported have the full support ofK > their owners who are not afraid to market it. And in the other cases, thesH > port was begun a long time ago while the previous chip was still being> > developed and the first iteration of IA64 supports their OS.  C We are still developing the previous chip, EV7, through its planned- variations.   F This timing's a good thing.  The first iteration "Merced" was too slowH to market anyhow, turning it into merely a prototyping vehicle.  SGI ranG onto rocks switching to it prematurely.  HP had to re-start its PA-RISC > designs.  The follow ons and roadmap are much better now.  The/ timing for this change could not be any better.   B We'll begin selling our OS's on IA64 exactly when IA64 performanceA surpasses others (including Alpha) and when volume rises and when ? Intel's marketing machine goes into hyperdrive, helping us too.rE If Intel roadmap schedule slips, we can still ship using a prior pin-0< compatible IA64 cartridge, and continue selling tweaked EV7s? (and maybe even Mips).  Investing in EV8 as an insurance policyt: would be very expensive, and it would still be a dead end.   >oC > In the case of VMS, Compaq has announced this at the last minute,i  C A 2-year notice to customers ain't last minute;  more isn't useful.   @ A 2-year notice to internal engineering teams ain't last minute.B Ending future Alpha chip design after ten years of unprofitability? and 5 years of controversy is abrubt and a shock but definitelyQ not last minute.  ' > warns it may take 4 years to get donei  7 No, the announcement said 2003 for VMS; that's 2 years. ? The 2004 laggards are us over in Himalaya land, but that's very/> preliminary, and it's because we always need custom glue chips; and additional core chip testing for the lockstep overhead.e8 Has no effect on when VMS and Tru64 can ship on standard high-volume server boards.  H > with the possibility that IA64 might require additions to support VMS,  A I believe no announcement said that; that's a presumption created0B in this newsgroup. The original Alpha architects tacked onto their> generic RISC design only three small features to support VMS &
 its users:< 1. hardwired support for VAX floating point format (which by& now could be done totally in software)* 2. PAL code level (also available in IA64)@ 3. One clever flipflop for turning multi-instruction simulations= of VAX load/modify/store ops into an atomic action.  (Readilyd# simulated or replaced on new ports)   < I don't know VMS at all, but have been involved in 3 (now 4)= porting efforts for NSK.  Seems likely that VMS can be ported @ onto any stock version of any little-endian processor capable of: also running Unixes, at some performance-compromise level.  < The announcement did say that the engineers invited to Intel6 may apply Digital/Alpha/Compaq inventions & experienceB to future IA64 products.  I think that will be in areas of circuit8 design, multiprocessor configs, compiler techniques, and: high-end workloads.  Porting support from the transplanted= GEM team will be critical.  But it seems exceedingly doubtful 9 that any of this will change visible IA64 instruction set : architecture in any way.  The OS ports can't and shouldn't depend on any changes.  5 The announcement was worded to suggest that Compaq inh5 particular would benefit somehow (not just in reducedi; headcount) by selling off its experienced chip designers to < Intel, and to vaguely suggest that Intel was hungry to apply9 tangible aspects of Alpha architecture.  I think that wase face-saving spin.    ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 03:05:29 -0700" From: daveparboo@hotmail.com (DXP)  Subject: Power consumption rates= Message-ID: <819f1cc4.0106280205.6a1e7fd9@posting.google.com>-  
 Greetings   D While we are waiting for our good friend OpenVMS to pull through (orA pop its clogs), I am trying to find the nominal and maximum power * usage for the following biits of (old) kit   Tape Drive   - TZ87t                TZ88p                TSZ07   Storage Cab  - SW300                SW800   Monitors     - VT320              - VRCX5   AlphaServer  - 2000m              - 2100               - 4000-  F Could someone please point me to an online refrerence? In addition, ifD someone has information regarding the "initial inrush current", this too would be muchu appreciated.   Many Thanksc     Dave Parboo1   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 21:32:30 -0700 5 From: "cstranslations" <cstranslations@email.msn.com>-? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry ShannonS) Message-ID: <ujEh3s4$AHA.263@cpmsnbbsa09>L  6 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> wrote in messageL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4A19466@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net... >^I > However, please do understand that there was a huge effort to make suretH > Customers, partners and ISV's got the news in a very quick manner. TheJ > morning of the announcement, Sales and Marketing folks were out visitingH > and/or setting up appointments with their Customers.  These visits are > continuing as we speak.e   That's great Kerry.o  L We're running two applications. One was developed in house. We've bought theJ source for the second. For over a year now the "be all and end all" that'sJ going to solve all our problems and replace the two existing apps has beenI in the works. It's going to pretty much mean a migration off OpenVMS. ForhH the longest time the plan was we were going to go the AIX route. Had theH Compaq people in about three months ago to address storage issues on the 4100.u  J Two interesting things happened. (1) 3 days after the two Compaq guys wereL here one of them got "rightsized." (2) The whole AIX thing just kind of wentG flat. We were going to go with the new app running on Tru64. A GS80 wasbL being considered. If not that then 2 ES40s. Upgrade the 4 300 Mhz CPU in theJ 4100. A SAN solution from Compaq. It was wonderful... Been waiting for theG funding to go through. If the financing had happened last Thursday they 6 probably would have been signing the papers on Friday.  D Monday was a kick in the teeth. This afternoon I was putting up withK comments over the cube wall from Bill's fan club along the lines of, "lotta9I money to spend on something that'll be in the Smithsonian in 3 years." At-G this point the VP is rethink the Compaq solution (and how good that AIX-K soultion look). At this point MikieC could come in with his clogs and dancen9 a little jig. I don't think it would do one iota of good.s  F It's great that Hoff is excited (he kinda lost form there and ended upJ getting a bit chastised). It great that Fred says his resume isn't "out onJ the street." Looks like exciting times in engineering. Maybe 10 years fromK now we'll all look back and wonder how we could have been so blinded at the J dawn of something so great. I dunno. I do know that at the moment out here in the "trenches" it's ugly.   Joe-   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:11:44 +0000 (UTC)r' From: Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.jyu.fi>>? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon3, Message-ID: <9hfaeg$mg8$1@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>  & Bill Todd <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote:  : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message ...oH > Not to mention the real possibility that the only way to keep AMD fromN > blowing Intel's doors off in that space will be to continue high-performance > IA32 development there.   " >> Something Alpha could never do.  L > One of the few good decisions DEC and Compaq made:  there was no reason toH > fight in that space with the existing, well-entrenched occupants givenI > ownership of a product with such a great command of a far-higher-marginb > space.  J Oh, yeah? That's the decision which killed Alpha line. Dinosaurs must die.! (Like so called super computers.)tH There were no occupants in the all-purpose space (from lowest to highest0 end). Alpha(+VMS) would have been good for that.   regardsm          Osmo Kujala   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:53:24 +0200/2 From: "Ren Schelbaum" <rene.schelbaum@datakom.at>? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon G Message-ID: <3b3b3664$0$33850$6e365a64@newsreader02.highway.telekom.at>   I .... And who guarantees that the nice statements of those Compaq-Salesmen L are not of the same reliability as the former commitment to W/NT on Alpha or? the nice Alpha-roadmaps i have seen on presentations recently ?)   Ren Schelbaum   Datakom Austria GesmbH  < "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> schrieb im NewsbeitragL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4A19466@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net... > Brad,L > H > >>> There were (to my knowledge) *no* efforts by COMPAQ's sales force, > marketers, or Engineers)H > to "prepare" their customers for this news - probably because it was a > surprise to everyone > involved.<<< > G > As you stated, there is obviously lots of justifiable emotion running  > through the NG right now.a >aI > However, please do understand that there was a huge effort to make sureTH > Customers, partners and ISV's got the news in a very quick manner. TheJ > morning of the announcement, Sales and Marketing folks were out visitingH > and/or setting up appointments with their Customers.  These visits are > continuing as we speak.E >f- > It is only a day since the announcement ...T >1B > In addition, there was the information available on the web site immediately.! > when the announcement was made.l >l3 > Was the info available on the web enough detail ?  >u > Nope.c >tK > Will more technical info likely be made available in the upcoming weeks /M
 > months ? >i > Yes. >$; > Was I surprised at the announcement? Sure - everyone was.R >DL > However, on reflection, my personal opinion, albeit vendor biased (so takeG > it for whatever its worth), is that Compaq has made a major statement  about  > future support for OpenVMS.O >VI > If Compaq did not view a good future for OpenVMS, would not the logical8 moveH > been to announce that Tru64 and NSK were being ported, but OpenVMS was > remaining on Alpha?1 >1L > A decision to port to another platform is a huge expense that is obviously8 > not taken lightly in these days of IT belt tightening. >iJ > So, imho, OpenVMS and its applications will be enhanced in the future as the3H > Eng's will have the chance to enhance / improve things that are issues todaynH > and it should be available on cheaper hardware IA64-2 (or whatever the Alphah. > enhanced IA64 platform is called) platforms. >sD > Since these OpenVMS Eng folks have a great deal of experience with porting,/ > I believe that the results will be very good.f >bI > I personally think the idea of OpenVMS strengths going up against Win64 L > offerings is great .. each OS gets to compete on scalability, availablity,J > performance on a similar HW platform. [No, I have no idea how similar or$ > identical these platforms will be] >0K > Course, everyone in a NG is entititled to their own opinions, so, on with  > the discussions. >m
 > Regards, >  > Kerry Main > Senior Consultant  > Compaq Canada Inc. > Professional Services4 > Voice: 613-592-46604 > Fax  :  819-772-7036 > Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com >S >E > -----Original Message-----F > From: hamilton@encompasserve.org [mailto:hamilton@encompasserve.org] > Sent: June 26, 2001 9:49 PMu > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComeA > Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon  >e >  > Hi Terry,i >sL > I understand that the last 36 hours has been very trying for all involved. > I > I don't think that there is anyone (c.o.v. posters, COMPAQ, even Intel)a	 > *wants*NK > to destroy VMS.  I *do* think that a lot of the "negativity" seen in thiso NG > arises1 > from the *way* in which the news was delivered.( >lD > There were (to my knowledge) *no* efforts by COMPAQ's sales force, > marketers, or EngineersoH > to "prepare" their customers for this news - probably because it was a > surprise to everyone > involved.- >-F > This surprise has generated a lot of the FUD that you think has been > generated by this NG.eJ > You have seen the word "shock" used here in many postings - human beings > tend to react.C > in previously-unknown patterns when a shock is delivered to them.e >,K > Many of us have to answer to our customers and managers who *immediately*p > had questionshI > upon hearing the news.  I am on "vacation" this week, but I had to feede some > quick information,L > to my colleagues at work who were caught by surprise by this announcement, > and who spent mostK > of their time on the phone to customers and management on Monday morning,t > trying toc > explain the "unexplainable". >mF > We had just been given a great presentation on Thursday, showing our > customers how they couldH > use VMS, from Web server front-end, to DB back-end, to tie up a lot of > "loose-end" applicationsF > on different platforms.  I was *very* pleased after that meeting - I thoughtc
 > that we had K > finally turned a corner in our multi-year battle to convince our cutomersv > (and managers) of the . > worthiness of VMS as an enterprise platform. >  > What do we tell them now???  > I > I will choose to interpret your one-liner at the bottom of this post as  > something arising fromH > extreme frustration and exhaustion, but please, don't let it appear as > though you feel the NGJ > is somehow responsible for the current situation!  It's alomst as if you > think that VMS customers > are at fault!m >@	 > Thanks,a > BradI > >> In article <Pine.SGI.4.21.0106251430450.16346-100000@world.std.com>,u1 > Terry C Shannon <shannon@world.std.com> writes:M > <snip>K > >> Having a background effort to port VMS to IA-64 to cover all the bases  > makes G > >> sense. Stopping development and selling Alpha to Intel doesn't. Itb sendsu > allhH > >> the wrong signals. Compaq have just created their own FUD which may well# > >> destroy VMS, TRU64 and Compaq.h > >L > >nL > > And this newsgroup is doing its damdest to ensure the destruction of the > > aforementioned.  > >n   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 10:24:19 -05003 From: malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg)i? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannone3 Message-ID: <J2v$ldVUgtob@eisner.encompasserve.org>l  ) In article <ujEh3s4$AHA.263@cpmsnbbsa09>,a; "cstranslations" <cstranslations@email.msn.company> writes:s <snip> >gF > Monday was a kick in the teeth. This afternoon I was putting up withM > comments over the cube wall from Bill's fan club along the lines of, "lotta-K > money to spend on something that'll be in the Smithsonian in 3 years." At7I > this point the VP is rethink the Compaq solution (and how good that AIX M > soultion look). At this point MikieC could come in with his clogs and dancem; > a little jig. I don't think it would do one iota of good.A  E History has shown that the resale value of any 3 year old computer asoM compared to it's purchase price is a steep change.  OpenVMS based systems ande, a handful of others tend to do a bit better.  J The closer a system is to commodity hardware and software, the faster it's used price will drop.s  F It used to be important to change out the CPU of a system and keep theH memory and the peripherals.  Now the economic lifespan of the memory and2 the disk technology can be shorter than the CPU's.  K If you need the speed of a new ALPHA system now, and the software currentlytL runs on ALPHA, then it makes economic sense to purchase the ALPHA system now9 instead of stopping everything to port to a new platform.w  I OpenVMS wil be there on the IPF family when the day comes that the Alphas G that will be sold over the next few years finaly run out of steam.  And-K based on what I have seen with the VAX family, that will probably be longeru than most other platforms.  H There is a great opportunity to attact new ISV's to the OpenVMS platformC here for all.  It is time to start thinking of some of what will be J practical now that the CPU will be the same as on other operating systems.  I There are a few things that I can think of, and I can get a head start on., implementing them on existing Alpha systems.    F I seem to have seen references about some large software company using0 the ALPHA chip to develope software for the IPF.  F Look at Intel's current roadmap for the x86 business for the timeframe that OpenVMS will be on IPF.  K Much of the future is always uncertain, but Intel and now Compaq are firmlyrK committed to having the IPF succeed.  And I personally feel that OpenVMS ist  a major part of that commitment.  F I have also bet my financial future on OpenVMS's success, and I am not* worried from the IPF porting announcement.   -Johny wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:52:52 GMTh4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon(: Message-ID: <8xH_6.765$Bp5.428699@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  = "Ren Schelbaum" <rene.schelbaum@datakom.at> wrote in messagerA news:3b3b3664$0$33850$6e365a64@newsreader02.highway.telekom.at...tK > .... And who guarantees that the nice statements of those Compaq-Salesmen.K > are not of the same reliability as the former commitment to W/NT on Alphao orA > the nice Alpha-roadmaps i have seen on presentations recently ?c  F Nobody but Compaq. Had Compaq better articulated the AlphaNT MarketingI Magnum Oopus (which may not have occurred if Compaq salesdroids supported K Alpha from Day One of the acquisition, AlphaNT went from 15 percent to lessiI than 2 percent of Alpha shipments during the first seven months after the H announcement of the buyout) they might not have as much of a credibility factor to deal with.  K And they may not realize the magnitude of the problem they have. This mighthI be a good opportunity to send 'em a message in www.compaqworkinggroup.org   I What would be useful is a detailed description of the VMS porting effort.nK NSK and Tru64 can pretty much be taken for granted since preliminary Mercedh3 ports of both OSes exist. VMS is a different story.   J Equally useful would be a detailed description of what components of AlphaL get embedded in IA-64, and when. As near as I can tell, the Alpha-betization= doesn't take place until two IA-64 interations past McKinley.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:01:30 -0500o1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> ? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannoni' Message-ID: <3B3B46CA.3E8B03B5@fsi.net>i   John Santos wrote: > / > On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, David J. Dachtera wrote:w > ! > > "Bradford J. Hamilton" wrote:t > > >e > > > Hi Terry,( > > > P > > > I understand that the last 36 hours has been very trying for all involved. > > > U > > > I don't think that there is anyone (c.o.v. posters, COMPAQ, even Intel) *wants*mY > > > to destroy VMS.  I *do* think that a lot of the "negativity" seen in this NG arisesa5 > > > from the *way* in which the news was delivered.p > >t" > > For myself, I'd tend to agree. > >uI > > Not that doing it doesn't make sense - we've been beating them bloodylK > > about VMS on Intel since news of Emerald first appeared. That's not the 
 > > point. > >gI > > The point is that it makes sense for Itanic, Itanic-capable mobos andr > > VMS to "grow-up" together: > >c@ > > o There are no commercially viable Itanic chips as of today.I > > o For the prototype chips that exist, mobo designs are still in flux.uL > > o VMS on Itanic is today a challenge, as opposed to the impossibility it > > was once thought to be.  > >IK > > Just as Alpha, Alpha mobos and AXP/VMS grew from VAX/VMS V5.4-2, so nowa< > > Itanic, Itanic mobos and OpenVMS-IA64 can grow together. > >eI > > Taken together, this could be the most serious threat to M$ since theP > > rise of Linux. > > > David?  Is this you?  Do I see a ray of positive light about > the future of VMS here?  :-) > : > (No, I don't know what postive light is, the opposite of= > negative light, I suppose, which which be stream of photons  > with negative energy...)  7 Yes, this is the most promising ray of hope I can find.    > [snip]@ > In 6 months or so, I'm sure the price will drop a lot, and theC > prices then will be a better comparison than today's prices.  The-D > long-term question is will it eventually (in 3 years) drop so thatB > the price-performance is competitive with x86 PC's (at least forA > native apps) or will it stay at a premium.  If it drops to that.C > level, I think it will eventually replace the x86 as the standard > > desktop PC, even for people with no rational need for 64 bitA > address space.  (Especially if there is a killer app available,M$ > which for PC's seems to be games.) > B > If that happens and the VMS-IA64 port works, then maybe you will/ > at long last have your affordable VMS system.F > C > I know that is a lot of "if's" but it is something to hope for...   
 Very true.  G As I've mentioned before, however, this was an idea whose time had come E circa. ten years ago, when the OpenVMS market was hot and Digital was,G just starting to get into the PC business. They started out with a goodmA idea, but somewhere along the way, before it became a fashionableeC expression, they got "assimilated", and became a "me, too" PC cloneaF maker. Had they gone ahead and built compatible mobos that resolve theA addressing, IRQ and vectored interrupt issues (imagine if DEC hadpH "invented" PCI or an equivalent technology - does the phrase "cash flow"D mean anything to you?), VAX/VMS and x86/VMS would together have beenD "siblings" to AXP/VMS and later OpenVMS-{VAX,Alpha,x86}. VAX-powered@ VAXstations and MicroVAXes would instead have been Intel-poweredC VMSstations and MicroServers, while big VAXes would slowly yield toqD Alpha. Who knows - perhaps Alpha might have started as a cooperativeD effort between Digital and Intel, instead of the way things actually went.6   Yes, hindsight is always 20/20.f  C If the VMS market were still that hot, I'd say, "yeah - *NOW* we'reoF gonna *REALLY* cook!". However, that time is past - the OpenVMS marketG is mostly dead. Of course, fans of "The Princess Bride" will, I'm sure,wE be quick to point out that there's a difference between being "mostlyeE dead" and "all dead". The best we can hope for now, since the OpenVMSlF market is already dead in many parts of the world and in all but a fewF niche industries, is that this will become the light at the end of the tunnel.   G True, we'll see greater attrition until then. Recent single-digit gainsnF in marketshare in some areas will become double-digit losses globally,A and it will be a struggle even to survive (I said this before, atiH http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/soholic.html back circa. January of 1998,A and the words are even more true today than they were back then).k  > In the end, what survives of VMS, if anything, will at last beE positioned for growth, and for longevity well beyond the lifespans ofoE many of today's OpenVMS faithful, some of whom have been around sincen the PDP-8 days.   C I dare say that twenty(20) years from now, when the next generation B reaches the age of the senior VMS people in this group, those nextG generation people will say with pride, "I remember when VMS only ran ongH machines that couldn't run that ancient Windows-thing that some Bill-guy got rich off of".u   -- u David J. Dachterao dba DJE Systemsa 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.v   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:18:12 -0300i) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.broY Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon (andsomegeneral comments)eL Message-ID: <OFB87C08C2.0D01A1C3-ON03256A79.003DC96F@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>   Well  E I just gave a suggestion and you explained everything in your answer:-  0 a) Kids which dont know how to develop a driver;D b) Kids dont want to learn C and operating systems internals becauseG they dont like to read "old books" and these informations are not ready  over the internet;    J PS: I am not a developer, but reading this NG and seeing a lot of requests fortK drivers (ex. DVD, CD-RW, USB), I believe more than 70% here are developers.e Why not they create ?    Regardsh   FC        C rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) em 27/06/2001 16:31:05   > Favor responder a rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)             Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComA      D Assunto: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon (and          somegeneral comments)    
 In articleA <OF8BB15099.76A624F6-ON03256A78.0056184B@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>,r* fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br wrote:   > Like to have for example:     E > c) A tool / compiler to develop OpenVMS Device Drivers more easily.u  I What do you find so hard about VMS device drivers?  This is an inherentlysJ complex problem.  You have to interact with the innards of the OS, and the quirks of a hardware widget.  C Digital provided the tools (C compiler and extensive driver supportrF routines and macros) the documentation (VMS manual set and the DigitalG Press book "Writing OpenVMS Alpha Device Drivers in C") and examples of D working drivers.  They've also provided extensive debugging support.  F You have to understand your device.  I don't see any "tool" that could solve that for you.   5 Then you have to follow the clearly documented rules.    What's missing.l  I If there are fewer folks able to write drivers these days, I suspect it'st< because there are fewer good programmers than in olden days.J Script-kiddies probably can't write decent device drivers on any platform.  E If you have ideas to make this complex task easier, I'm interested inh
 hearing them.    -- Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:40:01 +0100a% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>  Subject: Re: Rdb troll8 Message-ID: <299mjtg2u83horiisv239iukuc4lctdorj@4ax.com>  @ On 27 Jun 2001 10:39:32 -0500, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) wrote:    ? >Note that there is no supported Bliss on VMS, yet Oracle seemsc >to be able to build Rdb.t  B Oracle address this point on the RDB web site saying that althoughD Bliss is unsupported on VMS they can guarantee that Compaq will keepB it up to date with bugfixes and new processor support as these are! "must haves" for VMS engineering.   C I agree that Oracle found an excuse to drop the NT port convenient.    -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:11:53 -0400O2 From: norm lastovica <norman.lastovica@oracle.com> Subject: Re: Rdb troll* Message-ID: <3B3B5749.E7D48D2F@oracle.com>   Alan Greig wrote:m > B > On 27 Jun 2001 10:39:32 -0500, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam > (Larry Kilgallen) wrote: > A > >Note that there is no supported Bliss on VMS, yet Oracle seems  > >to be able to build Rdb.e  8 	Oracle has an agreement with Compaq for BLISS VAX/Alpha? support.  No such agreement was able to be maintained by Compaq  for BLISS on NT.  mD > Oracle address this point on the RDB web site saying that althoughF > Bliss is unsupported on VMS they can guarantee that Compaq will keepD > it up to date with bugfixes and new processor support as these are# > "must haves" for VMS engineering.t > E > I agree that Oracle found an excuse to drop the NT port convenient.   2 	you've got to be joking.  an excuse was certainly2 not what oracle was looking for, I can assure you.   > -- > Alan   -- w> norman lastovica / oracle rdb engineering / usa / 610.696.4685   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 19:46:08 -0700d5 From: "cstranslations" <cstranslations@email.msn.com>o# Subject: Re: Read other user's mailt) Message-ID: <O#Lqbx3$AHA.264@cpmsnbbsa09>s  , Oh boy - a technical question. Imagine that.  H If I'm not mistaken (assuming you have the necessary privileges) you canK read another users mail. I had to disable an account recently and got tiredsI of going around in circles in the on line help so I changed the password,eL logged into the account, and "dispatched" the email (the account belonged toJ someone who had just been terminated). Performing this was a rather simpleL matter and I'm not sure what 3rd party product you might be referring to (it3 must do something else to make it "worth while")...m  K You seem to indicate that the account is for "non-interactive purposes." Ash* such I would disable mail for the account:  & UAF> modify/flag=dismail [disnewmail]?  B Don't remember off the top of my head. At the uaf prompt do a help modify/flagg   Joee  3 "Lee Webb" <lee.webb@colossus.com> wrote in messagey, news:slrn9jkeng.1q3.lee.webb@colossus.com...) > Disclaimer: I'm not too hot with VMS...e >dC > I have a situation whereby a non-interactive account's mailbox is E > accumulating mail and needs deleting. However, the user in questionn$ > cannot simply login and type MAIL. >tB > Thus, I was wondering if there is a way of safely accessing (and
 modifying)F > this user's mailbox using the SYSTEM account. I've looked into a VMSF > equivalent of UNIX su, but that requires a third-party product and I0 > would prefer a VMS method as it is a live box. >'2 > So, is there any standard VMS way of doing this? >h	 > Thanks,b > Lee.   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 06:36 CDTs' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) # Subject: Re: Read other user's mail1- Message-ID: <28JUN200106364505@gerg.tamu.edu>     leewebb@btinternet.com writes...( }Disclaimer: I'm not too hot with VMS... } B }I have a situation whereby a non-interactive account's mailbox isD }accumulating mail and needs deleting. However, the user in question# }cannot simply login and type MAIL.a } L }Thus, I was wondering if there is a way of safely accessing (and modifying)E }this user's mailbox using the SYSTEM account. I've looked into a VMS E }equivalent of UNIX su, but that requires a third-party product and I-/ }would prefer a VMS method as it is a live box.: } 1 }So, is there any standard VMS way of doing this?m }  }Thanks, }Lee.Q  D Assuming your SYSTEM account actually has adequate privileges (which9 it probably does) then you can just use the mail utility..   Something along the lines of:n   $ mail' MAIL> set file userdisk:[userdirectory]i  F from that point on you are accessing the user's mail. (If the user hasG specified that their mail be in a subdirectory, you have to specify theo correct directory.)o  E You can't do a READ/NEW or a DIR/NEW since the /NEW qualifiers alwayssA specifically refer to your own new mail. Other than that, you can @ do just about anything. DIR/FOLD will show you his mail folders.D DIR NEWMAIL will list the contents of his NEWMAIL folder. And so on.   --- Carl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:58:21 -0400r+ From: Brendan Welch <brendan_welch@uml.edu> # Subject: Re: Read other user's mail ' Message-ID: <3B3B29ED.DDE6B1F3@uml.edu>   O > > Thus, I was wondering if there is a way of safely accessing (and modifying)wH > > this user's mailbox using the SYSTEM account. I've looked into a VMSH > > equivalent of UNIX su, but that requires a third-party product and I2 > > would prefer a VMS method as it is a live box. > >P4 > > So, is there any standard VMS way of doing this?  @ I have lost the previous parts of this thread.  But just for theC record, we formerly were quite happy using BECOME (= like su); I doiC not see why this is unacceptable.  But I too used to go through theiF same feelings as the poster, that the SYSTEM account should be able toC track everything;  I wanted a utility which would let me "look overi' the shoulder" of any person or process.l --E Brendan Welch, system analyst, Univ. of Massachusetts - Lowell, W1LPGt   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:44:59 -0400k- From: Michael Austin <miaustin@bellsouth.net>t# Subject: Re: Read other user's mail - Message-ID: <3B3B50FB.82D86E20@bellsouth.net>a   Carl Perkins wrote:   " > leewebb@btinternet.com writes...* > }Disclaimer: I'm not too hot with VMS... > }aD > }I have a situation whereby a non-interactive account's mailbox isF > }accumulating mail and needs deleting. However, the user in question% > }cannot simply login and type MAIL.e > }tN > }Thus, I was wondering if there is a way of safely accessing (and modifying)G > }this user's mailbox using the SYSTEM account. I've looked into a VMSsG > }equivalent of UNIX su, but that requires a third-party product and Ia1 > }would prefer a VMS method as it is a live box.n > }m3 > }So, is there any standard VMS way of doing this?J > } 
 > }Thanks, > }Lee.e >nF > Assuming your SYSTEM account actually has adequate privileges (which; > it probably does) then you can just use the mail utility.d >n > Something along the lines of:C >l > $ mail) > MAIL> set file userdisk:[userdirectory]6 >5H > from that point on you are accessing the user's mail. (If the user hasI > specified that their mail be in a subdirectory, you have to specify thei > correct directory.)  >.G > You can't do a READ/NEW or a DIR/NEW since the /NEW qualifiers always C > specifically refer to your own new mail. Other than that, you canlB > do just about anything. DIR/FOLD will show you his mail folders.F > DIR NEWMAIL will list the contents of his NEWMAIL folder. And so on. >r
 > --- Carl  P There is a "freeware" called SETUSER where you can "become" that user.  A search# through Northernlight will find it.n   Regards, Michael AustinL -- currently available.  and with the new changes at Comp-tel no telling how long I will be...u1 DBA Consultant (Rdb and Oracle on most platforms)    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:46:22 +0200e= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>e Subject: Re: Req VMS Tutorial.) Message-ID: <3B3B271E.539E235B@gtech.com>d   Jose Carlos Duclos wrote: 5 > I'm looking for a good VMS-VAX tutorial in Interneta > D > I've been looking for it but I haven't found anything interesting.   You could look at link at:+   http://www.levitte.org/~ava/vms_faq.htmlxe+   http://www.levitte.org/~ava/vms_doc.htmlx.   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 05:02:17 -0700t1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>- Subject: Re: Salt in the Wounds13 Message-ID: <3B3ABA59.4256C664@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>p   John Eisenschmidt wrote:  Q > According to Winkler, just to design and develop future generation of Alpha wasiQ > costing Compaq $300 million a year, he said. "That's no small change," he said.   Q > Hello? You paid 9 BILLION DOLLARS for DEC. That's B, as in BILLION. Three yearseR > later, you're dumping it because the Alpha division cost you 300 Million a year R > to run? That's like 3  percent. Maybe if you marketed the product you spent all7 > that money buying, you'd have seen a respectable ROI.t  S   I remember reading that Compaq pays something like $750 million/year to Microsoft K for the right to put Windows on its PCs.  How's that for a chunk of change?    --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 07:22:32 -0700o, From: "James Gessling" <jgessling@yahoo.com>. Subject: Sending command to programs with pipe4 Message-ID: <9hfej4$dl8t4$1@ID-46415.news.dfncis.de>  
 Greetings,  C Ran across a cute trick to eliminate usage of temp file in dcl (oneoF of my pet peeves).  In sda, I wanted to find out a process logical for; another process on the system.  Here's the snippet of code:t   $ say :== write sys$output6 $ pipe (say "set erase off" ; say "set proc ''p1'" ; -,         say "clue proc/log" ) | anal/sys | -         search sys$input 'p2'    Used like this:?    $ @showlog jgessling fieldtbls32  
 Regards,  Jime   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:53:31 -0700+ From: stephane_paquin@hotmail.com (SPaquin)i2 Subject: Re: Sending command to programs with pipe< Message-ID: <fdd7874.0106280853.1ba54755@posting.google.com>  h "James Gessling" <jgessling@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<9hfej4$dl8t4$1@ID-46415.news.dfncis.de>... > Greetings, > E > Ran across a cute trick to eliminate usage of temp file in dcl (one(H > of my pet peeves).  In sda, I wanted to find out a process logical for= > another process on the system.  Here's the snippet of code:. >  > $ say :== write sys$output8 > $ pipe (say "set erase off" ; say "set proc ''p1'" ; -. >         say "clue proc/log" ) | anal/sys | - >         search sys$input 'p2'. >  > Used like this:i > " > $ @showlog jgessling fieldtbls32 >  > Regards,  Jims  3 What is pipe ? What VMS version needed ? Freeware ?t   Stephane   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 04:56:52 -0400 ( From: Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com>M Subject: Re: SRM Auto_action: what's the difference between BOOT and RESTART?e+ Message-ID: <3B3AF154.7F8DE033@bigfoot.com>   F AUTO_ACTION set to "restart" causes the system to reboot automaticallyE after a crash, power failure, etc. (non-clean shutdown) wheres "boot"l	 does not.,   HM   David Spencer wrote: > D > Trying to forget the Alpha/Itanium crisis and move on with life... > C > Can somebody tell me what the difference is and why I should pickdA > one over the other? I have a system that doesn't always like toiD > auto-reboot after a power failure and I have to wonder if I've got > it wrong somehow...) > 	 > Thanks,8 >  > -- Dave Spencerv   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:11:28 +0100d  From: steven.reece@quintiles.comM Subject: Re: SRM Auto_action: what's the difference between BOOT and RESTART? H Message-ID: <OFCB3BC259.BB27A6BE-ON80256A79.0037A5BC@qedi.quintiles.com>  G More importantly (as I learned some months ago), RESTART means that theiF server will try to restart if it finds itself at a console prompt as aE result of some event.  This can enable you to get a crash dump if the*H system has keeled over or it may enable the system to keep running (a la "CONTINUE")nJ BOOT will cause the system to reboot, no matter how it got to the console.  H Preference is to set the parameter to RESTART rather than BOOT if you doD not want the system to halt on power up.  If the system is unable to restart per se it will boot.   Steve.   Hamln Mootoo wrote : >>>wF AUTO_ACTION set to "restart" causes the system to reboot automaticallyE after a crash, power failure, etc. (non-clean shutdown) wheres "boot" 	 does not.w   HM   David Spencer wrote: >oD > Trying to forget the Alpha/Itanium crisis and move on with life... >iC > Can somebody tell me what the difference is and why I should pick1A > one over the other? I have a system that doesn't always like toeD > auto-reboot after a power failure and I have to wonder if I've got > it wrong somehow..., >d	 > Thanks,i <<<l   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:31:35 +0800h- From: David B Sneddon <dbsneddon@bigpond.com>aM Subject: Re: SRM Auto_action: what's the difference between BOOT and RESTART?gA Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010628212751.009f7c60@mail.bigpond.com>o  0 At 04:56 AM 28/06/01 -0400, Hamlyn Mootoo wrote:G >AUTO_ACTION set to "restart" causes the system to reboot automaticallyiF >after a crash, power failure, etc. (non-clean shutdown) wheres "boot"
 >does not. >e >HMo >  >David Spencer wrote:  > >MF > > Trying to forget the Alpha/Itanium crisis and move on with life... > > E > > Can somebody tell me what the difference is and why I should pickeC > > one over the other? I have a system that doesn't always like toeF > > auto-reboot after a power failure and I have to wonder if I've got > > it wrong somehow...r > >v > > Thanks,- > >- > > -- Dave Spencere  D I thought RESTART caused a search for a valid RPB (restart parameterA block) which would allow a restart from the failure/condition fornE systems with appropriate memory battery backup etc. i.e. things would6@ carry on from where they left off.  BOOT causes an unconditional@ reset and boot sequence - I remember seeing "old" boxes with theB necessary battery backup recover from a power fail and carry on as if nothing happened.       Regards, Dave.y --  I David B Sneddon (dbs)  OpenVMS Systems Programmer   dbsneddon@bigpond.comtI Sneddo's quick guide ...          http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/oI DBS freeware at ...   http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/software.htmrI "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" Lennoni   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:26:57 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) > Subject: Re: Standalone Teco (was Re: VMS on IA64 (technical))3 Message-ID: <CAemXf44kWvQ@eisner.encompasserve.org>   f In article <dDq_6.210$rc5.5767@news.cpqcorp.net>, hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:H >   The initial IPF bootstrap of OpenVMS is expected to be based heavily >   on Standalone Teco.)  G Almost makes sense.  I knew of real systems where the entire DBMS was ad
 TECO macro.  a  C I think the same group wrote an entire system in one line of PDP-11 0 assembly code, which of course was a macro call.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporationm= NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GrouppE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingh   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:40:43 +0100y% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>t> Subject: Re: Standalone Teco (was Re: VMS on IA64 (technical))8 Message-ID: <c1gmjt8elk6u08k1rfi8up8vhcgihhvgue@4ax.com>  E On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 19:38:49 GMT, hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoffh Hoffman) wrote:d  d >In article <RX0w8ADYlmWU@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: >.J >:Anyone care to guess if TECO will survive?  I understand TECO was VESTedH >:which turned up a lot of bugs in VEST.  That's not exactly the same as" >:having a portable source around. >,G >  The initial IPF bootstrap of OpenVMS is expected to be based heavilyj >  on Standalone Teco. >-K >  But seriously, I would expect to see Teco available on IPF, either from 0L >  the existing nest of assembler code or based on a C version of Teco that M >  is apparently around.  This necessity has been fodder for a regular seriesRI >  of discussion -- most involving Andy, of course -- at the lunch table.    Hoff,u  B Any chance you could squeeze in PDP-10 emulation so I could have aB TOPS-20 session as well? That way I could run the  PDP-10 extendedE TECO in which the first version of EMACS was entirely written. Not to A mention "TV" the DEC screen mode editor version of TECO. Hey, the-B supported version of EDT on iVMS could be TOPS-20 EDT in emulation mode.l [DECSYSTEM-20 CONTINUED]    :-) :-) :-)     -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:50:56 -070011 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> : Subject: Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated3 Message-ID: <3B3A9B90.527F8415@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>    Alan Greig wrote:a  H > You can read all or nothing into Winkler's cryptic email to me of justH > a few months ago saying "regarding VMS I have found religion". For theH > moment I'm going to take that at face value. Note he did not say to me, > "regarding Alpha I have found religion"...  F   The people who followed Jim Jones in Guana found religion too.  Care for some koolade?a  "F > If Winkler is really the brains behind Compaq it is his head we need > to get inside.  #   I prefer to stay sane, thank you.a  D > Despite Winkler's subservience to Microsoft I suspect he'd love toF > fight them after years of kneeling but only if there was a chance of
 > success,  I   I doubt it, it looks like he's behind Compaq sticking to it's Intel and0E Microsoft roots which gets into the way of it becoming an Enterprise R computing company.  iE > Alternately Compaq might not exist as such in two years, Six monthsq= > from now there will be enough signs to conclude either way.e     Just look at their stock.c   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:58:34 -0700n1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>o: Subject: Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated3 Message-ID: <3B3A9D5A.77C7D32A@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>t  " Eric <etailor@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: > = > I used to be a vms kernel hacker. I still have 10 copies ofe> > that book that says "Vax, Architecture for the '80s".  I was6 > one of maybe 20 people who knew about special kernelA > mode ast's. I sold a few million dollars worth of software thatf > did these and other tricks..  
   Hi Eric,  E   Are you really an employee of JPL?  At New Employee Orientation theiC Ethics people specifically told us not to post on world-wide boardse: from JPL accounts unless it was specifically work related.   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/c   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 08:52:53 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)X: Subject: Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated3 Message-ID: <oKpKVPLOUMbJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  P In article <3B3A5656.CC4C0048@jpl.nasa.gov>, Eric <etailor@jpl.nasa.gov> writes:  : > Consider the vax without pdp-11 emulation when they went
 > to the vax.a  > For the first several years, VAXes included most of the PDP-11A instruction set (compatability mode).  I ran lots of PDP-11 tasks. copied from my RSX-11M system.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporationr= NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupIE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingt   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:12:35 GMTu? From: Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com (Jim Johnson)-C Subject: Re: Two Phase Commit (2PC) on VMS - the nature of the fuss 0 Message-ID: <3b3b24ff.17763542@news.demon.co.uk>  4 Warning: this post has *nothing* to do with Itanium.  B I realize some time has passed, but I thought those of you who hadD shown an earlier interest in the 2PC discussions might be interested< to see that DECdtm has now been documented.  Take a look at:  : http://www.openvms.compaq.com/commercial/decdtm/index.html  B Please note that this documentation has been put on the website toC make it available as quickly as possible.  I'd personally expect toeC see it merged into the full VMS docset at some point in the future.    Jim.    ! On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:30:35 GMT, @ Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com (Jim Johnson) wrote:   >Peter,  >dB >The issue is that there are 3 (or 4, depending on how you want toD >count) interfaces into DECdtm.  This is a fairly standard breakdown, >for a transaction manager, and consists of: > B >- the AP (application program) interface.  This is the well known< >$START_TRANS, $END_TRANS, $ABORT_TRANS services.  These are >documented. >oC >- the branch services interface.  These services allow distributed D >application programs to coordinate their commitment across multiple >instances.o >s> >- the RM (resource manager) interface.  These allow 'resourceB >managers', such as RMS or Rdb, to join a transaction, vote on its> >outcome, and hear about the results.  The recovery resolution& >interface is also part of this suite. >n> >- the CM (communications manager) interface.  This is used toD >communicate to another transaction manager instance.  Conceptually,F >this is a special form of the RM interface, inasmuch as it allows for< >'resource managers' that can be parents of the transaction. >.G >All of these have existed since V5.4, all are in use by one product oraF >another, but only the AP interface was ever publicly documented.  TheA >issue at hand is that support for something like XA, or your own3C >resource manager (such as one that provides transaction consistenttA >memory), requires access to some or all of the other interfaces.  >a >Jim.h > 2 >On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:14:07 +0000, Peter Jackson" ><peter.jackson@oracle.com> wrote: >d. >>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.( >>--------------1030AA62556F68CEB06D24FC, >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii! >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7biti >>^ >>Explicit use of the DECdtm system services is documented in the Oracle Rdb for OpenVMS Guide_ >>to Distributed Transactions. Apart from the changes to product names this manual has not beenm0 >>significantly changed since Oracle bought Rdb. >>^ >>The Compaq ACMS for OpenVMS Systems Interface Programming manual also describes using  them,7 >>and they are in the System Services Reference manual.a >> >>Peter Jacksono >> >>Larry Kilgallen wrote: >>F >>> The other issue is that VMS declined to document DDTM, so only RdbG >>> and RMS can be "Resource Managers".  Even if Compaq did not supporthG >>> the new protocols as Richard wants, someone else could do so if theiG >>> DECdtm specification were public.  I gather from Jim's comment thatlF >>> all other issues aside, Compaq is reluctant to document the DECdtm@ >>> interface because it has only been tested with two products. >>( >>--------------1030AA62556F68CEB06D24FC/ >>Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;- >> name="peter.jackson.vcf"e! >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bito- >>Content-Description: Card for Peter Jackson " >>Content-Disposition: attachment; >> filename="peter.jackson.vcf"a >> >>begin:vcard  >>n:Jackson;Petert >>tel;fax:01344 415100 >>tel;work:0118 9249165d >>x-mozilla-html:FALSE  >>org:Oracle Corporation UK Ltd. >>adr:;;;;;;
 >>version:2.1 ) >>email;internet:peter.jackson@oracle.com- >>fn:Peter Jackson >>end:vcardh >>* >>--------------1030AA62556F68CEB06D24FC-- >> >3 >Jim Johnson >Software Exploration, Ltd.u( >Software Navigation and Discovery Tools   Jim Johnsonn Software Exploration, Ltd.) (remove '.nospam' from the reply address)    ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:20:13 -0400/ From: jordan@lisa.gemair.com (Jordan Henderson)/C Subject: Re: Two Phase Commit (2PC) on VMS - the nature of the fuss,* Message-ID: <9hfaud$f9i$1@lisa.gemair.com>  0 In article <3b3b24ff.17763542@news.demon.co.uk>,@ Jim Johnson <Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com> wrote:5 >Warning: this post has *nothing* to do with Itanium.n >r >[snip]  >iD >see it merged into the full VMS docset at some point in the future. >l  D I'm sorry, but I have to point out that "the future" is a registered@ Service Mark of the Intel Corporation and refers to it's Itanium product line.  u  A You failed to produce a post that had nothing to do with Itanium.  Not a bad try, though.   >Jim.n >M   -Jordan Hendersont jordan@greenapple.coml   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 12:27:41 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)eC Subject: Re: Two Phase Commit (2PC) on VMS - the nature of the fusst3 Message-ID: <N8BXVyWpM6H9@eisner.encompasserve.org>    Hooray !  + Congratulations for your work on this, Jim.   r In article <3b3b24ff.17763542@news.demon.co.uk>, Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com (Jim Johnson) writes:6 > Warning: this post has *nothing* to do with Itanium. > D > I realize some time has passed, but I thought those of you who hadF > shown an earlier interest in the 2PC discussions might be interested> > to see that DECdtm has now been documented.  Take a look at: > < > http://www.openvms.compaq.com/commercial/decdtm/index.html > D > Please note that this documentation has been put on the website toE > make it available as quickly as possible.  I'd personally expect to E > see it merged into the full VMS docset at some point in the future.2 >  > Jim. >  > # > On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:30:35 GMT,2B > Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com (Jim Johnson) wrote: >  >>Peter, >>C >>The issue is that there are 3 (or 4, depending on how you want togE >>count) interfaces into DECdtm.  This is a fairly standard breakdown5- >>for a transaction manager, and consists of:l >>C >>- the AP (application program) interface.  This is the well known.= >>$START_TRANS, $END_TRANS, $ABORT_TRANS services.  These aree
 >>documented.f >>D >>- the branch services interface.  These services allow distributedE >>application programs to coordinate their commitment across multipleo >>instances. >>? >>- the RM (resource manager) interface.  These allow 'resourcetC >>managers', such as RMS or Rdb, to join a transaction, vote on its ? >>outcome, and hear about the results.  The recovery resolutiono' >>interface is also part of this suite., >>? >>- the CM (communications manager) interface.  This is used topE >>communicate to another transaction manager instance.  Conceptually,5G >>this is a special form of the RM interface, inasmuch as it allows for_= >>'resource managers' that can be parents of the transaction.g >>H >>All of these have existed since V5.4, all are in use by one product orG >>another, but only the AP interface was ever publicly documented.  TheoB >>issue at hand is that support for something like XA, or your ownD >>resource manager (such as one that provides transaction consistentB >>memory), requires access to some or all of the other interfaces. >> >>Jim. >>3 >>On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:14:07 +0000, Peter Jacksona# >><peter.jackson@oracle.com> wrote:  >>/ >>>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.w) >>>--------------1030AA62556F68CEB06D24FCD- >>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii " >>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>> _ >>>Explicit use of the DECdtm system services is documented in the Oracle Rdb for OpenVMS GuideT` >>>to Distributed Transactions. Apart from the changes to product names this manual has not been1 >>>significantly changed since Oracle bought Rdb.m >>>t_ >>>The Compaq ACMS for OpenVMS Systems Interface Programming manual also describes using  them,e8 >>>and they are in the System Services Reference manual. >>>h >>>Peter Jackson >>>y >>>Larry Kilgallen wrote:r >>>gG >>>> The other issue is that VMS declined to document DDTM, so only Rdb H >>>> and RMS can be "Resource Managers".  Even if Compaq did not supportH >>>> the new protocols as Richard wants, someone else could do so if theH >>>> DECdtm specification were public.  I gather from Jim's comment thatG >>>> all other issues aside, Compaq is reluctant to document the DECdtmtA >>>> interface because it has only been tested with two products.o >>>h) >>>--------------1030AA62556F68CEB06D24FCn0 >>>Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; >>> name="peter.jackson.vcf"" >>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit. >>>Content-Description: Card for Peter Jackson# >>>Content-Disposition: attachment;t  >>> filename="peter.jackson.vcf" >>>  >>>begin:vcard l >>>n:Jackson;Peter >>>tel;fax:01344 415100o >>>tel;work:0118 9249165 >>>x-mozilla-html:FALSE-! >>>org:Oracle Corporation UK Ltd. 
 >>>adr:;;;;;;3 >>>version:2.1* >>>email;internet:peter.jackson@oracle.com >>>fn:Peter Jacksonc >>>end:vcard >>>f+ >>>--------------1030AA62556F68CEB06D24FC--D >>>1 >>
 >>Jim Johnson7 >>Software Exploration, Ltd.) >>Software Navigation and Discovery Toolso > 
 > Jim JohnsonI > Software Exploration, Ltd.+ > (remove '.nospam' from the reply address)a -- oN ==============================================================================N Great Inventors of our time: Al Gore -> Internet; Sun Microsystems -> ClustersN ==============================================================================   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:11:45 +0100w% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>o$ Subject: Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)8 Message-ID: <svsljtg0hvbq531s3k5migqeggg46ht6es@4ax.com>  F On 27 Jun 2001 10:38:52 -0500, koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:   >rI >Anyone care to guess if TECO will survive?  I understand TECO was VESTed G >which turned up a lot of bugs in VEST.  That's not exactly the same asa! >having a portable source around.O  B Although Teco is VESTed I think DEC/Compaq  managed to resurrect aD compilable (at least on VAX) source. There was even one Y2K fix madeE to TECO I believe. My guess is that TECO won't be a priority but will B appear sometime. I'm fairly sure there was no translated teco with early Alpha/VMS releases.i   >.G >---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ >Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation> >NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupF >                                | please remove ".aspm" when replying   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:38:47 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>s$ Subject: Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)( Message-ID: <3B3B2557.D80A2C6@gtech.com>   "T. S. Murphy" wrote:aM > Any of the PALcode stuff could be done in software. Heck, Compaq could justaK > write an Alpha emulator under IA-64 and make VMS work that way. (It works H > for Transmeta...) That would certainly be a heck of a lot cheaper thanN > porting VMS, and since VMS is one of the least performance sensitive markets@ > (what percentage still runs VAX?) there wouldn't be a problem.  8 The number of VAX'es has dropped a lot the last 3 years.  ) And some VMS systems are computing bound.S  K > Lock step is a hardware (platform) problem, not a software problem. It is L > only a software problem inasmuch as NSK runs on lock step hardware. VMS isN > known to run on computers with commodity PC parts (such as the Multia, amongJ > others), so I would not expect there to be any issues transitioning to a5 > different (probably, more commodity-like) platform.J  H It is also possible to send men to Mars. The question is whether someone will pay and for what purpose !    cN > Since VMS could be made to work native on IA-32 with absolutely no problems,  F May I suggest that you contact Compaq and volunteer to do the project.D I do not know what porting VMS from VAX to Alpha costed, but 3 digitG millions sounds plausible. It cost a lot of money. Many people considerM that to be a problem !  :-)v   rne    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:44:18 +0200l= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>o$ Subject: Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)) Message-ID: <3B3B26A2.50959FB9@gtech.com>y   "T. S. Murphy" wrote:gA > "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in message H > news:rdeininger-2306012213110001@user-2ive69s.dialup.mindspring.com...K > > I disagree.  Many VMS applications ARE performance-critical.  And VAXes / > > don't run a very big percentage these days.  > H > I'm almost certain that a majority of VMS systems in service are still	 > VAX'es.f  	 Not true.h  ? It is not even easy to find a production VAX system any longer.i  K > Seriously, what high performance applications are running on VMS? For the-D > relatively small market which Alpha does have for high performance< > computing, most of the systems are running Linux or Tru64.  2 Many. Examples: lottery systems, Oracle databases.  J > Of course, from benchmarks posted on this newsgroup in the past, we knowN > that a Celeron running Linux outperforms VMS/Alpha on disk I/O by one or twoL > orders of magnitude. A Pentium 4 system has a much better memory subsystem= > than any Alpha, and the same I/O system as any Alpha (PCI).i  D Then you have not read those posts carefully enough. The results has
 nothing to> with I/O system or the like. It has to do with VMS's extremely conservative8 approach to caching (and a bit to do with RMS overhead).  H I was not aware of that Pentium 4 systems did switching like Spars'c and Alpha's.   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:24:44 -0500e1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>o$ Subject: Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)' Message-ID: <3B3B3E2C.ABB9077A@fsi.net>e   Arne Vajhj wrote: >  > "T. S. Murphy" wrote:pC > > "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messagewJ > > news:rdeininger-2306012213110001@user-2ive69s.dialup.mindspring.com...M > > > I disagree.  Many VMS applications ARE performance-critical.  And VAXesn1 > > > don't run a very big percentage these days.  > > J > > I'm almost certain that a majority of VMS systems in service are still > > VAX'es.  >  > Not true.u > A > It is not even easy to find a production VAX system any longer.S  A You might be surprised how many VAX systems still run here in thegA States. I even had a client last year who still writes DEC DIBOL,.H compiles and links on VAX, then VESTs the images and runs them on Alpha.   -- o David J. Dachterat dba DJE Systemst http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/n  F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.c   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 12:04:03 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)e$ Subject: Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)3 Message-ID: <wG0hdMknCtHQ@eisner.encompasserve.org>J  ` In article <svsljtg0hvbq531s3k5migqeggg46ht6es@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:H > On 27 Jun 2001 10:38:52 -0500, koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) > wrote: >  >>J >>Anyone care to guess if TECO will survive?  I understand TECO was VESTedH >>which turned up a lot of bugs in VEST.  That's not exactly the same as" >>having a portable source around. > D > Although Teco is VESTed I think DEC/Compaq  managed to resurrect aF > compilable (at least on VAX) source. There was even one Y2K fix madeG > to TECO I believe. My guess is that TECO won't be a priority but willeD > appear sometime. I'm fairly sure there was no translated teco with > early Alpha/VMS releases.e  < TECO was introduced with Alpha VMS 1.5.  Only 1.0 lacked it.   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:29:43 +0200 (CET)  From: gazso@csirke.elte.huE Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)T+ Message-ID: <01062811294316@csirke.elte.hu>t  o In article <UjY7MfSdZNKl@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes: ^ > In article <3B3945E9.80E2050C@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: >tM >> Had Compaq continued to develop Alpha until IA64 was capable of runnng VMStI >> (port included), then the perceptiosn would have been quite different.e >tF > As I read the schedule, Compaq _will_ be continuing to develop AlphaC > until IA64 is ready, just not beyond that (i.e., not to EV8 whiche) > would have been delivered beyond that).    Here is the big question:  - until IA64 is ready? or:? - until IA64 and the operating system ports for IA64 are ready?m  L In order to calm down a bit the anger in its VMS customers, Compaq should atK least commit itself for it won't stop producing Alphas until: IA64 is readyaJ and OpenVMS is ported to the new platform and the OpenVMS Itanium (or iVMSC or whatever) is supported (and the migration is supported as well).,  L Could the OpenVMS Engineering Group and/or any Compaq employees reading this  newsgrooup do anything about it?    Gaspar Erdelyi    ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 06:11 CDTt' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)cE Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)r- Message-ID: <28JUN200106115213@gerg.tamu.edu>o  = Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes...a] }In article <3B3A135B.89FFF08B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  }> Larry Kilgallen wrote: H }>> As I read the schedule, Compaq _will_ be continuing to develop AlphaE }>> until IA64 is ready, just not beyond that (i.e., not to EV8 whicha+ }>> would have been delivered beyond that).  }>  P }> No, Compaq is completing development of Alpha, irrespective of when IA64 willO }> be ready. So if IA64 is delayed by a few years, Compaq won't be adding a newf }> version of alpha to keep up.3 } J }If adequate performing version of IA64 is not available yet, what does it' }matter that people are stuck on EV78 ?t  B Are you not aware that some people do run into the need to upgrade due to increasing work load?   --- Carl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 04:36:03 -0700-1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>aE Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)t3 Message-ID: <3B3AB433.2715B7F7@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>h   John Eisenschmidt wrote: > V > Because HP is still in control of the PA-RISC line. Compaq just gave Alpha to Intel, >and with it their control.n > R > Once that transfer is complete, and EV7 is out the door, you can bet 100% of theX > remaining Alpha team will be working on Itanic/McKinley/whatever IA-64 chip they have.  R   Didn't Samsung get an architecural license for Alpha a few years ago in order to make additions to Alpha?     --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/c   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:03:30 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)iE Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)t3 Message-ID: <eQj0w9Bt+HIG@eisner.encompasserve.org>-  \ In article <3B3A45A8.5F643E71@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:N > Didn't Compaq announce that as soon as EV7 work is done, the remaining AlphaO > engineers will be switched to Intel ? Pretty hard to produce a new version ofsP > your chip when you no longer have the staff or infrastructure to do that work.   Outsourcing.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences CorporationP= NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupEE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingr   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:37:24 -05003 From: malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg) E Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)m3 Message-ID: <VGn6Yl2y10II@eisner.encompasserve.org>:  + In article <3B3AB045.A74BAB4@videotron.ca>, / JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:i > "Main, Kerry" wrote:F >> The reference to IA64-2 is simply to reflect the fact that OpenVMS,E >> Tru64 and NSK are not slated to be ported and run on todays intialiE >> release of the IA64 platform, but rather a followon version of the  >> architecture. >fG > When will we know exactly what features of IA64 are currently missinge > to allow VMS to run on IA64 ?e  H As Hoff and others have pointed out, that is being researched right now.H It may be that nothing needs to be added, or that some change is needed.  H Exactly what if any changes are needed should not be a cause of concern.= OpenVMS will be ported to the IPF (Itanium Processor Family).   B > Also consider that Intel already has access to much of the AlphaC > intellectual property. I doubt very much that the Alpha chip willBC > have any impact on IA64.  The Alpha engineers may find themselvesoC > stuck trying to improve IA64's performance, but they will be at anD > disadvantage because they were trained and spent much time workingE > on a chip that had a totally different philosophy for optimisation.e  F Having intellectual property is never as good as having engineers thatJ that actually developed the intellectual property and understand it fully.  D Many of the later VAX chips were designed because of lessons learned from building the ALPHA chips.   -Johnl Personal Opinion Onlyt wb8tyw@qsl.network   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:44:35 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)E Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)nL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2806010944350001@user-2iveapn.dialup.mindspring.com>  J In article <9hdr7n$2km$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote:  8 > "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> wrote in messageN > news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF48DBF0C@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net... > > J > > >>> Possibly because they no longer have the engineers / designers.<<< > >TL > > The EV68+, EV7 teams have not gone to Intel. They are not slated to move& > > over until all their work is done. > >cM > > If IA64-2 were delayed, the EV7 work could be considered to be incompelteo > > and a speed bump planned.  > D > This bullshit is getting tiresome:  either point to some reference< > describing details about this IA64-2, or shut up about it.  H Lighten up Bill.  It's clearly a generic name for a next-generation chipG that isn't specified yet.  How could it be?  The software folks haven'tn* had time to figure out their requirements.  J Can we just agree that a successor to the current Itanium will be needed? E If Kerry wants to call it IA64-2, and Christof wants to call it IA63,sF what's the problem?  Kerry isn't offering you a contract to deliver anF IA64-2; he's speaking generalities.  Calling it "bullspit" is a little harsh.   -- w Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comt   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:54:04 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)>E Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)>3 Message-ID: <RzbsDIe4aP4+@eisner.encompasserve.org>   [ In article <3B3AB045.A74BAB4@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:m > "Main, Kerry" wrote:L >> The reference to IA64-2 is simply to reflect the fact that OpenVMS, Tru64N >> and NSK are not slated to be ported and run on todays intial release of theD >> IA64 platform, but rather a followon version of the architecture. > P > When will we know exactly what features of IA64 are currently missing to allow > VMS to run on IA64 ?  E Why do you care ?  Do you distrust Fred Kleinsorge to be able to tellt( Michael Capellas how long it will take ?  C If that level of detail is to be provided, I suppose it would be at 4 successive DECUS(encompass for revisionists) events.  M >> As stated numerous times in the releases, todays IA64 technologies will be L >> integrated and upgraded with Alpha technologies to allow these OS's to be
 >> ported. > E > By your logic, EV7 would have been a MIPS/Alpha Hybrid because MipscO > technologies that allow Tandem to run will/would have been merged with Alpha.s > P > Just because you integrate some concepts and functions of another chip doesn't3 > mean that you implement that chip into your chip.-   And nobody said that it did.  @ We are not impressed by your ability to knock down strawmen that you have constructed yourself.   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:57:38 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)"E Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.) 3 Message-ID: <DPnQ7KfgY1m9@eisner.encompasserve.org>>  H In article <01062811294316@csirke.elte.hu>, gazso@csirke.elte.hu writes:q > In article <UjY7MfSdZNKl@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes:F_ >> In article <3B3945E9.80E2050C@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  >>N >>> Had Compaq continued to develop Alpha until IA64 was capable of runnng VMSJ >>> (port included), then the perceptiosn would have been quite different. >>G >> As I read the schedule, Compaq _will_ be continuing to develop AlphatD >> until IA64 is ready, just not beyond that (i.e., not to EV8 which* >> would have been delivered beyond that). >  > Here is the big question:  > - until IA64 is ready? or:A > - until IA64 and the operating system ports for IA64 are ready?o > N > In order to calm down a bit the anger in its VMS customers, Compaq should atM > least commit itself for it won't stop producing Alphas until: IA64 is readyrL > and OpenVMS is ported to the new platform and the OpenVMS Itanium (or iVMSE > or whatever) is supported (and the migration is supported as well).a  D I realize it is hard to read _all_ these notes, there is no date setE for stopping production of Alphas.  2004 is the approximate time they.F expect _new_designs_ to stop.  Somebody quoted Rich Marcello as sayingD that _sales_ of Alpha _systems_ could extend many years beyond that.D Somebody else quoted Michael Capellas as admitting that if IA64 fellA on it's sword Compaq still had the rights to resume designing new  Alpha chips.   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:58:55 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) E Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.) 3 Message-ID: <ayoxQ$Nb9YUl@eisner.encompasserve.org>   W In article <28JUN200106115213@gerg.tamu.edu>, carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) writes:c? > Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes...c_ > }In article <3B3A135B.89FFF08B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:p > }> Larry Kilgallen wrote:pJ > }>> As I read the schedule, Compaq _will_ be continuing to develop AlphaG > }>> until IA64 is ready, just not beyond that (i.e., not to EV8 whichM- > }>> would have been delivered beyond that).e > }> iR > }> No, Compaq is completing development of Alpha, irrespective of when IA64 willQ > }> be ready. So if IA64 is delayed by a few years, Compaq won't be adding a newm! > }> version of alpha to keep up.h > } L > }If adequate performing version of IA64 is not available yet, what does it) > }matter that people are stuck on EV78 ?e > D > Are you not aware that some people do run into the need to upgrade > due to increasing work load?  < Existing Alpha systems support clusters and multiprocessors.C New systems could even be designed without designing new CPU chips.i   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:14:52 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> E Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)u8 Message-ID: <qmemjtc9166ngkb1aqv8s6s99jkpoa8qe4@4ax.com>  E On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:22:41 -0400, rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robertt Deininger) wrote:l  6 >In article <3B3A135B.89FFF08B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei& ><jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote: >- >> Larry Kilgallen wrote: I >> > As I read the schedule, Compaq _will_ be continuing to develop Alpha=F >> > until IA64 is ready, just not beyond that (i.e., not to EV8 which, >> > would have been delivered beyond that). >> hP >> No, Compaq is completing development of Alpha, irrespective of when IA64 willO >> be ready. So if IA64 is delayed by a few years, Compaq won't be adding a newa >> version of alpha to keep up.p >oJ >That specifically contradicts what Compaq has said.  EV7 followed by EV78K >and EV79.  If there's a need, they can likely continue the process shrinksiK >and other incremental improvements.  EV710?  EV7A?  As you contantly pointsA >out, incremental improvements have done pretty well by the 8086.n  A Yep, Capellas committed (for what that's worth) Compaq to deliver A "speed bump" (his words) additions to EV7. By speed bump he meanteC changes other than just incremental clock speed increases. ProbablyaA just bigger caches and shrinking chips allowing some more supportn logic.  J >Are you ever optimistic about anything?  It must be an ordeal just to get >up in the morning.s   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:17:25 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>CE Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)s8 Message-ID: <j1fmjtgais39t9n7biof426vrbtrb08598@4ax.com>  E On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 19:49:23 -0400, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>o wrote:    C >This bullshit is getting tiresome:  either point to some referencei; >describing details about this IA64-2, or shut up about it.-  ? IA64-2 is McKinley. It is IA64-3 which is a dream at the momenth     -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:23:17 +01002% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>tE Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)n8 Message-ID: <e4fmjtcp6e4n5f5l20duk79hiirjlhhc5g@4ax.com>  1 On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:47:11 -0400, "Main, Kerry"  <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> wrote:   >A >pJ >The reference to IA64-2 is simply to reflect the fact that OpenVMS, Tru64L >and NSK are not slated to be ported and run on todays intial release of theB >IA64 platform, but rather a followon version of the architecture.   Kerry,  E Even Hoff has stated that it is possible VMS will run on current IA64 B hardware. Remember we are talking about basic single processor VMSF support to allow customers and ISVs to get started. I am sure that theB 1024 processor Itanium VMS system will require a future version of	 IA64. :-)m   >tK >As stated numerous times in the releases, todays IA64 technologies will beoJ >integrated and upgraded with Alpha technologies to allow these OS's to be >ported.  @ Basic lock-step support suitable for NSK is in McKinley and evenA Merced appears to have sufficient functionality to support singlea processor VMS at least.,    2 >Would you prefer something else like IA64.next ?? >-	 >Regards,- >- >Kerry Maina >Senior Consultant >Compaq Canada Inc.g >Professional Services >Voice: 613-592-4660 >Fax  :  819-772-7036  >Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.comw >d >C >-----Original Message-----J- >From: Bill Todd [mailto:billtodd@foo.mv.com]6 >Sent: June 27, 2001 7:49 PM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComF >Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.) >t >  > 7 >"Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> wrote in messagesM >news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF48DBF0C@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net...t >>I >> >>> Possibly because they no longer have the engineers / designers.<<<e >>K >> The EV68+, EV7 teams have not gone to Intel. They are not slated to movec% >> over until all their work is done.o >>L >> If IA64-2 were delayed, the EV7 work could be considered to be incompelte >> and a speed bump planned. >nC >This bullshit is getting tiresome:  either point to some referenceo; >describing details about this IA64-2, or shut up about it.- >- >- bill- >- >>
 >> Regards >> >>
 >> Kerry Main0 >> Senior Consultant >> Compaq Canada Inc.: >> Professional Services >> Voice: 613-592-4660 >> Fax  :  819-772-7036  >> Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com  >n   -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 13:03:33 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)0E Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning... (was: Question to Charlie Matco.)>3 Message-ID: <q60R$ULFj$Yn@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <e4fmjtcp6e4n5f5l20duk79hiirjlhhc5g@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:3 > On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:47:11 -0400, "Main, Kerry"u  > <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> wrote: >  >> >>K >>The reference to IA64-2 is simply to reflect the fact that OpenVMS, Tru64oM >>and NSK are not slated to be ported and run on todays intial release of theAC >>IA64 platform, but rather a followon version of the architecture.  >  > Kerry, > G > Even Hoff has stated that it is possible VMS will run on current IA64tD > hardware. Remember we are talking about basic single processor VMSH > support to allow customers and ISVs to get started. I am sure that theD > 1024 processor Itanium VMS system will require a future version of > IA64. :-)n  > Mr. Hoffman's statement that I recall said for "internal use".> Based on the feedback in this newsgroup, I think they would be< well-advised to keep that internal, since known defects that; made it outside Compaq would be used to trumpet the message  "VMS is dead".  9 Something that works "in the lab" is quite acceptable for > internal use.  Have you ever seen someone from VMS Development4 look at a new machine at DECUS Symposia and exclaim:  < 	"So that's what it looks like with the cabinet covers on !"   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:05:00 -0700A1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US> $ Subject: Re: Wailing and moaning....3 Message-ID: <3B3A9EDC.5EE7E51B@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>    Larry Kilgallen wrote:  L > > But one of the reasons for buying TRU64 rather than other Unix's was theK > > fact it ran on the Alpha chip. This was a selling point in certain high " > > performance computing markets. > > > And now they will have to survive on software quality alone,? > meaning there is no opportunity for Tru64 Development to resto@ > on the laurels of the chip designers.  That can only be a goodB > thing for software quality.  The basic principle I am interestedC > in is software quality, rather than Tru64 success.  The same goes:
 > for VMS.  I   Software quality is important, but a big problem with Tru64 is software7D availability also.  This was always a problem at my previous job andH the main reason why I suspect with the recent announcement of the demiseG of Alpha that my previous employer will probably move to Sun.  I'm gladV> I'm no longer there to reap the wrath for my Alpha evangelism.   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:50:18 +0200t= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> , Subject: Re: What about performance issues??) Message-ID: <3B3B2809.558D7BB5@gtech.com>J   Bill Gunshannon wrote:A > It has been said here that VMS performance, particularly I/O isaB > considerably slower than under other OSes.  Is this true, or wasD > it just the unjustified rantings of people not in a place to know?A > If it is in fact true, won't this become even more apparent andn? > detrimental once VMS is running on the same hardware as theseg > other OSes??  	 It could.w  ; But the problem is basicly due to VMS giving data integrityo@ total priority compared with performance when it comes to cache.  > VMS engineering know the problem and XFC in VMS 7.3 are a step in the rigth direction (AFAIK).-   Arne   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:28:44 GMTg2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)D Subject: Re: what it mean "exbytlm..." (was: Re: little help please)1 Message-ID: <0XI_6.249$rc5.6721@news.cpqcorp.net>0  d In article <kTr_6.2005$z11.158366@news.infostrada.it>, "wright" <wright.patterson@libero.it> writes:  0 :accept: non-translatable vms error code: 0x2A14- :%system-f-exbytlm, exceeded byte count quotaa ..D :every 7 day the application crashes with the error displayed above.  @   When posting, please provide the information referenced in the>   introductory section of the OpenVMS FAQ -- in this case, the?   OpenVMS platform and version, ECO kit, relevent product name o>   and version, the details of the particular application, etc.;   Also which OpenVMS and TCP/IP ECOs have been applied, andf=   details of the application support -- is this error arising <   from a locally-supported application or from a commercial 
   product.  ?   Please also pick a title specific to the question -- the morenC   generic the subject or the more it appears to be newsgroup spam, e>   the less likely you will receive an answer to your question.  >   The better the title and the more information you provide in@   your posting, the more likely you will receive an answer, and 5   the more likely you will receive an answer quickly.l     No offense is intended.l  ; :what happens to accept() ?     [the common TCPIP function]l  =   This initially looks like it is returned by an application.c@   This could be a problem with the accept call or the IP stack, @   or it could be that the accept call that is nailed by another %   error elsewhere in the application.a  0 :maybe the application does not release memory ?  1   This is certainly something I have seen before.g  ? :and ... call after call, up to the need of accept, then dies ?J  *   This does look like a leak of some sort.  F   If this is YOUR source code, please see topic (1661) in the Ask The %   Wizard area of the OpenVMS website.R  rH   If this is commercial code, contact the vendor of the package that is H   reporting the error -- in this case, the support for the package that F   is calling which-ever TCP/IP stack installed on this OpenVMS system.  : :what does it mean " exbytlm, exceeded byte count quota" ?   $ HELP/MESSAGE EXBYTLM  $  EXBYTLM,  exceeded byte count quota  '   Facility:     SYSTEM, System Services   N   Explanation:  The requested operation failed because the byte count quota ofL                 the process is not large enough. This can occur if excessiveL                 concurrent buffered I/O is outstanding, if a large number ofN                 mailboxes is created, or if a large number of windows needs to4                 be created to completely map a file.  K                 Failure on window creation can occur on a $CRMPSC, $CREATE_tJ                 GFILE, $CRMPSC_FILE_64, or $CRMPSC_GFILE_64 system serviceL                 call, the DCL command RUN, or an Access or Create of a file.L                 In this case, this message indicates that the specified fileI                 is very fragmented or the byte limit quota of the process4$                 should be increased.  H                 Failure can also occur on a disk read or write operationH                 indicating that a prior extend operation on the file has4                 caused it to become very fragmented.  K   User Action:  Compress the file by copying the volume with BACKUP, or askm?                 the system manager to increase the BYTLM quota.R    --i      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, 28 Jun 2001 09:27:46 -0300o) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.brc) Subject: Where is Samsung in this story ? L Message-ID: <OF247F2680.CCD75CBD-ON03256A79.00446122@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>  1 I didnt see any comment about Suamsung's positiont+ during this week. Do you have any idea ????    Regardse   FC   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:05:23 -0400s% From: "The Grump" <moore_mc@yahoo.ca>e. Subject: Re: Which group for VMS hardware ads?4 Message-ID: <KQG_6.257384$Z2.3028425@nnrp1.uunet.ca>  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in message>5 news:z9x_6.1079$UT1.330221@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...P >l) > <jon@eoin.demon.co.uk> wrote in messagea, > news:9hdkio$pkt$2@INDY.eoin.demon.co.uk...
 > > Hello, > > H > > I'm new here, and don't want to rock the boat, so I'd be grateful if > anyoneD > > could tell me if there is a suitable/preferred group to post VMS hardware > > for sale ads in. > >s >b; > The eBay "Vintage Computer" section might be appropriate.t >y >s    J Maybe just contact Craig Barrett directly.........but then again he's used# to having the stuff GIVEN to him!!!L   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:34:49 -0500r+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>r. Subject: RE: Which group for VMS hardware ads?L Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0D9D2008@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>  G Generally, if it runs VMS, or with VMS, then people don't mind it to ben= posted to comp.os.vms.  comp.sys.dec may also be appropriate.M   Regards,   Chris@  ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developero Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");  'l  a   > -----Original Message-----: > From: jon@eoin.demon.co.uk [mailto:jon@eoin.demon.co.uk]  ; > I'm new here, and don't want to rock the boat, so I'd be   > grateful if anyone? > could tell me if there is a suitable/preferred group to post s > VMS hardware > for sale ads in.   > Thanks in advance.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:56:38 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>. Subject: Re: Which group for VMS hardware ads?: Message-ID: <GAH_6.767$Bp5.429794@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  0 "The Grump" <moore_mc@yahoo.ca> wrote in message. news:KQG_6.257384$Z2.3028425@nnrp1.uunet.ca... >uA > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messages7 > news:z9x_6.1079$UT1.330221@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net.... > >4+ > > <jon@eoin.demon.co.uk> wrote in messagee. > > news:9hdkio$pkt$2@INDY.eoin.demon.co.uk... > > > Hello, > > >_J > > > I'm new here, and don't want to rock the boat, so I'd be grateful if
 > > anyoneF > > > could tell me if there is a suitable/preferred group to post VMS
 > hardware > > > for sale ads in. > > >h > > = > > The eBay "Vintage Computer" section might be appropriate.- > >  > >  >g >eL > Maybe just contact Craig Barrett directly.........but then again he's used% > to having the stuff GIVEN to him!!!  >s  K Now there's an interesting issue: Intel runs its fabs on VMS. If there's no12 VMS, what does Intel use to run its fabs? Windoze?   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:42:05 GMTc- From: lucejr@encompasserve.org (Charlie Luce)>. Subject: Re: Which group for VMS hardware ads?C Message-ID: <hfI_6.1088$ck5.96098@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>q  L In article <GAH_6.767$Bp5.429794@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, Terry C. Shannon  says...i >,L >Now there's an interesting issue: Intel runs its fabs on VMS. If there's no3 >VMS, what does Intel use to run its fabs? Windoze?e  J HP's been trying to sell Intel on switching thier fabs to run on their HP * 9000 based manufacturing system for years.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:07:48 -0500s* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>. Subject: RE: Which group for VMS hardware ads?- Message-ID: <0033000027832302000002L022*@MHS>    =0AIf there's no3 >VMS, what does Intel use to run its fabs? Windoze?o  3    Sounds like a sure-fire spiral of death to me...n  	    WWWebbw   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET ( > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 11:47 AMF > To: Webb, William W - Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET0 > Subject: RE: Which group for VMS hardware ads? >a >s< > In article <GAH_6.767$Bp5.429794@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, > Terry C. Shannon	 > says...r > >e; > >Now there's an interesting issue: Intel runs its fabs onc > VMS. If there's no5 > >VMS, what does Intel use to run its fabs? Windoze?w >e? > HP's been trying to sell Intel on switching thier fabs to rune
 > on their HP>, > 9000 based manufacturing system for years. >=   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 20:20:57 -0700N5 From: "cstranslations" <cstranslations@email.msn.com>i4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either) Message-ID: <utpQ4E4$AHA.265@cpmsnbbsa09>   ? "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messagerF news:rdeininger-2706011519320001@user-2ivebp7.dialup.mindspring.com...L > In article <9hd6i0$1v7@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu > wrote: >t. > > All that said, it might be prudent to takeI > > this second VMS porting opportunity to isolate the platform dependentlF > > pieces of the OS cleanly and to simultaneously port to PowerPC and Hammer.)I > > They don't need a whole bunch of people working on these other ports,n justG > > one or two guys for each of those other platforms, making sure thatl everyoI > > nonhardware dependent module that builds for IA64 also builds for thes other  > > platforms. > L > I suspect that VMS is getting more portable every time it is ported.  Some- > of what you want will happen automagically.g >.I > The "couple of guys" scheme has one major flaw, I think.  To build eachhF > module on another platform, they'll need compilers targeted to thoseL > platforms.  And a couple of guys can't make those compilers in their spare > time without getting caught.  J Oh I don't know... We're talking spare time after going home and few hoursJ here and there on the weekends right? Once it's done they could just bring8 it in on a couple floppies, "look what I did boss!"  :-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:25:38 +0200.= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>u4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either) Message-ID: <3B3B2242.33AE171C@gtech.com>7   David Mathog wrote:0L > They could not make market inroads with the Alpha, which for all but a fewJ > months of its life was the fastest CPU on the planet.  Among the reasonsJ > they did not do so were: noncompetitive prices, lack of advertising, andJ > insufficient software support, most notably, tepid support by Microsoft.J > That's not a technical problem, it's a management level problem, and theI > management is still there.  If they can't sell the greatest thing sincee% > sliced bread, what can they sell???h   Unfortunatetly I agree.i  E IA-32 has gained a lot on Alpha regarding performanve in the last 3-4t years.E And I can understand that Compaq was worried about IA-64 versus Alphae in the future.  @ But the question is: why was Alpha sales low ? I have read a lot; of reasons and I am quite sure that poor marketing, too fewe
 applications, B uncertainty about the future and too high prices are all much more common answers.d  D And this decision does not solve those problems. Indeed it increases them.   ! So the future does not look good.c   Arne   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:30:26 -0400/ From: jordan@lisa.gemair.com (Jordan Henderson)l4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either* Message-ID: <9hfbhi$g55$1@lisa.gemair.com>  ) In article <3B3B2242.33AE171C@gtech.com>, ? Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?=  <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote:a >David Mathog wrote:M >> They could not make market inroads with the Alpha, which for all but a fewoK >> months of its life was the fastest CPU on the planet.  Among the reasonsvK >> they did not do so were: noncompetitive prices, lack of advertising, andoK >> insufficient software support, most notably, tepid support by Microsoft. K >> That's not a technical problem, it's a management level problem, and thelJ >> management is still there.  If they can't sell the greatest thing since& >> sliced bread, what can they sell??? >  >Unfortunatetly I agree. > F >IA-32 has gained a lot on Alpha regarding performanve in the last 3-4 >years.SF >And I can understand that Compaq was worried about IA-64 versus Alpha >in the future.0 >>A >But the question is: why was Alpha sales low ? I have read a lot < >of reasons and I am quite sure that poor marketing, too few >applications,C >uncertainty about the future and too high prices are all much more: >common answers. >.E >And this decision does not solve those problems. Indeed it increasese >them. >e" >So the future does not look good. >0  K Another problem was product placement, which goes along with noncompetitive7H prices.  They should have produced low-cost low-end Alpha motherboards, D even if those systems would not outperform higher end Intel systems.  D I think a lot of hobbyists and small shops might have purchased suchG systems which would have seeded the future.  A lot of large businesses iJ with a stake in big Alpha Iron might have had a place for commodity Alphas as well.  H Note that this is not exactly identical with noncompetitive prices.  TheI price/performance of high end Alpha systems wasn't there either, and thattH should have been addressed separately.  They should have been willing toF loss leader old technology Alphas and flood the market with commodity H systems, even if these systems didn't exceed significantly benchmarks onG similarly configured commodity Intel systems of the day.  This wouldn't E have been cost DEC very much as they were running the Hudson plant atSD a very low utilization anyway.  It would have been better to lose 2xG on the Hudson plant and flood the low-end Alpha market than lose 1x anda- have little market penetration at some point.   E They also had the cash on hand to carry off such a plan at one point.-   >Arne-   -Jordan Henderson  jordan@greenapple.com0   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:34:00 GMT:4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either: Message-ID: <sfH_6.744$Bp5.423334@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  ? "Michael D. Ober" <mdo.@.wakeassoc.com.nospam> wrote in messagel- news:xyq_6.2220$T_2.374135@news.uswest.net...p >nA > "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messagelH > news:rdeininger-2706011519320001@user-2ivebp7.dialup.mindspring.com...0 > > In article <9hd6i0$1v7@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu 
 > > wrote: > >  > >bB > > > Think of it is insurance - you don't really want your familyK > > > to collect on your life insurance, but you'd be a fool not to pay it.n > SoK > > > when 2003 hits, if Microsoft announces that they've just made PowerPC  > the K > > > primary platform for Windows and are stopping all further developmente onK > > > IA64, Compaq, and more importantly, VMS, stands a chance of surviving  > it.a > >'L > > I assume you're making the same insurance suggestion to HP and the otherE > > unix folks who will certainly (according to you) beat Compaq into E > > IA64-land?  Compaq's risk at this point isn't much different than- several-J > > other companies'.  Compaq might have fired more rounds into their feet to> > > get here, but they find themselves in a fairly large boat. > >f >aL > The difference here is that IBM, HP, et.al won't have killed their primaryC > processor/OS lines.  Compaq will be the only one without the lifei
 preserver.  J Very true with IBM (Power4 coming along soon, etc, and no end in sight forL it). HP has extended the life of PA-RISC by several iterations already, withI perhaps two more to come. I don't know how much more headroom PA-RISC has  left in it.a  I As for Compaq, they are limited to whatever they can wring out of the EV7dH design, which apparently is EV78 and EV79. So if this migration does notI work, or the new VMS- (and T64 and NSK) ready silicon is not available in $ the 2004 timeframe, Compaq is toast.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:44:18 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either: Message-ID: <6pH_6.762$Bp5.426087@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  7 "Arne Vajhj" <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote in message6# news:3B3B2242.33AE171C@gtech.com...h     >rB > But the question is: why was Alpha sales low ? I have read a lot= > of reasons and I am quite sure that poor marketing, too fewe > applications,iD > uncertainty about the future and too high prices are all much more > common answers.r >iF > And this decision does not solve those problems. Indeed it increases > them.t  - The Compaq party line is that the transition:v  8 1) Eliminates concerns about Alpha's long-term viability  * 2) Will reduce the cost of future servers.  A 3) Attract more apps to VMS and T64 because of (1) and (2) above.s  H Well, killing Alpha certainly does resolve questions about its long-termE viability. It also raises questions about the viability of EV7 Marvelo systems!  K Cost reduction on future servers is limited to the chip level. The $250M orsK so per year on Alpha chip development aside, the cost reduction will not beh very significant.a  C Apps can only be attracted if ISVs (and customers) believe that the L transition is technically feasible and that Compaq can and will pull it off.  2 At the end of the day, IT'S THE MARKETING, STUPID!  J We'll just have to see how Compaq does in this regard. DEC never "got it,"F despite being told time and again by a multiplicity of sources (press,I analysts--including the big firms--and consultants, customers, employees,tJ etc). If Compaq doesn't communicate this grand plan rapidly, convincingly,I and coherently, it will be labeled as a Risky Scheme and it will fail. Soa! will Compaq Computer Corporation.f   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Jun 2001 15:22:03 GMT2 From: mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog)4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either, Message-ID: <9hfi2r$428@gap.cco.caltech.edu>   In article <rdeininger-2706011519320001@user-2ivebp7.dialup.mindspring.com>, rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) writes:e >aH >The "couple of guys" scheme has one major flaw, I think.  To build eachE >module on another platform, they'll need compilers targeted to thosePK >platforms.  And a couple of guys can't make those compilers in their spareY >time without getting caught.l  J For the PowerPC they don't have to make compilers - they can use the ones E from IBM.  Well, they may need to make one macro32 to C translator.  eD Anything else that presents a problem at compilation is probably in < violation of the language standard and should be corrected.   ? >> Think of it is insurance - you don't really want your familyyL >> to collect on your life insurance, but you'd be a fool not to pay it.  SoL >> when 2003 hits, if Microsoft announces that they've just made PowerPC theK >> primary platform for Windows and are stopping all further development ontM >> IA64, Compaq, and more importantly, VMS, stands a chance of surviving it. c >eI >I assume you're making the same insurance suggestion to HP and the otherrB >unix folks who will certainly (according to you) beat Compaq into >IA64-land?   J HP can resurrect their own CPU if they want to, Compaq having tied itself ( up in knots with Intel, probably cannot.  J And some of the bigger, fatter, rats (FIC and Asustek) are already leaving. the ship, or rather, refusing to get on. See:   +     http://www.theinquirer.org/28060108.htme   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu? Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech  J **************************************************************************J *                       RIP VMS & ALPHA                                  *J **************************************************************************   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 12:33:34 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) 4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either3 Message-ID: <$GS+QxAookBi@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  a In article <9hfi2r$428@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog) writes:  > In article <rdeininger-2706011519320001@user-2ivebp7.dialup.mindspring.com>, rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) writes:@ >>I >>The "couple of guys" scheme has one major flaw, I think.  To build each2F >>module on another platform, they'll need compilers targeted to thoseL >>platforms.  And a couple of guys can't make those compilers in their spare >>time without getting caught. > L > For the PowerPC they don't have to make compilers - they can use the ones G > from IBM.  Well, they may need to make one macro32 to C translator.  uF > Anything else that presents a problem at compilation is probably in > > violation of the language standard and should be corrected.   C I am certain that nobody in this group has never used a nonstandard C extension to a language, such as using a dollar sign in an Ada or C < symbol name, like all thos system services and RTL routines.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:55:23 GMTt= From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)r4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either0 Message-ID: <009FE35A.0F188691@SendSpamHere.ORG>  q In article <6pH_6.762$Bp5.426087@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:e > 8 >"Arne Vajhj" <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote in message$ >news:3B3B2242.33AE171C@gtech.com... >  >' >>C >> But the question is: why was Alpha sales low ? I have read a lota> >> of reasons and I am quite sure that poor marketing, too few >> applications,E >> uncertainty about the future and too high prices are all much moree >> common answers. >>G >> And this decision does not solve those problems. Indeed it increases  >> them. >o. >The Compaq party line is that the transition: >-9 >1) Eliminates concerns about Alpha's long-term viability  >r+ >2) Will reduce the cost of future servers.. >>B >3) Attract more apps to VMS and T64 because of (1) and (2) above. >7I >Well, killing Alpha certainly does resolve questions about its long-termtF >viability. It also raises questions about the viability of EV7 Marvel	 >systems!o ><L >Cost reduction on future servers is limited to the chip level. The $250M orL >so per year on Alpha chip development aside, the cost reduction will not be >very significant. >ND >Apps can only be attracted if ISVs (and customers) believe that theM >transition is technically feasible and that Compaq can and will pull it off.l > 3 >At the end of the day, IT'S THE MARKETING, STUPID!  >dK >We'll just have to see how Compaq does in this regard. DEC never "got it,"eG >despite being told time and again by a multiplicity of sources (press,aJ >analysts--including the big firms--and consultants, customers, employees,K >etc). If Compaq doesn't communicate this grand plan rapidly, convincingly, J >and coherently, it will be labeled as a Risky Scheme and it will fail. So" >will Compaq Computer Corporation.   Good and well deserved too!    --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMh             O city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:25:11 GMT.0 From: sander@vmsbiz.enet.dec.com (Warren Sander)/ Subject: Re: www.openvms.compaq.com unreachablee1 Message-ID: <r%H_6.247$rc5.6922@news.cpqcorp.net>   C I was on vacation and didn't get any page's about the server being b> down. It could have been a network glitch. They seem to happen more and more.  G Anyway. You can't traceroute, ping etc any of the 'compaq.com' servers.>G the routers don't allow that stuff through. It gets rid of a lot of DOS8
 type attacks.*   -warren0   -- rB ------------------------------------------------------------------6 Warren Sander                        OpenVMS MarketingD Compaq Computer Corporation          Work:  warren.sander@compaq.comE 200 Forest Street MR01-3/J1          Personal: sander@ma.ultranet.come3 Marlboro, MA 01752                   (508) 467-4875 6    My opinions are my own and I only speak for myself -          Read http://www.openvms.compaq.com/ tB ------------------------------------------------------------------   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Jun 2001 03:55:19 -0700. From: jordan@greenapple.com (Jordan Henderson)Y Subject: Re: [OT] IBM Slow and sclerotic?  ( Was Re: Compaq's Alpha design team  for salen= Message-ID: <51d39066.0106280255.7e81bf06@posting.google.com>   ] Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> wrote in message news:<3B3A5671.87EB3F68@infopuls.com>...< > Jordan Henderson wrote:m >  > [SNIP] >  y > > How about: > > & > >     http://www.realwareawards.com/ > > I > >     http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/stories/reviews/0,6755,2713481,00.htmls > > @ > >     http://www.siia.net/events/awards/2001codies/winner.html > > 6 > >     http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/010502/0101026581.html > > 8 > >     http://www.linuxworldexpo.com/event-sub-03.shtml > > > I don't trust these sources much less than close second hand? > experience and detailed explanations (remember the MIT guy?).i  A Please cite your reference for the "MIT guy".  I note that all ofl@ the references I gave above are fairly recent, most of them less@ than 60 days old.  Could be that a new revision of Websphere has  addressed the problems he cited?  ? Apparently, some reviewers have found Websphere to be useful atmB least in some situations.  YMMV, but your sweeping generalizations0 about IBM developed software seem unsupportable.   > B > > Now, I have to admit that I have no first hand experience with@ > > Websphere, and I think you'd have to admit that yourself.  I? > > just go by what's said in the press on such things, and thenC > > above looks pretty impressive.  Hardly worthy of the "worthless. > > piece of shit".. > B > This is the nicest description which is close to be appropriate.? > To put it in a different context: selling this is inline withi? > the type of fraud common with IBM SW products - it's simply a-B > way to get customers on the IBM life support system which is BTW > very, very expensive ... > = > > I note that you failed to address _any_ of the other SW Ie< > > mentioned.  I guess I have to assume that you are takingB > > back the statement "IBM has no useful piece of SW developed by
 > > its own."f > A > On the contrary - as I mentioned I don't want to delve in thesetB > areas also because the examples I picked were perfectly valid toA > show that you were writing about things you don't know exactly.  > : > > I would guess that a highly performing, cross platform@ > > database like DB/2 would be useful to someone.  Or, a reallyA > > good JIT Java compiler might be of some use to a Java user ord? > > developer.  Then, if you need voice recognition, you've got3: > > two realistic choices now, L&H (ha! would you bet your? > > application on software from a bunch of managers in jail ont@ > > fraud?) or ViaVoice, from IBM.  ViaVoice sounds useful, too.A > > A journaling file system might be useful to some Linux users.u > 8 > DB/2 has some major drawbacks compared to other DBs. I@ > participated in an evaluate 2 years ago and DB/2 came out flat@ > as a frog after a tank going over it. Oracle was the winner at
 > the end. >   ' Useless is how you would describe DB/2?   B > Java is crap by design. Do you know the San Francisco Framework? > Enough said. >   0 Still, a good JIT compiler is useful to someone.  = > > I know that where I work, we are finding a lot of use for@ > > MQ Series. > > = > > Admit it, your statement that "IBM has no useful piece ofa; > > SW developed by its own." is just a ridiculous sweepingt* > > statement that you now cannot justify. > ? > On the contrary I have to re-inforce that and to additionally ; > give the advice to everyone not to buy services from thato
 > company. >  > [SNIP] > I > > This is not an example of SW developed by IBM, true, but it is a goodtA > > example of a company that is not slow or sclerotic.  A lot ofeH > > companies buy technology and bury them (MS), or mismanage them (CA), > > but IBM has done neither.e > > > But this is exactly what sl&scl companies do becaues they're> > unable to do it on their own in a timely fashion and with an > idea where to go!a  ? A slow and sclerotic company would typically buy and mismanage u> technology, I would think, but they've done a pretty good job  with Lotus.h  9 > Think about Micro$hit when they missed the train to thes? > Internet. How much money and blackmailing other companies dido > they to destroy Netscape?i > F > > In your post you accuse IBM of being slow and sclerotic.  Somehow,F > > I think this image is at odds with a company that develops some of > > the world's finest HW. > 3 > Again, please read my initial post on that topic.n >   B Please explain.  I've read your initial post.  You only said that @ they had no useful piece of SW, but also that they were slow and? sclerotic.  I don't see that a company that does groundbreakingmA research into so many areas can be described accurately that way.e  I > > But, then, I have to admit, I don't understand your post.  See below.  >  > Different topics!h >    ?l  C > > The Web wasn't that new in the Summer of 1996???  Well, I guesssF > > Tim Berners-Lee did have some pages up in 1991.  Seriously though,D > > how many times has the Internet doubled in users since then?  OnH > > the other hand, the Web was experiencing rapid growth in those days. > A > It was old news in the time of world I live. At that time I hadyA > two years of Java applet developing finished and in trains were 9 > mobile Internet displays offered. Do you call that new?w >   1 Did you work for Sun in California at the time?  a  
 This page:  4   http://java.sun.com/features/1998/05/birthday.html  D says that the first release of Java was in March of 1995.  I find itG difficult to beleive you were developing in Java in the summer of 1994.u  F Also, please give me a citation for mobile Internet displays on trains in the Summer of 1996.  E While you're at it, tell me about all those other companies that were > doing large Web Site management so well in the Summer of 1996.  B > > Again, IBM attempted a site that had unprecedented hits at theF > > time and experienced some problems.  Sounds like a risk taker, not> > > something you would expect from a slow, sclerotic company. > @ > It seems that you're not at all familiar what really happened.> > The completely wrong dimensioned access connections were the7 > least problem though the one which was quite visible., > D > > Got anything more recent than 5 years ago of how bad the IBM web2 > > sites are?  How about a really recent example? > >  > >   http://www.wimbledon.com/, > > I > > Seems like a pretty good site to me.  Well laid out, lots of featuresnJ > > easy to navigate, fast searches.  Do you have an example of a _better_3 > > sports event site?  Why is your example better?  > A > Sorry, I'm not interested in sports other than doing it myself.v >   D Oh, but you are interested in criticizing IBM sports web sites.  YouC were saying that IBM web sites are slow and poorly defined.  Please : tell me who does it better?  They seem pretty good, today.  E > > Do you remember how deftly IBM got out of networking devices justaD > > before the market completely dropped out?  Leaving Cisco and the@ > > optical companies gasping for air?  Hardly a move by a slow, > > sclerotic company. > ? > Losing a business is a significant symptom for beeing sl&scl.m > = > BTW did you notice that you didn't respond to several of my  > facts? >   > Which facts are those?  I see very few 'facts', just a lot of ( unsubstatiated assertions in your posts.  C > > IBM is probably the most recognized brand in all of IT.  They'do@ > > be crazy to change it.  Oh, I know, how about something like' > > "Accenture", that'd be more snappy.  > < > IBM has the smell of fraud, corruption and blackmail. To aB > certain degree it's honest to stay to that by keeping the rottenA > name. But OTOH it's a symptom for not understanding what has to-B > be done from an economical point of view. And sorry for relatingB > a word like "honest" with IBM - this is one of the least fitting > association. > E > > I have dealt personally with IBM consultants, but I don't want toaD > > share these experiences in a public forum.  Leave it to say thatE > > I've dealt with much worse, even from other big consulting firms.y >  > Fair enough. >  > [SNIP] > I > > I was just pointing out how difficult it is for IBM to move fast (andcJ > > I think they do a pretty good job) when you are so large, and you giveJ > > me a counter example of someone who represents a much smaller company.D > > If there's any irony, it's because you want to keep changing the > > subject. > @ > No, I didn't. I tried to guide your attention to the fact thatB > your qualification of Steve Job's work was beyound any notion of> > reality. And BTW Apple has a size which allows for comparing > them with IBM. >   K So, Apple is quick and IBM is slow?  Apple who's every software engineeringlK product is years late?  Apple who's cube has been a dismal failure?   AppleoH who still can't figure out what to do about their distribution channels?  G > > OK.  Now I see!  An organization cannot have a vision.  So when youaD > > said that IBM is "visionless" you were just stating a tautology! >  > Narrowminded.t >  o    I don't understand your comment.  E > > But wait, now you are saying that almost every other company (alleG > > organizations) show more vision than IBM.  How can you show more oftA > > something that you can't have at all by your own definitions.d > ? > Don't waste your time with that type of arguing. Think about!C> > You won't learn anything. It's like arguing about grammar or > other language attributes. >   E What do you mean here?  We are talking about language attributes, youiF know, the meaning of words.  You appear to want them to mean something
 different.  D > > I have to admit that I don't understand your post, as you accuseD > > me of above.  But then, it appears you don't understand what you3 > > are saying either, so I can perhaps be excused.7 > @ > Not at all. And as you might have noticed despite your limited@ > understanding: there are different topics in this conversation@ > and if you don't understand one part - the one I was referringA > to - it means that you didn't understand my post as a whole but B > that doesn't mean that you could transfer your  problem from one+ > part to another where it might not exist.o >   C These debates are made up of words and those words have a definite eB meaning.  Since you refuse to define any of your terms, I can onlyD try to devine your meaning from how you use them.  Since you refuse 5 to define your terms, I have to try and decipher what D you mean from context.  When I find that you are using the same wordD incosistently (accusing IBM of being visionless and then saying that2 an organization cannot have vision), I'm confused.  J Please clear this conflict up for me.  It should be simple... Just provideE dictionary definition(s) of vision.  Show me how you can say that IBMgK is visionless (and that most other companies have more vision) and how, on h3 the other hand, an organization cannot have vision.o  C While you are at it, also define useless.  You seem to use a lot ofi words in non-standard ways.   D > > It's really hard to get a definition of "vision" out of you, butB > > I'm getting it bit-by-bit in what you say about it.  You avoidE > > the dictionary definition below, you know, where you say it's notoF > > "seeing into the future or prophesy".  The dictionary definition IG > >  associate with the word vision is "foresight", which is synonomous*E > > with being able to see into the future.  Please, tell me, what do  > > _you_ mean by vision?H > ? > This makes me tired. I suppose you know that the meaning of a*@ > word depends on the context. If a crystal ball analyser speaksA > about vision it clearly means something different than if Steven+ > Jobs lives it. What is the vision of IBM?c >   J I wouldn't say that 'vision' as I'm using it is a mystical knowledge, likeE a crystal ball gazer has, it's more like foresight, perception, whichoD implies being able to accurately gauge the future in a reasoned, not mystical, way.  / Who knows what it means to you, you won't say. e  = > > IBM bought Lotus in July of 1995.  By this time, OS/2 hadf> > > been almost completely abandoned in the Enterprise.  Sure,? > > they sold a lot of $89.95 boxes in 1994-95 to home and SOHOeA > > users, but by late 1995, the companies that had adopted OS/2,tC > > by and large, were moving away from OS/2 toward NT in a big wayy9 > > and the future looked very bleak for Enterprise OS/2.r > 9 > Depends on the part of the world and the business area.r > > > > Lotus notes is an Enterprise tool, selling into Enterprise< > > accounts.  No point in selling for a platform that's not. > > used in Enterprise accounts, now is there? >  > As I said, it depends. >   ? As I said, Lotus probably had targets for the markets they were B selling into.  They weren't going to develop a client for a market? that was tiny.  So, part of the world and business area doesn't 3 really come into it, just size of the total market.r  I > > Well, Andrew Harrison, for one.  There are others, particularly those-1 > > who would defend some things about UNIX here.c > > > Thanks, and yes, you are right on that. But I think that theA > UNIX discussion is not yet in a state that you could claim thatj> > as an example for me "beeing not in touch with reality". The? > most knowledgeable people in this NG added valuable argumentso> > against UNIX from what I conclude that my view of reality in! > this area is quite appropriate.i >   > Talk about different contexts.  I never claimed that those who? questioned your judgement here were right.  I was only pointingv@ out how irrelevant it is to point out what others may or may not' have questioned in earlier discussions.1  > It was just a stupid ad hominem attack using the authority of ? others that you didn't name against me.  The suggestion is thatp< I've often found to be inaccurate in the past.  Mostly, it's> Andrew Harrison that's questioning my inaccuracy.  If you want; to agree with AH, fine, but don't just make these sweeping  : attacks against me without being expected to back them up.  G > > Now, who questions my knowledge of facts except Andrew Harrison andvI > > yourself.  Are you saying that Andrew was correct on those occassionsp' > > and incorrect when criticizing you?o > > > Now, I don't regard AH as valuable source of information and > critiques.A > I thought about other posters who questioned your point of viewG- > (vision?) of HW development and assessment.p >    Who has done this?  @ > > Hardly.  I didn't make sweeping generalizations using highly@ > > charged rhetoric that I couldn't back up.  I questioned yourB > > judgement and gave a lot of specific examples to disprove your? > > generalizations.  Specific examples that you have failed to ' > > address, for the most part, at all.w > @ > Read your first sentences again. You are changeing the subject@ > here. I never critisised that you're doubting my facts but the; > style of your post. And I was completely specific on thataB > (quoting, if you remember) that there is no technical reason why' > you could have mismachted my comment.  >   ? I'm not changing the subject.  You said that I started the kindn@ of argumentation that I was criticizing.  I was criticizing your@ making highly charged, sweeping generalizations.  I haven't done that.n  B > > Oh, now here's an example that's 20 years old!  I believe thatA > > IBM has almost completely reorganized about twice since then. B > > I believe that _all_ of the SW products that I mentioned above9 > > as being useful were developed since then.  They grewo: > > to be the dominant services organization in that time. > > > But you didn't show with a certain credibility that these SW9 > have been developed by IBM and are in fact that useful.p > C > > About par for you.  A 5 year old example at how bad they are at3B > > Web Site management (which is like 50 years in Internet-time),B > > and a 20 year old decision.  That decision, BTW, was driven byA > > their frantic quest to field the original IBM PC before AppletC > > fielded a new generation.  Again, hardly an accusation of being A > > slow and sclerotic that you make bad decisions in the heat of01 > > trying to get something to market right away.u >  > If that was the reason ...A > Besides simple management mistakes it was the lack of a vision!  >   E A lack of vision that helped to establish the IBM PC as the 'Industryn= Standard' and led to IBM dominating the desktop for 10 years.o  @ > > I've had the tough job of proving a negative.  You said thatC > > (paraphrase) "IBM has no useful SW they developed on their own./@ > > They are slow, sclerotic and visionless".  I've had to prove > > this was not true. > > ? > > Fortunately, you used universal generalizations that can behB > > disproved with specific examples.  I gave specific examples ofA > > useful software, and how they are not, particularly in the HWhB > > domain, a slow, sclerotic and visionless company.  In the caseE > > of useful SW, you've only chosen to address Websphere at all, anduF > > I've now countered that with my own reasons for thinking that it'sF > > at least _useful_.  In the case of the HW, proving that IBM is not? > > slow and sclerotic, you've not given any rebuttal _at all_.e > B > Read my statements again, understand them and you will know why.( > You didn't prove what you're claiming.? > I found more examples to support my position. Especially youro* > reasoning about the crap IBM PC is weak. > B > > It seems the onus is on you to show how the SW examples I gave@ > > above are "useless".  Also, you need to justify how IBM is aD > > slow and sclerotic company in the face of a lot of evidence thatE > > they are actually quite innovative, particularly in the HW arena.w > 5 > Read my statements again and draw the consequences.t> > The companies I know are better without services and SW from > IBM. >   > > I could say the same to you. > 5 > A typical argument of a company which is sl&scl ...B >  > [snip]   -Jordan Henderson  jordan@greenapple.coml   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.356 ************************