1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 30 Jun 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 359       Contents:1 Re: 3 Reasons why VMS is alive and probably well+ ! Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows ! Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows ! Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows  Re: Alpha -> ItaniumH Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves theirincompetence)" Another VMS project bites the dust& Re: Another VMS project bites the dust+ Re: Apache CGI Problems on VMS with TCPware  Re: BACKUP listing []  Re: BACKUP listing [] * Re: Capellas admits move anti-competitive? Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms.  Re: Changing platforms. 0 Re: Combining lines of DCL code into one line???0 Re: Combining lines of DCL code into one line???0 Re: Combining lines of DCL code into one line???1 Compaq spin, and Capellas on vertical integration 5 Re: Compaq spin, and Capellas on vertical integration 5 Re: Compaq spin, and Capellas on vertical integration - Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 - Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7 ( Re: Compaq's Alpha design team for sale?P CPQ's on Vacation Next Week, But You Can Still Share Your Thoughts on the June 2 Re: DECnet over IP?  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.. FW: Compaq Itanium announcement and Oracle Rdb* Re: I hate Ziff-Davis AND Nathan Brookwood Re: IA64 Rocks My World  Re: IA64 Rocks My World  Re: IA64 Rocks My World  Re: IA64 Rocks My World  Intel Announcement webcast Re: Intel Announcement webcast Re: Intel Announcement webcast Mixed architecture wildfires ?( network clustering - multiple interfaces, Re: network clustering - multiple interfaces) Re: One more dreadful thought to consider ) Re: One more dreadful thought to consider  Re: Porting quandry  Re: Porting quandry  Re: Porting quandry  Re: Prediction6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon6 Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon Re: Question to Charlie Matco. Re: Question to Charlie Matco.
 Re: Rdb troll - Re: Re; One more dreadful thought to consider P Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General  Manager, CP Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, CompaqP Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, CoP Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, CoP Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, Co Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 Hotels  Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 Hotels ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' RE: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! ' Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business! 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 1 Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated ( Re: VMS Messaging to Pager, Mobile phone Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)  Re: VMS on UltraSparc? VMS V7.3 SPD Error Re: VMS V7.3 SPD Error Re: VMS V7.3 SPD Error Re: VMS V7.3 SPD Error+ 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: Why VMS on IA64 will succeed? % Re: Windows Images Running Under iVMS % Re: Windows Images Running Under iVMS % Re: Windows Images Running Under iVMS   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:38:12 GMT . From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>: Subject: Re: 3 Reasons why VMS is alive and probably well+D Message-ID: <oYa%6.5079$ck5.484234@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  7 "Arne Vajhj" <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote in message # news:3B3B237B.73B7CBEA@gtech.com... * > Which will start a bad spiral downwards.  
 Start ?!??!?!   ) What's been going on for the past decade?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:24:16 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> * Subject: Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows, Message-ID: <3B3CD5DD.DFC45ABF@videotron.ca>   David Mathog wrote: G > operator was running glitched.  The always on GUI interface is even a M > problem on some smaller systems, where the wrong choice of screen saver can  > bog down a file server.   N I guess the VMS engineers will be spending huge resources on changing the NULLB process to include the microsoft screen savers :-) ;-) :-) :-) :-)  N I agree entirely that the concept of the GUI console is ridiculous. In a largeN data centre where you have an "aquarium" control centre, you want the consoles@ there, not in each of the racks spread out in the computer room.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:15:41 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> * Subject: Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows* Message-ID: <3B3CE1ED.7EE65B6F@virgin.net>  ! steven.reece@quintiles.com wrote:   E > I think this has been around for a while Alan - I was told about it K > regarding NT4 on servers, being able to specify the interface as CMD when  > the server boots. / > I'm not sure where the setting is though.....   E Yes, there was an unsupported way to boot to command prompt even with J previous versions of NT but it is supported (via an F8 boot option) in W2K   >  > Steve. >  > Alan Greig wrote:  > >>> G > From Win2000 onwards it is possible to boot to DOS prompt (or command F > mode as they call it now). Although the main reason this is there is > for fixing gui problems. > <<<    --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:22:41 GMT / From: StevenU@POBoxes.com (Steven P. Underwood) * Subject: Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows2 Message-ID: <3b3d1b5e.564902758@news.telocity.com>  A On 29 Jun 2001 15:26:09 GMT, mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David  Mathog) wrote:  I >The thing that strikes me as must ludicrous about Microsoft's attempt to J >get into enterprise computing is that they insist on saddling a 64 bit OSH >with a Windows interface.  Look around most datacenters and you'll findJ >that the bigger the iron, the less likely there is to be a graphics card,L >let alone a spiffy GUI.  MS's strength in user interfaces isn't worth squatL >in this market.  In fact, it has negative value, since the graphics tend toL >destabilize the OS, and for performance reasons on smaller boxes they movedJ >GUI related functions into the kernel, where they can do the most damage.G >The Windows GUI isn't an optional bit of software, like X11, or even a I >"service" in the Windows sense, that you can turn on and off at will. In K >this sort of environment you don't want the console to bring down your 128 H >CPU monster database engine just because some itsy graphics program theF >operator was running glitched.  The always on GUI interface is even aL >problem on some smaller systems, where the wrong choice of screen saver can >bog down a file server.   > I >So if Intel's trying to get serious by pumping up the Itanium with Alpha K >developers and (maybe) techonology, shouldn't MS get serious by making it  F >possible to run without the Windows GUI in Windows 2003, at least forJ >enterprise usage?  And if they do so, aren't they pretty much back to the2 >bits of VMS they based NT on in the first place?  > 	 >Regards,  > 
 >David Mathog  >mathog@caltech.edu @ >Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech K >************************************************************************** K >*                       RIP VMS & ALPHA                                  * K >************************************************************************** A That's it.  Compaq's next announcement will be the sale of VMS to F Microsoft, so they can concentrate on their "core" business of selling	 boxes ;-)    Steve  Steven P. Underwood,DNRC Whitinsville,MA  StevenU@POBoxes.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 04:52:50 GMT . From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Alpha -> Itanium D Message-ID: <CWc%6.6801$eL5.653675@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  9 "Chuck Taylor" <Chuck.Taylor@Vishay.com> wrote in message 1 news:005701c0fe97$9f884a80$b7081eac@vishay.com... H >Does anyone have any insigt as to what this "transfer of technology" toK Intel actually means?  >Will a follow on microprocessor from Intel actually H be an Alpha in Intel clothing? or will >there be some sort of merging of- technologies or will there be something else?   I Off hand, EV8 doesn't offer anything that doesn't exist elsewhere.  There I just haven't been the resources to deliver much more than papers at ISSCC L while Intel, IBM, etc. have are delivering or are close to delivering chips.  H On the other hand, what EV7 is very close to delivering is computer chipH that can be integrated into large scale multiprocessors without any glue7 logic for memory, for I/O, or for interconnecting CPUs.   K In other words, EV7 does in 1 chip what Intel delivers with 3 chips.  For a K dual cpu, EV7 delivers in 2 chips what Intel delivers in 4 chips.  For a 64 E CPU configuration, EV7 delivers in 64 chips what Intel can't deliver.   G Perhaps the case of RDRAM (from Rambus) best illustrates the difference  between DEC and Intel.  I DEC engineers signed on for RDRAM because it enables a glueless CPU chip; " upper management was glueless ;-).  G Intel management signed on for RDRAM because of the financial and stock J incentives offered Intel by Rambus.  The engineers were clueless about how to make use of RDRAM.   A The compiler tech isn't remarkable if you're from DEC - define an L architecture for a compiler, then evolve the architecture as multiple groupsG build products from functional blocks built within the framework of the J architecture.  The architecture allows work to be reused and reused to theJ point that the results seem like magic.  How can a group of engineers thatD is about the size of a small single product software company deliver< compilers for 8 languages for 5 platforms in about 25 uniqueJ language/platform combinations (and that ignores a dozen that haven't been done in the past 5 years).  G (Then again, maybe the question is why didn't DEC expand this effort to E mirror what Oracle's done and have them generate compilers in a dozen K langauges for every platform on the market instead of just VMS and DEC unix  and just one compiler for i86?)    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:12:42 GMT . From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>Q Subject: Re: An Engineer's Perspective (was: Re: Compaq proves theirincompetence) D Message-ID: <Ksb%6.6600$eL5.622457@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  - <steven.reece@quintiles.com> wrote in message B news:OF8C7F2348.2206F28C-ON80256A78.004B3208@qedi.quintiles.com...L > There was also the description that I can install the software on an IntelG > server at a remote location from my local PeeCee.  Load the operating F > system CD in my local drive, connect to a console board in the Intel server > and carry out the install. > L > VMS has some capabilities in these respects (there being nothing new underK > the sun) but the techniques and developments that have made this possible = > in the Intel space may make our lives easier in the future.   I Let's see, about 12-15 years ago, VAX and Alpha systems supported booting L from a network CDROM out in the LAN (Infoserver); in fact, this was intendedH to be the primary method of installing software from that point forward.K Combine this with terminal servers and VCS systems and VAX and Alpha system J software could be configured, shutdown, rebooted, from half way around the world.  I And one of the big differences is that the VCS/Infoserver solution allows I you to use a VAXstations, Alphastation, or a PC, running VMS, unix of any H flavor, Linux, Windows of any flavor or even a VT100, DECnet, TELNET, or LAT, and it works.  J Using the Remote Insight Management Board in March, we found it would onlyK work with certain versions of Windows NT and certain version of IE 5 and it J assumes that you have a Microsoft network including using Windows DHCP and DNS servers.  I The fact that you can put a complete computer, 64 meg of memory, graphics E card, network adapter, a complete embedded OS with network stack, web J server, etc. on a short PCI card is pretty amazing, but all the complexityJ of the solution makes it rather fragile.  By depending on downloading JavaJ to the user's client system, you depend on a reliable, interoperable, JaveG environment that Microsoft isn't able to deliver to who ever Compaq has  developing the RIB.   J Give me the simple, unsophisicated solution that works much more reliably.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:08:14 +0100 - From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> + Subject: Another VMS project bites the dust ) Message-ID: <3B3CB5FD.4F94B9D4@bbc.co.uk>   A yes, I just turned off all the development boxes for the project, 6 ex-live boxes will be running for a short time longer.  ? its been nice to have a bbc.co.uk address but now it has ended.   F all the best to everyone, I'll be joinging in from my home address for the  time being anyway.   regards  --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk   A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those of  MedAS or the BBC.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:55:33 +0100 4 From: John Laird <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk>/ Subject: Re: Another VMS project bites the dust 8 Message-ID: <em0qjtk0ipqa93l712jhlhe7jhl4kuacrl@4ax.com>  1 On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:08:14 +0100, Tim Llewellyn   <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> wrote:  B >yes, I just turned off all the development boxes for the project,7 >ex-live boxes will be running for a short time longer.  > @ >its been nice to have a bbc.co.uk address but now it has ended. > G >all the best to everyone, I'll be joinging in from my home address for  >the >time being anyway.   C "Joinging" ?  Too much of the falling-down water already, perhaps ?   = Don't go away - I always find it mildly comforting to find uk < contributors still around, even during such uncertain times.     	John  --  
 John Laird Yezerski Roper Ltd   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:01:07 -0500 (CDT) & From: Drew Shelton <drew@sematech.org>4 Subject: Re: Apache CGI Problems on VMS with TCPware- Message-ID: <01K5CB78R2IQ007H4I@SEMATECH.Org>   ( Tom Rataski <trataski@clwcpc.com> wrote:@ >Has anyone successfully gotten Apache CGI to work with TCPware?  I We're working on that project as we speak.  We've got the server running, ; and we're trying to migrate our Purveyor scripts to Apache.   , >We are running OpenVMS 7.2 w/TCPware V5.3-2  . We're running OpenVMS 7.1-2 and TCPware 5.4-3.   Drew  L ============================================================================6 Drew Shelton                         drew@sematech.org9 VMS Systems Manager                  office: 512-356-7575 9 Sematech                             fax:    512-356-7600s 2706 Montopolis DriveeK Austin, TX 78741-6499                I speak for myself only, not Sematech.hB     "OpenVMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT v8.0 to be!"I                                                         - Compaq, 9/22/98jL ============================================================================   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 15:23:07 -0700- From: afeldman@gfigroup.com (Alan E. Feldman)g Subject: Re: BACKUP listing []= Message-ID: <af1e4ce6.0106291423.6224e305@posting.google.com>o  
 Hello all,   Comments interspersed below.  ^ John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> wrote in message news:<1010628234408.61768B-100000@Ives.egh.com>...( > On 28 Jun 2001, Alan E. Feldman wrote: > f > > Ingemar Olson <IOLSON@dairyworld.com> wrote in message news:<01K585U7CDES8ZE80I@dairyworld.com>...F > > > I had occasion to actually *look* at one of our backup listings.N > > > At the end there were a large number of files which were listed as being$ > > > in directory "[]" (ie: blank).E > > > When I check the disk I find they *are* in an actual directory.t > > > J > > > This is happening for 2 of our disks, the system disk and one other.S > > > The files from the system disk that show up on the listing as in "[]" appear tT > > > to be those in the aliased common directories. Although this is a bit hard to M > > > say definitively since I haven't memorized all the files in that tree. t, > > > And there are more than 10000 of them.G > > > The directory VMS$COMMON does not appear on the listing, however.o [snip] > > G > > I suspect that a restoration of this backup will not restore the []eH > > files in their proper directories because BACKUP walks the directoryD > > structure and checks off files it backs up in a copy it makes ofA > > INDEXF.SYS. Then any files that are not checked off after theeD > > directory walk-thru are backed up in []. If it had the directoryJ > > information for those [] files, I'd think it would have listed them as@ > > such. (This is based on an old post [c. 1993] explaining theF > > difference between /IMAGE and /FAST backups -- I can dig it up andG > > re-post it if anyone desires. The explanation there is quite good.)  > H > I think /NOALIAS is more recent than that and modifies this behaviour. > I > What changes is that during the directory walk-through, BACKUP compares G > the file's directory back-link and filename (both in the file header),E > to the directory entry BACKUP followed to get to the file.  If theynE > don't match, /NOALIAS causes the file to be skipped.  If it matchesaE > (which is only possible once), it is regarded as the primary entry,PF > and gets backed up.  Then at the end, after the directory walk-thru,C > the any remaining files are backed up as you said, with [] as theHC > directory.  (These are regarded as "lost" files, even though theye= > may have live alias entries, and thus are not really lost.)n  E Yes, I believe you are correct. Your explanation also agrees with the B VMS V6.2 release notes stating that to see if VMS$COMMON files areD listed by BACKUP/LIST as [] files to check if you have the bad-aliasF problem. But I think SHOW DEVICE /FILES SYS$SYSDEVICE is a much easier way to check for that.   [...stuff omitted...]h  J > > Have you tried restoring this save set to a scratch disk? If so, or ifG > > you do, what are the results of where the [] files are restored to?u >eC > I think in all these cases, backup/image followed by restore will # > faithfully preserve the problems.  > A > The file will get restored as a lost file, but it will keep itshC > original file ID, and still will be recorded (as an alias) in anys@ > directories that point to it.  Even though the files won't getC > backed up under their alias entries, the directories *containing* > > the aliases will get backed up, and restored, and will still@ > contain the same aliases, which will still point to the "lost" > file.   F Yes, you are correct. The first part of my post referred to the systemC disk problem. But the poster had the same problem with a non-system D disk, and I was thinking about the non-system disk when I wrote thatD the [] files would not be restored properly. But I did not say in myE post that I was switching from the system disk case to the non-system4 disk case, so I was in error.s  B As for restoration of the [] files on the non-system disk, if theyD were caused by a bug, they may well not be restored properly. But ifA they were caused by another alias problem, then they may well be.-  B My apologies for not being clear, and thank you for the additionalE information about how BACKUP/IMAGE walks thru the directory structure: and analyzes the files.    [snip]   Dislcaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman7   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:44:20 -0400e  From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> Subject: Re: BACKUP listing []6 Message-ID: <1010630011629.38769B-100000@Ives.egh.com>  & On 29 Jun 2001, Alan E. Feldman wrote:   > Hello all, >  > Comments interspersed below. > ` > John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> wrote in message news:<1010628234408.61768B-100000@Ives.egh.com>...* > > On 28 Jun 2001, Alan E. Feldman wrote: > > h > > > Ingemar Olson <IOLSON@dairyworld.com> wrote in message news:<01K585U7CDES8ZE80I@dairyworld.com>...H > > > > I had occasion to actually *look* at one of our backup listings.P > > > > At the end there were a large number of files which were listed as being& > > > > in directory "[]" (ie: blank).G > > > > When I check the disk I find they *are* in an actual directory.: > > > > L > > > > This is happening for 2 of our disks, the system disk and one other.U > > > > The files from the system disk that show up on the listing as in "[]" appear tV > > > > to be those in the aliased common directories. Although this is a bit hard to O > > > > say definitively since I haven't memorized all the files in that tree.  . > > > > And there are more than 10000 of them.I > > > > The directory VMS$COMMON does not appear on the listing, however.e [snip]  H > Yes, you are correct. The first part of my post referred to the systemE > disk problem. But the poster had the same problem with a non-system F > disk, and I was thinking about the non-system disk when I wrote thatF > the [] files would not be restored properly. But I did not say in myG > post that I was switching from the system disk case to the non-systemW > disk case, so I was in error.e  F No, you are wrong, because you were right!  ;-)  You did make it clearD (at least to me) that you were switching from the system disk to theG non-system disk case, and I snipped out the stuff about the system diskgF case because the post was getting so big.  (I may have drifted back toL the system disk case later, in which case I should have probably "unsnipped"I the stuff I had snipped, but it was getting late and the post was gettingn huge.  :-( )  G Just to make it clear, it is possible to have the same backlink problemtF on non-system disks as on system disks.  It is just harder to produce.C I think you have to have had aliases on the non-system disk at some A point and made use of "$set file/enter" and "$set file/remove" touE produce it.  IIRC, there was a bug in BACKUP at some point that wouldrD always produce the problem when restoring a system disk, which sinceF VMS V5.0 (or whenever the cluster-style system disk was made standard)C always has aliases.  I think backup and restore of a user disk withr> aliases under the buggy BACKUP could also produce the problem.  D > As for restoration of the [] files on the non-system disk, if theyF > were caused by a bug, they may well not be restored properly. But ifC > they were caused by another alias problem, then they may well be.n  E Yes, it is possible we are still dealing with a BACKUP or file systemrC bug here, and not one of the understandable cases where aliases cano cause the problem. [*]  @ That's why I urged caution and trying to repair the problem on aA copy of the disk rather than on the original disk, at least untils we know what's going on.  D > My apologies for not being clear, and thank you for the additionalG > information about how BACKUP/IMAGE walks thru the directory structures > and analyzes the files.n  1 I think you were clear, but I snipped it.  Sorry.s   > [snip] >  > Dislcaimer: JMHO > Alan E. Feldmano    9 [*] For example, you can produce the problem simply with:R  $ create/dir [.foo]  $ create/dir [.bar]  $ copy nl: [.foo]test.datK  $ set file/enter=[.bar]test.dat [.foo]test.dat ! create an alias in [.bar]*H  $ set file/remove [.foo]test.dat;1  ! remove the original primary entry  A But ANA/DISK (at least on VAX VMS V7.3) tells you the file has an* incorrect back link.)*     -- * John Santos* Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:03:37 GMTr. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>3 Subject: Re: Capellas admits move anti-competitive?oD Message-ID: <J4d%6.6820$eL5.656246@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  5 "Hamlyn Mootoo" <univms@bigfoot.com> wrote in messagee% news:3B38FC45.49905E0A@bigfoot.com...sF > According to sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, probablyJ > not.  In order to be a violation under section 1 the two companies wouldG > have to conspire to restrain interstate trade in some fashion.  SincehB > the effect of this agreement serves pretty much to only restrainE > Compaq's trade (personal opinion), there is no violation under this?E > section.  Section 2 prohibits an attempt to monopolize trade, whichbJ > there is no evidence of here.  The Clayton act also provides no relevant, > prohibitions against what Compaq is doing.  J Those aren't the relevant issues.  The questions are 1) whether the mergerJ of businesses tends to create a monopoly where one didn't previously existC and 2) whether it violates the terms of an agreement between the USrH government, Digital, and Intel, that Compaq then ratified to ensure that1 Alpha remains an independent competitor to Intel.w  K The latter required that Compaq find two foundaries for Alpha besides IntelV> and that there be at least one independent holder of Alpha IP.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:19:39 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>l  Subject: Re: Changing platforms., Message-ID: <3B3CD4C8.EC374C73@videotron.ca>   Malcolm Dunnett wrote:O >      Aren't Tandem systems in the "if you have to ask what it costs you can'teQ > afford it" class anyway. I can't see the cost of engineering motherboards beingb > a big concern for them.e  L > entire point of this exercise is to reduce the number of different systems! > they need to design and build. t    N Well, lets see, they will most definitely need special systems for Tandem. AndK I wonder if they will be able to implement Galaxy, memory interconnects etcTA etc with standard off-the shelf wintel IA64 motherboards for VMS.h  L In the end, they will not reduce the number of customer motherboards needed.K The only ones I can see being shared are the DS10 line of machines going tog standards wintel motherboards.  N Compaq will not really simplyfy and streamline its production. This is just PR2 talk to try to raise Compaq's lagging stock price.   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 12:47:32 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)o  Subject: Re: Changing platforms., Message-ID: <RpCPXq4bbl5v@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  - In article <3B3CD4C8.EC374C73@videotron.ca>, -2    JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:   > P > Well, lets see, they will most definitely need special systems for Tandem. AndM > I wonder if they will be able to implement Galaxy, memory interconnects etcLC > etc with standard off-the shelf wintel IA64 motherboards for VMS.. > O     AFAIK Compaq has never used "standard, off the shelf motherboards", they'veoO always made their own. I don't expect this is going to change. I do expect thatlN they should come up with a single type of motherboard for each class of systemJ ( ie the motherboard in a desktop system isn't going to be the same one in a 64 way server ).   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:07:30 +0100t- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>n  Subject: Re: Changing platforms.) Message-ID: <3B3A12D2.C157B455@bbc.co.uk>u   Peter Harding wrote:  4 >  Great if your disks were 90% empty to start with. >y  ?  Peter, you DID plan for increased disk usage when you migrateds to Alpha, didn't you?a   regards    --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.ukd  A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those oft MedAS or the BBC.i   ------------------------------   Date: 29 Jun 2001 20:33:55 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.320117.killspam.015d (Wayne Sewell)u9 Subject: Re: Combining lines of DCL code into one line???r. Message-ID: <oYO$0SAZdK0+@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  o In article <$HC0KlS3oAVD@eisner.encompasserve.org>, kaplow_r@eisner.encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) writes: H > I'm trying to do some maybe not quite so simple stuff in a DCL commandN > procedure. It seems in each of these two cases, I should be able to condenseM > 2 or 3 lines of DCL into a single line that doesn't use temporary variablesnI > to store intermediate results, but so far I've failed to figure out the M > right syntax. Anyone able to show me how to do this? I can't afford to loseo > any more of my hair :-)      e >  > $!> > $!	set default to directory that this command file is in ... > $!D > $ dddev	= ''f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"device")'G > $ dddir	= ''f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"directory")'l > $ set default 'dddev''dddir' > $!+ > $!	set process name to procedure name ...  > $!> > $ name	= f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"name")* > $ set proc /name='f$extract(0, 15, name) > $! >  > advTHANKSancee    M You are doing the assignment of "name" correctly, i.e. without the leading ''l1 and trailing '.  Do dddev and dddir the same way.c     $!< $!	set default to directory that this command file is in ... $!? $ dddev	= f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"device")bB $ dddir	= f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"directory") $ set default 'dddev''dddir' $!) $!	set process name to procedure name .... $!< $ name	= f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"name")( $ set proc /name='f$extract(0, 15, name) $!    I However, I think it would be much simpler to make the command procedure ar symbol too, as in:       $!< $!	set default to directory that this command file is in ... $!' $ cmd_proc = f$environment("procedure")e& $ dddev	= f$parse(cmd_proc,,,"device")) $ dddir	= f$parse(cmd_proc,,,"directory"): $ set default 'dddev''dddir' $!) $!	set process name to procedure name ...r $!# $ name	= f$parse(cmd_proc,,,"name") ( $ set proc /name='f$extract(0, 15, name) $!    I This is far less confusing and you don't have to deal with double-quoting N anything.  What's one more local symbol when you are already defining three of them?        -- mO ===============================================================================hM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxi: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)-O ===============================================================================cK Hotel guy (after bed demolition):  That bed goes back to Henry the eighth!!KO    Curly: That's nothin'!  We had a bed go back to Sears and Roebuck the fifth!a   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:10:19 -0000 + From: Guy Sherr <guy.sherr-nospam@mail.com>e9 Subject: Re: Combining lines of DCL code into one line???r= Message-ID: <Xns90CFEBB7CB89Fguysherrmailcom@207.126.101.100>2  < kaplow_r@eisner.encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) wrote in, news:$HC0KlS3oAVD@eisner.encompasserve.org:   H > I'm trying to do some maybe not quite so simple stuff in a DCL commandE > procedure. It seems in each of these two cases, I should be able toeB > condense 2 or 3 lines of DCL into a single line that doesn't useK > temporary variables to store intermediate results, but so far I've failedoJ > to figure out the right syntax. Anyone able to show me how to do this? I4 > can't afford to lose any more of my hair :-)       >  > $!B > $!     set default to directory that this command file is in ... > $!H > $ dddev     = ''f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"device")'K > $ dddir     = ''f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"directory")': > $ set default 'dddev''dddir' > $!/ > $!     set process name to procedure name ...e > $!B > $ name     = f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"name")* > $ set proc /name='f$extract(0, 15, name) > $! >  > advTHANKSance2   replace thusly:   K $ set def 'f$extr(0,f$loca("]",f$envi("procedure"))+1,f$envi("procedure"))'nD $ set proc/name='f$extr(0,15,f$parse(f$envi("procedure"),,,"name"))'  H The double quotes mostly don't need to be there.  All they really do is H preserve case.  Since you are operating on things which don't need that 3 preservation, you can just let DCL do all the work.   L When DCL encounters the nested calls, it will force their evaluation in the ! same way it would for any symbol.    cheers,i guyr   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 04:38:14 GMT ) From: DCantor@shore.net (David A. Cantor)e9 Subject: Re: Combining lines of DCL code into one line???s< Message-ID: <WIc%6.123351$v5.9333300@news1.rdc1.ct.home.com>  n In article <$HC0KlS3oAVD@eisner.encompasserve.org>, kaplow_r@eisner.encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) wrote:G >I'm trying to do some maybe not quite so simple stuff in a DCL commandsM >procedure. It seems in each of these two cases, I should be able to condenserL >2 or 3 lines of DCL into a single line that doesn't use temporary variablesH >to store intermediate results, but so far I've failed to figure out theL >right syntax. Anyone able to show me how to do this? I can't afford to lose >any more of my hair :-)         >$!dB >$!      set default to directory that this command file is in ... >$!xC >$ dddev = ''f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"device")'nF >$ dddir = ''f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"directory")' >$ set default 'dddev''dddir'  >$!I/ >$!      set process name to procedure name ...a >$!.> >$ name  = f$parse("''f$environment(""procedure"")'",,,"name")) >$ set proc /name='f$extract(0, 15, name)c >$!k   This is what I do:  ( $ this_file = f$environment("procedure"). $ this_dire = f$parse("$.;",this_file) - "$.;"- $ this_filename = f$parse(this_file,,,"name")k  ; Now I can use these variables for all sorts of things, liker  5 $ scratchfile = f$parse("sys$scratch:.tmp",this_file)e8 $ datfile = f$parse(this_filename+"_foo.dat;",this_file)I $ textfile = this_dire + f$edit(f$getjpi("","username"),"trim")) + ".txt"e  2 But, to answer the original question, you could do  E $ set def 'f$string(f$parse("$.;",f$environment("procedure"))-"$.;")'l  ! and, as someone previously noted,n   $ set proc -E  /name='f$extract(0,15,f$parse(f$environment("procedure"),,,"name"))'a  N Note none of the stuff I suggested here is subject to failure because someone 9 has used <> instead of [] in the directory specification.i   Dave C.c   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:55:39 -0400i' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>f: Subject: Compaq spin, and Capellas on vertical integration' Message-ID: <9hj7rm$3f$1@pyrite.mv.net>e  L Yesterday, the Inquirer ran an article that's relevant in multiple respects:  ' http://www.theinquirer.net/28060117.htm   I It began by describing the amazingly similarly-worded spin emanating fromdI Compaq employees supposedly posting on their own.  I particularly enjoyedfL what I think was a reference to a post I encountered yesterday; the Inquirer> didn't quote it, so I'll include the significant excerpt here:    L "Significant performance improvements beyond EV7* (and I've been told that IL can tell you this) are not possible.  Do you want us to tell you this now or+ keep you in the dark for a few more years?"e    C Unfortunately, the author chose to include comp.arch in the postingwI distribution, and comp.arch has a sizable population of people who designtF microprocessors for a living (as well as many others at least somewhatG conversant with such issues), so a statement that might have sneaked by]I unchallenged in comp.unix.tru64 was in fact challenged rather vigorously, 0 even by people involved with competing products.  L The article also made reference to senior DECUS (whoops - Encompass?) peopleI dutifully spouting the Compaq party line (not that we've seen any of thatE5 here), and closed with this illuminating observation:f    I "a most interesting piece of sworn testimony came to light as part of the-E recent Microsoft ruling: 'complementary products created by unrelatedJF companies do not work as well together as products created by a singleE company'. Testimony from Michael Capellas himself as the architect of $ architecture outsourcing at Compaq."    H Perhaps it's a good thing a lot of Compaq will be taking near-compulsory0 vacation next week:  I suspect they may need it.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:45:26 GMTr4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>> Subject: Re: Compaq spin, and Capellas on vertical integration: Message-ID: <Waa%6.591$9r6.712049@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  2 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message! news:9hj7rm$3f$1@pyrite.mv.net...nD > Yesterday, the Inquirer ran an article that's relevant in multiple	 respects:h >i) > http://www.theinquirer.net/28060117.htmd > K > It began by describing the amazingly similarly-worded spin emanating fromsK > Compaq employees supposedly posting on their own.  I particularly enjoyedeE > what I think was a reference to a post I encountered yesterday; thev Inquirer@ > didn't quote it, so I'll include the significant excerpt here: >0 > L > "Significant performance improvements beyond EV7* (and I've been told that IrK > can tell you this) are not possible.  Do you want us to tell you this nowh or- > keep you in the dark for a few more years?"m >r  K Seems to me that EV8 would have offered a significant improvement over EV7.wC Whether this improvement would be keep Alpha significantly ahead ofIG post-Madison IA-64 processors is unknown. Compaq claims the performance F delta would be marginal at best, and insufficient as a differentiator.    I Whatever, I noted with interest the Capellas Countdown Clock on The Inq'so
 home page.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:57:02 -0400h' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>u> Subject: Re: Compaq spin, and Capellas on vertical integration( Message-ID: <9hjifp$613$1@pyrite.mv.net>  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messagea4 news:Waa%6.591$9r6.712049@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...   ...t  K > Whatever, I noted with interest the Capellas Countdown Clock on The Inq'ss > home page.  I Yeah.  At first, I interpreted it as a 'time remaining as CEO' clock, butaK then realized what it was meant to refer to (though I still think there's arJ decent chance that my initial interpretation will turn out to be the right one).p   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:09:32 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>m6 Subject: Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7+ Message-ID: <3B3CD26A.E83D466@videotron.ca>e   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:d > N > Then things will get real interesting. Turf wars and all that. Note that theI > ISSG will have a 32-way McKinley box by late next year. I doubt they'llrD > stand still as the BCSG/HSPD work on their next-generation system. > J > OSes represent a logical line of demarcation. The ISSG can't handle VMS, > NSK, or Tru64.  N And guess what, I bet it will remain that way, with ISSG getting all the salesL and marketing, abnd BCSG told to stay in their small restricted corner as it. was in the past. Business as usual for Compaq.  J And I strongly suspect that the servers won't even be shared between the 2H groups to ensure that the BCSG doesn't compete against the ISSG (but the& reverse will be possible,. of course).   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:00:55 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>E6 Subject: Re: Compaq Transfers Alpha to Intel after EV7* Message-ID: <3B3CDE77.9DEE2C97@virgin.net>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:l  G > CPQ may have a little more leverage with Oracle because of the 9i RACaM > connection, but I imagine ORCL is considering the financial implications ofp > an Rdb port.  N Hoff has said many times that VMS engineering is dependent upon RDB. If an RDBP port wasn't secured before the announcement then something is very wrong. No RDB2 and no DBMS means no iVMS for my employer as well.   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:45:34 -0400a- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>J1 Subject: Re: Compaq's Alpha design team for sale?e, Message-ID: <3B3CDAD9.AD522A0E@videotron.ca>   Terry C Shannon wrote:F > Quite on the contrary. I am not at liberty to comment on the currentE > proceedings, but I would suggest that those who choose to speculatesI > should consider the prospect of VMS on a mainstream, high-volume 64-bit F > chip. Also worth contemplating is the potential impact on affordable > low-end VMS-capable systems.    N Mr Shannon, *WHEN* might us low life grunts see any concrete changes at CompaqM which might convince us that Compaq is actually serious about making VMS growo8 and succeed in many more markets than it actually does ?  L So far, all I have seen is Compaq taking the small TECHNICAL step of portingG VMS to IA64 to allow existing VMS customers to stay on VMS. I have seenoM absolutely nothing to suggest that Compaq might start marketing VMS, or would H change its pricing to be more competitive and that it would allow VMS to4 compete head to head with Compaq's core product: NT.  I Until I see hard evidence of such a change, it is quite logical to assumerN business as usual inside of Compaq with the  NT side controlling the slaes andH marketing and VMS relegated to an obscure corner and allowed to survive.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:52:55 GMTR4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>Y Subject: CPQ's on Vacation Next Week, But You Can Still Share Your Thoughts on the June 2t: Message-ID: <Xha%6.593$9r6.715169@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  2 at the Encompass-ITUG joint advocacy group website   www.compaqworkinggroup.org  I through July 4. All caveats regarding cookies and Javascript still apply,sK but if you're not averse to these tools of the devil, here's an opportunityn@ to give the Big Dogs at Compaq a thumbs up or thumbs down on the Assimilation of Alpha.   -- Terry C. Shannon Consultant and Publisher Shannon Knows Compaq  email: terryshannon@mediaone.net$ Web (info on SKC):  www.acersoft.com   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:18:29 GMTa* From: "Louis Schneider" <LSShome@home.com> Subject: Re: DECnet over IP?> Message-ID: <po5%6.141574$DG1.23578084@news1.rdc1.mi.home.com>  9 Just a hunch, but did you do the disable during the demo?r  F When you started the demo, the connection was created over the regular DECnet transport layer.aJ If you disable that.  The connection will hang.  I hope you did not expect the connection to just failover ! and start using the IP transport.t  8 Try disabling the csma-cd link before starting the demo.  K There was another post in this thread giving lots of good information aboutT setting up your DECnet/IPhD environment, so I won't go into that here.  I would add, that on our2 systems, we insert alias names in our DNS entries. Example:F $TCPIP SET HOST MYSYSTEM.ABC-SURVEY.ORG /ADD=10.11.12.13 /ALIAS=VMS476D then we use standard host naming like "$SET HOST VMS476" or "$DIRECT VMS476::SYS$MANAGER:LOGIN.COM"E We find it helpful to avoid needing to use big long domain name or ipt address forms of addressing.   Louis.    = "Didier Morandi" <Didier.Morandi@Compaq.com> wrote in message-$ news:3B3B96EA.26F60644@Compaq.com...C > I want to demonstrate to someone that DECnet Phase V task to taskc9 > communication "over IP" works as well as DECnet IV did.1 >.F > To do that, I need to disable DECnet routing to force the flow to goA > through the IP circuit (I am not very familiar with DECnet OSI)s >dB > I tried to "disable routing circuit csmacd-0" as the doc said inB > http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/73final/6499/6499pro_008.html >eE > but now my task-to-task demo (from Anagnostopoulos/Hoff's DCL Biblem >iL http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1555581919/o/qid=993760759/sr=2-1/ref" =aps_sr_b_1_1/103-0114853-7479053)A > is stuck to nowhere land. Even a ^Y doesn't exit the procedure.5 >T; > Does someone has a clue to give this kind of demo please?l >  > Thank you. >i > D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:48:14 +0200o) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>n Subject: Re: FUD, Message-ID: <3B3CF79E.FD041A24@infopuls.com>   John Eisenschmidt wrote: > K> Umm...have you heard Bill Joy talk? The people running Sun are NUTS not stupid. Why would they abandon Slowlaris (possibly the best Commercial Unix around)? To my knowledge, there isn't a free os that can compile native 64 bit code on an Ultra II/III, and nothing but Solaris has a mature enough kernel to support multiprocessor.h >  > They may not be doing well in a Wall Street sense, but they have money, backorders they can eventually fill, and a good product. This isn't SGI we're talking about.  7 My experience with Slowaris on SPARC isn't quite good -i9 especially the NFS and NIS+ related parts are a source ofy8 problems. Some servers with certain functions have to be? rebooted monthly (at least). The price/performance ratio sucks.i3 Do you know that the new Ultra III processers cost?e   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:51:39 +0200 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>t Subject: Re: FUD, Message-ID: <3B3CF86B.B9AB569C@infopuls.com>  ! steven.reece@quintiles.com wrote:t > L > Calm down Aaron.  At some point _everybody_ would be surprised, except theF > people that made the decision and the person that thought of it as a! > possibility in the first place.  > H > Drip feeding the market wouldn't help as we'd go through cycles of "OhK > look, there's gonna be two platforms running these O/Ses" followed by "OhcJ > dear, they've just killed off one of the architectures".  Compaq clearlyJ > couldn't gather all of the customers, potential customers and interestedK > others together in their teak-lined (if indeed they are) offices and telldI > them that way since (a) it would be too expensive and (b) someone would,H > post it to a web site or newsgroup before some had had their meetings. > M > Surprises are bound to happen.  In VMS land it would be more appropriate toxM > say that we don't like rapid change and we don't like things that lose dataa > or affect the status quo.i > M > VMS Engineering were surprised and I would guess that Tru64 Engineering and . > all the other people around Compaq were too. > L > Terry would have had whatever information he was granted access to under aL > NON DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT.  People tend to take those things seriously whenG > they've got less money than the person or organisation asking for theyJ > signature.  Ignoring it does not do one's reputation, business or health > very much good.= > Steve.  ; The point is not only the surprise. It's that big change ofn? direction. They showed EV8 and the bright technical future with ? SMT on the chip. I was very happy to see that because this is a-> very smart solution for multithreaded OSs. If they had decided@ to stop Alpha after EV8 and had announced that now it would be a+ big surprise also but not that devastating.B   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 18:45:06 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)c Subject: Re: FUD3 Message-ID: <ZSOK5EIXZSbr@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  X In article <3B3CF79E.FD041A24@infopuls.com>, Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:  9 > My experience with Slowaris on SPARC isn't quite good -n; > especially the NFS and NIS+ related parts are a source ofb: > problems. Some servers with certain functions have to be > rebooted monthly (at least).  F I know a Solaris-centric shop that wanted to reboot their VMS machines2 each month because that is "normal" for computers.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:14:56 -0400"- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>f) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.), Message-ID: <3B3CD3AE.980793C2@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:eM > Probably something on the order of what Compaq actually did do. It could be,L > argued that the announcement of a VMS, Tru64, and NSK port to IA-64 ratherJ > than a complete architectural transition would have made more sense, butL > such an announcement may well have imposed a sales freeze on Alpha systems	 > anyhow.a  M But the initial reaction would not have been Compaq breaking its commitments. M It would be Compaq expanding the VMS hardware possibilities and most probablysL eventually killing Alpha in the future is sales on IA64 become very high ans Alpha sales become very low.  I This is why the announcement had nothing to do with the future of VMS and U everything to do about Killing alpha in exchange for a large wad of Money from Intel.h   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:54:12 -0400n' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>9) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.e( Message-ID: <9him6g$hid$1@pyrite.mv.net>  4 "Carl Perkins" <carl@gerg.tamu.edu> wrote in message' news:29JUN200107023603@gerg.tamu.edu...e- > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes... G > }Note that IA64 isn't a commodity item either:  in fact it is not yet  *any* H > }kind of an item (save for a units supplied to people so that they can startdK > }developing things on it) - and shows little sign of becoming much of any G > }kind of an item until McKinley ships, since Itanic/Merced is so, er,a > }uninspiring.$ > }$	 > }- billd >u > This isn't correct.i  K I suggest that it is:  I did not say 'IA64 system' above, but 'IA64'.  IA64rK is AFAIK available from, and manufactured by, only a single source (Intel),,L whereas Alphas are available from, and manufactured by, multiple sources (asK are Alpha-based systems, but as you pointed out so are IA64-based systems).r   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:10:08 -0400d' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>u) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.)( Message-ID: <9hin4a$i9e$1@pyrite.mv.net>  : "Bob Koehler" <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:kSQA779Ga6YL@eisner.encompasserve.org...sH > In article <zxBLxECW9Hy8@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>, nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) writes:i > >eF > >     My assertion is that if Windows on Alpha had been a success we wouldn't  > > today be arguing about this. > >f >rF > OK, so Alpha has not been the success DEC originally pipe dreamed itE > would be.  If you were Compaq what would you do about it in face ofeA > IA-64 catching up with Alpha by the time you could get EV8 out?g  J At which point (assuming that IA64 *had* indeed caught up with EV7), AlphaH would promptly take back the lead, quite possibly permanently (given theG relative difficulty of continuing to enhance the performance of the twod architectures).u  I The fact that Alpha has held onto its performance lead, plus a sufficient$J market to pay for its development, despite many years of abject neglect isK more than adequate testament to the continued viability of the architecturegL if given *any* reasonable marketing support (especially in the VMS area) andI the funding that has been on Compaq's roadmap all along.  To suggest thattG higher levels of success were a pipe dream is to suggest that expectingnJ minimal levels of management competence from first DEC and now Compaq is aI pipe dream:  I might agree with that, but my suggested solution is to fixyK the management problem rather than to scrap the potentially valuable asset.i   - bill   >aH > ----------------------------------------------------------------------A > Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporationa? > NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil Group G >                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyinge   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:34:25 +0100c- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>e) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.r) Message-ID: <3B39D2D1.D24F7861@bbc.co.uk>w   Terry C Shannon wrote:  H >  Alpha's Omega was rendered inevitable by Digital's outright marketingF > malfeasance and a string of Stupid Strategy Tricks. Compaq's initialJ > indecisiveness and tepid support for Alpha (and the support was far lessJ > than tepid amongst the Compaq Classic box-pushers) delayed a turn-aroundF > in the business, which actually has grown during the past two years. >n > Too little, too late.i   too much dead wood     --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk   A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofM MedAS or the BBC.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:26:43 +0100s- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>1) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.l) Message-ID: <3B39FB33.D124887A@bbc.co.uk>a   "Hipenbecker, Doug" wrote:  H > Wouldn't it have made more sense to have ported OpenVMS, Tru64, NSK toL > Itanium and have the working incarnations of the OS's ready to demonstrateM > *BEFORE* announcing the abandonment of the only chip platforms they operatepK > on...I find it hard to believe that a savvy business decision maker wouldiN > throw his "trust" into Compaq's following through on its promise to actuallyM > port the OS's.  This is also the reason that this announcement will severlypE > hurt Compaq in the pocketbook immediately in terms of Alpha and NSK E > sales...they will practically vanish...how stupid can a company be?   E Exactly my thoughts, I don't think alpha was announced in a flurry oftF press-releases to the world several years before it was ready to ship.D Maybe big customers got NDA's, and we heard rumours for a few months  before the first alphas shipped.  ? Anyway, read the disclaimer at the bottom of the press release.i   --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk   A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofc MedAS or the BBC.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:15:15 +0100e- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>.) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.7) Message-ID: <3B3A14A3.54DFAD30@bbc.co.uk>    John Macallister wrote:t  G > > > You'll be able to buy an Itanium system from "any computer shop".  >sK > >Yes, but will VMS run on an "any shop" Itanium?  And will EDT be useablehI > >on and "any shop" keyboard, or will we still need three fingers to hit 
 > >"gold"? > M > Why should one shop's Itanium be different from another's re the running of-G > VMS any more than with Windows? Windows runs on any shop Pentiums,etciJ > because so many people use Windows and the market makes it worthwhile toL > cater for different hardware configurations. iVMS could be in a similar or > better position. >t  O And when you want to add a device to your WIndows, if you are lucky the drivers P are there in the Windows CAB's or whatever, more often than not you need to load  L a driver from a floppy. These drivers are written by the manufacturer of the device, notmO Compaq. How are you going to force the device vendors to write OpenVMS drivers?t   regardsn --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk   A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those of  MedAS or the BBC.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:38:03 +0100b- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>-) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. ) Message-ID: <3B3B252B.FDD56A97@bbc.co.uk>u   John Macallister wrote:   K >  A massive surge of enthusiasm from this news group, DECUS, VMS lobbyistsCI > everywhere is now needed to ensure that there is sufficient momentum toaM > convince third party vendors that it will be worthwhile porting packages toa > iVMS.t >s  M I thought the DOE Solaris Compatibility stuff was supposed to do thet. We gett that on Alpha too.     >w   --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk   A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofm MedAS or the BBC.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:18:50 +0100D- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> ) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.y) Message-ID: <3B3B58E9.BDA7AFD4@bbc.co.uk>b   Robert Deininger wrote:s   >  >o; > Could EV8 have stomped IA64 into the dirt, given a bettermG > management/marketing environment?  Many folks think so.  Could CompaqoH > provide that environment?  Many folks, I guess including Compaq, think > not.  J  and all because they like the smell of Bill Gates genitalia too much :-(.   --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.ukC  A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofo MedAS or the BBC.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:48:27 GMTM4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.e: Message-ID: <vQ5%6.534$9r6.575059@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  : "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> wrote in message# news:3B3B58E9.BDA7AFD4@bbc.co.uk...t >h >N > Robert Deininger wrote:s >d > >k > > = > > Could EV8 have stomped IA64 into the dirt, given a better I > > management/marketing environment?  Many folks think so.  Could CompaqrJ > > provide that environment?  Many folks, I guess including Compaq, think > > not. > L >  and all because they like the smell of Bill Gates genitalia too much :-(. >7  K I think its more pecuniary than olfactory. How much profit does Compaq makebJ on Gatesware? Not a bloody lot these days. Far more profit is made on VMS,K Tru64, and NSK. And Compaq apparently believes that it can make more profit J on these OSes if it doesn't have to spend a quarter of a billion dollars a& year on the care and feeding of Alpha.  I That said, a Better Management/Marketing Environment would have beat hello* out of that silly "Better Answers" slogan.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:44:02 GMTe4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. : Message-ID: <mM5%6.533$9r6.573232@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  : "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> wrote in message# news:3B39FB33.D124887A@bbc.co.uk...d >, >e > "Hipenbecker, Doug" wrote: >rJ > > Wouldn't it have made more sense to have ported OpenVMS, Tru64, NSK toB > > Itanium and have the working incarnations of the OS's ready to demonstratenG > > *BEFORE* announcing the abandonment of the only chip platforms theye operate G > > on...I find it hard to believe that a savvy business decision makeru wouldtG > > throw his "trust" into Compaq's following through on its promise tol actuallyG > > port the OS's.  This is also the reason that this announcement willT severlyHG > > hurt Compaq in the pocketbook immediately in terms of Alpha and NSKtG > > sales...they will practically vanish...how stupid can a company be?E >OG > Exactly my thoughts, I don't think alpha was announced in a flurry of H > press-releases to the world several years before it was ready to ship.F > Maybe big customers got NDA's, and we heard rumours for a few months" > before the first alphas shipped.  F The first "real" analyst briefing for Alpha was in February 1992, nineJ months before the official launch. And on the offficial launch date, AlphaJ might have been ready to ship, but it's for sure that no OSes or apps were ready.   >OA > Anyway, read the disclaimer at the bottom of the press release.c   Details, minor details. ;-}c   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:16:00 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>i) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.5, Message-ID: <3B3CF005.7E46EBEC@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:sM > I think its more pecuniary than olfactory. How much profit does Compaq makeoL > on Gatesware? Not a bloody lot these days. Far more profit is made on VMS, > Tru64, and NSK.-  L Since I have yet to see hard number of where "enterprise" profits come from,G when I see a large number, I know it include the wintel servers sold asp "enterprise" machines.  E Furthermore, Compaq is not measured by its profits, but rather by itsgN marketshare in the wintel market. Selling a VMS system does nothing to improve Compaq's image on Wall Street.  E Compaq knows that the remaining VMS customers won't migrate overnightlH otherwise they would have done as all the other former VMS customers andM heeded Palmer's hints a long time ago. So Compaq can take the VMS revenus fortN granted, and their bet is that even with the big blow of this week, Compaq can) still count on those revenus for a while.c  K So understandably, Compaq, being happy with a slowly dwindling VMS customereK base doesn't need to spend any significant amount of money on marketing. MytL guess is that last year, they saw a faster than expected drop in VMS revenusL and decided to spend a tiny amount on marketing to stop the bleeding insteadH of killing VMS, and it paid off. And they will only spend just enough to/ control the bleeding do that it is slow enough.3    M A company will focus on its core products. Compaq is a systems integrator. It G takes stuff from Intel and Microsoft, puts its logo on it. It also addseK Microsoft and Intel logos in it. That is Compaq's core business and it will M build stuff around it to support that core business (such as software/supportr for the wintel stuff).  G I think that Compaq sees VMS as a necessary evil, just as companies see H departments such as corporate security, accounting etc as non productive necessary evils.   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 18:38:23 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)t) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium. 3 Message-ID: <GOFaUJ6SQ7QQ@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  Y In article <3B3B252B.FDD56A97@bbc.co.uk>, Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> writes:. >  >  > John Macallister wrote:o > L >>  A massive surge of enthusiasm from this news group, DECUS, VMS lobbyistsJ >> everywhere is now needed to ensure that there is sufficient momentum toN >> convince third party vendors that it will be worthwhile porting packages to >> iVMS. >> > K > I thought the COE Solaris Compatibility stuff was supposed to do thet. Wea > get that on Alpha too.  E COE should make it easier to port C programs from Unix, nothing more.m   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:50:40 -0400g  From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com>) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.t6 Message-ID: <1010629232221.38769A-100000@Ives.egh.com>  " On 29 Jun 2001, Dave Barlow wrote:  f > alanb@cloud9.net (Alan B.) wrote in message news:<88599d89.0106260433.b78e49c@posting.google.com>... > I > > ** What do I tell my boss now about my plan for migrating our old VAX J > > apps to Alpha, as opposed to a PC OS as has happened to other apps? HeH > > was quite receptive and told me to go ahead. Now that Alpha's futureF > > (and what would be required to move to Itanium) is uncertain, thisE > > puts quite a damper on things. ** I feel somewhat screwed by CPQ!o > @ > Having just read this I know what you mean. After 18 months ofF > haggling we eventually convinced management to at least try and portG > VAX code to Alphas. If they catch wind that Alpha is now being phasede? > out they are very likely to port to Solaris or AIX, being the ? > corporate standards. Alternatively they will speed up findingh) > replacements for the in-house VMS apps.h > 
 > Dave Barlow   M But the port from VAX to Alpha would be easy for most user-mode applications, D and almost trivial for anything not written in MACRO-32 or contortedC K&R C.  (MACRO can be easy if you aren't doing anything to strange.7C All you really need to do is identify your entry points and give itgG some hints about register usage, and make sure you aren't too seriously > violating stack dicipline or have too high a linguini factor.)  B I expect VAX to IA-64 migration to be about the same as VAX->Alpha2 and Alpha->IA-32 to be trivial.  (Compile and go.)  E Porting to Solaris or AIX would be orders of magnitude more difficultu for almost anything.  C I have been criticized before for having unreasonable expectations.wD I don't think they are unreasonable at all.  If Compaq can deliver aA working IA64 VMS by the time they claim, they will have had to dorE all the necessary compiler work.  If they can't, then they will stille@ be selling Alphas, despite what people are reading into Monday'sB announcement.  The third possibility, that they are out of the VMSC business or out of business completely just means that someone elsedH will own VMS and the rights to produce Alpha-based systems and you will @ still be able to get it.  (The new owners may not be as activelyC developing VMS and the Alpha systems might be identical to what youoL can get today, and the support might not be as good, but it will still run.)  > If you bought an ES40 (or smaller) today, would it be powerful@ enough (with currently-available upgrades or in a small cluster)@ to run your app for the next 10 years?  If so, I don't think youB really have anything to worry about.  In 10 years, you can revisitF the "Re-implement on another platform" question, and consider re-doing? it in Borneo on a Mercury, or whatever the hot language and hot  platform are in 2011.K   -- b John Santosm Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:20:31 -0400r- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>o) Subject: Re: Full port of VMS to Itanium.-, Message-ID: <3B3D618D.AE62B4E5@videotron.ca>   John Santos wrote:D > I expect VAX to IA-64 migration to be about the same as VAX->Alpha4 > and Alpha->IA-32 to be trivial.  (Compile and go.)  M I agree. But having automatic emulator kick in when you run an image would beaM very neat. (Aka : macintosh). And that includes an alpha image that is linked,J against a native IA64 sharable image or vice-versa. (If Apple could do it,J those engineers that used to work for Digital should be able to dit it :-)  G > Porting to Solaris or AIX would be orders of magnitude more difficult  > for almost anything.  J But on the other side of the coin, when you run a mainstream OS, you don'tH have to port a lot of software because a lot of software runs on that OSM "natively". (eg: software availability). When you run a niche OS, you have to F worte/port your onw software from sources that were designed to run on mainstream systems.n   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:28:50 -0500t5 From: "Hipenbecker, Doug" <Hipenbecker.Doug@MBCO.COM>s7 Subject: FW: Compaq Itanium announcement and Oracle RdbnG Message-ID: <DD11CB6FEB21D41184510004ACA3715304C906DB@mbsus228.mbc.com>e   Per someone's request...   -----Original Message-----4 From: Rdb Information [mailto:RdbInfo_us@oracle.com]# Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:57 AM 3 Subject: Compaq Itanium announcement and Oracle Rdbf     Dear Rdb Customer:  @ As you may have heard, on Monday of this week, Michael Capellas,@ Chairman of Compaq Computer Corp. announced plans to consolidateI Compaq's entire 64-bit server family on the Itanium(tm) architecture fromrJ Intel.  He also announced that Compaq will port OpenVMS to new Itanium(tm)H based systems for general availability in 2004. Naturally, customers are< now asking what this will mean for the future of Oracle Rdb.  B This announcement was closely held within Compaq.  Rdb EngineeringD learned of the news during a briefing with OpenVMS management as theF announcement was being made publicly.  As is the case for you, this is very recent news for us.  F We understand that you want to know what this will mean for the futureC of Oracle Rdb and the other business critical applications you rely F on.   We've just come back from meeting hundreds of Rdb customers in 3@ cities in Europe as well as a meeting with our European CustomerC Advisory Council.  The Oracle Rdb team spends significant effort toaC understand our customers' requirements through these events as wellyG Technical Forum events, other industry meetings and in face-to-face andpE electronic communications.  We will use this same approach as we plan E our strategy for supporting Rdb on OpenVMS in the future.  Right now,e> we're meeting with Compaq, gathering information and trying toK understand what OpenVMS on Itanium(tm) will look like to us, other softwaree vendors and to our customers.M  I In the three years between today and the time that OpenVMS on Itanium(tm)0H is scheduled to ship, both Oracle and our customers will have ample timeE to work with the new versions of the operating system, the compilers,cC the middleware and the development tools.  In consultation with oureE customers, we will carefully evaluate which development strategy willr  offer them the greatest benefit.  F In the meantime, Oracle will continued to enhance and develop Rdb like; we've been doing for the past six years.  The focus of that H development effort will continue to be to meet the real, practical needsE of our many customers.  The newest release of Rdb, supporting OpenVMS > version 7.3, GS series hardware, Oracle 9iAS, plus a number ofF significant enhancements, is slated for release this month.  This will7 be the ninth release of Oracle Rdb in the past 7 years.e  B We look forward to in-depth conversations with Compaq and with ourH customers about this change so we can  pursue the best possible plan for) supporting Oracle Rdb on OpenVMS systems.    Thanks for your patience.s  F I sent you this mail because of your business relationship with OracleB Rdb.  If you no longer wish to receive mailings from us about Rdb,G please reply to this message with the word "Remove" in the subject line G of your message.  We will immediately remove your name from our mailingp list.    Kevin Duffy  Director, Rdb Developmentt   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:25:06 +0200e) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>l3 Subject: Re: I hate Ziff-Davis AND Nathan Brookwood , Message-ID: <3B3CF232.1518081D@infopuls.com>   WILLIAM WEBB wrote:  > 2 > Perhaps it was originally Holzkopf, which is the! > German colloquialism for idiot.t > 	 > WWWebb.    :-)   @ Nathan Teicholtz seems to be a Jewish name - at least in Germany@ this kind of name is regarded as typical Jewish. "Holz" is *not*? part of that name. "Teich" consumes the "H" and the "tz" at thef> end is not conforming with the spelling of "Holz". The reverse+ translation of "Brookwood" is "Bckenholz".,  : To get the "real" meaning I assume some knowlege of Hebrew# and/or Jiddisch might be necessary.r   Very on topic, eh?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:07:21 +0000u1 From: bengtl.net@telia.nospam.com (Bengt Larsson)u  Subject: Re: IA64 Rocks My World1 Message-ID: <3b3cc1b7.96926782@enews.newsguy.com>   > In comp.arch, Brannon_Batson@yahoo.com (Brannon Batson) wrote:  k >bengtl.net@telia.nospam.com (Bengt Larsson) wrote in message news:<3b3b4181.30126558@enews.newsguy.com>...SE >> In comp.arch, Eric Smith <eric-no-spam-for-me@brouhaha.com> wrote:r >> oT >> >Casper.Dik@Holland.Sun.Com (Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engineer) writes:D >> >> Engineers shouldn't blame everything on marketing; Digital has> >> >> made serious mistakes when it came to building hardware. >> > >> >Such as? >> -# >> - Not building large enough SMPs0 >b >EV7 >i6 >> - Not focusing on memory performance (esp. latency) >o >EV7  ? The discussion was about Digital, ie past tense. And, as Alexisn: Cousein pointed out it was about machines, not processors.  B >> - Aversion to obsoleting their own systems (esp. the 8200/8400) >n@ >What do you mean?  Is Digital too bad about supporting existing  >customers with legacy hardware?  = I meant 'obsolete' in the sense of building new machines that D competed, at least partially, with the old, not dropping support for the old.   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 15:16:32 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)l  Subject: Re: IA64 Rocks My World3 Message-ID: <VjaK8O+7tL$q@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  e In article <3b3cc1b7.96926782@enews.newsguy.com>, bengtl.net@telia.nospam.com (Bengt Larsson) writes:u@ > In comp.arch, Brannon_Batson@yahoo.com (Brannon Batson) wrote: > l >>bengtl.net@telia.nospam.com (Bengt Larsson) wrote in message news:<3b3b4181.30126558@enews.newsguy.com>...F >>> In comp.arch, Eric Smith <eric-no-spam-for-me@brouhaha.com> wrote: >>> U >>> >Casper.Dik@Holland.Sun.Com (Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engineer) writes:hE >>> >> Engineers shouldn't blame everything on marketing; Digital has ? >>> >> made serious mistakes when it came to building hardware.m >>> >.
 >>> >Such as?w  C >>> - Aversion to obsoleting their own systems (esp. the 8200/8400)l >>A >>What do you mean?  Is Digital too bad about supporting existingl! >>customers with legacy hardware?  > ? > I meant 'obsolete' in the sense of building new machines thatBF > competed, at least partially, with the old, not dropping support for
 > the old.  E That would be the Wildfire machines, which were delivered quite late.o@ Characterizing late delivery as an "aversion" to timely delivery= is sufficient poetic license to obscure communications.  I do ? recognize that the poster providing the clarification (if it int> fact is a clarification) is not the poster who originally used	 the term.e   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 15:56:34 -0700 From: chfong@yahoo.com (Wow)  Subject: Re: IA64 Rocks My World= Message-ID: <203e73fa.0106291456.67240057@posting.google.com>a  C IBM did not cave in to Intel. Just look at the Power4 architecture.7C An two-way processors on one die. And an eight-way on a MCM module.o= Running at >1.0 Ghz. Motorola and Apple wished that they have  this Power4 thing. ,    A Disclaimer: my views and opinions does not represent my employer.p CHF     W "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message news:<9h8vnv$3t4$1@pyrite.mv.net>...e1 > "del cecchi" <dcecchi@msn.com> wrote in messagee. > news:dFSZ6.454$%I.34290@eagle.america.net... >  > ...a > K > > Clearly you need to fight back by dedicating yourself to the success of2K > > one of the three competitors left:  AMD, Sun, IBM.  (yeah I know I left>
 > > out SGI).F > N > There could turn out to be a great many people who wind up feeling that way. > K > If IBM doesn't cave like DECpaq did, the Power architecture seems to have.N > the strength to stand up to anything HP comes up with (Intel's contributionsN > being a non-issue if Merced is much indication).  Maybe they'll steal an SMTM > page from Alpha to improve the chip-area (and power - small 'p') efficiencynM > of CMP (please don't get upset if IBM invented SMT in the first place:  I'mf4 > just a software type and don't know these things). > I > Makes one wonder whether Compaq wasn't planning this a year ago when itoK > canned NT on Alpha:  if *that* still existed, the *only* real uncontestedoL > market base for IA64 wouldn't (and would anyone really care that it had anL > IA32 wart on the chip then?  especially if McKinley doesn't?).  Of course,I > the same could be true if AMD pulls off Hammer and Windows supports itscJ > 64-bit extensions:  with an AMD processor that supports a 64-bit addressL > space *and* runs IA32 applications compatibly to cover the lowish end, SUNK > plugging along doing what it's always done, and Power spanning everythingi$ > *but* the low end, who needs IA64? > I > Perhaps just wishful thinking, but it beats shooting the Q BoD (and I'da1 > rather they died a slow, painful death anyway).t >  > - bill >  > >e+ > > I have a preference as to which one :-)  > >e > > del cecchi   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:08:32 -0700-& From: name99@mac.com (Maynard Handley)  Subject: Re: IA64 Rocks My World> Message-ID: <name99-2906011608320001@il0203a-dhcp93.apple.com>  E In article <9hg93t$cof$1@hubcap.clemson.edu>, mark@hubcap.clemson.edue (Mark Smotherman) wrote:  - > John Bayko <jbayko@sk.sympatico.ca> writes:qC > >    The Intel i960, at one point the world's most popular 32-bitiJ > >embedded CPU, was tossed without regard when Intel switched to ARM. ARMH > >may have been a better architecture, but the i960 was not at all bad,F > >and had much life left in it - even superscalar versions, which ARM > >doesn't have. > N > The i960CA was actually the first single-chip superscalar processor in 1990. > J > I'm not completely familiar with the ARM family, but a blurb in May said8 > they are working on a superscalar core called Cheetah.  , Were the low-end RS/6000s available in 1989  (a) not single chip or (b) not super scalar?l  > It was my understanding that even the very first RS/6000s wereG superscalar, and I would have thought the low-end ones were single CPU.o   Maynardt   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:48:40 GMTi/ From: StevenU@POBoxes.com (Steven P. Underwood)a# Subject: Intel Announcement webcasta2 Message-ID: <3b3d2dda.569635644@news.telocity.com>  
 Hello all:  A Has anyone been able to get the replay of the webcast to work.  IdF tried at work today and now at home tonight and I get the same thing.   C The skin comes up and the buttons on the player work except for the  play button.     Thanks     Steven P. Underwood,DNRC Whitinsville,MAe StevenU@POBoxes.coma   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:26:04 +0100g% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>n' Subject: Re: Intel Announcement webcasts* Message-ID: <3B3D38BC.F4A5F871@virgin.net>   "Steven P. Underwood" wrote:   > Hello all: >rC > Has anyone been able to get the replay of the webcast to work.  IsG > tried at work today and now at home tonight and I get the same thing.  >oE > The skin comes up and the buttons on the player work except for the- > play button. >9  G I had the same problem. You have to fill in the register window - whichl@ for me popped up behind the main window and couldn't be seen. Go	 figure...Q     >r > Thanks >e > Steven P. Underwood,DNRC > Whitinsville,MAu > StevenU@POBoxes.coml   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:38:53 GMTf/ From: StevenU@POBoxes.com (Steven P. Underwood)y' Subject: Re: Intel Announcement webcastr2 Message-ID: <3b3d498b.576725577@news.telocity.com>  C On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:26:04 +0100, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>i wrote:   >  >  >"Steven P. Underwood" wrote:b >t
 >> Hello all:p >>D >> Has anyone been able to get the replay of the webcast to work.  IH >> tried at work today and now at home tonight and I get the same thing. >>F >> The skin comes up and the buttons on the player work except for the >> play button.R >> > H >I had the same problem. You have to fill in the register window - whichA >for me popped up behind the main window and couldn't be seen. Go(
 >figure... >i >e >>	 >> Thanks9 >> >> Steven P. Underwood,DNRCo >> Whitinsville,MA >> StevenU@POBoxes.com >  >--b >Alan Greigo >i >t@ Oh, I did that but it still did not start.  It is definitely notC download either as I have my external DSL modem here telling me so.    Stevew Steven P. Underwood,DNRC Whitinsville,MAe StevenU@POBoxes.comI   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:38:20 -0400m- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>t' Subject: Mixed architecture wildfires ? , Message-ID: <3B3D65BA.391BC0DD@videotron.ca>  I Consider that to Compaq, the only VMS customers that matter are those whol$ spend the millions to buy wildfires.  G It will be most intersting to see if Compaq takes any steps to make the.6 transition to IA64 cost effective for those customers.  D Will customers be expected to purchase a second IA64 based "wildfireI equivalent" to which they will port their existing wildfire environment ?i  N Or would it be conceptually and technically possible to add IA64 cpu blocks toJ an existing ALPHA based wildfire and progressively move from alpha to IA64, without having to buy a brand new wildfire ?  N It would make for very interesting scenarios of shared memory between an alpha+ instance of VMS and a IA64 instance of VMS.)   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:41:39 -0400 5 From: "Martin Bondy" <mbondy1pjennings@starpower.net>n1 Subject: network clustering - multiple interfacesr+ Message-ID: <9hj73t$1ic$1@bob.news.rcn.net>b  J We have several ES40's that are using network clustering as opposed HSJ's.H Each ES40 has 3 network interfaces, 100BaseT, FDDI & Gigabit ethernet. IL have been told that the clustering software tries to use any and all networkK connections for communications between the ES40's.  We have special purposepL hardware on the 100BaseT network which requires the highest possible networkJ performance.  I want to eliminate all "unnecesary" traffic on the 100BaseTI network.  Does anyone know how to tell the clustering software not to usedJ the 100BaseT interface? In fact it would be preferable if only the gigabitI interface was used, as not only is it faster, but it is a private network D and does not receive any traffic from "outside" computers. Thanks in advance.   Martin Bondy   PS. We are running 7.2.1.H   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:24:13 +0100e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>r5 Subject: Re: network clustering - multiple interfaceso* Message-ID: <3B3D384D.20958B9A@virgin.net>   Martin Bondy wrote:h  L > We have several ES40's that are using network clustering as opposed HSJ's.J > Each ES40 has 3 network interfaces, 100BaseT, FDDI & Gigabit ethernet. IN > have been told that the clustering software tries to use any and all networkM > connections for communications between the ES40's.  We have special purposeoN > hardware on the 100BaseT network which requires the highest possible networkL > performance.  I want to eliminate all "unnecesary" traffic on the 100BaseTK > network.  Does anyone know how to tell the clustering software not to use(L > the 100BaseT interface? In fact it would be preferable if only the gigabitK > interface was used, as not only is it faster, but it is a private networkaF > and does not receive any traffic from "outside" computers. Thanks in
 > advance. >o  O you need to run  lavc$stop_bus and give it the device name you want to stop. At:M home so can't check the exact name but you should be able to work it out from = that. VMS 7.3 provides additional functionality in this area.e     > Martin Bondy >O > PS. We are running 7.2.1.H   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:00:40 +0100i- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>t2 Subject: Re: One more dreadful thought to consider) Message-ID: <3B3B54A8.566D2814@bbc.co.uk>-  & "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote:  c > In article <9hebaa$k3u@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog) writes: J > >A horrible trend popped into my mind this evening.  Here it is for your > >unenjoyment:b > >8D > >1.  Rather than compete with Oracle in databases, sell RDB to it.Q > >2.  Rather than compete with Quantum in storage, sell the disk business to it.:D > >3.  Rather than compete with Intel in CPUs, sell the Alpha to it. > >C  > >and the sickening conclusion: > >oB > >4.  Rather than compete with Microsoft in OS's, sell VMS to it. > G > I'm outta there then!  Even if M$ would keep it alive and nurture it.hF > It's that foul taste that anything M$ leaves on my palate.  There isG > pandemonium in the top brass at the Q and it wouldn't surprise me oneiG > bit if your prognostication was right on the target.  I can only hopet@ > and pray that David "Nostradamus" Mathog's vision is occluded.  E I'd say it is very bad synergy to even THINK such a thing and proposeO this thread dies right away.     --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk   A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofu MedAS or the BBC.e   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 18:47:00 -0500+ From: kuhrt@encompasserve.org (Marty Kuhrt)u2 Subject: Re: One more dreadful thought to consider3 Message-ID: <aJE$2oem4eF7@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  a In article <9hebaa$k3u@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog) writes:rI > A horrible trend popped into my mind this evening.  Here it is for youre > unenjoyment: > C > 1.  Rather than compete with Oracle in databases, sell RDB to it.gP > 2.  Rather than compete with Quantum in storage, sell the disk business to it.  D And the rumor I heard was that Quantum only wanted the disk divison D and didn't want anything to do with the tape drive stuff.  Digital, H in typical "baby and the bath water" style, insisted that they take the D tape division, too.  Quantum may not be making money with disks, butB you have to think that they are cleaning up on tape drive margins.D Granted, this may be an unsubstantiated rumor, but is outside of the realm of believability?t  C > 3.  Rather than compete with Intel in CPUs, sell the Alpha to it.e >  > and the sickening conclusion:t > A > 4.  Rather than compete with Microsoft in OS's, sell VMS to it.e > > [snip of the rest of the scenario, which seems all too likely]   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 14:46:01 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)m Subject: Re: Porting quandry3 Message-ID: <7vI2DMe214HO@eisner.encompasserve.org>R  a In article <mx1$NMf1w7R2@eisner.encompasserve.org>, kuhrt@encompasserve.org (Marty Kuhrt) writes:m  A > So it seems to me that they pretty much _had_ all the OSs they uB > want to sell on a 64 bit "standard" platform.  Not only that butA > the Alpha has been in production for almost 10 years.  Can IA64t( > be considered production ready, yet?    E No, but Compaq considers it will be production-ready before Alpha EV8 D would have come out.  To the extent that Alpha EV8 had a performanceF advantage, it would not have been _enough_ of a difference to overcome the Intel juggernaut.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:37:28 -0400m' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>u Subject: Re: Porting quandry( Message-ID: <9hivon$od6$1@pyrite.mv.net>  . "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message3 news:CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEDFCOAA.tom@kednos.com...eI > It is true, but what they didn't say was that they couldn't sustain thehJ > ongoing develpoment required to keep alpha competitive, and owing to its	 > design,tF > it probably could never have been competitive with PPC, for example.  F Perhaps they didn't say this because it is so clearly untrue that evenF Compaq couldn't stomach the lie (or at least couldn't believe in their ability to carry it off).s   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:39:40 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>r Subject: Re: Porting quandry( Message-ID: <9hivsn$odb$1@pyrite.mv.net>  F "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam> wrote in message- news:7vI2DMe214HO@eisner.encompasserve.org..._5 > In article <mx1$NMf1w7R2@eisner.encompasserve.org>,@- kuhrt@encompasserve.org (Marty Kuhrt) writes:g >eB > > So it seems to me that they pretty much _had_ all the OSs theyD > > want to sell on a 64 bit "standard" platform.  Not only that butC > > the Alpha has been in production for almost 10 years.  Can IA64:( > > be considered production ready, yet? >oG > No, but Compaq considers it will be production-ready before Alpha EV8lF > would have come out.  To the extent that Alpha EV8 had a performanceH > advantage, it would not have been _enough_ of a difference to overcome > the Intel juggernaut.s  K Possibly true given continuation of Compaq's indifferent (at best) attitudewK toward competing.  At least equally possibly false given *any* real effort.y   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:11:35 +0100n- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>  Subject: Re: Prediction ) Message-ID: <3B3A13C7.734BB618@bbc.co.uk>t   Hamlyn Mootoo wrote:   > Jinkies, you're right !!!o  % nah., its really an alien conspiracy,-   :-)-   >a >  > HM >0( > "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote: > >oZ > > In article <3B38580E.9609DF3B@bigfoot.com>, Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com> writes:H > > >I predict that Michael Capellas will not be CEO of Compaq within 14L > > >months of the date of this message.  A view from the top: Having mappedL > > >out his OWN EXIT strategy by whatever personal (monetary) forces causesI > > >him to make the decisions announced on the 6/25/2001, Mr. Capellas ImJ > > >predict will retire early, as the deal has made him quite financially* > > >comfortable at the expense of Compaq. > >.J > > Capellas is dead and buried in the concrete of some major constructionJ > > project.  Who you see at the helm is Robert Palmer with a well-crafted/ > > hollywood-style latex mask of Capellas.  ;)  > >  > > --S > > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMn > > S > > city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.    --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.ukc  A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofy MedAS or the BBC.o   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 20:39:09 +0200 From: gazso@ludens.elte.hu? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannonf! Message-ID: <EYvASvwq7apX@ludens>i  E > I dare say that twenty(20) years from now, when the next generation2D > reaches the age of the senior VMS people in this group, those nextI > generation people will say with pride, "I remember when VMS only ran onaJ > machines that couldn't run that ancient Windows-thing that some Bill-guy > got rich off of".n  G Well, I'm only 22, and I know some other interested people of my age :)     Gaspari   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:13:41 +0100i- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> ? Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco - reply to Terry Shannon$) Message-ID: <3B3B57B5.8D165148@bbc.co.uk>c   Osmo Kujala wrote:  M >  Oh, yeah? That's the decision which killed Alpha line. Dinosaurs must die.l# > (Like so called super computers.)aJ > There were no occupants in the all-purpose space (from lowest to highest2 > end). Alpha(+VMS) would have been good for that.  Q yeah, from desktop to data-centre. If people wanna run their buisiness on cheaper P low-end boxes rather than high end boxes this should have been encouraged rather+ than actively discouraged. Too late now :-(    --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uke  A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofh MedAS or the BBC.f   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:24:31 +0100d- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>g' Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco.a) Message-ID: <3B39D07F.7B7320B4@bbc.co.uk>e   Terry C Shannon wrote:   >d > ( > No, but I can say IA-64: Alpha-Inside.   however, can Intel say it too? --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uko  A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those of  MedAS or the BBC.    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:21:22 GMTg4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>' Subject: Re: Question to Charlie Matco. : Message-ID: <6r5%6.525$9r6.563492@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  : "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> wrote in message# news:3B39D07F.7B7320B4@bbc.co.uk...  >  >  > Terry C Shannon wrote: >- > >- > >-* > > No, but I can say IA-64: Alpha-Inside. >r  > however, can Intel say it too?  ( I guess we'll just have to wait and see.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:48:45 +01009% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>a Subject: Re: Rdb troll* Message-ID: <3B3CDB9D.DC93E6C9@virgin.net>   Malcolm Dunnett wrote:  D >    The Rdb development group sent an email out ( presumably to all> > Rdb customers ) this morning talking about the announcement. >A  K I'm an RDB and DBMS customer and have not received any email. I have spoken H verbally to an Oracle RDB and he said something similar to the email you@ have quoted below. I need something more solid than that really.   >sF >    It was very carefully worded to commit to nothing. It talks aboutC > how the Rdb group was not aware of the plans until Monday morning F > (this seems to contrast with the "Oracle Classic" folks being toutedE > at the announcement as being "excited" about Tru64 on IPF - do they F > "excite" quickly or did they have some prior information?). They key' > statement in the message seems to be:  >aH > "In the three years between today and the time that OpenVMS on ItaniumJ > is scheduled to ship, both Oracle and our customers will have ample timeG > to work with the new versions of the operating system, the compilers, E > the middleware and the development tools.  In consultation with ourwG > customers, we will carefully evaluate which development strategy willt# > offer them the greatest benefit."u >n> >   Perhaps they're concerned they won't get access to a Bliss > compiler for IPF?o >NI >    I suppose one couldn't expect anything more given that the Rdb folks-H > were as surprised as any of us - but the way it reads it leaves OracleF > open to conclude that leaving Rdb as VAX/Alpha only is the "greatestD > benefit" to their customers. Hopefully it will be followed up ASAP. > with a more definite statement of direction.   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:12:31 +0100t% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> 6 Subject: Re: Re; One more dreadful thought to consider* Message-ID: <3B3CE12E.A6CF2EFE@virgin.net>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:   L > Of course, this does NOT explain CA's pricing. To the best of my knowledge# > the CEO of CA does not own a MiG.n  F But CA did manage to provide a free bar all Monday at the CAMUS EuropeM conference and I came away loaded down with free bottles of wine, CA InterbizfJ hats, CA Interbiz bran flakes (I am not kidding) and CA Interbiz bouncing,P flashing balls which are just like the VMS ones except the CA ones buzz as well.K I've put my VMS ball and my CA ball together in a darkened room to see what  develops...n  N So that's where all the CA support money goes. I'm afraid I've got it all now!   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:13:28 GMTs& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>Y Subject: Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General  Manager, Cr8 Message-ID: <cBa%6.3781$1m4.740052@typhoon1.gnilink.net>  L > I doubt that enough details will be available publicly in that time frame. IeH > would think that a year or two from now would be the time where Compaq will bePE > able to introduce hard facts into the equation such as the types of  systemstK > initially available, type of pricing, licencing change policies/costs etce etc etc.  L It appears facts will prove the statement above to be in error - stay tunnedE because of the Compaq shutdown in is going to take a few weeks to the2
 details...   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:40:55 GMT & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>Y Subject: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, Compaq 8 Message-ID: <bR4%6.7566$gs1.564580@typhoon2.gnilink.net>  	 Dear Jeffg  6 By now you are aware Compaq has announced that we will7 standardize our 64-bit enterprise server product lines,o9 including the NonStop Himalaya, AlphaServer, and ProLiant 6 families, on Intel's Itanium(tm) processor family, its7 next-generation microprocessor targeted at the high-endh enterprise computing market.3 http://www.compaq.com/hps/ipf-enterprise/index.htmlo  < The question you are likely now asking yourself is what does this mean to me?  < First let me assure you that Compaq will immediately begin a7 full port of the Tru64 UNIX, OpenVMS and NonStop KernelV6 operating systems and development tools to the Itanium7 processor family. This means that all of the enterprisee< features and characteristics that you have relied on will be8 there on the Itanium platform. Additionally, Compaq will7 continue development and enhancement of these operatingi< system environments ensuring that we can continue to deliver0 leadership capabilities - such as clustering and7 availability. Our intention is to have our first Compaqo: Itanium-based systems for Tru64 UNIX and OpenVMS available8 in 2003 for early ISV testing and generally available in 2004.i  7 It is of utmost importance to us, however, that you arel8 confident that Compaq is delivering significant business8 value today and complete investment protection in Alpha-4 based solutions for many years to come. Compaq's top9 priorities for Alpha-based systems remain unchanged -- too: deliver improved performance and faster implementations of6 the Alpha microprocessor to meet committed performance2 enhancements, while continuing to provide the most/ available, scalable systems at the lowest cost.a  ; We will continue to supply you information via our web siten: and through other means, however I would like to alert you< to a special upcoming opportunity to get the information you: will need to deploy this technology. The Compaq Enterprise4 Technology Symposium, which will be held in Anaheim,: California, September 9-14, will be your most concentrated: source for knowledge on how to plan fully rollout this new4 technology as well as how to continue optimizing and3 extending your current Alpha based environment. Theh Symposium will focus on:  4 - Our strategy and product roadmaps. Compaq's senior4 management team, including Michael Capellas, will be4 there to help you clearly understand our directions.  4 - What to do and what not to do to get ready for our9 Itanium based environment. Compaq's engineering communityf7 will present what should be done to prepare for Itaniumt6 and what you need to think about and what you will not have to worry about.  9 - Compaq will provide the technical knowledge to not onlyv5 assist you in planning the transition to Itanium, but'6 also on how to achieve the best co-existence with your existing environments.  7 Whether you are a Tru64 UNIX, OpenVMS, Windows 2000, ora3 Linux technologist the Compaq Enterprise Technologyl9 Symposium in September is the place you need to be to get 5 the jump on deploying Itanium technology. Compaq wille5 provide the insight to show you that not only will wet< deliver the best operating systems available for Itanium but8 also how to prepare for adopting this technology rapidly9 into your enterprise. Along with Compaq's Engineering and(9 Management teams, please join me in September in Anaheim.m, For more information visit www.CETS2001.com.  
 Best Regards,   1 Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Managers! High Performance Systems Divisionc    7 For additional information on the multi-year Compaq and:. Intel technology and marketing agreement visit< http://www.compaq.com/hps/ipf-enterprise/index.html Included8 on this site is the opportunity to view a webcast of the7 announcement, press releases, customer quotes and more.    ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 13:03:03 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)uY Subject: Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, Co , Message-ID: <51$DVERCOxNx@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  9 In article <bR4%6.7566$gs1.564580@typhoon2.gnilink.net>, .+    "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:I > = > We will continue to supply you information via our web site < > and through other means, however I would like to alert you> > to a special upcoming opportunity to get the information you< > will need to deploy this technology. The Compaq Enterprise6 > Technology Symposium, which will be held in Anaheim,< > California, September 9-14, will be your most concentrated< > source for knowledge on how to plan fully rollout this new > technology  2    AHA. So this was all a plot to boost attendance at CETS 2001 wasn't it !!!!e   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:20:49 GMT@4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>Y Subject: Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, Co : Message-ID: <Bq5%6.524$9r6.563117@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  > "Malcolm Dunnett" <nothome@spammers.are.scum> wrote in message& news:51$DVERCOxNx@malvm5.mala.bc.ca...: > In article <bR4%6.7566$gs1.564580@typhoon2.gnilink.net>,- >    "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:s > > ? > > We will continue to supply you information via our web sitet> > > and through other means, however I would like to alert you@ > > to a special upcoming opportunity to get the information you> > > will need to deploy this technology. The Compaq Enterprise8 > > Technology Symposium, which will be held in Anaheim,> > > California, September 9-14, will be your most concentrated> > > source for knowledge on how to plan fully rollout this new > > technology >M4 >    AHA. So this was all a plot to boost attendance > at CETS 2001 wasn't it !!!!s  B Ya never know.... but truth be told, with this year's Innovate andI PartnerVision events cancelled, CETS2001 and the colocated ITUG Summit ismI THE place to go to get the facts on the Alpha-IPF convergence. The timingrI will be perfect, as it's gonna take Compaq a couple of months to sort outp$ all the details of its new strategy.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:59:19 -0400t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>lY Subject: Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 - Rich Marcello, Vice President and General Manager, Coe, Message-ID: <3B3CEC1D.6CB84B02@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:iD > Ya never know.... but truth be told, with this year's Innovate andK > PartnerVision events cancelled, CETS2001 and the colocated ITUG Summit isiK > THE place to go to get the facts on the Alpha-IPF convergence. The timing-K > will be perfect, as it's gonna take Compaq a couple of months to sort outv& > all the details of its new strategy.  L I doubt that enough details will be available publicly in that time frame. IN would think that a year or two from now would be the time where Compaq will beK able to introduce hard facts into the equation such as the types of systemsmR initially available, type of pricing, licencing change policies/costs etc etc etc.  N Also, this early, you won't have any serious hard facts on application portingF by ISVs because ISVs will still be waiting to evaluate their position.  N Actions speak louder than words, especially when you cannot trust their words.M Let Compaq provide hard facts. Listining to their PR speak is useless because  they cannot be trusted.t   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:54:14 GMT@& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>( Subject: Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 Hotels8 Message-ID: <ah3%6.2866$1m4.534274@typhoon1.gnilink.net>  K Bob please call Maritz again and ask them to book your room.  I suspect youML have JAVA script and cookies disabled - it won't work without those enabled.F Please Email for my phone number before you call.  If you get the sameJ response please take the name of the Martiz person and call me right away. I will get this resolved.r  F "Bob Kaplow" <kaplow_r@eisner.encompasserve.org.mars> wrote in message- news:7EAYt78NH6ro@eisner.encompasserve.org....I > In article <gH__6.2405$1m4.441728@typhoon1.gnilink.net>, "Jeff Killeen"  <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:fJ > > Assuming that about 5000 people will attend CETS this year we reserved about K > > 3000 hotel rooms. This is normal ratio because of locals and people who  makeI > > their own hotel reservations. For some reason, yet unknown to us, the- hotelsK > > are going at a fast rate. The very low cost hotel rooms are about gone.c AtK > > the current pace the reserved rooms will be gone by the end of July. OfaK > > course there will be rooms available at that point, there are plenty ofeL > > rooms in Anaheim. However, the additional rooms will not be available at the:J > > convention rate. If you are super sensitive to the hotel costs I would > > suggest you register early.e > >tE > > There were some cases of the advertised hotel rates and rates notf matchingK > > during the registration process.  That is being fixed and registrationst that( > > were processed are being reviewed... >s > I > Taking your advice, I had our travel folks call the hotel of my choice.  THeyH > said that we had to go through Maritz, the folks who screwed up all my stuffbK > last year. I called Maritz, and they said I had to do it myself online. InK > tried to do it online, going to the "Review/Change My Hotel Reservations"b, > button. I get the following error message: >l > "Error Encountered > / > An unexpected error occured on page "receipt"f= > The name of the exception is java.lang.NullPointerException  >i >  > = > An error occurred while attempting to process your request.  >m) > You may wish to use the back button andt5 > try the action again or return to the login page. "d >rL > So my travel department can't book me a room, Hilton won't book me a room,G > Maritz won't book me a room, and the online registration is broken. Ie guesstK > my last option is to sleep in the street with the Disneyland panhandlers.0 >rK > Looks like the CETS-2001 process learned NOTHING from CETS-2000. Or maybee > went backwards.g >D   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 14:24:14 -05009 From: kaplow_r@eisner.encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow)o( Subject: Re: Symposium: CETS-2001 Hotels3 Message-ID: <mxDWtcUPvIsc@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  a In article <ah3%6.2866$1m4.534274@typhoon1.gnilink.net>, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes: M > Bob please call Maritz again and ask them to book your room.  I suspect you N > have JAVA script and cookies disabled - it won't work without those enabled.  L I usually do, but tried enabling both for this. I jsut tried it again, afterD verifying that both were enabled, and now I'm getting the error whenJ clicking on "Return Visit Services". I can't even get as far as I did this morning.  H > Please Email for my phone number before you call.  If you get the sameL > response please take the name of the Martiz person and call me right away. > I will get this resolved.l  " This morning, I talked to "April".   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:05:20 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>h0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <3B3CD16D.BAC25891@videotron.ca>   Christopher Smith wrote:L > I generally have little tolerance for stupidity, and converting _anything_2 > to windows is the stupidest move one could make.   I am starting to disagree.  I Windows went through very bad times in the 1990s, forcing customers to do-M migrations because of huge mood swings which caused some products to fall outlK of favour. (ccMAIL to MSmail to Exchange for instance,  Wordperfect to WORDs	 etc etc).3  M However, now, Windows seems to be pretty stable, with the basic applications,aL SQL server, Access, IIS, Office, Exchange here to stay with just "upgrades".  M Also, windows shops have now learned not to upgrade for the sake of upgradingoL (hence Microsoft having no success with Windows 2000, and XP will suffer the- safe fate). The windows weenies are learning.r  L And more importantly: While window may not offer the stability of old legacyL systems such as VMS, you can sleep at night and not have to worry about whatG the (Fire trUCK) Compaq is really planning for VMS and where you should5K migrate to.  It may not be the best platform techncally, but it is the best.K platform politically and a platform where you don't have to worry about the N future. Windows Weenies are a commodity so hiring is not a problem and becauseL 90% of job openings want a Window Weenie, then people know that their skills' are not useless if they choose Windows.   N I used to think that a former employer was supid for going "all microsoft" andK not even considering other vendors such as Oracle etc. But in the end guess K what, their systems work and they are not stuck having to wonder where theylL will go when the vendor pulls the plug on their products. They don't have toJ worry about their users not being able to read email messages that containJ proprietary MS documents. As much as I disagreed with their MIS director'sS decision to go with MS only, I think that in the end, they made the right decision.r  N In the movie SCANNERS, some alien plants take over the brains of humans one byC one, and eventually, there is only one who has managed to avoid thehI brainwashing, and she spends time avoiding the brainwashed people and notxM doing anything. Meanwhile the brainwashed people/aliens lead normal lifes (orpM so they think). I often feel I am that last person still fighting for VMS andIG it has become a pointless battle because even the maker of VMS has beens# absorbed by the aliens (Microsoft).u   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:40:43 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>e0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <3B3CD9B6.93C015CD@videotron.ca>   Graham Allan wrote:eD > Anyone who makes such decisions right now on the basis of Monday'sH > announcement is surely an idiot. If Alpha systems running Tru64 or VMS7 > were working well last week, they will this week too.   K But if your company is RIGHT NOW at a point where it is reconsidering is ITeK strategy, and has bids from various vendors with a decision to be made realeN soon, then the dark Monday announcement will throw out any and all Alpha based/ solutions and that is not a knee jerk reaction.l  L Yes, Alpha will continue to run and yes, Compaq will continue to sell AlphasM for a few more years. That will satisfy the installed base and give them timel= to migrate off lf Alpha-VMS to wherever (including IA64-VMS).>  K But unless you have very short term requirements for 64 bit computing RIGHTnM NOW, you wouldn't invest in Alpha platform. Think about it. Just at about thedN time you have completed your migration from wherever you just came, you'd have! to do a conversion again to IA64.t  J Alpha will be there to help existing customers cope with growth until they/ migrate to IA64, and that is IT. Nothing more. e  L It is perfectly normal that Alpha solutions will be discarded by potentially new customers.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:40:56 -0500 + From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>t0 Subject: RE: Thanks Compaq for the new business!L Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0D9D2020@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca]   > Christopher Smith wrote:   > converting _anything_t4 > > to windows is the stupidest move one could make.   > I am starting to disagree.  B I see your point, but let me offer a few arguments of my own here.   <snip>  < > However, now, Windows seems to be pretty stable, with the  > basic applications,p> > SQL server, Access, IIS, Office, Exchange here to stay with  > just "upgrades".  K Ahh, yes.  Note that the "upgrades" are often so incompatible with previousnK versions that you may as well switch to a different product anyway, though.w  H Let me also address the capability of those apps by saying these things:  @ Out of the apps you mentioned, I can name none that will performG satisfactorily.  Access, for instance is ok for databases a few megs inaJ size, but have you ever seen, for instance, a payroll system that uses it? (I have, and it was disgusting)e  K Office is mostly bells and whistles, and no functionality.  In general wordoL cares more about filling the screen up with crap than about offering a fully functional editor...  G Exchange is likely one of the worst email systems I've seen, due to itse over-complexity.  J That leaves SQL server being the only app I have no big problem with.  TheL problem is that SQL server is just that, and depends on other programs to do9 its work.  I certainly don't trust many of them either ;)b  > > Also, windows shops have now learned not to upgrade for the  > sake of upgrading    Have you any proof? ;)    ? > (hence Microsoft having no success with Windows 2000, and XP t > will suffer thes/ > safe fate). The windows weenies are learning.e  I Windows 2000, from my point of view, was a marketing blunder.  MicroshafteG couldn't make up their mind who they wanted to sell the program to, andu5 ended up not selling it to anyone.  (sound familiar?)i  J It's just as well that most people haven't upgraded yet.  My shop has, andH .. let me count... it takes about ten seconds from a double-click on theL "my computer" icon to the time the window pops up and is useable. (pentium-2 400mhz, 128 megs of ram...)n  7 > And more importantly: While window may not offer the a > stability of old legacyr> > systems such as VMS, you can sleep at night and not have to  > worry about what? > the (Fire trUCK) Compaq is really planning for VMS and where d > you should? > migrate to.  It may not be the best platform techncally, but m > it is the best> > platform politically and a platform where you don't have to  > worry about thet= > future. Windows Weenies are a commodity so hiring is not a n > problem and because = > 90% of job openings want a Window Weenie, then people know e > that their skillsn) > are not useless if they choose Windows.o  L Well, I see it a bit differently than you.  First, you'd only be trading oneD worry for another.  Would you rather worry about the system becoming de-supported, or exploding?  e  K On the other hand, how long can you be sure that windows will be supported?pJ Microsoft may disappear completely in the next few years just as easily asA Compaq.  AFAICT, M$ exhibits all the behavior you'd expect from aeK fly-by-night operation, anyway, in terms of quality control and support...    L Windows weenies may all decide that the computer industry isn't for them andH go back to college to get English degrees.  The windows weenie market isI saturated as it is, and I don't think people are as sure about windows asoJ they have been in the past.  This really could be the beginning of the end for windows too.  = > I used to think that a former employer was supid for going o > "all microsoft" and @ > not even considering other vendors such as Oracle etc. But in  > the end guesso< > what, their systems work and they are not stuck having to  > wonder where theyp; > will go when the vendor pulls the plug on their products.d  I Then please tell me what they'll do when their vendor pulls the plug on ad product?    > They don't have to@ > worry about their users not being able to read email messages  > that contain> > proprietary MS documents. As much as I disagreed with their   J They don't have to worry about lack of peesee support jobs cleaning up theI viruses from the workstations where people read email with proprietary MS  documents, either. :)h   > MIS director's= > decision to go with MS only, I think that in the end, they   > made the right decision.  I As I said, I see your point on one hand, on the other hand, this sounds asH lot like the all-too-familiar "one billion flies" argument.  I certainly don't agree.  @ > In the movie SCANNERS, some alien plants take over the brains  > of humans one byE > one, and eventually, there is only one who has managed to avoid the7= > brainwashing, and she spends time avoiding the brainwashed : > people and not? > doing anything. Meanwhile the brainwashed people/aliens lead   > normal lifes (or; > so they think). I often feel I am that last person still @ > fighting for VMS and= > it has become a pointless battle because even the maker of o > VMS has been% > absorbed by the aliens (Microsoft).n  E There are many of us here who don't want to see VMS ruined.  Yes, theuB majority of the world are vegetables, but the brainwashing part is reversible.l   Regards,   Chrisp    ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developerl Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");o 'o   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Jun 2001 12:59:43 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)!0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <xwFLBodPiduI@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  - In article <3B3CD9B6.93C015CD@videotron.ca>, :2    JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  I >> announcement is surely an idiot. If Alpha systems running Tru64 or VMSa8 >> were working well last week, they will this week too. > M > But if your company is RIGHT NOW at a point where it is reconsidering is ITgM > strategy, and has bids from various vendors with a decision to be made realsP > soon, then the dark Monday announcement will throw out any and all Alpha based1 > solutions and that is not a knee jerk reaction.y > L    Of course it is a knee jerk reaction. If you trust Compaq as a vendor youM should believe their game plan to continue Alphaserver production for severalhJ years and to provide an upgrade path th IPF after that. It those plans fitL your predicted demands you've got nothing to worry about. If you don't trustB Compaq you should have thrown out their proposal before Monday ;-)  I    If Compaq has committed to deliver Alphas for another 11 years, as haslK been stated in this NG ( though I've not seen a reference where Compaq saysdJ what that actually means ) they you've got nothing to worry about - nobodyK can predict where the industry will be in 11 years so you'd be re-examiningc! your strategy before then anyway.h   > N > It is perfectly normal that Alpha solutions will be discarded by potentially > new customers.  J    As many of them have done in the preceeding years. Of course Compaq canL make the situation much better or worse through their communication strategy (or lack thereof).  L    Once again, it all comes down to Compaq needing to put all their cards onK the table for everyone to see, not just having private handholding sessionsaK with their favourite customers ( unless their game plan truly is that thosel+ are the only customers they want to keep ).e   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:04:44 GMTh= From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)i0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!0 Message-ID: <009FE43D.AD5256B3@SendSpamHere.ORG>  \ In article <3B3CD16D.BAC25891@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: {...snip...}O >In the movie SCANNERS, some alien plants take over the brains of humans one by D >one, and eventually, there is only one who has managed to avoid theJ >brainwashing, and she spends time avoiding the brainwashed people and notN >doing anything. Meanwhile the brainwashed people/aliens lead normal lifes (orN >so they think). I often feel I am that last person still fighting for VMS andH >it has become a pointless battle because even the maker of VMS has been$ >absorbed by the aliens (Microsoft).  I You are not of the body.  You are not one with Landru.  Please, come with  us and be absorbed.  :)  .  & (The Star Trekkies will understand it)   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMd            bO city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.r   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:38:26 -0400i- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>i0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <3B3CE739.EC47A4D5@videotron.ca>   Malcolm Dunnett wrote:K >    If Compaq has committed to deliver Alphas for another 11 years, as hasfM > been stated in this NG ( though I've not seen a reference where Compaq sayslD > what that actually means ) they you've got nothing to worry about   J All I have seen written is that Compaq will complete work of EV7, at whichN point those engineers are off to Intel, and that VMS will be ported to IA64. II have not seen any commitments to sell Alphas for 11 years, nor to provideu speed improvements to EV7.  L Perhaps those were made, but I haven't seen them. Guess what, most customers would also not have seen them.  K However, what is most important in this is the effect that this change will M have on any of the Alpha based OS. During the transition period, much FUD andwN uncertainty will exist. As a result, sales will go down, and as a result, ISVs2 may reconsider their commitments to that platform.  F So, if you have to choose between a platform where ISV and applicationM availability is in question, and one where you have no problems trusting that ? your applications will be available, you will choose the later.t  N VMS already had problems attracting customers due to lack of applications. And> the uncertainty due to transition period will make this worse.  G If a vendor did not port to VMS on Alpha when Compaq was making sreioustI commitments for Alpha, he sure as hell won't start porting to Alpha afterr0 Compaq has announced the death of that platform.J He *MIGHT* consider porting to IA54-VMS  *IF AND ONLY IF* Compaq makes notN only a commitment to marketing but actually delivers real marketing and provesJ that VMS is not part of its core product portfolio. But even then, while aM product might be ported to IA64-VMS, there is no assurance it would be portedw; to Alpha-VMS since the later is a shrinking market at best.o    L So if today you are being offered an Alpha solution, I think it is perfectly@ reasonable and logical to reject it and choose another platform.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:25:06 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!: Message-ID: <Cu5%6.527$9r6.564678@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>   >oK >    Once again, it all comes down to Compaq needing to put all their cards% onD > the table for everyone to see, not just having private handholding sessionsG > with their favourite customers ( unless their game plan truly is that  those - > are the only customers they want to keep ).t  H That would be a damnfool game plan indeed. I have a hunch that CPQ stillJ needs to take a close look at the cards it's been handed in this new deal.K The whole scheme apparently began early this month and the vast majority of J employees didn't get the word until last Sunday evening or during the June 25 announcement itself.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:26:55 -0400r- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>s0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <3B3CE488.9B65021F@videotron.ca>  & "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote:K > You are not of the body.  You are not one with Landru.  Please, come withD > us and be absorbed.  :)r > ( > (The Star Trekkies will understand it)  K Yes, but in that example, it was far too easy to fix the problem by zappingsM the controlling computer. In the case of Scanners, there was no central point N where the brainwashing influcence could be stopped because each individual had# a separate alien inside of him/her.e  M Was in in that episode where Kirk disabled the main computer by convincing itcE that it was not doing its job and the computer then getting confused,bJ generating a large puff of smoke and expired ? (or did they just use their phasers to get it over with ?)   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:36:12 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>t0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!* Message-ID: <3B3CE6BB.F9CC731A@virgin.net>  & "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote:  K > You are not of the body.  You are not one with Landru.  Please, come withc > us and be absorbed.  :)a >t  ^ Ah yes they convinced Landru that his charges were not developing and evolving and that he was^ damaging them because of this. Landru then self destructed. Think this will work on the Compaq senior management? :)    > ( > (The Star Trekkies will understand it) >n > --Q > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMn > Q > city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.    --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:02:47 -0400c- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>t0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <3B3CECED.9648CBBE@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:lJ > That would be a damnfool game plan indeed. I have a hunch that CPQ stillL > needs to take a close look at the cards it's been handed in this new deal.M > The whole scheme apparently began early this month and the vast majority oftL > employees didn't get the word until last Sunday evening or during the June > 25 announcement itself.r  N Perhaps the board may have taken the decision early this month, but I stronglyJ suspect that certain factions inside of Compaq had been hard at work for aL much longer time to formulate the strategy with Intel and had decided on theI timing of the announcement. When Intel confirmed that the agreed time hadlN arrived, the faction then went to the board fgor approval of a "done" deal and. that would have been in early june as you say.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:01:10 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>@0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!* Message-ID: <3B3CEC96.F79B7923@virgin.net>   JF Mezei wrote:    >mL > All I have seen written is that Compaq will complete work of EV7, at whichP > point those engineers are off to Intel, and that VMS will be ported to IA64. IK > have not seen any commitments to sell Alphas for 11 years, nor to providen > speed improvements to EV7. >t  L Not sure about the 11 years figure but Capellas at least had the guts in theO webcast to say (in front of Intel) that Alpha still was the "best in class" andyO that they would keep it that way for some time yet. He did promise "speed bump"pN enhancements to the EV7 architecture for whatever that's worth and whatever itR actually means. In the UK a speed bump is something that forces you to slow down -9 ie a bump in the middle of the road in residential areas.e   >uN > Perhaps those were made, but I haven't seen them. Guess what, most customers  > would also not have seen them. >uM > However, what is most important in this is the effect that this change willyO > have on any of the Alpha based OS. During the transition period, much FUD andrP > uncertainty will exist. As a result, sales will go down, and as a result, ISVs4 > may reconsider their commitments to that platform. >lH > So, if you have to choose between a platform where ISV and applicationO > availability is in question, and one where you have no problems trusting thateA > your applications will be available, you will choose the later.w >sP > VMS already had problems attracting customers due to lack of applications. And@ > the uncertainty due to transition period will make this worse. >sI > If a vendor did not port to VMS on Alpha when Compaq was making sreiousgK > commitments for Alpha, he sure as hell won't start porting to Alpha aftero2 > Compaq has announced the death of that platform.L > He *MIGHT* consider porting to IA54-VMS  *IF AND ONLY IF* Compaq makes notP > only a commitment to marketing but actually delivers real marketing and provesL > that VMS is not part of its core product portfolio. But even then, while aO > product might be ported to IA64-VMS, there is no assurance it would be portedl= > to Alpha-VMS since the later is a shrinking market at best.  >rN > So if today you are being offered an Alpha solution, I think it is perfectlyB > reasonable and logical to reject it and choose another platform.   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:53:08 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>i0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <3B3CF8B7.661F7B11@videotron.ca>   Alan Greig wrote:fQ > webcast to say (in front of Intel) that Alpha still was the "best in class" and Q > that they would keep it that way for some time yet. He did promise "speed bump"lA > enhancements to the EV7 architecture for whatever that's worth r  I But I didn't listen to that webcast. I only saw the news release, the PPTeH presentation and comments on CNN. How many customers would listen to the	 webcast ?o  M (I assume it is in that microsoft video format that crashes my macintosh more  often tha real video does).   T > actually means. In the UK a speed bump is something that forces you to slow down -; > ie a bump in the middle of the road in residential areas.   F Speed bumps are those dangerous things that send cyclists to hospitalsU especially when the town conveniently forgets to paint them and put up warning signs.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:59:29 -0400u' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> 0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!( Message-ID: <9hithf$mr1$1@pyrite.mv.net>  > "Malcolm Dunnett" <nothome@spammers.are.scum> wrote in message& news:xwFLBodPiduI@malvm5.mala.bc.ca...   ...i  J >    Of course it is a knee jerk reaction. If you trust Compaq as a vendor younG > should believe their game plan to continue Alphaserver production forC severalrL > years and to provide an upgrade path th IPF after that. It those plans fitH > your predicted demands you've got nothing to worry about. If you don't trustdD > Compaq you should have thrown out their proposal before Monday ;-)  K Except that it seems quite likely that Monday's announcement caused a major0D change in many customers' (and potential customers') level of trust.J Calling such change in the fact of significant new evidence 'knee-jerk' isI correct only in the physical sense (cause and effect), not the figurativee& sense (of an un-thought-out response).   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:52:58 -0400e' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>i0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!( Message-ID: <9hj0lo$ori$1@pyrite.mv.net>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3B3CF8B7.661F7B11@videotron.ca... > Alan Greig wrote:.H > > webcast to say (in front of Intel) that Alpha still was the "best in
 class" andF > > that they would keep it that way for some time yet. He did promise "speed bump"B > > enhancements to the EV7 architecture for whatever that's worth > K > But I didn't listen to that webcast. I only saw the news release, the PPT J > presentation and comments on CNN. How many customers would listen to the > webcast ?   H Gee, I tried but it just hung Win98 so badly that the IE window couldn't even be aborted externally.y   - bill   >tJ > (I assume it is in that microsoft video format that crashes my macintosh more > often tha real video does).    ------------------------------   Date: 29 Jun 2001 23:39:34 GMT2 From: mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog)0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!, Message-ID: <9hj3jm$27q@gap.cco.caltech.edu>  ` In article <xwFLBodPiduI@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>, nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) writes:$ >If you trust Compaq as a vendor ...  5 What kind of idiot would trust Compaq at this point?    E The incompetent slimeballs at the helm could pink slip the entire VMSlF division tomorrow and then make up some claim that dumping a couple of6 billion in sales is a forward looking business plan!     David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu? Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech  J **************************************************************************J *                       RIP VMS & ALPHA                                  *J **************************************************************************   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:38:05 GMTe. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!D Message-ID: <hYa%6.5078$ck5.484234@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3B3CD16D.BAC25891@videotron.ca...I > In the movie SCANNERS, some alien plants take over the brains of humansu one byE > one, and eventually, there is only one who has managed to avoid the K > brainwashing, and she spends time avoiding the brainwashed people and not~K > doing anything. Meanwhile the brainwashed people/aliens lead normal lifes- (or- > so they think).   I Wrong movie - Scanners summary from imdb http://us.imdb.com/Title?0081455!  J "Darryl Revok is the most powerful of all the scanners, and is the head ofJ the underground scanner movement for world domination. Scanners have greatH psychic power, strong enough to control minds; they can inflict enormousI pain/damage on their victims. Doctor Paul Ruth finds a scanner that Revok D hasn't, and converts him to their cause - to destroy the underground movement. "h   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:38:18 GMTd. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!D Message-ID: <uYa%6.5081$ck5.484234@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  2 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message" news:9hj0lo$ori$1@pyrite.mv.net...J > Gee, I tried but it just hung Win98 so badly that the IE window couldn't > even be aborted externally.   6 You mean that unplugging your PC wouldn't unhang IE???  K I've never had problems with my "pull the plug" method of aborting whateverlI is hung on windows - I used to simply cycle power, but now that the poweriI switch is controlled by windows, the power switch is no longer a reliableG way to turn off power.  K We need IBM to fix the power switch not turning the power off; just as theyi came up with this solution:a ---dI IBM's xSeries freestanding 232 and its 5.25-inch thick rack-mountable 342sK servers both feature " software rejuvenation," the ability to automaticallyiJ reboot Windows machines periodically as a less inconvenient alternative to them crashing on their own.yJ The software rejuvenation project is part of the multibillion-dollar Eliza? project to create servers that can fix themselves without human,
 intervention.o --- G IBM might invent a power switch that is based on a mechanical method ofn) interrupting the current to the computer.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:56:04 -0400s* From: "Andy Stoffel" <acs@fcgnetworks.net>0 Subject: Re: Thanks Compaq for the new business!9 Message-ID: <Y5c%6.110947$Uo3.2481698@news6.giganews.com>   : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3B3CF8B7.661F7B11@videotron.ca... > Alan Greig wrote:HH > > webcast to say (in front of Intel) that Alpha still was the "best in
 class" andF > > that they would keep it that way for some time yet. He did promise "speed bump"B > > enhancements to the EV7 architecture for whatever that's worth  K > But I didn't listen to that webcast. I only saw the news release, the PPT J > presentation and comments on CNN. How many customers would listen to the > webcast ?   J > (I assume it is in that microsoft video format that crashes my macintosh more > often tha real video does).p  E Hmmm.... not sure what format the "replay" is in but the original wasa? available in both WMF (Windows Media Format ?) and Real "video"iH (which is the format I watched it in.....  and I had no problems with it@ [Of course, I'm using W2K and an older version of IE (5.0) since that's not supported on VMS]   -Andy-   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:07:40 -0400t' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>-: Subject: Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated( Message-ID: <9hiu0m$n32$1@pyrite.mv.net>  0 "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> wrote in message) news:tjp72vkid095b6@news.supernews.com...o4 > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message$ > news:9hdrua$353$1@pyrite.mv.net... > > 4 > > "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> wrote in message- > > news:tjk1j99u64spe1@news.supernews.com...tD > > > "Malcolm Dunnett" <nothome@spammers.are.scum> wrote in message, > > > news:MFVbm5gV2I4b@malvm5.mala.bc.ca...7 > > > > In article <tji3n47ge8e60b@news.supernews.com>,o3 > > > >     "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> writes:n	 > > > > > I > > > > > 32 bit processors are a dead end for general purpose computing.s > > > > I > > > >     Which problem in particular do you see 32bit processors beingeD > > > > inadequate for? Will those problems need to be solved by the( > > > > average desktop system customer? > > > >o > > >fG > > > It's not that all (or even many) problems need more than 32 bits.i It's > > thatK > > > most computers are used to do more than one thing.  A 32 bit chip canc > only > > > address 4GB of RAM.  > >uL > > Tell that to Intel and its Xeons (32-bit machines supporting up to 64 GB > ofL > > RAM).  It's like telling people a 16-bit PDP-11 could only address 64 KB > of" > > RAM (IIRC 4 MB was the limit). > >  > H > The Xeon uses 36 bits for addressing memory.  It's a half assed 36 bit3 > processor.  But, you already know that don't you?t  F Without bothering to address the merits of Xeons (or PDP-11s, for thatF matter), the fact remains that Xeons are universally considered 32-bit* processors and that you were simply wrong.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:07:49 GMTo& From: Eric Taylor <et@rocketship1.com>: Subject: Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated/ Message-ID: <3B3D264E.C83BC5D6@rocketship1.com>u   Bob Koehler wrote:  R > In article <3B3A5656.CC4C0048@jpl.nasa.gov>, Eric <etailor@jpl.nasa.gov> writes: >V< > > Consider the vax without pdp-11 emulation when they went > > to the vax.n >f@ > For the first several years, VAXes included most of the PDP-11C > instruction set (compatability mode).  I ran lots of PDP-11 tasks-  > copied from my RSX-11M system. >1H > ----------------------------------------------------------------------A > Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation7? > NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GrouplG >                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingo  A Exactly. And I thought they did a terrific job. I too started outiP on rsx-11m (and 11D and IAS). If we couldn't have migrated our pdp-11 tools, the1 vax would never have been as sucessful as it was.w  = (As an aside, I recall when rsx11m first surfaced, it did notl< do "type-ahead" the way it's big brother rsx11d did it. But,9 it did have some capability, and we had sources. I made asV 3 line (assembly language)  patch, published it in the multitasker magazine and became8 instantly famous for doing what DEC said was impossible.* However, DEC was quite unhappy, since they6 then had to explain why they said it couldn't be done.= I then ditto'd this with a task builder hack the next month.)   = So, why didn't they have a vax emulation (compatibility) moderC on the alpha? I heard they said it would run too slow. Well, I haveh? an old mac and some old 68k software. With on the fly emulationTA tricks, the old stuff ran faster (i have a 80mhz mac!!!) emulatedt= on a powerpc than the fastest 68040 or whatever could run it.n  8 But none of our critical programs would work using DEC's< migration tools. So, is apple so smart? Dec couldn't do what
 apple did?  > The point of my post was to blame this technical snafu for the= demise of the alpha. It was the fastest chip around, and theyc? couldn't figure out how to do it right. If the sources had beenf: available, maybe somebody like me or my friends would have= been able to write the emulator. That's what open source does-> for you. Even though I once worked as a consultant for DEC and> had a software "raid" package that DEC bought for Europe, they- wouldn't let me touch their alpha. I did ask.E  ? So, what are the chances that they will port vms. About none. I > have a friend from the old days who was just telling me how he< packed up and left his job at compaq. He was doing some sort of alpha work. Gone!  @ So, my reason for posting is to try to convince anyone out there@ that works for NASA, JPL, or any .gov organization, to not waste4 anymore taxpayer money counting on the alpha or vms.  > And for an O.S., Linux may be unix, but I have the sources and= can  fix problems that compaq would never get to. And it runs)B on just about any box, so if by some stretch, the alpha rises fromB the dead, linux will run on it. Oh, yeah, did I mention the price?  A As for the posting from my jpl account, that was an error. I workf= from home and I use my own equipment. I have a vpn connectioneH to jpl, and sometimes I forget to turn it off when I post messages. This8 message was delivered thru my jpl connection by mistake.  F I appologize for using a government connection for this post. However,J my posting was still  in the line of work, therefore I don't expect to get admonished for this mistake.  . My intent is to pursuade all vms users to moveP to linux if at all possible. My project at JPL has just spent less than a coupleL of man years to port this system (some of which comprises linux code donatedF to the government). The original cost of development on the vax was onO the order of $100 million. This effort, and my posting of information about it,oN might help to save the country from a doomed project (which I can't name) thatL has already eaten up 3 times that much and needs to be stopped. That projectO is supposed to use a 32 node cluster of Sun systems. Another closed proprietaryr system.   % /Anyway, For more  info on our  port:.  5 "There is a small article on page 10 of the July 2001w1 issue of Linux Journal that describes how the CBSe6 Project successfully ported from VAX/VMS to PC/Linux."   eric  < This posting is solely my opinion. I do work for JPL, but my posting here is my own.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:16:11 -0500 + From: Phil Mendelsohn <mend0070@tc.umn.edu> : Subject: Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggeratedG Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.20.0106292110500.5029-100000@garnet.tc.umn.edu>   ' On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Eric Taylor wrote:a  ? > (As an aside, I recall when rsx11m first surfaced, it did notd> > do "type-ahead" the way it's big brother rsx11d did it. But,; > it did have some capability, and we had sources. I made aeX > 3 line (assembly language)  patch, published it in the multitasker magazine and became: > instantly famous for doing what DEC said was impossible., > However, DEC was quite unhappy, since they8 > then had to explain why they said it couldn't be done.? > I then ditto'd this with a task builder hack the next month.)w  I That was not uncommon.  My dad wrote some of RSX-11M, and tells the story F that DEC marketing said that 11M would only address 32K(?) and not theE full 128K(?) of memory that 11D would.  There was no veracity to this.G claim; it was solely a marketing ploy to justify a price difference anda& keep the "big" product more expensive.  D The difference between then and now is that Dave Cutler took it uponI himself to release his own press release internally *AND* external to theaD company saying that it was utter nonsense and that 11M could address everything 11D could.i  A Not too many people left willing to call things as they see them.p   --  6 "To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." --Anonymous   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 04:25:00 GMTt& From: Eric Taylor <et@rocketship1.com>: Subject: Re: The death of VMS has been greatly exaggerated/ Message-ID: <3B3D5485.451147B3@rocketship1.com>l   Phil Mendelsohn wrote:  ) > On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Eric Taylor wrote:e >oA > > (As an aside, I recall when rsx11m first surfaced, it did noto@ > > do "type-ahead" the way it's big brother rsx11d did it. But,= > > it did have some capability, and we had sources. I made a Z > > 3 line (assembly language)  patch, published it in the multitasker magazine and became< > > instantly famous for doing what DEC said was impossible.. > > However, DEC was quite unhappy, since they: > > then had to explain why they said it couldn't be done.A > > I then ditto'd this with a task builder hack the next month.)! >eK > That was not uncommon.  My dad wrote some of RSX-11M, and tells the storyoH > that DEC marketing said that 11M would only address 32K(?) and not theG > full 128K(?) of memory that 11D would.  There was no veracity to this I > claim; it was solely a marketing ploy to justify a price difference and ( > keep the "big" product more expensive. > F > The difference between then and now is that Dave Cutler took it uponK > himself to release his own press release internally *AND* external to thesF > company saying that it was utter nonsense and that 11M could address > everything 11D could.s  C Dec did have a marketing problem. 11m was written for a system that A did not have memory management. I guess Dave put in the hooks, or E it wasn't much of an issue to add the support. Anyway, 11m was merelyiL a kernel rewrite, but they first tried to sell it as a complete new product.  L It came with sources, so lot's of us could mess with it. Before you knew it,8 it was the top dog and they didn't know how to price it.  L And it's real biggy, was get this, commands could be read from files.Can you. imagine? Right, standard 11d couldn't do that.  O Geez, me and my buddies hacked that into 11d (along with command line editing),sQ done with a stumbled upon piece of source code called: MCR. And  <ret><ret> wouldrQ let you repeat a command. I was the only one who could rapid blast a message ontoeL other screens playing  terminal wars. Nobody could figure out how we did it.  E Anyway, one way to keep em honest is with open source. Puts the powers- in the programmers hands, not the marketeers.d     >  >xC > Not too many people left willing to call things as they see them.a >0 > --8 > "To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." --Anonymous   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:35:48 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>s1 Subject: Re: VMS Messaging to Pager, Mobile phone-, Message-ID: <3B3CCA83.28F4BB72@videotron.ca>   Trevor Blake wrote: J > More convenient for me would be SMS Text messaging to a mobile phone, asG > I can do via ICQ on a Win box.  Does any software exist for VMS to dol > SMS Text Messaging ?  G I had written most of an SMS system from VMS that use that TAP protocol.K (supported by most mobile phoen companies). But stopped work due to lack ofo: interest. If there is money to be made I would reconsider.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:05:29 +0100b- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>f$ Subject: Re: VMS on IA64 (technical)) Message-ID: <3B3B55C9.634F1961@bbc.co.uk>h   Arne Vajhj wrote:   > "T. S. Murphy" wrote:eC > > "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messageeJ > > news:rdeininger-2306012213110001@user-2ive69s.dialup.mindspring.com...M > > > I disagree.  Many VMS applications ARE performance-critical.  And VAXesi1 > > > don't run a very big percentage these days.  > >eJ > > I'm almost certain that a majority of VMS systems in service are still > > VAX'es.m >a > Not true.i >aA > It is not even easy to find a production VAX system any longer.s  K yup, there are 4 VAX 4000-100's and a 4000-300 here that are no longer liveI" and due to be turned off any week.   >. >mM > > Seriously, what high performance applications are running on VMS? For thefF > > relatively small market which Alpha does have for high performance> > > computing, most of the systems are running Linux or Tru64. > 4 > Many. Examples: lottery systems, Oracle databases. >   G Isn't security rather than performance the reason lotteries run on VMS?e. The Oracle story, well we all know about that.   --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk*  A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those of* MedAS or the BBC.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:15:52 +0100h- From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk>k Subject: Re: VMS on UltraSparc?e) Message-ID: <3B39F8A8.8E71D91A@bbc.co.uk>p   Tom Linden wrote:>  M > They announced a 216 HHz transistor today, which they claim will go to 300!2   whats a HHz?   --6 Tim Llewellyn, OpenVMS Infrastructure, Remarcs Project0 MedAS at the BBC, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK.A Email tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk. Home tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.ukn  A I speak for myself only and my views in no way represent those ofn MedAS or the BBC.h   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:50:39 GMT  From: dittman@dittman.netm Subject: VMS V7.3 SPD Error.A Message-ID: <Pfa%6.154244$Mq.4633135@e420r-sjo3.usenetserver.com>   @ The VMS V7.3 SPD lists the MicroVAX II in both the supported and- unsupported hardware list.  Which is correct?o -- s Eric Dittman dittman@dittman.net    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:05:52 -0600a% From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com>r Subject: Re: VMS V7.3 SPD ErroryB Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010629200516.04adfdd8@ntbsod.psccos.com>  F Maybe it means "you pays yer money and takes yer chances"...?   <grin>  1 At 07:50 PM 6/29/2001, dittman@dittman.net wrote:sA >The VMS V7.3 SPD lists the MicroVAX II in both the supported andl. >unsupported hardware list.  Which is correct? >--n
 >Eric Dittman9 >dittman@dittman.net   ------I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ I | Dan O'Reilly                  |                                       |nI | Principal Engineer            |  "Why should I care about posterity?  |rI | Process Software              |   What's posterity ever done for me?" |tI | http://www.process.com        |                    -- Groucho Marx    |gI +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+c   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:09:31 -0700-+ From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com>2 Subject: Re: VMS V7.3 SPD Error ( Message-ID: <3B3D34DB.FC972C13@mmaz.com>   dittman@dittman.net wrote:  B > The VMS V7.3 SPD lists the MicroVAX II in both the supported and/ > unsupported hardware list.  Which is correct?t   [INSERT TONGUE IN CHEEK]  H Perhaps both if you have the old Q-bus X86 processor board in it...  The' VAX is not supported, but the X86 is...n   [/INSERT TONGUE IN CHEEK]p   --  ? Barry Treahy, Jr  *  Midwest Microwave  *  Vice President & CIOr  A E-mail: Treahy@mmaz.com * Phone: 480/314-1320 * FAX: 480/661-7028,   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:17:37 -0500u+ From: Phil Mendelsohn <mend0070@tc.umn.edu>! Subject: Re: VMS V7.3 SPD Error4G Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.20.0106292117080.5029-100000@garnet.tc.umn.edu>r  . On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 dittman@dittman.net wrote:  B > The VMS V7.3 SPD lists the MicroVAX II in both the supported and/ > unsupported hardware list.  Which is correct?h  # Depends on your equipment karma?       -- t6 "To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." --Anonymous   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:49:08 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> 4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either, Message-ID: <3B3CCDA3.19299E9D@videotron.ca>   Alphaman wrote:iG > retrospect, I'd have to say they're right.  Funny how the guys on thedN > inside, the grunts with the marching orders, know better than the CEO what's3 > going on, and are MUCH better at articulating it.a  K Perhaps. But customers don't hear or see that, they only hear/see the CEO'seJ damning statements and the grunts are prevented from taking any actions to help VMS's cause.t  C Look at how hard Marcello must have fought to get a trivially small  advertising budget last year.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:53:15 +0100g% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>$4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either* Message-ID: <3B3CDCAA.DBDEF417@virgin.net>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:o  K > But there is some encouraging behind-the-scenes marketing stuff going on..J > CPQ actually set up a "War Room" to deal with the recent turn of events. >6  M Hmm, can I get them extradited to the Hague for war crimes? ;) Chipicide must  be a crime Shirley?    --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:35:49 GMT.4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either: Message-ID: <FE5%6.531$9r6.569645@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  2 "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message$ news:3B3CDCAA.DBDEF417@virgin.net... >l >o > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:  >tI > > But there is some encouraging behind-the-scenes marketing stuff goingn on.aL > > CPQ actually set up a "War Room" to deal with the recent turn of events. > >c >uJ > Hmm, can I get them extradited to the Hague for war crimes? ;) Chipicide must > be a crime Shirley?   K Shirley is my aunt, but whatever... the chipicide is not yet committed, norfJ will it be until EV79 is past prime. But it might be time to start drawing% up an indictment for use in Den Haag.m   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:39:48 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>a4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either( Message-ID: <9hisce$lvo$1@pyrite.mv.net>  9 "Alphaman" <alphaman64@nixspam-home.com> wrote in messagei5 news:X7%_6.17013$P5.5646572@news1.rdc1.tn.home.com....   ...i  H > Simply put, Intel has finally admitted, at least privately, they don't knowK > how to design a 64 bit processor.  They need decent engineers, and that'seL > where the xfer of Alpha engineers to Intel fits.  What is missing from theL > publicly presented equation is the quiet flow in the opposite direction of/ > undisclosed numbers of large buckets of cash.o >pJ > More specifically put, the next generation Itanium processor, Itanium-II (aH > la "Pentium II"), while it will not contain specific Alpha components, willL > be designed by Alpha engineers (if many of them go ;^) and it will containK > features that will help to optimize the processor to Q-specific operating L > systems.  What are the details beyond that?  I don't know -- no one knows,D > because pen hasn't been put to paper (light pen hasn't been put to screen?)H > yet for this chip design.  That's the EV8 team's task.  Build a betterB > Itanium than anything Intel or HP could, and call it Itanium-II.  H Simply put, the above just isn't very credible - though that it would beK floated out as a short-term palliative certainly is (i.e., I'm not doubting G your own statements about what you were told, nor the statements of thet4 people you talked with about what *they* were told).  A Both Intel and HP have *massive* investments in the existing IA64rJ architecture, and by most accounts that architecture is not at all readilyL susceptible to extension in the directions Alpha went.  Furthermore, currentG evidence suggests that it's far from a *complete* dud, so there's everyeE reason to believe that Intel can muscle it through to majority markettJ penetration (though also reason to believe that it won't be good enough toL freeze out all competition and *certainly* wouldn't have been good enough to4 freeze out a credibly-pursued Alpha product family).  G So while I can easily believe that Intel was drooling at the thought of H acquiring a large bunch of experienced microprocessor designers, that itF will do anything remotely like replacing EPIC with Alpha-style innardsD (while maintaining the IA64 instruction set, of course) seems prettyK far-fetched - and, of course, in any event nothing that would take place ingL anything like the time frames being discussed for porting the various Compaq OSs.  K Of course, even if all the above turns out to be an exact prediction of theEH future, it still doesn't make much difference to VMS, whose fate will beL decided in the next year or two, before even the port is completed much lessI any Alpha-based IA64 architecture member appears.  The negative impact oneL VMS's nascent recovery (and to at least some extent Tru64) alone should haveJ been sufficient to make dropping Alpha unthinkable - if VMS was consideredK to have anything but short-term value to the company (the port 'commitment'sK being the obvious counter-move to try to preserve more short-term revenue).y  F Compaq is pretty good at telling people what they want to hear, but ifE history hasn't taught you not to believe everything Compaq says (evenoI trusted friends within Compaq:  the rule seems to be that the people mosteJ closely associated with a project are about the last to know it's going to& be axed), then I don't know what will.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:07:56 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>i4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either, Message-ID: <3B3CFC2E.98360BC0@videotron.ca>   Bill Todd wrote:C > Both Intel and HP have *massive* investments in the existing IA64nL > architecture, and by most accounts that architecture is not at all readily8 > susceptible to extension in the directions Alpha went.  M That doesn't really matter. What matters is how fast NT boots after a failuremI so the corporate web site is back on-line. There are many ways to acheiveoC speed and Intel chose one which is different from Alpha. One may be N better/cleaner/simpler/more elegant than the other, but it doesn't prevent the other to become very fast.  N Intel was able to take the 8086 game controller and turn it into a world classN CPU good eniough to be called "the world'd fastest CPU" and go unchallenged byJ Compaq who had the world's fastest CPU. Intel will succeed in making speedM increments to IA64 and will continue thetradition of gradually turning a crap22 chip into something that is respectable over time.  F The problem is specific to VMS. VMS is in no position to widthsand theH uncertainty associated with this transition period. Its fragile recoveryE following 10 years of heavy bleeding won't be able to widthstand this2O uncertainty period of transition and I fear that the bleeding will start again.a  F Do not forget that there are still markets such as international fundsJ transfers that VMS is still scheduled to lose in a year or so. While thoseN losses are not related to the IA64 switch, they will occur at a time where VMS  could ill afford to have losses.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:17:07 -0500.1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>b4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either& Message-ID: <3B3D2893.EBE9984@fsi.net>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:C > 4 > "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message& > news:3B3CDCAA.DBDEF417@virgin.net... > >o > >i > > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:n > >oK > > > But there is some encouraging behind-the-scenes marketing stuff going  > on. N > > > CPQ actually set up a "War Room" to deal with the recent turn of events. > > >  > >yL > > Hmm, can I get them extradited to the Hague for war crimes? ;) Chipicide > must > > be a crime Shirley?e > M > Shirley is my aunt, but whatever... the chipicide is not yet committed, nornL > will it be until EV79 is past prime. But it might be time to start drawing' > up an indictment for use in Den Haag.p  5 Yeah - maybe assault with intent to commit chipicide.a   ...and don't call me Shirley!    --   David J. Dachteral dba DJE Systemsg 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.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:47:18 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either: Message-ID: <Gca%6.592$9r6.712742@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message  news:3B3D2893.EBE9984@fsi.net... > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:, > >w6 > > "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message( > > news:3B3CDCAA.DBDEF417@virgin.net... > > >o > > >  > > > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:  > > >!G > > > > But there is some encouraging behind-the-scenes marketing stuffh goingo > > on.DH > > > > CPQ actually set up a "War Room" to deal with the recent turn of events.  > > > >a > > >oD > > > Hmm, can I get them extradited to the Hague for war crimes? ;)	 Chipicidej > > must > > > be a crime Shirley?p > >"K > > Shirley is my aunt, but whatever... the chipicide is not yet committed,a noreF > > will it be until EV79 is past prime. But it might be time to start drawing ) > > up an indictment for use in Den Haag.w >u7 > Yeah - maybe assault with intent to commit chipicide.D  D All manner of charges are possible under the Secret Code of Military
 Toughness.   >  > ...and don't call me Shirley!a  K I resemble that remark. Did it come from the old same place or the same old,
 place. ;-}   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:07:34 -0500r* From: cjt & trefoil <cheljuba@prodigy.net>4 Subject: Re: Why Compaq won't succeed on IA64 either+ Message-ID: <3B3D5E96.2549A9C9@prodigy.net>.   Christopher Smith wrote: > N > You can cure technical problems with technical solutions, but you can't cure+ > poor management with technical solutions.a > 
 > Regards, >  > Chrish > # > Christopher Smith, Perl Developerm > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");u > 'p >  >  > > -----Original Message-----7 > > From: Alphaman [mailto:alphaman64@nixspam-home.com]d > < > > With Alpha engineers working on Itanium-II (read: fixing > > what's wrong witho< > > Itanium-I with Alpha technology), we can hope that there > > won't be as manyG > > slips and delays as what we saw with the college kids doing Itanic.i  G Alpha engineers working on an HP architecture at Intel.  At least it's ,
 cosmopolitan.:   ------------------------------   Date: 29 Jun 2001 19:10:20 GMT2 From: mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog)* Subject: Re: Why VMS on IA64 will succeed?, Message-ID: <9hijqs$mre@gap.cco.caltech.edu>  u In article <Tb2%6.4389$eL5.469935@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net> writes:l) >This might allow Compaq to pull off whatoI >Microsoft hasn't yet done - turn low priced bundled software to create at >monthly stream of cash.  H The crew running Compaq these days couldn't turn a gold brick into cash.J They'd head off to the bank with it and come home with 5 magic beans and aJ stack of pets.com stock.  Anyone want to lay bets on the ROI, 2 years down@ the road, of the hundreds of millions they're about to invest in "services"?   J That isn't to say that a subscription software model cannot work.  It justC has to be viewed as a good deal by the consumer.  For instance, I'm1K perfectly happy with the $70/year I send Sun now for their academic programoJ , but I was not at all happy with the $600/year I used to send Compaq for # the ESL/CSLG.  Note the past tense.t   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu? Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech nJ **************************************************************************J *                       RIP VMS & ALPHA                                  *J **************************************************************************   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:25:27 GMTs2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman). Subject: Re: Windows Images Running Under iVMS1 Message-ID: <rK3%6.303$rc5.7985@news.cpqcorp.net>   _ In article <tjp80rpcq6bnd5@news.supernews.com>, wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer) writes:lK :The point here is that Win32 has already been ported to OpenVMS.  Is this sM :enough or are there other (besides MFC) system interfaces required to run a @ :Windows executable?  ,   The API is enough for porting source code.  G   To execute a non-native image, a compatible run-time environment (the-G   system entry points, the memory management model, etc), a translation H   of the image, or an emulation of the environment, or an interpretation   of the code, is needed.  9  H   Translations, emulations, and interpreters (and combinations of same) E   are the typical choices when the instruction set differs.  With an lH   instruction set that is shared, a compatible run-time environment may K   (conceivably) be feasible/possible, depending on the relative similarity a'   of the system execution environments.     N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:48:00 -0400n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>-. Subject: Re: Windows Images Running Under iVMS, Message-ID: <3B3CDB6B.F886F200@videotron.ca>   Hoff Hoffman wrote: I >   To execute a non-native image, a compatible run-time environment (the I >   system entry points, the memory management model, etc), a translation J >   of the image, or an emulation of the environment, or an interpretation >   of the code, is needed.u  M Perhaps Compaq, in its upcoming $500 million buying binge, could buy Insignia9A Solutions and get them to write the windows emulator on VMS-IA64.-  = They could give VMS both Win32 emulator and a Win64 emulator.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:50:13 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> . Subject: Re: Windows Images Running Under iVMS, Message-ID: <3B3CDBEF.D6A3F351@videotron.ca>   JF Mezei wrote: O > Perhaps Compaq, in its upcoming $500 million buying binge, could buy Insignia-C > Solutions and get them to write the windows emulator on VMS-IA64.  > ? > They could give VMS both Win32 emulator and a Win64 emulator.T    I And thinking about this further, I think that Bill Gates would approve ofCK this, especially if Compaq bundles the Windows emulator in each copy of VMScN distributed. You see, then Bill Gates would get Windows license fees for everyK VMS system sold so he would not object to Compaq marketing VMS agressively.6   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.359 ************************