1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 11 Nov 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 628       Contents: Re: Compaq guarantees? Re: Compaq/HP merger in trouble $ Re: Compaq: VMS is alive and kicking$ Re: Compaq: VMS is alive and kickingD Re: Editing DCL command lines longer than the current terminal widthD Re: Editing DCL command lines longer than the current terminal width, Re: Erasing a  software write locked tape... Re: files with long lines  Re: files with long lines , Re: files with long lines (in Compaq Pascal)2 Re: Hewlett family votes "NO" on HP-Compaq merger!2 Re: Hewlett family votes "NO" on HP-Compaq merger!2 Re: Hewlett family votes "NO" on HP-Compaq merger!$ HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ?( Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ?( Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ?( Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ?( Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ? Re: InfoserverE Re: Rob's British Champion, was: Re: Compaq: VMS is alive and kicking E Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.org E Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.org E Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.org  UNIX-like utilities for VMS   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:15:09 -0500 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: Compaq guarantees? L Message-ID: <rdeininger-1111011115090001@user-2ive62s.dialup.mindspring.com>  F In article <9sh28k$sb$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@cs.scranton.edu wrote:    H > Well, unless The Emancipation Proclamation was revoked sometime when I2 > wasn't looking, what's wrong with this scenario: >   Merger falls thru.P >   Comnpaq's new managment decides to revive Alpha and VMS as core technolgies.N >   Compaq advertises for Processor Engineers to work on new Alpha processors.I >   Former Alpha Engineers leave Intel and take jobs with the new Compaq.  > M > I do not believe there is any kind of agreement between those two companies L > that could bind the employees or restrict in any way their ability to earn > a living.   C In this kind of deal, I think there usually _is_ an agreement about I re-hiring transfered employees.  I suspect Compaq is barred from offering F these folks jobs without Intel's consent, for a period of a few years.  > Since the folks are not actually forced to work for Intel, the) Emancipation Proclamation remains intact.    --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:36:23 -0000 / From: Michael Zarlenga <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> ( Subject: Re: Compaq/HP merger in trouble/ Message-ID: <tut377qrrdq8da@corp.supernews.com>   B Ok, we know the consensus at the HP BOD level regarding the mergerA but  what's the consensus at Compaq's BOD level - that the merger $ being off is good or bad for Compaq?   Does anyone know?    --   -- Mike Zarlenga   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:27:52 -0500 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)- Subject: Re: Compaq: VMS is alive and kicking L Message-ID: <rdeininger-1111011127530001@user-2ive62s.dialup.mindspring.com>  = In article <d7791aa1.0111090908.41e096af@posting.google.com>, ) bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:     M > if you call blue screens and spending 80% of my time patching security bugs +                                           ^ +                                           | H Aha!  Bob DOES have a shift key!  I almost missed the vital clue, hidden right in front of my eyes!  7 > a major upside, your above comment makes no sense ...    ;-)    --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:36:06 -0800 % From: Dean Woodward <deanw@rdrop.com> - Subject: Re: Compaq: VMS is alive and kicking ) Message-ID: <3BEEC516.5BF94F6E@rdrop.com>    Robert Deininger wrote:  > ? > In article <d7791aa1.0111090908.41e096af@posting.google.com>, + > bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:  > O > > if you call blue screens and spending 80% of my time patching security bugs - >                                           ^ J > Aha!  Bob DOES have a shift key!  I almost missed the vital clue, hidden > right in front of my eyes!  G Of course he does; unless, of course, he's remapped a keyboard with '$' D and '_' available unshifted, he'd have a hard time doing much useful work in VMS.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:56:43 +0200 ' From: "Gabriel Sterk" <gabi@aipm.co.il> M Subject: Re: Editing DCL command lines longer than the current terminal width 2 Message-ID: <000001c16a97$2bd6fc00$2c46bf10@manai>   Simon Clubley wrote: > J > Are there any plans to fix the inability to fully edit DCL command lines* > longer than the current terminal width ? > J > Having just spent a good chunk of the weekend editing long command linesI > (as part of some application testing), it is my opinion [currently, Not J > So Humble :-)] that the inability to fully edit DCL command lines longer6 > than the current terminal width is now unacceptable. >  > What do other people think ?   Agreed. A Worked in the 1980's with an opsys (Honeywell CP-6), which worked O perfectly with the dumbest of terminals, like ADM3's and the more intelligents:  VT's & Tattungs.  
 Gabriel Sterk    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:29:26 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> M Subject: Re: Editing DCL command lines longer than the current terminal width , Message-ID: <3BEE60FE.CAB47A7D@videotron.ca>   Gabriel Sterk wrote:C > Worked in the 1980's with an opsys (Honeywell CP-6), which worked Q > perfectly with the dumbest of terminals, like ADM3's and the more intelligents:  > VT's & Tattungs.  J Actually, perhaps this is it. If you set the terminal to autowrap and suchJ that a backspace at the column 1 results in cursor going to last column ofL previous line, then the operating system wouldn't really know what was goingL on as you were backspacing through a long line which the OS would think were on a single line.   L However, when you consider editing commands such as <CTRL-U> which erases toL beginning of line, it wouldn't work properly in that scenario since it wouldK only erase rto rge beginning of the second line, letting you think that the 7 first line was still there when in fact it wouldn't be.   N Perhaps the VMS guys should assign a VT sequence to get DECTERM to QUICKLY popG up a window into which the long command would be displayed and editable L locally, and when you press OK, it is then sent to the remote host as if youN had typed it. Inside of a local window, the text would appear as a single longF string which the window would wrap to fit the window without inserting anything inside the string.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 07:05:00 GMT ; From: "Stuart R. Fuller" <stu@c49395-a.wodhvn1.mi.home.com> 5 Subject: Re: Erasing a  software write locked tape... 0 Message-ID: <3f5ls9.afc.ln@dadsys1.fuller.local>  & valdemir <valdemir-@uol.com.br> wrote:; : Is there any way to erase a software write locked tape ?     Yes, there is.  E Dismount the tape from VMS, and remount the tape without the /nowrite 
 qualifier.           Stu    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:50:59 -0000 / From: Michael Zarlenga <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> " Subject: Re: files with long lines/ Message-ID: <tut42j2veb8ba7@corp.supernews.com>   " H Behling <hbehling@wxs.nl> wrote: : A programming problem,P : How can I read in Pascal a very long line (without CR/LF) from an ascii file ?  C You cannot.  The Pascal string datatype has a single-byte prefix to C hold the length of the string.  The maximum possible length is thus 6 255 bytes (127 bytes if treated as a signed quantity).  < As I recall, both readln and writeln suffer this limitation.  G The best suggestion I have is to switch to a real programming language, 1 not one designed primarily for teaching students.    --   -- Mike Zarlenga   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:23:10 GMT " From: Art Rice <arice@myhouse.org>" Subject: Re: files with long lines9 Message-ID: <OBxH7.193$Kv4.212796@paloalto-snr2.gtei.net>    Michael Zarlenga wrote:   $ > H Behling <hbehling@wxs.nl> wrote: > : A programming problem,K > : How can I read in Pascal a very long line (without CR/LF) from an ascii 
 > : file ? > E > You cannot.  The Pascal string datatype has a single-byte prefix to E > hold the length of the string.  The maximum possible length is thus 8 > 255 bytes (127 bytes if treated as a signed quantity). > > > As I recall, both readln and writeln suffer this limitation. > I > The best suggestion I have is to switch to a real programming language, 3 > not one designed primarily for teaching students.  > I I only remember this limitation on PC and Unix implementations of PASCAL.    --   Art Rice Tandem Admin Special Data Processing Corp ----------------------------* All opinions are my own and do not reflect* the views of the above mentioned employer.   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Nov 2001 09:23:42 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 5 Subject: Re: files with long lines (in Compaq Pascal) 3 Message-ID: <M1KmwhZPL61G@eisner.encompasserve.org>   a In article <tut42j2veb8ba7@corp.supernews.com>, Michael Zarlenga <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes: $ > H Behling <hbehling@wxs.nl> wrote: > : A programming problem,R > : How can I read in Pascal a very long line (without CR/LF) from an ascii file ? > E > You cannot.  The Pascal string datatype has a single-byte prefix to E > hold the length of the string.  The maximum possible length is thus 8 > 255 bytes (127 bytes if treated as a signed quantity).  @ Your answer seems to be confusing Compaq Pascal with some PascalA implementation on a Microsoft machine.  In Compaq Pascal "string"  is a predefined schema.    Try typing:   + 	HELP PASCAL Data_Types String_Types String   @ to see that the limit is 65535, quite able to handle the maximum record size supported in RMS.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:56:19 +0100 ( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>; Subject: Re: Hewlett family votes "NO" on HP-Compaq merger! - Message-ID: <VA.000004b6.4e6fe629@bluewin.ch>   Q In article <d7791aa1.0111092135.7e7f89c5@posting.google.com>, Bob Ceculski wrote:     G > with 39 alpha servers and stations to support, i rarely have time to   > make things nice and pretty,    G You can have the best idea in the world but it will fail to be accepted J if not presented correctly. We are simply asking you to observe some basic rules of etiquette.   K Please take the time to learn, and as others have pointed out, it's a skill * which has benefits in other walks of life.   ___ 
 Paul Sture Switzerland    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:32:26 GMT " From: Art Rice <arice@myhouse.org>; Subject: Re: Hewlett family votes "NO" on HP-Compaq merger! 9 Message-ID: <uKxH7.195$Kv4.221527@paloalto-snr2.gtei.net>    David Froble wrote:    > John Eisenschmidt wrote: >  >> What's so unintuitive?  >>   >> cd - change directory >> cp - copy >> ln - link >> ls - list >> man - manual  >> ps - process list >> rm - remove >>  F >> While the command names in VMS are pretty intuitive (except for SETJ >> DEFAULT), the ones in Unix aren't that far off. There are also purposly& >> terse since they're so often typed. >>  C >> But it's nice to know there are still open minded people who are  >> accepting of change.  > G > There is no consistancy.  'cd' is the first letter in each word. 'cp' I > has no logic at all, just random letters from the word.  Same with 'ln' D > and 'ls'.  Wait, I get it, use the first and third letter from theH > command.  Whoops, 'man' upset that rule.  Care to tell me which 's' inH > process list is used in the 'ps'?  Ah, 'rm' is back to first and third
 > characters.  > D > If you were to have the following, and allow abrivations of enoughB > characters to be unique, then you would have intuitive commands. >  > change_directory > copy > link > list_files > manual > process_list > remove > % > Opps, then it wouldn't be so geeky.  >  > Dave > A You have disovered the key.  Commands written by geeks FOR geeks. & Intuative and Unix are not compatable.   --   Art Rice Tandem Admin Special Data Processing Corp ----------------------------* All opinions are my own and do not reflect* the views of the above mentioned employer.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 17:53:28 GMT   From: cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net>; Subject: Re: Hewlett family votes "NO" on HP-Compaq merger! + Message-ID: <3BEEBB32.182C9757@prodigy.net>    Art Rice wrote:  >  > David Froble wrote:  >  > > John Eisenschmidt wrote: > >  > >> What's so unintuitive?  > >> > >> cd - change directory > >> cp - copy > >> ln - link > >> ls - list > >> man - manual  > >> ps - process list > >> rm - remove > >>H > >> While the command names in VMS are pretty intuitive (except for SETL > >> DEFAULT), the ones in Unix aren't that far off. There are also purposly( > >> terse since they're so often typed. > >>E > >> But it's nice to know there are still open minded people who are  > >> accepting of change.  > > I > > There is no consistancy.  'cd' is the first letter in each word. 'cp' K > > has no logic at all, just random letters from the word.  Same with 'ln' F > > and 'ls'.  Wait, I get it, use the first and third letter from theJ > > command.  Whoops, 'man' upset that rule.  Care to tell me which 's' inJ > > process list is used in the 'ps'?  Ah, 'rm' is back to first and third > > characters.  > > F > > If you were to have the following, and allow abrivations of enoughD > > characters to be unique, then you would have intuitive commands. > >  > > change_directory > > copy > > link > > list_files
 > > manual > > process_list
 > > remove > > ' > > Opps, then it wouldn't be so geeky.  > >  > > Dave > > C > You have disovered the key.  Commands written by geeks FOR geeks. ( > Intuative and Unix are not compatable. >  > --
 > Art Rice > Tandem Admin > Special Data Processing Corp > ----------------------------, > All opinions are my own and do not reflect, > the views of the above mentioned employer.  @ It's easy enough to set up an alias for each one you don't like.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:42:09 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> - Subject: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ? , Message-ID: <3BEE63F8.2D14D163@videotron.ca>  # HP used to mean high quality stuff.   = HP got rid of its high quality stuff, spinning it to Agilent.   Q HP now wants to coencentrate on high volume low quality wintel junk and printers.   M Since HP stands for Hewlett Packard, I wonder if Mr Hewlett could force HP to N change its name because he no longer wants his name to be associated with what HP wants to do.   L For instance, couldn't he force the HP name to be transfered to Agilent (the. real HP) and tell HP to find some other name ?   ------  J Secondly, perhaps Carly could buy Compaq, but transfer Digital's assets to. Agilent, and keep in HP the wintel junk stuff.  M This way, HP would be happy with its wintel junk, and Agilent, a company with < a focus on quality would love to have VMS and Alpha etc etc.  N Agilent, not being a Microsoft slave, would be allowed to do as it wishes withG VMS and market it as it wants, and HP could continue to lick Gate's ass O without Gates being able to be nervous about HP selling non microsoft products.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:59:05 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) 1 Subject: Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ? 0 Message-ID: <00A04E0F.325DACB6@SendSpamHere.ORG>  \ In article <3BEE63F8.2D14D163@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:$ >HP used to mean high quality stuff. > > >HP got rid of its high quality stuff, spinning it to Agilent. > R >HP now wants to coencentrate on high volume low quality wintel junk and printers.  > I must say that I can't agree with you more on this statement.  L I used to have hoards of HP printers when I worked under contact to the DoD.K Nice hardware and well engineered and very seldom a problem.   I also own ae HP scanner (4c).  M I've looked at newer HP printers and scanners, and I am not at all impressed.iM The scanners are CHEAPLY constructed.  My take on that is that HP wants to berL able to play in the $1.98 PeeCee marketspace.  I also looked at the HP colorL printers.  The color output on plain paper is flat and inconsistent.  That'sL why I purchased my LNC02.  Granted, it cost far more but it's been operatingN without problems save for a lightning storm which seemed to scramble its firm-M ware and required a reprogramming.  I have a neighbor that has a new LaserJetwL and nothing but problems.  Paper jams, inconsistent print quality and it hasM a problem processing certain PostScript files.  It seems to me that more thanoC one leg of the price-quality-performance triangle is missing at HP.      --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMc            eJ   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery I   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbes    ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:54:08 -0800 (PST) . From: Fabio Cardoso <fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br>1 Subject: Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ?C@ Message-ID: <20011111145408.89088.qmail@web20206.mail.yahoo.com>   Agilent and OpenVMS????o   YES ! YES ! YES !2  1 I assing below ! There is much to do with OpenVMS: under the Agilent flag !  0 Running VMS in VXL/Itanium boards for industrial automation sounds goods !=20  / Imagine the Industrial Automation clusters ....            Regardsm   FC=20e2 --- JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:% > HP used to mean high quality stuff.r >=206 > HP got rid of its high quality stuff, spinning it to
 > Agilent. >=201 > HP now wants to coencentrate on high volume lowe# > quality wintel junk and printers.w >=205 > Since HP stands for Hewlett Packard, I wonder if Mrr > Hewlett could force HP toi5 > change its name because he no longer wants his namen > to be associated with what > HP wants to do.=20 >=203 > For instance, couldn't he force the HP name to ber > transfered to Agilent (the0 > real HP) and tell HP to find some other name ? >=20 > ------ >=20/ > Secondly, perhaps Carly could buy Compaq, buta > transfer Digital's assets to0 > Agilent, and keep in HP the wintel junk stuff. >=203 > This way, HP would be happy with its wintel junk,o > and Agilent, a company withi5 > a focus on quality would love to have VMS and AlphaC
 > etc etc. >=200 > Agilent, not being a Microsoft slave, would be! > allowed to do as it wishes withu6 > VMS and market it as it wants, and HP could continue > to lick Gate's ass1 > without Gates being able to be nervous about HP ! > selling non microsoft products.n     =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D L =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D  F=E1bio dos Santos Cardoso OpenVMS System Manager Rio de Janeiro - BrazilS fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.brL =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3Dt  2 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume.  http://careers.yahoo.com   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:45:39 GMT " From: Art Rice <arice@myhouse.org>1 Subject: Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ?O9 Message-ID: <TWxH7.198$Kv4.230983@paloalto-snr2.gtei.net>n  $ Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:  7 > In article <3BEE63F8.2D14D163@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei ( > <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:% >>HP used to mean high quality stuff.- >>? >>HP got rid of its high quality stuff, spinning it to Agilent.a >>I >>HP now wants to coencentrate on high volume low quality wintel junk andE >>printers.E > @ > I must say that I can't agree with you more on this statement. > I > I used to have hoards of HP printers when I worked under contact to thew > DoD.K > Nice hardware and well engineered and very seldom a problem.   I also owny > a HP scanner (4c). > D > I've looked at newer HP printers and scanners, and I am not at all > impressed.L > The scanners are CHEAPLY constructed.  My take on that is that HP wants to > beH > able to play in the $1.98 PeeCee marketspace.  I also looked at the HP > coloraG > printers.  The color output on plain paper is flat and inconsistent. - > That'sD > why I purchased my LNC02.  Granted, it cost far more but it's beenG > operating without problems save for a lightning storm which seemed tor > scramble its firm-F > ware and required a reprogramming.  I have a neighbor that has a new
 > LaserJetJ > and nothing but problems.  Paper jams, inconsistent print quality and it > hasuJ > a problem processing certain PostScript files.  It seems to me that moreJ > than one leg of the price-quality-performance triangle is missing at HP. >  >  > --8 > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     > VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
 >            cK >   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery?K >   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbese >  > H Amen to that.  Being a part of Compaq was scary enough.  The thought of + being under HP keeps me up late at night.  - -- - Art Rice, Tandem Admin Special Data Processing Corp ----------------------------L All opinions are my own and do not reflect the views of the above mentioned 	 employer.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:58:54 -0500t' From: Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net>n1 Subject: Re: HP merger: new take VMS to Agilent ? < Message-ID: <howard-F05695.12585411112001@enews.newsguy.com>  , In article <3BEE63F8.2D14D163@videotron.ca>,/  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:   O > Since HP stands for Hewlett Packard, I wonder if Mr Hewlett could force HP tofL > change its name because he no longer wants his name to be associated with  > what > HP wants to do.   ! I don't think so.  Isn't he dead?l -- n Howard S ShubsD "Run in circles, scream and shout!"  "I hope you have good backups!"   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Nov 2001 07:20:24 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)e Subject: Re: Infoserverl3 Message-ID: <xcrOIoNl4V0U@eisner.encompasserve.org>l  f In article <howard-D688AD.01083311112001@enews.newsguy.com>, Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:  . > My ass was saved by an Infoserver 150 today.   But you don't give details.a  N > Yes, I could have offered a service from another system, but the Infoserver O > was more convienient.  Is there a newer way to do the same thing?  Or is the  2 > newer way to have a normal node offer a service?  9 That really depends on what you mean by "the same thing".-  ? If you are talking about Infoserver tape support, buying a used @ Infoserver 1000 on eBay is the only thing newer.  If the one you> buy is not licensed for tape support, there have been periodic= rumblings about free Infoserver licenses, but I don't know ifr anything has happened yet.  A If you are talking about Infoserver disk support or disc support,u@ there have been periodic rumblings about doing the same thing on8 Alpha, but I don't think anything has been released yet.  B DEQ folk have said, however, that Infoserver support is one of theA chinks in their IA64 plans.  IPF machines (even from Compaq) willgB _not_ boot from an Infoserver.  Probably fixing that would requireA making Compaq IA64 machines different from those offered by othera: vendors, and most VMS fans think that would be a bad idea.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:37:52 GMTe" From: Art Rice <arice@myhouse.org>N Subject: Re: Rob's British Champion, was: Re: Compaq: VMS is alive and kicking9 Message-ID: <zPxH7.197$Kv4.225575@paloalto-snr2.gtei.net>t   David Froble wrote:t   > Fred Kleinsorge wrote: > I >> Hmmm.  Now that you mention it.  Andrew hasn't been heard from here in  >> quite a while.a >> a+ >> Not to look a gift horse in the mouth...u > J > Actually, I miss him.  At least with Andrew I didn't have to feel bad ifF > I typed before thinking and flamed him.  If I thought that he didn'tH > deserve it for that instance, I was sure that there was something that8 > deserved it, so no qualms.  When you felt like kicking/ > someone/something, Andrew was available.  :-)  > H > Unfortunately for us VMS bigots, sometimes he had some rather accurate, > things to say that we didn't want to hear. > H > Guess the downturn in the economy must have caused Sun to do away with > their FUDsters.  :-) >  > Dave >   J Well, you could pick on us guys from the Tandem camp.  But since we share + so many of the same frustrations nowdays...    --   Art Rice Tandem Admin Special Data Processing Corp ----------------------------* All opinions are my own and do not reflect* the views of the above mentioned employer.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:08:41 GMTn* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>N Subject: Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.orgC Message-ID: <JDvH7.138368$tb2.11256158@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>f  8 Terry C Shannon <shannon@world.std.com> wrote in message> news:Pine.SGI.4.30.0111102342060.15684-100000@world.std.com... >rK > I just put together a special issue of Shannon Knows Compaq that containsl? > three articles on Compaq's IPF Consolidation. Included in the F > free-for-the-downloading PDF are a discussion of why Compaq opted toJ > scuttle Alpha, an explanation of why things were done as they were (e.g.K > why publish an Alpha obituary three or four years before the architecture ? > shuffles off its mortal coils), and what's behind the currents& > unavailability of IPF-based systems.  H Despite your introductory statement that "finally details are emerging",D this is largely a re-hash of the bullshit that Compaq (and you) wereK spreading so liberally just after June 25th.  Why you expect anyone to find 5 it any more believable this time around is not clear.-  D If "Compaq - and Digital before it - invested heavily in a series ofK misguided marketing campaigns", they must have been so 'misguided' that theNK results appeared only in places like the Australian outback.  Can you pointnK to any external evidence of such 'heavy' expenditures?  We do know that theeG marketing budget for VMS in Y2K was about $13 million (which presumablymI includes salaries, though it's not clear who would have merited them), sohJ the 'heavy' funding sure wasn't spent there.  In the same year Compaq as aD whole spent $385 million on *advertising* (not including things likeK salaries and promotions that the term 'marketing budget' encompasses) - andcG while Alpha and Tru64 probably received a bit more of that than VMS did H (though I've always suspected that some of the VMS funding, chicken feedL though it was, got siphoned off into more generic Alpha promotion, since youI can buy an awful lot more blinking balls for a few mill than seem to havetJ gotten handed out) without actual numbers and expense sheets (or copies ofI the ads that appeared with indications of where and how often) I'm afraid>L I'll just have to file this 'explanation' in the same wastebasket of crap so- many of Compaq's other pronouncements occupy.i  L Of course, it *is* possible to squander significant amounts of money withoutI visible effect if you're sufficiently incompetent.  That's one reason whyiI the magnum opus our group sent to Curly contained specific suggestions innK this area, but we sure as hell know that *those* never got implemented (the'L VMS Web pages did improve, but that was  a) already under way and  b) hardlyL a significant expenditure).  But Compaq has demonstrated at least some levelK of competence in advertising over the years, which makes it a bit difficultsL to believe that their Alpha promotional efforts would have been so invisible had they really been trying.  B Not to mention the fact that Alpha remained the corporation's mostJ profitable franchise.  So if the ad campaigns actually existed and weren'tL effective, then, by George, a company interested in profitability would haveL tried something else - possibly figuring out that the existing customer baseH which was happy to support the products even in the absence of effectiveK advertising might have a useful suggestion or two.  The explanation offered-G to you is pathetic, and your unquestioning acceptance of it equally so.a  I It is interesting that you say the Alpha 'soul searching' began about twooH years ago, since that's about the time of the Pfeiffer/Curly transition.K Which makes one suspect that the decision may have had a hell of a lot moreoK to do with corporate politics than with anything substantive, but of coursen8 one can't know unless some inside mole chooses to speak.  H Then you have the gall to reiterate that "escalating costs and dwindlingK performance differentation rendered the Alpha business unsustainable in theeJ long term".  This is just as much crap as it was when you tried to palm itL off in July:  do you really think people have forgotten why by now, or it isK just the 'big lie' philosophy at work in the hope that the truth has gottenl a bit tired?  G Here's a hint:  if costs were indeed escalating, quantify that.  By allcL accounts I've heard from the engineers EV8 was on track for both performanceD and delivery date, and over the years Alpha development has remainedF admirable stable in both progress and costs (save when it's been beingI fucked over by upper management) - and has *easily* been justified by the I profits Alpha systems have generated.  I won't repeat my entire July 19th F rebuttal from comp.arch et al. here, but it remains as valid as it did. then - and your contentions remain as vacuous.  I And given that Compaq's 'misguided advertising' experience had supposedly L already suggested that it wasn't *just* performance that sold Alphas, that'sC a pretty definite indication that some temporary - or even possiblyeK permanent - erosion in this area would hardly be fatal.  Not that Alpha wasmG in any danger from IA64 in that area:  POWER4 was and still is the only I credible 64-bit competitor (though Hammer could possibly become one), andrK its choice of CMP over SMT could well have left EV8 with advantages in bothe< chip area and power consumption if not absolute performance.  J Moving right along, we get into some really mealy-mouth wording in the EV8H section.  First, you say Compaq concluded that "Alpha would maintain itsL performance superiority through the EV7 processor generation", then that theJ "EV8 chip was expected to outperform all rivals".  Gee, I guess that meansL that Alpha was expected to maintain its performance superiority through EV8,0 not just EV7 - i.e., for the foreseeable future.  J Then we have "The EV8 program required significant incremental developmentK resources, and its success was predicated on timely and flawless delivery".oI This in the face of an IA64 product that required *humongous* incrementaltJ development resources, was 4 years late (5 years if you don't count MercedL because it's a joke that no one is using commercially), and nothing like theI processing powerhouse it was promoted as:  if Intel can justify continuedlG IA64 development, then there's no way in hell that Compaq can't justify & developing as good a product as Alpha.  F I really hope that one of the former Alpha engineers will address yourL 'anecdotal evidence' that SMT would have cost a full GHz:  I certainly neverH heard mention of any problem of that sort and I certainly wouldn't trust= your Compaq sources to know, let alone be truthful, about it.y  H And your artful juxtaposition in the phrase "EV8 was projected to have aK marginal advantage over then-current IBM and Intel processors" convenientlyRK obscures the fact that the *only* Intel processors able to make Alpha breakvK a sweat are, and would have continued to be, 32-bit processors, not Itanic:fK EV6 makes Merced a joke (have you forgotten the 'smoking brick of death'?),nI EV7 will make McKinley a joke (any lessening of the difference in SPECintaH numbers will be more than erased in real-world commercial performance byL EV7's on-chip memory and MP support), and Intel hasn't even unveiled *plans*G for a processor beyond the McKinley/Madison/Deerfield core (so we can't L specify what EV8 would have made a joke of, though the Alpha team transplant@ eventually may help at least reduce the volume of the laughter).  L By contrast, the 'Chips are Down' section actually raises some valid points,G but then proceeds to completely misinterpret their significance.  It iscG indeed the case that "modern servers are increasingly differentiated bybJ metrics such as latency, bandwidth, RAS features, NUMA implementation, andJ system balance" - but EV7, due to its on-chip glue, has *vast* superiorityK in latency, bandwidth, NUMA performance, and system balance over any ItaniciK yet talked about by Intel, which translates to at least a 3-year head-start.G in those areas over any IA64-based server.  And had you included 'powereL consumption' in the list as you should have, Alpha's continuing advantage isJ even greater.  But now, Compaq must compete either with a dead-ended AlphaJ platform or a laughable Itanic platform against POWER4 on the high end andK Hammer on the low end, both of which have on-chip glue similar to EV7's and- reasonable power consumption.   L But it's back to weasel-wording in the next section, where you have the gallL to suggest that Compaq evaluated Itanic and POWER4 in anything resembling anL even-handed manner and found POWER4 wanting because, even though Itanic is aH complete slug by virtue of massively-flawed design assumptions that willL weigh it down forever in commercial (vs. floating-point-style) applications,K "Intel is an undisputed leader in process technology".  The use of the word D 'an' keeps the rationale merely completely misleading rather than anK outright lie - since of course IBM is also 'an undisputed leader in processaI technology', so when comparing Itanic to POWER4 that's a wash rather thane any telling Intel advantage.  K And finally we have 'the essence of Alpha'.  If Intel will indeed "leveragenF Compaq's expertise in glueless multiprocessing, high bandwidth and low= latency CPU designs, symmetric multithreading, and chip-basednI multiprocessing", then all the more reason to believe that *Compaq* could I have leveraged them in Alpha effectively as well - with at least a 3-year?K head-start over their potential appearance on the decks of the Itanic.  AndrH since POWER4 and Hammer appear to have about the same lead in several ofK these areas, Compaq is now left without *any* competitive platform to field,> (unless they can convince people to commit to a declared-dying architecture).  L Saying that "the game plan appears valid and defensible" sounds a lot like aK 3-year-old pronouncing the likely outcome of the next Presidential electionoG based on his parents' political leanings:  he may know the names of theeG candidates, but he has no clue about the mechanisms involved.  So while3E you've done a decent job of taking Compaq's June rationalizations and H dressing them up in soothing and superficially-convincing verbiage, it'sK still utter crap.  If you believe it, you're a fool; if not, you're a pimp.3  I I won't go into detailed deconstruction of your "Hasta la vista" article,_I since it's based on the flawed premise that the migration off Alpha makesmJ some kind of sense and just goes down-hill from there.  But I will ask youH to identify any Intel commitment to include *any* enhancements to ItanicG (which you seem to think are important upsides of the deal for Compaq - D though again this assumes that having VMS and Tru64 run on Itanic isK worthwhile in the first place) that will make life easier for Compaq's OSs:uI I've seen absolutely no indication that Intel wants anything but to applyfJ the expertise of the Alpha team to keeping Itanic afloat, nor do I know ofG any specific tweaks that would be much help to VMS or Tru64 anyway (and'L Itanic already incorporates the lock-step facilities that NSK needs).  And IL will take exception to your characterization of EV8 as "a classic example ofJ trouble waiting to happen":  that sounds a lot more like a classic example- of an infomercial masquerading as journalism.r   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:15:11 GMTa- From: Terry C Shannon <shannon@world.std.com> N Subject: Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.orgD Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.4.30.0111110935030.14587-100000@world.std.com>  % On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Bill Todd wrote:t   >t: > Terry C Shannon <shannon@world.std.com> wrote in message@ > news:Pine.SGI.4.30.0111102342060.15684-100000@world.std.com... > >eM > > I just put together a special issue of Shannon Knows Compaq that contains A > > three articles on Compaq's IPF Consolidation. Included in thenH > > free-for-the-downloading PDF are a discussion of why Compaq opted toL > > scuttle Alpha, an explanation of why things were done as they were (e.g.M > > why publish an Alpha obituary three or four years before the architecture1A > > shuffles off its mortal coils), and what's behind the currente( > > unavailability of IPF-based systems. > J > Despite your introductory statement that "finally details are emerging",F > this is largely a re-hash of the bullshit that Compaq (and you) wereM > spreading so liberally just after June 25th.  Why you expect anyone to findr7 > it any more believable this time around is not clear.- >-  ( <Body of commentary deleted for brevity>  H One thing the Taliban vermin have not managed to do is deprive us of our> right to freely express our opinion in a public forum. The IPFG consolidation remains an incendiary issue. What I find ironic about theaI matter is the fact that the shrillness of the diatribe often is inverselyuG proportional to the financial stake of the individual expressing his ori her opinion.    E PS-- liberally salting a polemic with expressions such as "bullsh*t,"eG "infomercial"," gall," "mealy-mouthed," "utter crap," "fool" and "pimp"sJ (to mention a few)  detracts immensely from the credibility of the message and the messenger alike.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:10:42 GMTd* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>N Subject: Re: Special IPF-Inside Issue of Shannon Knows Compaq at www.tru64.orgA Message-ID: <6qxH7.98840$7x1.8281887@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>c  8 Terry C Shannon <shannon@world.std.com> wrote in message> news:Pine.SGI.4.30.0111110935030.14587-100000@world.std.com...   ...a  J > One thing the Taliban vermin have not managed to do is deprive us of our8 > right to freely express our opinion in a public forum.  K It's by no means clear that the Taliban want to deprive us of anything savee< our God-given right to interfere in their part of the world.    The IPFI > consolidation remains an incendiary issue. What I find ironic about thetK > matter is the fact that the shrillness of the diatribe often is inversely I > proportional to the financial stake of the individual expressing his oro > her opinion.  L I think you may have a bit of difficulty distinguishing between 'shrill' andA 'blunt'.  Not to mention trouble understanding the virtues of thekD objectivity one brings to the table when one doesn't have a personal) financial or career-related axe to grind.t   >a >hG > PS-- liberally salting a polemic with expressions such as "bullsh*t,"rI > "infomercial"," gall," "mealy-mouthed," "utter crap," "fool" and "pimp"mL > (to mention a few)  detracts immensely from the credibility of the message > and the messenger alike.  I Your opinion.  I've had numerous comments to the contrary from people whokH have decided that being more politely pissed off just hasn't worked very well for the past decade or so.    - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Nov 2001 10:17:26 -0800$ From: wjair@hotmail.com (Willy Jair)$ Subject: UNIX-like utilities for VMS= Message-ID: <4f4df6ee.0111111017.61ed3f41@posting.google.com>:   Hi,>  : Does any know where can I download the UNIX-like utilities' for VMS? i.e. awk, sed, vi, cut ... etcN   Thanks,a
 Willy Jair wjair@hotmail.com    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.628 ************************