1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 07 Sep 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 498       Contents: Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters  Re: Big black helicopters 2 Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable file2 Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable file2 Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable file2 Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable file Re: cpio ported to OpenVMS?  Re: cpio ported to OpenVMS?  Re: EV7 will never ship? Re: EV7 will never ship? Re: EV7 will never ship? Re: EV7 will never ship? Re: EV7 will never ship? Re: EV7 will never ship? Re: EV7 will never ship?  Re: Feeling Better about Itanium Full printer support at last? ! Re: Full printer support at last? ! Re: Full printer support at last? ! Re: Full printer support at last?  Re: H-P "jumps the shark"  Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.  Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.  Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.  Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.  Re: I hate Compaq  Re: I hate Compaq + Re: INQUIRE/NODISPLAY or equivalent in DCL?  MAIL$MESSAGE_DELETE question... 2 Re: MicroVAX II (KA630) - RXCS,RXDB,TXCS, and TXDB> Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoft> Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoft> Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoft> Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoft> Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoft> Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoft> Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoft- Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime 1 Re: Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime 1 Re: Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime 1 Re: Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime * solaris 7 compatible with vms  in printing Re: Third postcard from Sun / Re: Vax/Vms Systems Administrator in Albany, NY " Re: VMS NFS and PC-NFS (Reflexion)5 Re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ? 5 re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ? 5 re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ? 5 Re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ? 5 re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ? $ Re: WSJ reporting HP will buy Compaq* [AMDS V7.3A] Problem on OpenVMS VAX V7.3 ?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 07 Sep 2001 09:08:01 +0200G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> " Subject: Re: Big black helicoptersH Message-ID: <y48zfro4vi.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  ; politics2000@hotmail.com (politics2000@hotmail.com) writes:   C > By definition, a monopoly is when the public is not given another F > choice.  Well, we do have other choices ... VMS, UNIX, Linux ... andC > any Windows user can go to shareware.com and get Netscape or some  > other browser for free.   M You might as well say "we can go and write our own compiler, operating system I and browser to be completely Microsoft-free". The important point is that J Microsoft forbids the OEMs to set up the computers they sell in such a wayF that their customers could make an easy, boot-time choice of operatingH system. Gasse, founder and ex-CEO of Be, wanted to testify on this issueI against Microsoft in the anti-trust trial because he considers this to be : the heart of the matter, but the Klein and Boies declined.   	Jan   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:19:02 +01004 From: M.K.Horsburgh@damtp.cam.ac.uk (Mark Horsburgh)" Subject: Re: Big black helicoptersD Message-ID: <slrn9ph0nm.tn4.M.K.Horsburgh@krull.dialup.ntlworld.com>  g On 07 Sep 2001 09:08:01 +0200, Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote: = > politics2000@hotmail.com (politics2000@hotmail.com) writes:  > D >> By definition, a monopoly is when the public is not given anotherG >> choice.  Well, we do have other choices ... VMS, UNIX, Linux ... and D >> any Windows user can go to shareware.com and get Netscape or some >> other browser for free. > O > You might as well say "we can go and write our own compiler, operating system K > and browser to be completely Microsoft-free". The important point is that L > Microsoft forbids the OEMs to set up the computers they sell in such a wayH > that their customers could make an easy, boot-time choice of operatingJ > system. Gasse, founder and ex-CEO of Be, wanted to testify on this issueK > against Microsoft in the anti-trust trial because he considers this to be < > the heart of the matter, but the Klein and Boies declined.  J Yeah... I've never understood this. In every other profession you go afterK the low hanging fruit first - maximum gain for minimum effort, so what were J the DoJ lawyers thinking? The browser issue is a difficult one and I wouldH have thought that making headway would be tricky. However, the whole OEML licencing stuff is _clearly_ very illegal, or at least it is here in Europe.K It's such a blatant abuse of monopoly power that I can't see US legislation H being weaker on this issue. Prosecute them on the basis of that and then> bring out the browser stuff if you really feel the need later.   Mark   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 08:40:19 GMT  From: TTK Ciar" Subject: Re: Big black helicopters+ Message-ID: <9na15j08ec@enews1.newsguy.com>   ' Once upon a time, Jan Vorbrueggen said:  > < >politics2000@hotmail.com (politics2000@hotmail.com) writes: > D >> By definition, a monopoly is when the public is not given anotherG >> choice.  Well, we do have other choices ... VMS, UNIX, Linux ... and D >> any Windows user can go to shareware.com and get Netscape or some >> other browser for free. > H >You might as well say "we can go and write our own compiler, operating 6 >system and browser to be completely Microsoft-free".   F   Well, yes.  We have done that.  I have been 100% microsoft-free for B many years, running gcc, gdb, perl, freebsd, linux, XFree86, KDE, D Netscape, Lynx, Mutt, et al.  The only software I've wanted which I F haven't been able to find for free is something with the same kind of C functionality as MS-Project (though, I would prefer something that  % doesn't suck as badly as MS-Project).   F   Just what, exactly, is the basis for your contention that Microsoft D is a monopoly, given the existence of bountiful alternatives?  That # people *think* they have no choice?    >The important point  I >is that Microsoft forbids the OEMs to set up the computers they sell in  I >such a way that their customers could make an easy, boot-time choice of   >operating system.  E   Microsoft cannot forbid this.  They can only use the techniques we  : have already seen (admittedly nonexhaustive list follows):E   1) they can design their licenses such that this is more expensive. C   2) they can design their product to make this practice difficult  E (qv, Windows95 detecting + reformatting HPFS partitions, overwriting  < boot managers (if installed after the boot manager), et al).3   3) they can stop returning the OEM's phone calls. D   4) they can use pervasive marketing/advertising and "embraced and B extended" standard formats/protocols to fool people into thinking D that they don't want to use anything but Microsoft products (or, on D a related note, to fool OEM's into thinking that there isn't enough B interest in non-Microsoft products to make the effort worth their  while).   D   This is "dirty pool", but well within their rights.  It might not F be possible to establish legal checks against these practices without F also preventing other companies from performing similar acts for more E benign reasons (ie, for purely technical reasons).  Therefore we are  C probably better off not trying, and instead exploiting Microsoft's  D most severe weaknesses -- its lack of foresight and the low quality A of its products -- to carve out pieces of the market for our own  	 products.   @   The situation's analogous to gun control legislation -- every D attempt to curb firearm abuses with legal barriers to ownership has D instead made that abuse easier and more pervasive by decreasing the C numbers of law-abiding gun bearers.  Free of any fear of reprisal,  B criminals can use their weapons more boldly and to better effect. B Also, the weakening of the gun culture results in a lower quality A of gun education among children, resulting in greater numbers of  
 accidents.  E   Similarly, antimonopoly litigation against Microsoft will probably  F do little more than render Microsoft's would-be competitors less able E to function effectively as software companies, and thus less able to   compete against Microsoft.     -- TTK   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:13:18 +01004 From: M.K.Horsburgh@damtp.cam.ac.uk (Mark Horsburgh)" Subject: Re: Big black helicoptersD Message-ID: <slrn9phaue.ujs.M.K.Horsburgh@krull.dialup.ntlworld.com>  5 On 7 Sep 2001 08:40:19 GMT, TTK Ciar <TTKCiar> wrote:  > ) > Once upon a time, Jan Vorbrueggen said:  >>= >>politics2000@hotmail.com (politics2000@hotmail.com) writes:  >>E >>> By definition, a monopoly is when the public is not given another H >>> choice.  Well, we do have other choices ... VMS, UNIX, Linux ... andE >>> any Windows user can go to shareware.com and get Netscape or some  >>> other browser for free.  >>I >>You might as well say "we can go and write our own compiler, operating  7 >>system and browser to be completely Microsoft-free".   > H >   Well, yes.  We have done that.  I have been 100% microsoft-free for D > many years, running gcc, gdb, perl, freebsd, linux, XFree86, KDE, F > Netscape, Lynx, Mutt, et al.  The only software I've wanted which I H > haven't been able to find for free is something with the same kind of E > functionality as MS-Project (though, I would prefer something that  ' > doesn't suck as badly as MS-Project).  > H >   Just what, exactly, is the basis for your contention that Microsoft F > is a monopoly, given the existence of bountiful alternatives?  That % > people *think* they have no choice?   F A monopoly is defined in legal terms as a proportion of market share, D whether there are alternatives is _completely_ immaterial. US vs IBMF was successful (i.e. it obtained the consent decree), despite the factD that IBM had plenty of competition in the form of the seven dwarves.E The point of monopoly legislation is to prevent companies with a very F large market share from using the power generated by that market share to their unfair advantage.   >>The important point J >>is that Microsoft forbids the OEMs to set up the computers they sell in J >>such a way that their customers could make an easy, boot-time choice of  >>operating system.  > G >   Microsoft cannot forbid this.  They can only use the techniques we  < > have already seen (admittedly nonexhaustive list follows):  ' Actually, a bunch of these are illegal:   G >   1) they can design their licenses such that this is more expensive.   2 This is illegal if they're in a monopoly position.  E >   2) they can design their product to make this practice difficult  G > (qv, Windows95 detecting + reformatting HPFS partitions, overwriting  > > boot managers (if installed after the boot manager), et al).  E Difficult to legislate against. The easy defence is just to say - oh, @ we're crap. Of course, if you can dig up internal memos that sayE that it is policy to screw up competitors operating systems, then you 9 could make a very strong case - see Caldera vs Microsoft.   5 >   3) they can stop returning the OEM's phone calls.   G This would be illegal if other OEMs were getting preferential treatment F because your OEM is selling other operating systems. The difficulty is? in proving it - which is always a problem when you're trying to  demonstrate bad faith.  F >   4) they can use pervasive marketing/advertising and "embraced and D > extended" standard formats/protocols to fool people into thinking F > that they don't want to use anything but Microsoft products (or, on F > a related note, to fool OEM's into thinking that there isn't enough D > interest in non-Microsoft products to make the effort worth their 	 > while).   D Not currently illegal except in the case of very clear abuses of theF truth. Again, difficult to legislate against, unless they are telling   outright lies about competitors.  F >   This is "dirty pool", but well within their rights.  It might not H > be possible to establish legal checks against these practices without H > also preventing other companies from performing similar acts for more G > benign reasons (ie, for purely technical reasons).  Therefore we are  E > probably better off not trying, and instead exploiting Microsoft's  F > most severe weaknesses -- its lack of foresight and the low quality C > of its products -- to carve out pieces of the market for our own   > products.   B Actually, this is precisely the point of monopoly legislation. YouD don't restrict the behaviour of companies that have a monopoly. WhenD you have a monopoly the rules _change_ - you are not governed by the2 same laws as companies that don't have monopolies.  B >   The situation's analogous to gun control legislation -- every F > attempt to curb firearm abuses with legal barriers to ownership has F > instead made that abuse easier and more pervasive by decreasing the E > numbers of law-abiding gun bearers.  Free of any fear of reprisal,  D > criminals can use their weapons more boldly and to better effect. D > Also, the weakening of the gun culture results in a lower quality C > of gun education among children, resulting in greater numbers of   > accidents.  E I'm not even going to dignify this with a response, since people have ) been over this ground far too many times.   G >   Similarly, antimonopoly litigation against Microsoft will probably  H > do little more than render Microsoft's would-be competitors less able G > to function effectively as software companies, and thus less able to   > compete against Microsoft.  G How could restricting the behaviour of companies with monopolies affect  companies without monopolies?    Mark   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 13:38:34 +0200 * From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)" Subject: Re: Big black helicopters* Message-ID: <3b98b1ba$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  < In article <9na15j08ec@enews1.newsguy.com>, TTK Ciar writes:( >Once upon a time, Jan Vorbrueggen said:I >>You might as well say "we can go and write our own compiler, operating  7 >>system and browser to be completely Microsoft-free".   > G >  Well, yes.  We have done that.  I have been 100% microsoft-free for  C >many years, running gcc, gdb, perl, freebsd, linux, XFree86, KDE,  E >Netscape, Lynx, Mutt, et al.  The only software I've wanted which I  G >haven't been able to find for free is something with the same kind of  D >functionality as MS-Project (though, I would prefer something that & >doesn't suck as badly as MS-Project).  K May I humbly ask, what you use as Word, Excel and Powerpoint Alternatives ? J I know of the (said to be very good) XESS spreadsheet (http://www.ais.com)L but it is not free. And _I_ still don't know any freeware reading PPT files.  G >  Just what, exactly, is the basis for your contention that Microsoft  E >is a monopoly, given the existence of bountiful alternatives?  That  $ >people *think* they have no choice?   Sort of.G And the fact, that almost every PC bought in a store comes preinstalled H with M$ and you have virtually no chance to get the box without the s/w.   --  < Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888 < <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------    Date: 07 Sep 2001 14:33:08 +0200G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> " Subject: Re: Big black helicoptersH Message-ID: <y4itev5gfv.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>   TTK Ciar writes:  H > >The important point is that Microsoft forbids the OEMs to set up the N > >computers they sell in such a way that their customers could make an easy, ( > >boot-time choice of operating system." >   Microsoft cannot forbid this.   E Of course they can. Their license contracts with OEMs aren't public - H reportedly, they contain a clause voiding them if they do become public.E And all external evidence is that they indeed contain such a clause -vH that was the point of Gassee's interview recently: there is not a singleD largish company on the market offering dual-boot systems (Win/Linux,* Win/Be, Win/FreeBSD, ... take your pick).   B >   The situation's analogous to gun control legislation -- every F > attempt to curb firearm abuses with legal barriers to ownership has F > instead made that abuse easier and more pervasive by decreasing the & > numbers of law-abiding gun bearers.   @ Your view of the world severely restricted by your USA blinders.   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 13:30:58 +0100e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>m" Subject: Re: Big black helicopters8 Message-ID: <jefhptg7bpoifitmvpdc28bat8vljd12r8@4ax.com>  B On 7 Sep 2001 13:38:34 +0200, eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) wrote:   >M >AL >May I humbly ask, what you use as Word, Excel and Powerpoint Alternatives ?K >I know of the (said to be very good) XESS spreadsheet (http://www.ais.com)mM >but it is not free. And _I_ still don't know any freeware reading PPT files.p  F Star Office read a few basic power point presentations I through at it once.    -- Alan   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:29:54 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> " Subject: Re: Big black helicopters( Message-ID: <9nai2l$40p$1@pyrite.mv.net>  2 "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message2 news:jefhptg7bpoifitmvpdc28bat8vljd12r8@4ax.com...D > On 7 Sep 2001 13:38:34 +0200, eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) > wrote: >m > >u > > L > >May I humbly ask, what you use as Word, Excel and Powerpoint Alternatives ?a8 > >I know of the (said to be very good) XESS spreadsheet (http://www.ais.com)H > >but it is not free. And _I_ still don't know any freeware reading PPT files. > H > Star Office read a few basic power point presentations I through at it > once.e  K And I've loaded at least two free (not 'freeware' in the open-source sense,tL but free to use) PPT readers from Microsoft itself that have read everything I've thrown at them recently.?   - bill   >- > -- > Alan   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:16:16 -0500+ From: Phil Mendelsohn <mend0070@tc.umn.edu>e" Subject: Re: Big black helicoptersH Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.20.0109070911030.25248-100000@garnet.tc.umn.edu>  ) On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Mark Horsburgh wrote:s  D > Actually, this is precisely the point of monopoly legislation. YouF > don't restrict the behaviour of companies that have a monopoly. WhenF > you have a monopoly the rules _change_ - you are not governed by the4 > same laws as companies that don't have monopolies.   Proposed rule change:   A Microsoft will henceforth be required to build it's own hardware.i   -- e+ I liked HP, and at one time I liked Compaq,e7 but I liked DEC better than HP and Compaq put together.E   ------------------------------    Date: 07 Sep 2001 10:27:01 -0400P From: "Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>" <monnier+comp.arch/news/@flint.cs.yale.edu>" Subject: Re: Big black helicopters, Message-ID: <5l1ylj3wlm.fsf@rum.cs.yale.edu>  ] >>>>> "politics2000@hotmail" == politics2000@hotmail com <(politics2000@hotmail.com)> writes:.D > I hope Bill doesn't cave in and dole out contributions in the next > election cycle.   B Last I heard, Microsoft (or was it Gates?) contributed significantI campaing money for the 2000 elections.  About equally distributed betweenl republicans and democrats.     	StefanJ   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 16:21:53 +0200e* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)" Subject: Re: Big black helicopters* Message-ID: <3b98d801$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  ` In article <jefhptg7bpoifitmvpdc28bat8vljd12r8@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:J >On 7 Sep 2001 13:38:34 +0200, eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) wrote:M >>May I humbly ask, what you use as Word, Excel and Powerpoint Alternatives ?,L >>I know of the (said to be very good) XESS spreadsheet (http://www.ais.com)N >>but it is not free. And _I_ still don't know any freeware reading PPT files. >iG >Star Office read a few basic power point presentations I through at it  >once.  C But Star Office is way too big for me to try to port it to OpenVMS.h
 Another one ?i   -- r< Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888.< <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:29:58 -0400) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>a; Subject: Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable filen; Message-ID: <%g1m7.30342$836.3557404@news20.bellglobal.com>E  J Many people are under the impression that characters like <cr> and/or <lf>J are found in "RMS based" OpenVMS text files. This isn't true. If you don'tL believe me, just EDIT and save a small file then use DUMP to view it. You'llL see that all RMS strings begin with a 16 bit word which represent the numberE of characters on that line which is then followed by the actual ASCII1J characters. Blank lines contain a 16 bit word equal to zero. The last word, in the file only contains hex FFFF (65,536).  E Text files that are created without using RMS may have embedded paperhE commands and no line length information. The only way to use BASIC to E convert a text file produced by "C" is to read in 512 byte blocks (ifoH possible), extract only what you need, then use PRINT statements to disk3 which will create a proper RMS formatted text file.e  # The following zip contains 2 files: E http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/demo_vms/basic-open-useropen-bas.zip K 1) The first file is just a USEROPEN demo which allows DEC-BASIC to PEEK at F the RAB (record access block) and FAB (file access block) information.H 2) The second file is a practical USEROPEN application to fix text filesG which were FTP'd to OpenVMS using a BINARY transfer mode rather than anaI ASCII transfer mode (These kinds of files all have embedded <cr> and <lf>i% chars in 512 byte fixed size blocks).n  G If it's not possible to open your file exactly as I have done, then youn! could try variations on my theme: I 1) you may wish to "not call SYS$CLOSE" in the USEROPEN routine, and then G use the MOVE FROM statement to transfer data from the RMS buffer into afJ dynamic string or map. (this means you wouldn't need to do a second reopen as I have done)eK 2) as others have already suggested in this news group, you could tweak the D file attributes prior to BASIC's open via the following DCL command:E $ SET FILE/ATTR=(ORG:SEQ,LRL:512,MRS:512,RAT:NONE,RFM:FIX) myfile.txt5H This does not change the contents of a file, only the file header (which< tells RMS how to process the contents when doing record i/o)  < ------------------------------------------------------------K p.s. This is not a VMS anomaly; TEXT files are stored differently on almosto9 every computer platform I've ever worked on. For example,s  H 1) WINDOWS NOTEPAD stores <cr> followed by <lf> at the end of each line. 2) CP/M stores only <ctrl-z>.o6 3) OpenVMS (when created via RMS) was described above.  L It is because of these platform differences that FTP requires you transfer aL file using ASCII mode rather than BINARY mode. When you use ASCII mode to doE a file PUT, the FTP client translates local text into a neutral knowncJ format, then sends it to the FTP server where the remote machine stores it# using rules of the remote platform.i< ------------------------------------------------------------  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,t Ontario, Canada.! http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/k@ http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/compaq_memorial_site.html   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 12:25:57 GMT * From: "David Cressey" <david@dcressey.com>; Subject: Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable file 6 Message-ID: <p13m7.457$Iw2.28070@petpeeve.ziplink.net>   Neil wrote:   L > Many people are under the impression that characters like <cr> and/or <lf>L > are found in "RMS based" OpenVMS text files. This isn't true. If you don'tG > believe me, just EDIT and save a small file then use DUMP to view it.l You'll   Neil,n  J What you say is true, for the "normal" formats of RMS files.  However, the "stream" formatsK are different.  In the "stream" formats,  the actual end-of-line characters  are in the file itself..  J You can verify this by doing the same experiment you recommended, but with an extra step.  K Use a CONVERT/FDL command, with a suitable FDL file, to copy the file savede
 by the editor @ to a stream-LF file.  Then do a DUMP on the result.  You'll see.   -- Regards,     David CresseyC     www.dcressey.com   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 08:33:34 -0500m- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)y; Subject: Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable filee3 Message-ID: <gINVR7fuhHbi@eisner.encompasserve.org>M  g In article <%g1m7.30342$836.3557404@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes:r  L > Many people are under the impression that characters like <cr> and/or <lf>. > are found in "RMS based" OpenVMS text files.  G Nonsense.  RMS supports stream files, if that's what the user desires. bD C, C++, and Java based code default to stream-lf files, all done viaG RMS.  EDT and TPU don't default to stream files, but since both use RMSfF they can read stream files anyhow and EDT will write new versions that, way if the old version was written that way.  G > Text files that are created without using RMS may have embedded paperaG > commands and no line length information. The only way to use BASIC tooG > convert a text file produced by "C" is to read in 512 byte blocks (ifuJ > possible), extract only what you need, then use PRINT statements to disk5 > which will create a proper RMS formatted text file.a  C Back to reality:  C accesses it's files via RMS.  RMS is what makesIE files accessable to a variety of languages even though they're not inaC the format that language was designed around.  I've exchanged fileseG between a variety of C, Fortran, Ada, and Java programs.   BASIC should  play well, too.a   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:20:13 +02002 From: "Ren Schelbaum" <rene.schelbaum@datakom.at>; Subject: Re: Converting a stream_lf file to a variable file>G Message-ID: <3b98d6ec$0$43430$6e365a64@newsreader02.highway.telekom.at>   @ "Bob Koehler" <koehler@encompasserve.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag- news:gINVR7fuhHbi@eisner.encompasserve.org...sJ > In article <%g1m7.30342$836.3557404@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes: >iI > > Many people are under the impression that characters like <cr> and/ort <lf>0 > > are found in "RMS based" OpenVMS text files. >eH > Nonsense.  RMS supports stream files, if that's what the user desires.F > C, C++, and Java based code default to stream-lf files, all done viaI > RMS.  EDT and TPU don't default to stream files, but since both use RMS H > they can read stream files anyhow and EDT will write new versions that. > way if the old version was written that way. >rI > > Text files that are created without using RMS may have embedded papersI > > commands and no line length information. The only way to use BASIC topI > > convert a text file produced by "C" is to read in 512 byte blocks (ifaL > > possible), extract only what you need, then use PRINT statements to disk7 > > which will create a proper RMS formatted text file.u > E > Back to reality:  C accesses it's files via RMS.  RMS is what makeskG > files accessable to a variety of languages even though they're not inoE > the format that language was designed around.  I've exchanged filesgI > between a variety of C, Fortran, Ada, and Java programs.   BASIC shouldk > play well, too.t >o    Hi!  H Sorry, but I remember having worked on files written by C-Programs (withJ C-prints, not RMS-Calls) with embedded LFs, where the gap between them wasH never longer than a couple of bytes, but these files were definitely notK readable with RMS-means, as the whole file (or part of it) was estimated ash> just one record (wich was longer than the maximum buffersize).   regards    Ren Schelbaum   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 07:51:12 -0400m* From: Joshua Cope <Joshua.Cope@Compaq.com>$ Subject: Re: cpio ported to OpenVMS?* Message-ID: <3B98B4B0.6C62BDD8@Compaq.com>  H   The POSIX executables must be run in the POSIX environment (or via theI $POSIX/RUN command); you can't pick and choose images and run them under t "native" OpenVMS.      Jan-Erik Sderholm wrote:r > - > CPIO is included in the POSIX ad-on to VMS.'/ > Don't know if you have to run the whole POSIX 0 > install, or if you just could extract the cpio/ > util from the kit and run it without the restc/ > of the POSIX stuff. Who is actualy using thisi > POSIX thing ?u > # > It's metioned in the VMS-FAQ on : 8 > http://www.openvms.compaq.com/wizard/openvms_faq.html. >  > Jan-Erik Sderholm.t > # > jamese@beast.dtsw.army.mil wrote:c > >n
 > > Hello, > > ? > > Does any one have any info about a port of cpio to OpenVMS?r   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 08:54:20 -0500l- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) $ Subject: Re: cpio ported to OpenVMS?3 Message-ID: <3rMCFx4BHqhM@eisner.encompasserve.org>c  g In article <3B97DE06.926C1FCC@home.com>, Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <noone@home.com> writes:a- > CPIO is included in the POSIX ad-on to VMS.l/ > Don't know if you have to run the whole POSIX 0 > install, or if you just could extract the cpio/ > util from the kit and run it without the rests/ > of the POSIX stuff. Who is actualy using thiso > POSIX thing ?r  ?    You probably have to install the whole kit.  But POSIX isn'to=    supported on current versions of VMS.  I actually used it.-  B    On the other hand, a GNU site probably has a GNU cpio that will"    run on current versions of VMS.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 14:13:54 GMTo4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>! Subject: Re: EV7 will never ship?J< Message-ID: <CC4m7.3316$CR2.3383951@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  J EV7 will ship. Pass One booted VMS and T64 early last month. How this willG be rationalized with HP remains to be seen, but when you converge T64'siJ clustering and FT and management capabilities (oh, alomost forgot SSI) andJ HP-UX's vast installed base, you have something that ought to put the fear# of God into Mister Solaris hisself!f< "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3B96C025.2267D829@fsi.net...r > Roger Barnett wrote: > >c9 > > In article <3B8CD0E2.153D8125@virgin.net>, Alan Greige > > <a.greig@virgin.net> writest > > >eJ > > >I can at least confirm that the Compaq IA64 boxes intended to ship in	 2004/2005t	 > > >wille? > > >have Galaxy support features according to current customerJ presentations. The > > >slidesoH > > >show one system running Windows-64, VMS, Linux, and Tru64. Although exactly whyt > > >youL > > >would want to run Linux, and Tru64 at the same time is a puzzle as they will bev > > >binary  > > >compatible. > >tL > > I thought that Microsoft's OEM licence conditions prevent companies likeJ > > Compaq from providing Windows on multiple operating system platforms ? >r> > How do you "poison" a system so it can't run Linux? ...*BSD? >AG > Same line of thinking. By M$'s line of thought, Linux and *BSD should G > get a cut of every machine sold that might possibly run one of those.- >- > -- > David J. Dachtera4 > dba DJE Systems  > http://www.djesys.com/ >.* > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page:! > http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/g   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 16:25:18 +0200 * From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)! Subject: Re: EV7 will never ship?o* Message-ID: <3b98d8ce$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  s In article <CC4m7.3316$CR2.3383951@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes: K >EV7 will ship. Pass One booted VMS and T64 early last month. How this will H >be rationalized with HP remains to be seen, but when you converge T64'sK >clustering and FT and management capabilities (oh, alomost forgot SSI) andhK >HP-UX's vast installed base, you have something that ought to put the fears$ >of God into Mister Solaris hisself!   Way too optimistic in my eyes.1 But I didn't expect it otherwise from you, Terry.t  " btw: I miss your new signature ;-)   --  < Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888e< <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:54:08 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>n! Subject: Re: EV7 will never ship?c( Message-ID: <9nan0h$8t5$1@pyrite.mv.net>  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messageh6 news:CC4m7.3316$CR2.3383951@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...L > EV7 will ship. Pass One booted VMS and T64 early last month. How this willI > be rationalized with HP remains to be seen, but when you converge T64'ssL > clustering and FT and management capabilities (oh, alomost forgot SSI) andL > HP-UX's vast installed base, you have something that ought to put the fear% > of God into Mister Solaris hisself!-  K Bzzzzttttt!  Cluelessness-Alert!  Terry of late doesn't seem to remember tom, engage his brain before releasing the brake.  E First, Compaq proved with Win2K and Win64 on Alpha that simply havingrJ systems up and running was no guarantee that they would ship.  Strike One.  G Second, Tru64 and HP-UX converge only with *major* pain to at least one F party.  HP-UX is a big-endian system, whereas Tru64 is a little-endianF system:  even after maximal efforts by the vendor to ease the process,I application binaries don't port across at all, *source code* doesn't portoI across without examination and usually modification, neither do *existingr" (non-text) files* ...  Strike Two.  F Third, HP-UX *already has* clustering facilities (no, I don't maintainJ they're equal to Tru64's, but they're there), and Tru64 *doesn't* yet haveK the FT capabilities Terry has lately been hawking.  Just as with most otherlG parts of the merger, there's a lot more duplication than synergy here -5E which means that the likely result is elimination of the duplication.k
 Strike Three.e    G Time is running out, folks:  you may have become used to the Death of aFL Thousand Cuts over the past seven years or so, but this summer Compaq tossedJ away the scalpel and brought out the cleaver.  There's about one shot leftI with any chance at all to save the software (and maybe even the hardware)uK that you seem to value:  piss away this opportunity by hoping for the best,. and it's gone forever.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 17:07:31 +0100i0 From: andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com>! Subject: Re: EV7 will never ship?u* Message-ID: <3B98F0C3.465896A2@uk.sun.com>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:: > L > EV7 will ship. Pass One booted VMS and T64 early last month. How this willI > be rationalized with HP remains to be seen, but when you converge T64'suL > clustering and FT and management capabilities (oh, alomost forgot SSI) andL > HP-UX's vast installed base, you have something that ought to put the fear% > of God into Mister Solaris hisself!c  D In order to acheive this HP needs to overcome a number of technical  hurdles.   1.	Endianess 2.	Big code merge ; 3.	Preservation of one of the API's at least HP-UX or Tru64.  > In addition there are a number of organisational and resource  hurdles.  ' 1.	The winner (HP-UX) takes the spoils.G; 2.	HP-UX is currently transitioning from HP-PA -> IA64 does9= 	the HP-UX team have the resources or the will to participate8) 	in a train smash merge at the same time.v; 3.	Tru64 is currently transitioning from Alpha -> IA64 doesc6 	the Tru64 team have the resources to participate in a$ 	train smash merge at the same time.@ 4.	This will all be conducted against a background of declining 5 	sales and staff cuts just to add a bit of additionaln 	stress.; 5.	HP-UX has a much larger ISV portfolio than Tru64 and HP e8 	will not want to do anything that will compromise this,9 	they have had enough difficulty transitioning from HP-UXt# 	10.x to HP-UX 11 with their ISV's.i  @ They also need to retain their existing customer base, this may B be harder than it will be for the Wintel folks. The fact that the A Wintel boxes are commodity servers means that customers are less V@ concerned about the long term prospects of either vendors, they ? are buying commodity products with a relatively short life span8? and if either vendor messes up they can go to one of the other C Wintel vendors quite easily.  > On the other hand the enterprise customers buying Tru64/HP-UX > are much more concerned about the long term, will my platform > be available/supported/viable in 5-6-7 years time is a serious9 question in this space but hardly relevant to the Wintel I space.  > So HP will be very cautious about any changes to their premier? UNIX platform (HP-UX) that may cause customers to have concernsc about their investement.  > Almost all the analysts agree that this merger offers Sun and : IBM the opportunity to grow market share at the expense of7 Compaq/HP and this is assuming that HP does a good job.r   regardsi Andrew Harrisona Enterprise IT Architecto   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 11:39:57 -0500 + From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)d! Subject: Re: EV7 will never ship?,3 Message-ID: <LEtoQHLC$BWg@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  R In article <9nan0h$8t5$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes: > A > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messageu8 > news:CC4m7.3316$CR2.3383951@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...M >> EV7 will ship. Pass One booted VMS and T64 early last month. How this willlJ >> be rationalized with HP remains to be seen, but when you converge T64'sM >> clustering and FT and management capabilities (oh, alomost forgot SSI) and M >> HP-UX's vast installed base, you have something that ought to put the feare& >> of God into Mister Solaris hisself! > M > Bzzzzttttt!  Cluelessness-Alert!  Terry of late doesn't seem to remember tot. > engage his brain before releasing the brake. >   C 	Bill.. I've got an idea.  Instead of talking in such generalities,s= 	why not make a statement similar to the following, pick one:i  , 		1)  I doubt that EV7 boxes will ever ship.? 		2)  If EV7 ships, I doubt there will be more than $50 millions 		    dollars worth sold.t+ 		3)  Marvel sales won't surpass 100 units.t  @ 	Occasionally, our British Champion makes the "mistake" of being  	specific and that trips him up.  B 	The EV7 program has the 3 best people in the world working on it.H 	That is Fred Kleinsorge's statement and concurred by an Alpha engineer,D 	- former Compaq employee - (now Intel employee) Brannon Batson.  So 	EV7 looks good to go.    D 	Looking at Tru64... that seems that could seemlessly be melded intoA 	HP/UX over a period of years.  Tru64 isn't that old, most sourceOD 	code is still around.  Maybe the plan would revolve around seamlessD 	re-compiles of Tru64 code at some future time.  From an engineering> 	perspective, there aren't impossibilities here but big issuesD 	as you point out, re: big versus little endian for running binaries 	on the same box.   G 	But maybe at some future time, HP/UX is equivalent to Tru64, the next eF 	boxes you buy to plug into your Tru64 cluster are HP/UX boxes and you 	go from there.   D 	But maybe you have a "really" bad scenario in mind for the customer 	in their migration.   				Robl   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:02:41 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>.! Subject: Re: EV7 will never ship?t( Message-ID: <9nauhi$gqf$1@pyrite.mv.net>  8 "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:LEtoQHLC$BWg@eisner.encompasserve.org... L > In article <9nan0h$8t5$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:. > > C > > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messagee: > > news:CC4m7.3316$CR2.3383951@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...J > >> EV7 will ship. Pass One booted VMS and T64 early last month. How this willL > >> be rationalized with HP remains to be seen, but when you converge T64'sK > >> clustering and FT and management capabilities (oh, alomost forgot SSI)i andnJ > >> HP-UX's vast installed base, you have something that ought to put the fear( > >> of God into Mister Solaris hisself! > >mL > > Bzzzzttttt!  Cluelessness-Alert!  Terry of late doesn't seem to remember to0 > > engage his brain before releasing the brake. > >y >eD > Bill.. I've got an idea.  Instead of talking in such generalities,  D That wasn't generality, it was simply preamble to the specifics thatK followed it (which you seem to have not bothered reading before writing then above).v  > > why not make a statement similar to the following, pick one: >a, > 1)  I doubt that EV7 boxes will ever ship.? > 2)  If EV7 ships, I doubt there will be more than $50 million0 >     dollars worth sold.c+ > 3)  Marvel sales won't surpass 100 units.p  L Because that's not the point.  The point is that I have no real idea whetherF EV7 will ship or not, AND NEITHER DOES TERRY (nor do you).  All that'sK required is to point this out, with a supporting example or two (as I did).    >rA > Occasionally, our British Champion makes the "mistake" of beinga! > specific and that trips him up.h  J Whereas I embrace specificity with a vengeance.  And whenever you disagreeH specifically (rather than spout inaccurate generalities, as you're doingL now), you usually wind up with egg on your face (not that this seems to have any lasting effect).   >SC > The EV7 program has the 3 best people in the world working on it.b  L The EV8 SMT work certainly had the best people in the world working on it as+ well:  look where EV8 is today as a result.a   ...x  E > Looking at Tru64... that seems that could seemlessly be melded into B > HP/UX over a period of years.  Tru64 isn't that old, most sourceE > code is still around.  Maybe the plan would revolve around seamlesse0 > re-compiles of Tru64 code at some future time.   Rob, you ignorant slut...l  L A change in endianness is not, and cannot, be 'seemless'.  I'd accuse you ofJ failing to read what I wrote, but you refer to it just below, so obviously/ your brain is no more engaged than Terry's was.l     From an engineering$? > perspective, there aren't impossibilities here but big issuesrE > as you point out, re: big versus little endian for running binaries@ > on the same box. >gG > But maybe at some future time, HP/UX is equivalent to Tru64, the next G > boxes you buy to plug into your Tru64 cluster are HP/UX boxes and you  > go from there.  L Perhaps you'd like to discuss that with cluster engineering.  When they wereK talking about integrating Itanic hardware into existing clusters, they wereeJ talking about using said hardware in little-endian fashion.  Integrating aJ big-endian system like HP/UX into a little-endian cluster like Tru64 is an entirely different ball of wax.o   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 12:45:59 -0500a+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)i! Subject: Re: EV7 will never ship?a3 Message-ID: <9V30dg+R9VNR@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  R In article <9nauhi$gqf$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes: > : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message/ > news:LEtoQHLC$BWg@eisner.encompasserve.org...eM >> In article <9nan0h$8t5$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> 	 > writes:M >> >D >> > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in message; >> > news:CC4m7.3316$CR2.3383951@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net... K >> >> EV7 will ship. Pass One booted VMS and T64 early last month. How thisa > willM >> >> be rationalized with HP remains to be seen, but when you converge T64'saL >> >> clustering and FT and management capabilities (oh, alomost forgot SSI) > anddK >> >> HP-UX's vast installed base, you have something that ought to put theb > fear) >> >> of God into Mister Solaris hisself!M >> >M >> > Bzzzzttttt!  Cluelessness-Alert!  Terry of late doesn't seem to remembera > to1 >> > engage his brain before releasing the brake. >> > >>E >> Bill.. I've got an idea.  Instead of talking in such generalities,0 > F > That wasn't generality, it was simply preamble to the specifics thatM > followed it (which you seem to have not bothered reading before writing thee	 > above).u > ? >> why not make a statement similar to the following, pick one:t >>- >> 1)  I doubt that EV7 boxes will ever ship.v@ >> 2)  If EV7 ships, I doubt there will be more than $50 million >>     dollars worth sold., >> 3)  Marvel sales won't surpass 100 units. > N > Because that's not the point.  The point is that I have no real idea whetherH > EV7 will ship or not, AND NEITHER DOES TERRY (nor do you).  All that'sM > required is to point this out, with a supporting example or two (as I did).s >   > 	So.. how about this for a statement that you can sign off on:    		"I highly doubt EV7 will ship"  0 	Is that your opinion?  We are entitled to them.     >>B >> Occasionally, our British Champion makes the "mistake" of being" >> specific and that trips him up. > L > Whereas I embrace specificity with a vengeance.  And whenever you disagreeJ > specifically (rather than spout inaccurate generalities, as you're doingN > now), you usually wind up with egg on your face (not that this seems to have > any lasting effect). >  >>D >> The EV7 program has the 3 best people in the world working on it. > N > The EV8 SMT work certainly had the best people in the world working on it as- > well:  look where EV8 is today as a result.s >   . 	Right.  Not where EV7 is.  And your point is?   > ...t > F >> Looking at Tru64... that seems that could seemlessly be melded intoC >> HP/UX over a period of years.  Tru64 isn't that old, most sourceoF >> code is still around.  Maybe the plan would revolve around seamless1 >> re-compiles of Tru64 code at some future time.0 >  > Rob, you ignorant slut...  > N > A change in endianness is not, and cannot, be 'seemless'.  I'd accuse you ofL > failing to read what I wrote, but you refer to it just below, so obviously1 > your brain is no more engaged than Terry's was.  >  >   From an engineeringn@ >> perspective, there aren't impossibilities here but big issuesF >> as you point out, re: big versus little endian for running binaries >> on the same box.o >>H >> But maybe at some future time, HP/UX is equivalent to Tru64, the nextH >> boxes you buy to plug into your Tru64 cluster are HP/UX boxes and you >> go from there.  > N > Perhaps you'd like to discuss that with cluster engineering.  When they wereM > talking about integrating Itanic hardware into existing clusters, they weretL > talking about using said hardware in little-endian fashion.  Integrating aL > big-endian system like HP/UX into a little-endian cluster like Tru64 is an! > entirely different ball of wax.n >   E 	Right.  But message passing is still message passing or am I missing  	something?o   				Rob    ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 08:45:00 -0500 - From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)c) Subject: Re: Feeling Better about Itaniump3 Message-ID: <kP$Nj19QH1+j@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  a In article <9c7TGNgXbR4q@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:  > 9 > 	I can do ALL things through Christ who strengthens me.  >  > 		Phillipians 4:13 > 	 > 				Robe  '    So can you get us the return of DEC?-   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:31:35 +01008 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>& Subject: Full printer support at last?N Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF03B@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  H Will DCPS finally fully support the latest HP printers once the dust has settled?   John  B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukH Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)b   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 18:50:48 +0200u From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>* Subject: Re: Full printer support at last?' Message-ID: <3B98FAE8.7A888BF3@home.nl>t  J That remains to be seen. The problem may be that DCPS is build by Genicom,J and Genicom also produces printers. So here we have a potential confict of interests........o   John Macallister wrote:   J > Will DCPS finally fully support the latest HP printers once the dust has
 > settled? >n > John > D > Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukJ > Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKC > Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)0   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:12:51 -05001 From: "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com>m* Subject: Re: Full printer support at last?7 Message-ID: <9nav6b$rp$1@fizban.fizban.pprd.abbott.com>5  H I believe DCPS came back to Compaq earlier this year, which is goodness.   Dave...o  + "Dirk Munk" <munk@home.nl> wrote in messagee! news:3B98FAE8.7A888BF3@home.nl...eL > That remains to be seen. The problem may be that DCPS is build by Genicom,L > and Genicom also produces printers. So here we have a potential confict of > interests........i >  > John Macallister wrote:  >zL > > Will DCPS finally fully support the latest HP printers once the dust has > > settled? > >  > > John > >rF > > Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.ukL > > Post: Nuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKE > > Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)e >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 13:14:54 -0400n0 From: Paul Anderson <paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>* Subject: Re: Full printer support at last?; Message-ID: <070920011314547075%paul.r.anderson@compaq.com>s  
 In articleC <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF03B@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>,l9 John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> wrote:n  J > Will DCPS finally fully support the latest HP printers once the dust has
 > settled?  E We already mostly did at the release of DCPS V2.0 earlier this year.  C Well, HP introduced a few new models (2200, 4100, 9000) just beforel* release time, so we're behind a bit again.  D It remains to be seen how the HP deal affects DCPS, but I suppose it/ won't mean *worse* support of HP printers.  ;-)e  G In article <3B98FAE8.7A888BF3@home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote:,  L > That remains to be seen. The problem may be that DCPS is build by Genicom,L > and Genicom also produces printers. So here we have a potential confict of > interests........e  G No, DCPS came back to Compaq last year.  Genicom still makes the LA, LGe! and LN series of printers though.i   Paul   -- -  Paul Anderson   OpenVMS Engineeringe   Compaq Computer Corporationn   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 09:30:37 -0400u# From: Jim Agnew <agnew@hsc.vcu.edu>u" Subject: Re: H-P "jumps the shark"+ Message-ID: <3B98CBFD.47517B1B@hsc.vcu.edu>d   hahahahahahaahahahaaaaaa   !!!!l  	 eeewww...a     Jimh  & "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote: >  > Latest headline news:F > L > Dr. Jack Kevorkian to become chief CEO of HP-Compaq merger corporation. ;) >  > --Q > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMc > K >   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery.K >   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbesl   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:04:15 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>H& Subject: Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.( Message-ID: <9n9nv3$9ch$1@pyrite.mv.net>  ; "Lyndon Bartels" <lbartels@pressenter.com> wrote in messagep' news:3B97E7BE.F7682F5@pressenter.com... I > I've been doing some thinking about the whole Intel-Compaq-HP trifecta.T  < The speculative portion of your 'thinking' has two problems:  , 1) it lacks any substantiating evidence, and  9 2) even taken as pure fantasy, it doesn't make any sense.t   >t > C > For the sake of my opinions, I've made the following assumptions.r >lG > 1. The alpha processor, from a strictly technical standpoint has moree@ > than a little potential left in it. Maybe several years worth.  H Try "at least several years' worth".  The only other architecture with aI ghost of a chance of keeping up (had EV8 been produced) during the next 4l years (minimum) was Power4.l   >sF > 1a. Only looking at the current 64-bit procesors available out thereD > today, available today, and those to be available in the next 6-12? > months, the alpha is technically the best there is. (strictlyr > technically speaking, again.)t >o- > 2. Compaq's PC area has been loosing money.o >rG > 3. Compaq's Enterprise area (VMS, Tru64, StorageWorks, NSK) have beene > making money.t >,I > 4. Intel's 64-bit processor, while working has a long way to go (like 3s9 > or 4 years) before it can be called "enterprise ready."i  F Not true:  the main problem with Itanic is its sluggish performance onL typical server code, but even Merced's server-code (i.e., SPECint) processorH performance is comparable to Sun's products (which definitely qualify asK 'enterprise-ready' in the estimation of the market) and McKinley's promisespL to be somewhat better (though will use more power than Sun's USIII - or just about anything else).h  I And since HP is ready to start shoving high-end SuperDome servers out the L door as soon as McKinley processors are available to stuff into them, expectK IA64 to start showing up in even high-end enterprise use in about one year.h   >1 >rA > Now with those assumptions in mind. Let's look at each company.y >  > Intel: >rJ > Intel has spent millions of dollars and many man-hours to get to ItaniumI > where it is. They've made many promises, companies have counted on them J > to deliver on those promises. But they've learned that they're not goingJ > to. It'll take them years to get to where they thought they'd be by now.  F As long as they can sell product, they don't care.  And as long as theC industry (pundits, marketeers, panderers like Compaq) buys into theiH inevitability of Itanic's success, Intel will sell product, even if it'sK years behind the competition in performance - because it's perceived, sold,.L and purchased for its 'industry-standard' (or even 'non-proprietary' - hah!) nature.n  E > They've learned, just like the alpha engineers did, that creating al@ > whole new 64-bit chip is a whole lot more involved than addingH > to/augmenting current technology. (Digital with their chip, Intel withJ > the x86s.) They see AMD getting stronger and stronger, and the potentialI > of loosing the opening surge into the 64-bit market space is becoming ae" > greater and greater possibility.  J AMD is indeed almost certainly perceived as a threat, which makes me worryG that Intel will find a way to sink AMD by other than normal competitives mechanisms.   F But there's no 64-bit 'surge' coming *unless* Intel sinks AMD and thusF obtains the complete control over the high-volume (desktop and low-endF server) market that would allow it to *force* 64-bit solutions on that/ market (despite the lack of any need for them).n  J There's no pent-up high-volume 64-bit demand waiting to be satisfied:  APII sold Alpha (Linux) systems for about $3K, and Sun sells entry-level SPARChF systems for about $1K (unless those are old 32-bit SPARCs - I've never	 checked).e  @ AMD's Hammer might be extremely successful if AMD could price itH competitively with IA32 solutions, since then people could buy it to runI IA32 code with the idea that if a 64-bit application came along that they-D wanted they could run that too.  Otherwise, the complete adequacy ofG existing 32-bit solutions for all high-volume use plus the inability of-I other 64-bit solutions to run them efficiently will keep 64-bit platforms J *relatively* low-volume for at least 4 - 5 years (which is not to say thatK there won't be many more of them out there than there are today - just that L they'll remain a negligible amount compared with IA32 systems, unless Hammer5 becomes accepted as the ideal transitional platform)..   >> > So they Pre-empt.O  I No, they don't.  People pre-empt to forestall the perceived likelihood ofwE failure, whereas Intel has every reason right now to foresee success.   5  They know the alpha's out there. They've had a tasteIB > of what it can do, why not acquire the alpha, and go from there?  J Because they see no need to deviate from their current course - especiallyE after they've just succeeded in eliminating one of the most promising  competing architectures.    AllF > they've have to do is tell their prospective customers that the nextG > generation of 64-bit chip will have this "different" instruction set,bB > and since those people haven't gotten a lot of porting to 64-bitC > completed yet, they're not loosing a whole lot of time/resources.e  K In the case of HP, that's pure and utter bullshit.  IA64 is very close to a H 'bet the company' architecture for HP, and they've said so publicly (and very recently).   H Intel isn't as stupid as Compaq, not by a long shot.  They don't royallyJ piss off their customers (HP might be the most pissed, but a large portionK of the rest of the industry would be upset in varying degrees) without damniK good reason.  Your inclination to minimize the effect merely indicates thatl* you haven't a clue about its significance.    AndH > besides, the new chip is "so much better, and so much faster, it'll be > well worth it."d  C They've already been telling the world this about Itanic for years.rG Changing their tune now would be at least extremely impolitic.  And, as H noted above, they're certainly not stupid enough to do so without really concrete reasons.o   >nH > Before getting any farther into to 64 bit realm, while losses would be0 > minimal, would be the time to make the change.  L If they had strong reason to believe that it was necessary.  But they don't.    Not 3 years from now. It E > wouldn't go over very well if they were to make a mid-stream change  > then.t  F It wouldn't go over very well if their CEO were caught having sex withJ animals, either.  Neither is something they expect, thus neither is likely3 to be something they spend much time preparing for.d  C  Right now, they've barely cast off, and are only a little way frombH > shore. Changing to a new direction, one that already been traveled, is6 > not as hard to do now as it could be in a few years.  K So what?  They don't expect to have to at all.  If you think otherwise (andnF your entire thesis appears to rest on that assumption), you'll have toL provide at least *some* kind of supporting evidence, since the only evidence I know of is to the contrary.o  J In particular, Intel *didn't purchase Alpha*, which is what one would haveD expected them to do if they had any interest in developing it.  TheyI purchased the right to use some intellectual property (having been burned H once already by DEC patents they infringed), and the right to entice EV8H (and later EV7) engineers to complement their reportedly far-less-matureI Itanic engineering cadre, and a promise from Compaq to standardize future L OSs on Itanic and bury Alpha where it couldn't continue to embarrass Itanic.  J But if what they wanted to do was to replace Itanic with Alpha, they wouldK without any shadow of a doubt have acquired the entire EV7 effort - because J that's the most effective platform that could quickly be brought to marketH to compete with Power4 (not to mention having the same kinds of externalE interfaces that EV8 has, ensuring smooth forward progress to the next.* stage).  And they did nothing of the kind.   >sI > But what about one of their biggest backers? HP? They've spent time andVG > resources with the McKinley and Itanium... What are they going to do?i >  >> > HP.t >a7 > HP's server technology is truly near the end of life.6  K No, it's not.  SuperDome server technology is a completely new product, andSI they expect it to last quite a while.  And while PA-RISC is no youngster,tL they're prepared to live with it - quite adequately - for several more years if they have to.    They've stretched > it as far as they can.  K Not at all:  when Itanic slipped badly a couple of years back, they broughtBK PA-RISC development back to life in earnest, and now have at least a couplet3 more generations of enhancements to pull out of it.c  /  And they've been betting the bank that Intel'soJ > new 64-bit processor is going to save the day. But it isn't ready... Now > they start scrambling...  I No:  as indicated above, they scrambled two years ago, and thus are *not*IL desperate now.  While they'd obviously prefer not to have to wait for Itanic& to catch up, they can if they have to.  9 So the rest of your fantasy below is only that:  fantasy.i  -  They look at Compaq... "Hmmm..." they think.iH > "That might work....what could we do...? We could port HP-UX to alpha.D > No, that'd take too long. 'It'd take less time to port some of ourG > applications over to alpha and Tru64.' somebody says. "But what abouthF > our commitment to Intel and the IA64? How would that look if we justG > abandoned them?" somebody else chimes in. "And besides, do we want to J > actually *help* one of our competitors? We'd be giving them business andF > money?" Yet another person says. "But what if we bought Compaq? ThenG > we'd be able to do both." Then the first person comes back. "But whatl2 > about Intel? Again, we have a commitment there." > I > If Intel were to acquire the alpha, and call it an intel, then HP couldpJ > run HP-UX on the "new" "Intel" processor. And be good to go. But there'sD > the porting issue. So HP needs to get an OS that will run on it...  L Except that HP-UX is the Unix with enterprise acceptance, while Tru64 trailsL noticeably behind.  Even Compaq was interested in HP-UX for this reason:  toI think that HP would want to jerk around their enterprise customers by notdK only switching Unixes but switching platform endianness is - well, 'absurd'l is too kind.   > That's where Compaq comes in., >u >n	 > Compaq.. > F > They've been bleeding red ink from their PC business. Trying to stayH > afloat until by siphoning off the money from the bigger boxes. But theG > stock-holders are getting a bit restless, and they want profits. They @ > want profits now. Compaq wants to be a box builder. A "ServiceI > Provider." They want to sell, and resell things other people make. ThisoH > is what they think they're good at. They really didn't want that peskyG > alpha processor when the bought Digital, they just wanted the servicetF > organization and the support chain. So they dump the alpha to Intel.D > Then they can phase out the OSes as well. Maybe sell them to CA orI > somebody who wants them. They'll just bundle it all together and viola! I > Instant profits, minimal expense. No R&D. Just a bit of advertising andI > watch the money roll in.  D I'm pretty much in agreement with that paragraph - though I have theJ impression that Pfeiffer *did* actually want to try to make a go of Alpha.   >aJ > Add to that a bigger PC business... Hey no more PC market red-ink! Watch > the money roll in now! >:I > I really think the the three players sat together, put all the cards onFH > the table and took out what each one wanted the most. No matter who itJ > originally belonged to. Once that was accomplished, they figured out howJ > to arrive at that goal. First the Intel "licensing of alpha technology."G > That made Intel happy. Then the merger. That positions HP to take the H > next step. And the next step, once the merger is actually approved andE > completed? The "Roadmap." I wouldn't be surprised to see HP annouceeI > using Tru64 (once it's ported to IA64 of course) as the basis for their3 > next generation of unix.  K The planned Tru64 port to IA64 kept Tru64 little-endian.  I don't think youeL understand the significance of endianness, since I've mentioned it to you inL an earlier post - but it makes your suggestion at best rather unlikely to be anything close to reality.  + So, again, what follows below is - fantasy.3  0  Then they port over some of their software, andG > their Unix world gets much bigger, better, happier. They'll phrase itmD > something like "We'll take the best of both Operating systems, andG > building upon the porting to IA64 that's already been done, move to abJ > new system that will fill the needs of all our customers." Intel waits aJ > while before announcing the next 64-bit processor, which could very wellI > be a repackaged alpha. Intel's powers-that-be, if they ever get presseduH > into speaking something near the truth can spin the tail of how "TheirI > engineers, learning from the Itanium experience, found many new ways to,J > expand the flexibility and power of what once was the alpha technology."E > That saves their reputation. Compaq ceases to exist. And because it,C > no-longer exists, any change of direction can't be traced back too< > Capellas and Compaq because... "hey it was HP's decision." > > > Was their a grand conspiracy.... Maybe.... More likely CarlyF > orchestrated it all... She thought all this out and said to herself,I > "what would be the best possible world according to me?" And arrived atl > this scenario..s  K Given the levels of incompetence already demonstrated by Carly and Mikey, IlG suppose anything might be possible from them.  But Intel is a different.J story, and without Intel's support of Alpha the rest never gets out of the@ starting gate:  fantasy, and poorly-constructed fantasy at that.  J I didn't bother to respond when you posted this in c.o.v. because I expectJ c.o.v. participants to be sufficiently aware of the situation to have someK ability to differentiate between the flimsiest kind of wishful thinking and 5 analysis that has at least some grounding in reality.r  F But when Ken picked it up for tru64.org, I decided that a response wasJ indicated:  complacency resulting from false hopes is what has brought theH situation to where it is today, and I'd hate to see things continue that way.   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 10:43:10 GMTy7 From: woodacre@scala.reading.sgi.com (Michael Woodacre)r& Subject: Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.. Message-ID: <9na8bu$hal68$1@fido.engr.sgi.com>  R In article <9n9nv3$9ch$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes: |>  M |> In particular, Intel *didn't purchase Alpha*, which is what one would have G |> expected them to do if they had any interest in developing it.  They*L |> purchased the right to use some intellectual property (having been burnedK |> once already by DEC patents they infringed), and the right to entice EV8   K I'm still very interested to know which of DECs patents Intel is claimed toeO have infringed. I've not seen any reference to a specific patent(s) yet though.q   Thanks,  Mike   -- l    Michael S. Woodacre N woodacre@sgi.com   h   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 07:02:07 -0500p- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)-& Subject: Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.3 Message-ID: <Ym9t7jH$iD2a@eisner.encompasserve.org>u  Y In article <1010907000407.64342A-100000@Ives.egh.com>, John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> writes:a+ > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Lyndon Bartels wrote:  >  > [snip] > J >> I've been doing some thinking about the whole Intel-Compaq-HP trifecta.J >> If Intel were to acquire the alpha, and call it an intel, then HP couldK >> run HP-UX on the "new" "Intel" processor. And be good to go. But there's E >> the porting issue. So HP needs to get an OS that will run on it...m  >> That's where Compaq comes in. > D > The unnamed HP PR person who was quoted in Ken Farmer's post (if ID > have my attributes correct) did say they were going ahead with the@ > HP-UX port to *ALPHA*.  I just assumed he/she was misquoted or@ > fumble-tongued and meant the HP-UX port to IPF or possibly the' > Tru64 and VMS ports to IPF...  but???e  I Perhaps a rebadging of Tru64 with some HP-UX features to add credibility.   # Perhaps a big-endian Unix on Alpha.    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 15:34:28 GMTk* From: "Dirk Lockard" <r.d.lockard@att.net>& Subject: Re: HP-Compaq-Intel Trifecta.H Message-ID: <8O5m7.13950$151.1153884@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>   >a9 > I'm still very interested to know which of DECs patents  Intel is claimed toh; > have infringed. I've not seen any reference to a specific  patent(s) yet though.  >s	 > Thanks,e > Mike >.4 My fuzzy recollection is that it was first Digital's; cacheing technology introduced in the Pentium-Pro.  I don'te< recall any mention of this suit continuing after the sale of Digital to Compaq.   Dirk Lockard   ------------------------------  $ Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:50:04 -0700+ From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com>s Subject: Re: I hate Compaq- Message-ID: <9n9qnp$f8b$1@nnrp2.phx.gblx.net>   0 <yyyc186@illegaltospam.mindspring.com> wrote ...O > >> And despite all of that they went with Intel...a company that is dead last 1 > >> in the world of chip fabrication technology.l > > > >Where would you say they stand in terms of chip fabrication > >infrastructure? >rL > They don't have any infrastructure with respect to the new technologies inI > place at either IBM or AMD.  What they have is a large capacity to turnc > out very dated chips.p  = Ah, it looks like it's anonymous clueless troll season again.s< [ Either that or 0.13 micron (drawn) copper processes became8  "dated" without me noticing. And that seems unlikely. ] --3 Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.como. Vanity Web Page http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 07:13:36 -0600x* From: yyyc186@illegaltospam.mindspring.com Subject: Re: I hate Compaq; Message-ID: <3b98c8a8$1$lllp186$mr2ice@nntp.mindspring.com>e  4 In <9n9qnp$f8b$1@nnrp2.phx.gblx.net>, on 09/06/2001 ;    at 11:50 PM, "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com> said:i  1 ><yyyc186@illegaltospam.mindspring.com> wrote ...iP >> >> And despite all of that they went with Intel...a company that is dead last2 >> >> in the world of chip fabrication technology. >>? >> >Where would you say they stand in terms of chip fabricationl >> >infrastructure?c >>M >> They don't have any infrastructure with respect to the new technologies insJ >> place at either IBM or AMD.  What they have is a large capacity to turn >> out very dated chips.  G >Ah, it looks like it's anonymous clueless troll season again. [ Either 4 >that or 0.13 micron (drawn) copper processes became9 > "dated" without me noticing. And that seems unlikely. ]a  F No, just clueless pompous ass season again.  Eject your lead booty andJ check out the specs of AMD's new (<1year old) plant and the specs of IBM'sJ copper.  More importantly check out the successfull stamping percentages. C Intel's copper process is turning out a lot of landfill fodder. >--t4 >Dennis O'Connor                   dmoc@primenet.com/ >Vanity Web Page http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/e     --  ; -----------------------------------------------------------i yyyc186@mindspring.com; -----------------------------------------------------------e   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 08:52:49 -0500r- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)e4 Subject: Re: INQUIRE/NODISPLAY or equivalent in DCL?3 Message-ID: <BZftyafF9Wax@eisner.encompasserve.org>f  O In article <3B97CAF1.711D0DDB@alphase.com>, Don Sykes <don@alphase.com> writes:  > 9 > 	copy Node1"myname MyActualPassword"::dev:[dir]file  []n >   ,    When no one is looking over your shoulder  >    $define other Node1"""myname MyActualPassword"""::dev:[dir]      Then you can just      $copy other:file []      But:v1       1. never define this in a shared name tabley;       2. make sure you really trust everyone who has CMKRNLiB       3. never do a show logical when someone is looking over your       	 shoulder   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:19:29 -0500( From: "Don Whitlow" <Don.Whitlow@qg.com>( Subject: MAIL$MESSAGE_DELETE question...( Message-ID: <3b98e582$1@news.qgraph.com>   Hi All,h  I While using MAIL$MESSAGE_DELETE within a C program I have written, I came K across the need to delete mail messages that have been 'marked'. Currently, E the default behavior, even when using the callable routine, is that af2 message cannot be deleted unless un'mark'ed first.  I Is there a flag to MAIL$MESSAGE_DELETE that will allow me to override thesG marking of a mail message and simply delete it, or do I have to throw aaH routine in that will unmark all the selected messages first, then do theI delete? In either event, not too hard to do, just looking for the easiestm	 solution.e   Thanks,  Doni   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 12:09:48 -0000  From: sword7@speakeasy.org; Subject: Re: MicroVAX II (KA630) - RXCS,RXDB,TXCS, and TXDBe/ Message-ID: <tphe8c31k09la6@corp.supernews.com>l  0 In comp.os.vms John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> wrote: > Tim -e  A > Could it be that the test sent a character in MAINT mode and is'2 > waiting for it to appear in the receiver buffer?  1 Yes, I am aware of that.   I will work on it now.4   -- Tim Stark   -- b, Timothy Stark	<><	Inet: sword7@speakeasy.orgJ --------------------------------------------------------------------------F "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that H whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.. Amen." -- John 3:16 (King James Version Bible)   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 04:02:53 -0400+ From: "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com>aG Subject: Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoftt+ Message-ID: <9n9uvm$b0l$1@bob.news.rcn.net>l  A "Jerry Leslie" <LESLIE@209-16-45-102.insync.net> wrote in messaget! news:4tYl7.753$Oh1.8105@insync...r, > John Saunders (jws@ma.ultranet.com) wrote:: > : "Jerry Leslie" <leslie@clio.rice.edu> wrote in message% > : news:9n9bue$gse$1@joe.rice.edu...aJ > : > Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr (winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU)
 > : wrote: > : > :cE > : > : Macintoshes?  The third-party IP stacks that were written forB Windowso > : 3.1,5 > : > : which certainly didn't shop with an IP stack?i > : > :rD > : > But Microsoft did offer an IP stack for Windows 3.1, code name > : "Wolverine",/ > : > to create Windows for Workgroups in 1994.t > :s@ > : I don't believe that the WfW IP stack supported PPP, did it? > :e' > Yes, here's a trouble-shooting guide:w >hB >   http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q115/5/93.asp@ >   Troubleshooting Remote Access in Windows for Workgroups 3.11 >s2 > but it only supported the NetBeui protocol, per: >a2 >   http://pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win311.html >   Windows for Workgroups 3.11h  1 The first article does not mention PPP, just RAS.  --
 John Saunderst jws@ma.ultranet.comr   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 13:02:07 GMTy1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) G Subject: Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoftt, Message-ID: <9naggf$2g3n$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  8 In article <00A01A7E.4B085357@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>,O  winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:E\ |> In article <9n8ind$4j3$1@bob.news.rcn.net>, "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> writes:6 |> >"Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message( |> >news:3B97C8A9.71A79CF1@virgin.net... |>L |> >If Microsoft hadn't shipped a with Windows a TCP/IP stack with PPP and aP |> >dialer, which devices would have connected hosts privately connecting to the
 |> >Internet?  |> sN |> Macintoshes?  The third-party IP stacks that were written for Windows 3.1, K |> which certainly didn't shop with an IP stack?  AOL software for Windows?a: |> PPP support shipped by third-party modem manufacturers? |>    G And let's not forget KA9Q's NET/NOS, which ran under DOS (or frequentlygI under DoubleDOS so you could remain connected and downloading while still I doing real work on the PC.)  Plus, much of th early access was done usinge; Shell Accounts from ISP's.  Not everybody was IP connected.p   bill   -- eJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   t   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 15:57:18 +0100y% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>oG Subject: Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoftr8 Message-ID: <pvnhpt004aegq092u2r731dn4mohkts49i@4ax.com>  ; On 7 Sep 2001 13:02:07 GMT, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill  Gunshannon) wrote:  1 >port shipped by third-party modem manufacturers?. >|>  > H >And let's not forget KA9Q's NET/NOS, which ran under DOS (or frequently  A I was desperately trying to remember the names of some of the DOStE stacks. Was fairly sure there was a free one which had evolved in thet amateur radio community.  J >under DoubleDOS so you could remain connected and downloading while stillJ >doing real work on the PC.)  Plus, much of th early access was done using< >Shell Accounts from ISP's.  Not everybody was IP connected. >o >billa   -- Alan   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 16:53:59 GMT 1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)eG Subject: Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsofty, Message-ID: <9nau37$2nk7$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>  * In article <3B97D4F8.BCC4DE3F@virgin.net>,(  Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes: |>   |> b |> John Saunders wrote:t |> rM |> > If Microsoft hadn't shipped a with Windows a TCP/IP stack with PPP and aeQ |> > dialer, which devices would have connected hosts privately connecting to thep |> > Internet? |> "O |> There were PC IP stacks supporting dialup SLIP and PPP available long beforePP |> Microsoft shipped one. Have you heard of Winsock for instance? It was Winsock? |> that most commonly connected earlier Windows PCs to the net.n  H And there was a lot of network communications going on even before an ofI that.  It is likely that this newsgroup has been running since before the E first PC IP stack was ever written.  The INTERNET is not spelled WWW.    bill   -- CJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   w   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 16:51:22 GMTi1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)nG Subject: Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsofto, Message-ID: <9natua$2nk7$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  + In article <9n8ind$4j3$1@bob.news.rcn.net>,t.  "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> writes: |> cK |> If Microsoft hadn't shipped a with Windows a TCP/IP stack with PPP and a O |> dialer, which devices would have connected hosts privately connecting to the  |> Internet?  F People were communicating computer to computer using the Internet (andE it's predecessors) for at least a decade before MS shipped it's firsttH product with a working IP stack included.  Bill Gate's is as responsible for the INTERNET as Al Gore.   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 12:18:33 -0500d- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)lG Subject: Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoftp3 Message-ID: <EruERTUDcRGd@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <9natua$2nk7$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:- > In article <9n8ind$4j3$1@bob.news.rcn.net>,s0 >  "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> writes: > |> iM > |> If Microsoft hadn't shipped a with Windows a TCP/IP stack with PPP and a Q > |> dialer, which devices would have connected hosts privately connecting to the, > |> Internet? > H > People were communicating computer to computer using the Internet (andG > it's predecessors) for at least a decade before MS shipped it's first J > product with a working IP stack included.  Bill Gate's is as responsible > for the INTERNET as Al Gore.  B Bill Gates is more responsible for the growth of the Internet thanF Al Gore.  Consider how many more Usenet messages there are criticizing$ Bill Gates than criticizing Al Gore.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:12:39 -0400+ From: "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com>iG Subject: Re: OT: Bush administration drops effort to break up Microsoftr+ Message-ID: <9nav6h$9hv$1@bob.news.rcn.net>s  > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message& news:9natua$2nk7$1@info.cs.uofs.edu...- > In article <9n8ind$4j3$1@bob.news.rcn.net>,e0 >  "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> writes: > |>K > |> If Microsoft hadn't shipped a with Windows a TCP/IP stack with PPP and, a J > |> dialer, which devices would have connected hosts privately connecting to the > |> Internet? >eH > People were communicating computer to computer using the Internet (andG > it's predecessors) for at least a decade before MS shipped it's first J > product with a working IP stack included.  Bill Gate's is as responsible > for the INTERNET as Al Gore.  L The issue is numbers. Of course the Internet was there before Microsoft, butL my contension is that Microsoft, by including TCP/IP, PPP and basic InternetK applications with the system, created a market for Internet-based goods and C services - by creating tens of millions of Internet-ready computers  (hundreds of millions?)w --
 John Saunders  jws@ma.ultranet.comx   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 16:37:58 GMTv, From: bjskidmore@macbbs.com (Barry Skidmore)6 Subject: Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime/ Message-ID: <3b98f74b.67288226@news.iquest.net>n  D I have been looking for Dec C documentation on how to pass argumentsF to main() at runtime, but have not had any luck.  Could someone please? point me in the right direction.  I am using Dec C (V6.0) underh OpenVMS 7.2.   Thanks,- Barry-   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 12:22:49 -0500s- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)c: Subject: Re: Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime3 Message-ID: <B19sDWTFHoDx@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  ^ In article <3b98f74b.67288226@news.iquest.net>, bjskidmore@macbbs.com (Barry Skidmore) writes:F > I have been looking for Dec C documentation on how to pass argumentsH > to main() at runtime, but have not had any luck.  Could someone pleaseA > point me in the right direction.  I am using Dec C (V6.0) underD > OpenVMS 7.2.  & From DCL I would expect you would use:  2 	MCR ddcu:[dir.sdir]my_program arg1 arg2 arg3 arg4   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:47:27 +0400s4 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" <Laishev@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>: Subject: Re: Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime/ Message-ID: <3B99082F.B4F808F@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>2   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > ` > In article <3b98f74b.67288226@news.iquest.net>, bjskidmore@macbbs.com (Barry Skidmore) writes:H > > I have been looking for Dec C documentation on how to pass argumentsJ > > to main() at runtime, but have not had any luck.  Could someone pleaseC > > point me in the right direction.  I am using Dec C (V6.0) undero > > OpenVMS 7.2. > @ $cc/preff=all/nowar sys$input /obj=ddcu:[dir.sdir]my_program.obj #include	<stdio.h>  ) int     main    (int    argc,char **argv)c {o int	i; 	for (i = 0;i < argc;i++) # 		printf("arg%u = %s\n",i,argv[i]);g }a ^Z $link ddcu:[dir.sdir]my_program'  ( > From DCL I would expect you would use: > ; >         MCR ddcu:[dir.sdir]my_program arg1 arg2 arg3 arg4    -- t Cheers, Ruslan.a? +----------------pure personal opinion------------------------+t9     RADIUS Server for OpenVMS project - www.radiusvms.comt6       vms-isps@dls.net - Forum for ISP running OpenVMS)                 Mobile: +7 (901) 971-3222g   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 17:45:02 GMTi, From: bjskidmore@macbbs.com (Barry Skidmore): Subject: Re: Passing arguments to Dec C program at runtime/ Message-ID: <3b9906cf.71261070@news.iquest.net>:   Larry,  B When I enter 'mcr' at the DCL prompt I receive the following error message:  + %DCL-W-ACTIMAGE, error activating image RSXo$ -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF,image file not found+ HOBBY$DKA0:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSEXE]RSX.EXE   @ I do not see RSX listed as a layered product, unless it is under a different name.z   Barrye  E On 7 Sep 2001 12:22:49 -0500, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)h wrote:  _ >In article <3b98f74b.67288226@news.iquest.net>, bjskidmore@macbbs.com (Barry Skidmore) writes: G >> I have been looking for Dec C documentation on how to pass arguments I >> to main() at runtime, but have not had any luck.  Could someone pleaseIB >> point me in the right direction.  I am using Dec C (V6.0) under >> OpenVMS 7.2.m >n' >From DCL I would expect you would use:a >o3 >	MCR ddcu:[dir.sdir]my_program arg1 arg2 arg3 arg4l >    ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 09:05:11 -0700u  From: coparah@hotmail.com (uche)3 Subject: solaris 7 compatible with vms  in printingt= Message-ID: <88327173.0109070805.6169671a@posting.google.com>n   hello folks,C does anyone know whether solaris 7 is compatible with vms as far ase6 printing is concerned. Thanks for helping a newbie out   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 17:42:50 +0200e* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)$ Subject: Re: Third postcard from Sun* Message-ID: <3b98eafa$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  j In article <5.1.0.14.2.20010806144824.02c4cba8@ntbsod.psccos.com>, Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com> writes:+ >At 02:34 PM 8/6/2001, Brian Tillman wrote:t- >> >What Capellas's attement really means is:qG >> >"We received far fewer complaints than we had expected, so customerq
 >>responseN >> >was very positive compared to what we had expected" (eg: customer response >>was / >> >positive compared to what we had expected).  >>H >>Sure. What they probably said was, "You're dropping Alphas?  Sure.  GoL >>ahead.  We'll be migrating off your platforms real soon anyhow."  CapellasH >>heard the "Sure.  Go ahead" part and took that as a positive response. >eJ >Or maybe, just MAYBE, the customers have been wanting VMS on an industry-H >standard platform all along (like many in this forum have been bitchingC >about).  Given that scenario, Capellas would be telling the truth.n  < Since when is IA64 the industry-standard platform ? IA32 is.5 And this won't change for the next couple of years...e   -- n< Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888c< <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:33:26 -04002 From: "Gary E. Green" <gegreen@dra-consulting.com>8 Subject: Re: Vax/Vms Systems Administrator in Albany, NY8 Message-ID: <3b98dbe5$0$35755$f92e4de5@news.stratos.net>  9 >     2+ years administering Unix-based computer systems.- .- .- .-3 >     Shell Scripting (Perl, Bourne, SH, KSH, CSH).e  K -) And these are requirements for a "VAX/VMS"  systems administrator. (theyuF probably should have included "Skill in scrounging Unibus parts", too)   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 06:19:59 -0500h- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) + Subject: Re: VMS NFS and PC-NFS (Reflexion)e3 Message-ID: <MJJhl67Q3yRm@eisner.encompasserve.org>r  Z In article <9n94r2.9l.1@hans.myfqdn.de>, Hans.Bachner@altavista.net (Hans Bachner) writes:% > Jakob Erber (erberj@post.ch) wrote:  >  > <snip>9 >>... but Reflexion always comes back saying: Cannot readkI >>targets file system (or similar). We are using HPs (:-)) TCPIP Servicesl' >>for VMS. Ping works fine from the PC.  > 2 > Anything interesting in the NFS server log file? > N > Turn on the SECURITY privilege, enable OPCOM replies, and see what messages ; > you get when you try to access the files from reflection.e  C On some systems you would be well advised to also enable additionalC+ audit alarms for the duration of this test.n  N ==============================================================================I The Boulder Pledge: "Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anythingeJ      offered to me as the result of an unsolicited email message. Nor willI      I forward chain letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warningstH      to large numbers of others. This is my contribution to the survival      of the online community."N ==============================================================================   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 08:37:03 +0100  From: Roy Omond <Roy@Omond.net>w> Subject: Re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ?) Message-ID: <3B987920.CC3E3A49@Omond.net>a  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote:  N > That was smarter than what I tried.  I tried writing to Jim.McDonnell@hp.com7 > and to James.McDonnell@hp.com, both of which bounced.    Alan,v  G please note that HP (stupidly, IMHO) have e-mail addresses of the form:S       firstname_lastname@hp.comn  # Note, underscore instead of period.-  	 Roy Omond- Blue Bubble Ltd.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 12:00:18 +0100 / From: Nigel Arnot <sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>h> Subject: re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ?7 Message-ID: <00A01B1D.20AD8222.18@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>-  G For what it's worth, HP has now re-iterated Compaq's commitment to VMS.sB See www.theinquirer.net/07090102.htm (penultimate paragraph). It'sJ unrealistic to expect anything much more than this in the immediate future
 (few weeks). E  H Things may then get worse, or they may get better. HP are a company withF experience of enterprise computing (unlike Compaq), so I feel there's H more hope that they'll be supportive. After all, MPE is still supported,. and that's surely more of a dinosaur than VMS.  H If I'm wrong, it'll probably be because VMS gets used as a pawn in some D fight to the death in the merged company's executive suites, rather 2 than anything with any rational thought behind it.  J I hope that the big-money VMS users out there will try hard to contact theE new HP managers with VMS responsibility just as soon as HP works out  N who they are, to make your feelings clear. With a bit of luck, HP'ers rememberG that while Digital was trying to migrate VMS users, HP picked up a faircG number of them for HPUX, as did Sun and IBM, so they'll understand thatAE if HP now kills VMS there will be many defections to Sun and IBM and e= major resentment against HP to overcome. They'd probably loses5 75% of the VMS customer base to the Unix competition.i  G And at least as far as this writer is concerned: how you treat VMS willtJ do a lot to sway my feelings with respect to HP PCs and printers, far more5 than any amount of expensive glossy advertizing can.     	Yours,:
 		Nigel Arnoti- 		NRA@MAXWELL.PH.KCL.AC.UK                   e  7 		"In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."0 > L > In another thread, I suggested that our wonderful VMS engineers are going G > through what I went through -- writing code that would never come to o& > fruition.  It was hell knowing that. > 3 > My sympathies to Fred, Hoff, Andy, amonst others.n > K > Needless to say, let's hope that some of the big vendees will (can) have o > something to say.i > K > I'm too small to have any influence on someone who earns $3.7 million US.n >  > Regards, Paddy >  >    ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 06:55:48 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)w> Subject: re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ?3 Message-ID: <pv3$DBezFJ$V@eisner.encompasserve.org>   i In article <00A01B1D.20AD8222.18@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>, Nigel Arnot <sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk> writes:eI > For what it's worth, HP has now re-iterated Compaq's commitment to VMS.wD > See www.theinquirer.net/07090102.htm (penultimate paragraph). It'sL > unrealistic to expect anything much more than this in the immediate future > (few weeks).     The line about:i  4 	"HP-UX would be extended to support Alpha systems."  @ might be a re-badging of Tru64, or it might be running the Alpha? in big-endian mode.  Trying to force little-endian customers to. big-endian would be a mistake.   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 08:57:13 -0500<- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)i> Subject: Re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ?3 Message-ID: <Gx44LuerAG3P@eisner.encompasserve.org>2  \ In article <3B97E88E.C7E75E04@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:  > > a proper downsizing of VMS while retaining the VMS customers > on a different platform ?O  <    Even IBM doesn't market well enough to pull that one off.   ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 10:00:48 -0500w- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)t> Subject: re: VMS To Be Squeezed Out Of HP's Strategic Vision ?3 Message-ID: <tAjGKH9jp782@eisner.encompasserve.org>   i In article <00A01B1D.20AD8222.18@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>, Nigel Arnot <sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk> writes:lI > For what it's worth, HP has now re-iterated Compaq's commitment to VMS.5@ > See www.theinquirer.net/07090102.htm (penultimate paragraph).   L    And to port HP-UX to Alpha (surprize).  Does HP see a need for something G    to fill the gap between HP-PARC and IA-64?  Will Alpha get marketed?n   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 04:42:42 GMTe* From: cjt & trefoil <cheljuba@prodigy.net>- Subject: Re: WSJ reporting HP will buy Compaqn+ Message-ID: <3B945C02.A28C2B99@prodigy.net>o  # So will it now be "Terry Knows HP?"h   Dan O'Reilly wrote:" > 7 > OK, Terry and/or Sue - what does it all mean...??????v > + > At 10:17 PM 9/3/2001, Jeff Killeen wrote:a > >More details... > >o4 > >http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7046410.html >  > ------K > +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+nK > | Dan O'Reilly                  |                                       |iK > | Principal Engineer            |  "Why should I care about posterity?  |tK > | Process Software              |   What's posterity ever done for me?" |mK > | http://www.process.com        |                    -- Groucho Marx    |oK > +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+    ------------------------------   Date: 7 Sep 2001 17:07:21 +0200-* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)3 Subject: [AMDS V7.3A] Problem on OpenVMS VAX V7.3 ?:* Message-ID: <3b98e2a9$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  G I installed AMDS V7.3 a couple of months ago on my OpenVMS VAX V7.2 andt: OpenVMS Alpha V7.2-1 systems. All was working as expected.  E But after upgrading OpenVMS VAX to V7.3, every AMDS Console could notiJ connect to the AMDS Collector (RMDRIVER) on this system. The error message on the console ist  L %AMDS-W-BADPARAM, bad parameter for program RMCONFIG request for node ....../ %TRACE-W-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows)L module name     routine name                     line       rel PC    abs PC  M COMM_UTILITY    AMDS$CheckIosbStatus            65934      000003D1  000538F9 M COMM_UTILITY    ConfigDone                      66413      0000008E  00053E92eM ECL_ROUTINES    ecl$send                        62953      0000015D  00058EB5 M COMM_UTILITY    greetings                       67220      000003A4  00054790sM DECAMDS         rcv_from_comm                   63058      00000196  000511D60M DECAMDS         AMDS$check_message              62917      00000010  00051020iM                                                            001B095C  001B095CrM                                                            001B0C2B  001B0C2BgM                                                            001AFFC5  001AFFC5cM                                                            001AFFA1  001AFFA1rM DECAMDS         main                            62292      000008CC  00050644,    J So, I thought I need to reinstall AMDS because of a change in kernel (haveD been seen by me with AMDS on Alpha but so far not on VAX). Bad luck.C AMDS on OpenVMS Alpha V7.3 does run, but on VAX still the BADPARAM.s   Am I alone ?   -- r< Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888e< <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.498 ************************