1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 17 Jun 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 333       Contents:0 Asia =?Big5?B?s8ymbqq6uvSkV6aopEilzqt+sU295qmx?=$ GOGOMEME =?Big5?B?qcqlzqt+uvSkV6mx?=0 I can see it now - Slowaris poisons food supply!+ Re: Looking for Unix commands to do VMS DCL * One of Terry's shoes seems to have dropped. Re: One of Terry's shoes seems to have dropped. Re: One of Terry's shoes seems to have dropped Re: SET WATCH question Re: SET WATCH question Re: SET WATCH question Re: SET WATCH question Re: SET WATCH question Re: SET WATCH question& Re: tpc/ip file server for VMS systems1 US FDA ponders Slowaris over VMS ... what morons! 5 Re: US FDA ponders Slowaris over VMS ... what morons! 5 Re: US FDA ponders Slowaris over VMS ... what morons! ( What kind of morons work at the FDA now?, Re: What kind of morons work at the FDA now?, Re: What kind of morons work at the FDA now?' Re: Why is Compaq memory so expensive ? * Re: Why is TCPIP$ROUTE.DAT in SYS$COMMON ?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 07:45:56 +0800  From: "fork" <fork@yahoo.corn>9 Subject: Asia =?Big5?B?s8ymbqq6uvSkV6aopEilzqt+sU295qmx?= / Message-ID: <aejc2v$qa0$19004@news.ctimail.com>   + http://www.ilookasia.com/sextoy/default.asp    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:50:03 +0800  From: "fork" <fork@yahoo.corn>- Subject: GOGOMEME =?Big5?B?qcqlzqt+uvSkV6mx?= / Message-ID: <aejjt7$qa0$49395@news.ctimail.com>   , http://www.gogomeme.com/adulttoy/default.asp   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jun 2002 19:57:01 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)9 Subject: I can see it now - Slowaris poisons food supply! = Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0206161856.7f46d25d@posting.google.com>   3 And at your local pharmacy, you receive a pill from 0 your doctor, new on the market, for indigestion,. and after taking it, you start glowing purple!   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 14:45:41 -0400 1 From: Michael Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com> 4 Subject: Re: Looking for Unix commands to do VMS DCL2 Message-ID: <3D0CDCD5.D31A1042@firstdbasource.com>   Sue Skonetski wrote: >  > Fabio, > L > At the European Technical updates in April, Brad McCusker did a session on2 > COE and Unix portability.  You may want to visit. > http://www.openvms.compaq.com/tud/index.html >  > Warn Regards,  > Sue  > = > "Fabio Cardoso" <fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br> wrote in message < > news:20020612134914.18613.qmail@web20207.mail.yahoo.com... > > Check at > >  > > www.bosbc.com  > >  > >  > > Regards  > >  > > FC4 > > --- Arthur Cochrane <cochrane@encompasserve.org>
 > > wrote:5 > > >     I am a VMS system manager but to broaden my  > > > worth I want to learn 7 > > >     Linux/UNIX. I have installed Red Hat Linux on  > > > one of my PCs at home and 4 > > >     on an Alpha workstation at work, but I use > > > another Alpha with VMS2 > > >     installed for my real work of VMS system# > > > management. What I would like 9 > > >     is to define symbols that are Unix commands for  > > > VMS commands, i.e.: > > >     pwd:==show default. Also, maybe some programs to > > > do VMS things but with4 > > >     UNIX style commands. Grep for search as an  > > > example. I have VILE for a8 > > >     vi editor (just need to start using it, I love > > > TPU/EDT). If I could at : > > >     least start using UNIX syntax that would help in > > > some transition. I9 > > >     understand Unix and the file system but getting  > > > use to the commands is8 > > >     the next hurdle I think I need now. In DCL you > > > use SHOW so look at the 4 > > >     status of a lot of items, (show user, show  > > > system, show network, show2 > > >     default, etc.) but in Unix each of these# > > > commands is a different verb. 7 > > >     The same with SET, (set process, set default,  > > > file, etc.) To save me7 > > >     some work is there a good resource that would  > > > have a command file I 8 > > >     could copy to my login.com to set up some good > > > symbols? Are there some 9 > > >     command procedures to emulate some of the basic  > > > Unix commands? Best 9 > > >     programs to do Unix commands on VMS? This way I  > > > can do my work on VMS : > > >     but learn Unix commands also. Thanks in advance. > > >  > > >     Arthur Cochrane  > > >  > > > @ > > stop_spamcochrane@stop_spamEisner.Encompasserve.orgstop_spam$ > > >     Remove all stop_spam above > >  > > 	 > > =====  > > ========================== > > Fbio dos Santos Cardoso > > OpenVMS System Manager > > Rio de Janeiro - Brazil  > > fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br > > ========================== > > 6 > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!?4 > > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup! > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com   > I had an Ultrix trainer (circa 1985) that had their entire VMSG environment set up with "unix" symbols and DCL procedures so they could D not tell which box they were on.  I wish now that I had obtained her$ login.com and dcl unix procedures.    H If you have a POSIX enviroment installed, this would accomplish the same thing.. (IIRC) --   Regards,  7 Michael Austin            Registered Linux User #261163 7 First DBA Source, Inc.    http://www.firstdbasource.com  Sr. Consultant 704-947-1089 (Office)  704-236-4377 (Mobile)    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:30:58 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>3 Subject: One of Terry's shoes seems to have dropped B Message-ID: <Ck8P8.276168$Gs.22594482@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  J (unless this was yet another shoe that Terry didn't happen to know about):  ' http://www.theinquirer.net/16060203.htm   F To summarize, it sounds as if the FDA is about to ditch the 40% of its> non-Intel servers that run VMS on Alpha.  For obvious reasons.  I And to forestall the wails from the faithful that VMS has a long, vibrant K life ahead of it, *it doesn't matter* whether that's true or not, because a H large portion of the world is simply not going to believe HP's (formerlyJ Q's) statements about the future because of their past record of egregiousL lies and shattered unequivocal commitments in this area.  And while the goodK folks in the VMS group may be tempted to offer reassurances, they certainly L didn't offer any useful insights into Alpha's future prior to last June 25thJ and hence aren't particularly credible in such matters (though very likelyH honest in their opinions, unlike those who are actually in a position to make such decisions).    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:05:55 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> 7 Subject: Re: One of Terry's shoes seems to have dropped , Message-ID: <3D0D43FF.A363C151@videotron.ca>   Bill Todd wrote:) > http://www.theinquirer.net/16060203.htm  > H > To summarize, it sounds as if the FDA is about to ditch the 40% of its@ > non-Intel servers that run VMS on Alpha.  For obvious reasons.  K I think that the story is a bit sensationalistic. If they have 40% of their N computing done on VMS, then they can't just "dump" it like that. If the writerJ said something akin to the FDA having decided to stop buying VMS boxes andC gradually move to a new platform, it would have been more credible.   N I think that the major story is that there are Digits inside of HP who are notI happy with the way HP is handling VMS and ready to leak that information.    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jun 2002 19:53:36 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)7 Subject: Re: One of Terry's shoes seems to have dropped = Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0206161853.5230a174@posting.google.com>   t "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<Ck8P8.276168$Gs.22594482@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...L > (unless this was yet another shoe that Terry didn't happen to know about): > ) > http://www.theinquirer.net/16060203.htm  > H > To summarize, it sounds as if the FDA is about to ditch the 40% of its@ > non-Intel servers that run VMS on Alpha.  For obvious reasons. >  > - bill  % Slowaris, a database OS?  Since when?   @ With EV7's coming out, this will not suffice a measley two years@ while they see what happens to itanium?  Try sufficing more like
 5-7 years ...   < and the kicker, run Hammers?  The chip just out that now has> announced delays and being now said as overrated?  This sounds? like Itanium One!  And this guarantees Hammer will be a success > and itanium will not?  I guess those dummed down students that> started coming out of the eighties are now making their way up" into FDA management.  God help us!   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:38:27 +0200 - From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr>  Subject: Re: SET WATCH question ' Message-ID: <3D0CE933.3381BB5B@Free.fr>    JF Mezei wrote:  > L > In a SET WATCH FILE/CLASS=ALL question, when I see a "Deaccess", does this > mean $CLOSE ?    To me, yes. N If the file was not opened for any reason, you get no deaccess and you get the1 reason in the status field (910 = not found, etc)    T > Also, when it requests access to a file, there is an Access=xxxx and Status=xxxxxx2 > Does the Access= equate to the FAB$L_FOB field ?   Dunno. Hein?   P > I traced what ALL-IN-1 does on a dataset when it opens it. It seems to open itP > READ only until you need to write to it, at which point it seems to re-open itM > READ-WRITE (based on a SET ACL ALARM=SECURITY on the indexed file), but the ' > Access=xxxxx seems not to match that. J > (First access is a value of 1 which seems to be PUT, when A1 seems to be > opening it as GET)M > Also, can one confirm that an ALARM=SECURITY ACE is triggered only when the  > file is opened ?  M You can trigger read, write, execute, delete and control with a security ACE. O When a file is deleted, it is its entry in the directory file which is altered, M the file itself is not accessed. Only its header in the INDEXF.SYS file (from  top of my head).    E > (is there one that could be added to get the arms when it closes ?)   # I don't know any easy way to do so.   O Now, back to TV. French deputy elections: 400 seats for the Right Wing, 177 for \ the left one (socialists, communists, ecologists, and other ists), none for the Ultra-Right.   D. --  2   ------------------------------------------------2 MORANDI Consultants  http://Didier.Morandi.Free.fr0   19 chemin de la Butte, 31400 Toulouse, France.2 Tel.: +33 (0)6 7983 6418 - Fax: +33 (0)5 6154 19282 OpenVMS, APPLE, Computer Security, Migration plans2 --------------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 16:15:00 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: SET WATCH question , Message-ID: <3D0CF1C3.BB548F9D@videotron.ca>   Didier Morandi wrote: Q > Now, back to TV. French deputy elections: 400 seats for the Right Wing, 177 for ^ > the left one (socialists, communists, ecologists, and other ists), none for the Ultra-Right.  F Shouldn't Jean-Marie have gotten at least one seat to make things more8 interesting ? Aren't politicians there to entertain us ?   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:43:04 GMT + From: Ryan Moore <rmoore@rmoore.dyndns.org>  Subject: Re: SET WATCH question = Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0206161430440.19806-100000@jaipur>   $ On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, JF Mezei wrote:L > In a SET WATCH FILE/CLASS=ALL question, when I see a "Deaccess", does this > mean $CLOSE ?  > T > Also, when it requests access to a file, there is an Access=xxxx and Status=xxxxxx > 2 > Does the Access= equate to the FAB$L_FOB field ?  H My understanding is that SET WATCH is looking at XQP operations.  XQP isE the layer below RMS.  An RMS open is probably doing an XQP IO$_ACCESS H operation.  I'm guess the "Access=" field has to do with the FIB$L_ACCTLI field in the IO$_ACCESS call.  Look at the I/O Users Reference, chapter 1 ) for information in the ACP-QIO interface.   P > I traced what ALL-IN-1 does on a dataset when it opens it. It seems to open itP > READ only until you need to write to it, at which point it seems to re-open itM > READ-WRITE (based on a SET ACL ALARM=SECURITY on the indexed file), but the & > Access=xxxxx seems not to match that > J > (First access is a value of 1 which seems to be PUT, when A1 seems to be > opening it as GET) > M > Also, can one confirm that an ALARM=SECURITY ACE is triggered only when the L > file is opened ? (is there one that could be added to get the arms when it > closes ?)   G According to the System Security guide, it looks like you can put audit H and alarm ACLs for both Access and Deaccess operations.  Chapter 9 talks about that.    RTFM  :)   -Ryan    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jun 2002 18:06:18 -0700" From: cstranslations@msn.com (Joe) Subject: Re: SET WATCH question = Message-ID: <d56d1c2d.0206161706.266871de@posting.google.com>   a JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3D0CB8BA.D536ADD6@videotron.ca>... L > In a SET WATCH FILE/CLASS=ALL question, when I see a "Deaccess", does this > mean $CLOSE ?  > T > Also, when it requests access to a file, there is an Access=xxxx and Status=xxxxxx  C In the output there are references to XQP. With out looking through E the listings my guess would be $QIO with function codes of IO$_ACCESS  and IO$_DEACCESS.    Joe    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:16:36 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: SET WATCH question , Message-ID: <3D0D3874.E9A282C8@videotron.ca>   Ryan Moore wrote: I > According to the System Security guide, it looks like you can put audit J > and alarm ACLs for both Access and Deaccess operations.  Chapter 9 talks
 > about that.  > 
 > RTFM  :)    K Thanks. The help inside of EDIT/ACL is broken. I was able to get a bit more K information out of HELP/LIBRARY=ACLEDT which seems to be the source for the I help inside of EDIT/ACL, but I couldn't find a list of types of accesses.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 07:38:31 +0200 - From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr>  Subject: Re: SET WATCH question ' Message-ID: <3D0D75D7.3538B130@Free.fr>    JF Mezei wrote:  >  > Didier Morandi wrote: S > > Now, back to TV. French deputy elections: 400 seats for the Right Wing, 177 for ` > > the left one (socialists, communists, ecologists, and other ists), none for the Ultra-Right. > H > Shouldn't Jean-Marie have gotten at least one seat to make things more: > interesting ? Aren't politicians there to entertain us ?  # this space intentionally left blank    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 14:41:03 -0400 1 From: Michael Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com> / Subject: Re: tpc/ip file server for VMS systems 2 Message-ID: <3D0CDBBF.28B2B47D@firstdbasource.com>  	 rf wrote:  > N > The primary goal is to provide a substantial increase in online file storageL > while keeping  costs (hdwr and license) as low as possible.  DEC equipmentM > is pricy! whereas an Intel/AMD system running BSD is not.  The tradeoff may M > be in lowered performance via ethernet vs. direct SCSI access.  A secondary L > goal is an alternative file backup system.  'Print services' is just icing > but could improve things.  > L > Please don't let this digress (as so often happens) to a discussion of oneJ > OS being better than another.  I have been a VMS fan (read bigot) for 16F > years but I'm willing keep my options open and do what is necessary. > ( > As noted earlier, here are some specs:J > IP package info: "DEC TCP/IP Services for OpenVMS AXP Version V4.0 - ECO4 > Level 5 on a DEC 3000 - M700 running OpenVMS V6.2" > I > What is needed is some help in understanding how to approach this. Alan N > Winston has suggested NFS (thanks) and I think that FTP might be a fall-back	 > option.   G Depending on how your files are created on the VMS side, there could be C some conversion issues such that they are people-readable from both G platforms (type, cat, more etc...) and how CR/LF will be interpreted by F each.  I recently assisted in setting up a Multinet->SunOS NFS and had@ to add a convert statement when the files were copied from theirB original locatation to this "work" location due to the files beingB created fixed-record by a COBOL program.  When they would 'cat' orG 'more' the file on the SunOS box, all of the lines would run together. n ABCd ACCl would become	 ABCACC...c  7 Instead of copying the file to this directory I used a d? convert a.a [newdir]a.a/fdl=variable-rec.fdl  to accomplish thefD "translation".  Now all is well and the files can be read (human andE system/program) on each system.  The hardest part is trying to set up E the security for this - especially when you have many-to-many UID/GIDs users.   -- p Regards,  7 Michael Austin            Registered Linux User #261163i7 First DBA Source, Inc.    http://www.firstdbasource.com  Sr. Consultant 704-947-1089 (Office)f 704-236-4377 (Mobile)    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jun 2002 18:06:07 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski): Subject: US FDA ponders Slowaris over VMS ... what morons!= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0206161706.361c00cd@posting.google.com>-  ? Why in earth would you ever dump VMS with EV7 coming out and gom? to a Cert Bug filled, slow unix garbage os like slowaris, whicha> may soon follow the way of tru64 ... and our govt. is spending? 10's of thousands of dollars on Gartner ... what double morons!-= Fools, imbiciles, idiots ... thank goodness the defense dept. = isn't as stupid ... EV7 VMS will outrun slowaris for years toq? come ... waste more of our money running 80,000 chip boxes that = will IO wise scale nowhere close to EV7 ... if this moron CIO-@ does this, we will all have to watch what we eat from now on ...; Slowaris will poison the food supply ... not to mention thel; pharmaceutical industry ... they talk about wanting to save6@ money, and instead of plopping in those EV7's, they are going to= port to a slow, unsecure, expensive os like slowaris, anothere= brainstorm ... this CIO idiot should be fired for number one,-D wasting our tax money on the Gartner group and their biased reports!0 Call your congressman and senators immediately!     D US Food and Drug Administration loses confidence in Hewlett-Packard, Intel0  8 Itanium "unproven", Tru64 dead, VMS future questionable & By Mike Magee, 16/06/2002 17:44:23 BST    E CONFIDENTIAL US GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS SEEN BY THE INQUIRER reveal thatuF the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) mega-department is engaged on a@ massive re-evaluation of its server platforms and is considering@ dumping VMS systems it has, while it also appears to think Intel? 64-bit plans are unproved, after taking advice from a number of % analysts including the Gartner Group. C Over 40 per cent of its big tin currently runs on Alpha-VMS combos.   E The 50 page report, prepared by Anteon Corporation and shown to us byeC a disgruntled European "Compaq", now HP, executive in London at the D end of last week, shows that the FDA was originally choosing between1 four different operating systems for its big tin.   C The FDA report is relying heavily on advice from the Gartner Group,dC which published information earlier this year which appeared to say E there was no future for VMS on Itanium. The executive told us that hepC considered that as it spent tens of thousands of dollars on Gartnerd@ reports during 2002, this was all a little too ironic for him to absorb at once.s  D Other firms that the FDA's analysts appear to have relied on include1 the Meta Group, the Aberdeen Group, and DH Brown.n  C The four OSes that were under evaluation were Sun's Solaris, Linux,eC IBM AIX and Compaq's "Tru64" but the last looks like it's the leastlE likely to score any future wins, while the report also doubts whether D Intel's plans to migrate VMS on Itanium  its IPF strategy  has got much going for it.  D Over 40 per cent of FDA non-Intel servers use Alpha machines runningF VMS, but the report appears to believe Gartner over Compaq/HP, forcing6 the huge government department to re-think everything.  F A Gartner report, which the FDA document quotes, said that running VMS@ on an Itanium chip was a matter of a round peg in a square hole.E Interesting. The metaphor works better the other way round. Compaq/HP D denies there's any kind of problem with this future implementation - backed by Intel.  B Sun is likely to win FDA business  because notes we took from the< extensive presentation show that while Linux is reliable andB economical, it is not considered as a suitable enterprise databaseB server operating system for such a big US government organisation.  D Because Tru64 Unix was decked by HP/Compaq, the FDA is being advisedE that it cannot be considered as any kind of standard for this kind of.A body, the report said. Sun tin and Solaris are cheaper than IBM's_ answers too, it suggests._  C So Sun's Solaris appears to be the answer which the FDA is activelyCD interested in implementing when next it spends big money on big tin.  F The report  damning for both the current bosses at HPQ and at Intel @ says that while Itaniums may reduce the cost of computing, it isF "still unproven" and may not "flourish" for at least one to two years.  E The FDA is even considering using AMD Hammer processors, according toh the documents we saw.   F The INQUIRER will have a full report, with the likely implications, in! the next issue of our magazine. w  C * THE FDA Web site shows that the US president wants its budget for-1 2003 to be $1.726 billion. Here's the break down.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:54:15 +0000.2 From: John Eisenschmidt <jweisen@eisenschmidt.org>> Subject: Re: US FDA ponders Slowaris over VMS ... what morons!4 Message-ID: <20020617015415.C19159@eisenschmidt.org>  J Well, let's face it: HP hasn't given anyone reason to have faith, and I t= hink samJ ying "Solaris going the way of Tru64" is inaccurate at best. Some people = want tohJ  look 5 to 10 years ahead, and while VMS has a roadmap, who's to say what=  will ht appen with Itanium?o  J The members of Congress (the Senate and the House) have no control over h= ow an a J gency spends its money if it's budgeted. They really only have control ov= er unbua5 dgeted appropriations. The rest is controlled by OMB.f  J If you want to vent your anger, go after government agencies who use noth= ing butdJ  Windows. When you run out of those, go after HP and Intel for the vapor = that ist	  Itanium.u  I Unless the Voices are Mistaken, Bob Ceculski (bob@instantwhip.com) Wrote:pA > Why in earth would you ever dump VMS with EV7 coming out and go A > to a Cert Bug filled, slow unix garbage os like slowaris, whiche@ > may soon follow the way of tru64 ... and our govt. is spendingA > 10's of thousands of dollars on Gartner ... what double morons!m? > Fools, imbiciles, idiots ... thank goodness the defense dept.v? > isn't as stupid ... EV7 VMS will outrun slowaris for years toTA > come ... waste more of our money running 80,000 chip boxes thatm? > will IO wise scale nowhere close to EV7 ... if this moron CIO B > does this, we will all have to watch what we eat from now on ...= > Slowaris will poison the food supply ... not to mention the4= > pharmaceutical industry ... they talk about wanting to save"B > money, and instead of plopping in those EV7's, they are going to? > port to a slow, unsecure, expensive os like slowaris, anothert? > brainstorm ... this CIO idiot should be fired for number one,rF > wasting our tax money on the Gartner group and their biased reports!4 > Call your congressman and senators immediately!=20 >=20 >=20F > US Food and Drug Administration loses confidence in Hewlett-Packard, > Inteln >=20< > Itanium "unproven", Tru64 dead, VMS future questionable=20( > By Mike Magee, 16/06/2002 17:44:23 BST >=20 >=20G > CONFIDENTIAL US GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS SEEN BY THE INQUIRER reveal that H > the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) mega-department is engaged on aB > massive re-evaluation of its server platforms and is consideringB > dumping VMS systems it has, while it also appears to think IntelA > 64-bit plans are unproved, after taking advice from a number of ' > analysts including the Gartner Group. E > Over 40 per cent of its big tin currently runs on Alpha-VMS combos.h >=20G > The 50 page report, prepared by Anteon Corporation and shown to us by E > a disgruntled European "Compaq", now HP, executive in London at the.F > end of last week, shows that the FDA was originally choosing between3 > four different operating systems for its big tin.o >=20E > The FDA report is relying heavily on advice from the Gartner Group,tE > which published information earlier this year which appeared to saygG > there was no future for VMS on Itanium. The executive told us that heoE > considered that as it spent tens of thousands of dollars on Gartner2B > reports during 2002, this was all a little too ironic for him to > absorb at once.q >=20F > Other firms that the FDA's analysts appear to have relied on include3 > the Meta Group, the Aberdeen Group, and DH Brown." >=20E > The four OSes that were under evaluation were Sun's Solaris, Linux,pE > IBM AIX and Compaq's "Tru64" but the last looks like it's the least G > likely to score any future wins, while the report also doubts whether J > Intel's plans to migrate VMS on Itanium =96 its IPF strategy =96 has go= t  > much going for it. >=20F > Over 40 per cent of FDA non-Intel servers use Alpha machines runningH > VMS, but the report appears to believe Gartner over Compaq/HP, forcing8 > the huge government department to re-think everything. >=20H > A Gartner report, which the FDA document quotes, said that running VMSB > on an Itanium chip was a matter of a round peg in a square hole.G > Interesting. The metaphor works better the other way round. Compaq/HP F > denies there's any kind of problem with this future implementation - > backed by Intel. >=20F > Sun is likely to win FDA business =96 because notes we took from the> > extensive presentation show that while Linux is reliable andD > economical, it is not considered as a suitable enterprise databaseD > server operating system for such a big US government organisation. >=20F > Because Tru64 Unix was decked by HP/Compaq, the FDA is being advisedG > that it cannot be considered as any kind of standard for this kind ofgC > body, the report said. Sun tin and Solaris are cheaper than IBM'se > answers too, it suggests.i >=20E > So Sun's Solaris appears to be the answer which the FDA is actively F > interested in implementing when next it spends big money on big tin. >=20J > The report =96 damning for both the current bosses at HPQ and at Intel = =96EB > says that while Itaniums may reduce the cost of computing, it isH > "still unproven" and may not "flourish" for at least one to two years. >=20G > The FDA is even considering using AMD Hammer processors, according to: > the documents we saw.  >=20H > The INQUIRER will have a full report, with the likely implications, in% > the next issue of our magazine. =B5  >=20E > * THE FDA Web site shows that the US president wants its budget forc3 > 2003 to be $1.726 billion. Here's the break down.    --=20'/ John W. Eisenschmidt <jweisen@eisenschmidt.org>e6  Homepage URL    | http://www.eisenschmidt.org/jweisenJ  PGP Public Key  | http://www.eisenschmidt.org/jweisen/misc/jeisenschmidt= asc0D  PGP Fingerprint | 5F9B F916 5AD1 3295 CF99 BC1E 1F97 E6A3 37E3 BEF2  J FOO MANE PADME HUM: "Our first obligation is to keep the FOO counters tur= ning."   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:33:23 -0400n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>L> Subject: Re: US FDA ponders Slowaris over VMS ... what morons!, Message-ID: <3D0D4A6E.9AC14E22@videotron.ca>   Bob Ceculski wrote:eA > Why in earth would you ever dump VMS with EV7 coming out and go A > to a Cert Bug filled, slow unix garbage os like slowaris, whicho" > may soon follow the way of tru64  	 lets see:u 	-more defined platform future3 	-no second guessing of Sun's commitment to Solaris 8 	-if you're forced to plan a migration with VMS to IA64,/ 	-tons more applications on Solaris than on VMS @ 	-other systems getting closer to VMS's clustering capabilities.  A > 10's of thousands of dollars on Gartner ... what double morons! ? > Fools, imbiciles, idiots ... thank goodness the defense dept.e > isn't as stupid ...   L What makes you think that the defense department will not eventually come toJ the same conclusion ? VMS may be resilient, but if HP keeps on testing its$ limits, it will eventually flounder.  * >EV7 VMS will outrun slowaris for years to
 > come ...  L Not much good if the software you need is no longer support on VMS. Not muchL good if the software you are using isn't being ported to IA64.  Consider theN White House's use of VMS for email. Since ALL-IN-1 isn't being ported to IA64,< then it is a given that the white house will be dumping VMS.  = > pharmaceutical industry ... they talk about wanting to savecB > money, and instead of plopping in those EV7's, they are going to7 > port to a slow, unsecure, expensive os like slowaris,t  N "plopping in those EV7" is not the case. Existing Alphas cannot be upgraded toI EV7. The multi million dollar investments in those big fancy Wildfires isSJ worth nil and you need to buy a brand new box to upgrade to EV7. So if youM need to buy brand new mainframes, you might as well look at all your options,nJ especially when you know that EV7 is a dead end and you'll need to migrate after that.O  K I would think that existing Wildfire customers would be more likely to just2L keep on adding EV6x CPUs to make their wildfire last a few more years beforeJ their migration plans are fully decided. I am not so sure that EV7 will do that well.    F > wasting our tax money on the Gartner group and their biased reports!1 > Call your congressman and senators immediately!r  K gartner may be biased, but it is still respected. That is what counts. TheyiN logic for stating VMS won't be ported to Itanium is totally flawed. But if youM agree with their conclusion (for different reasons), then you can use GartnerC to help support your decision.   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jun 2002 19:44:40 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)1 Subject: What kind of morons work at the FDA now?W< Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0206161844.2397fd8@posting.google.com>  B Sun is likely to win FDA business  because notes we took from the< extensive presentation show that while Linux is reliable andB economical, it is not considered as a suitable enterprise databaseB server operating system for such a big US government organisation.  < Slowaris is a suitable database OS ... when did this happen?  F The report  damning for both the current bosses at HPQ and at Intel @ says that while Itaniums may reduce the cost of computing, it isF "still unproven" and may not "flourish" for at least one to two years.  D well, dummies, their is something coming out there called EV7, which byE early estimates will blow the socks off of sparc, hammer, jammer, ands= any other inferior 64 bit platform out there ... am I missings	 somethingdD here?  EV7 is just out now, with EV79 upgrades the next year or two, andAC if my second grade math is correct, 1 plus 1 is two, so EV7-79 willf notcF due them for a few years while they wait to see the outcome of itanium> before wasting tax payers dollars moving onto a slow, unsecure platformB like Slowaris?  EV7 would due them the next five years easily.  No wonder4 the govt. is going broke!  Morons!  Absolute idiots!  E The FDA is even considering using AMD Hammer processors, according tom the documents we saw.h  F Now that definitely proves who we are dealing here with ... Hammer has justD had announced delays, and early tests showed it is an overated chip, andDD hammer is more proven than Itanium?  Boy is stupidity showing itselfB in the FDA!  Morons, imbiciles, idiots!  And these people make six figure incomes?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 03:18:41 +0000u2 From: John Eisenschmidt <jweisen@eisenschmidt.org>5 Subject: Re: What kind of morons work at the FDA now?a4 Message-ID: <20020617031841.A25436@eisenschmidt.org>  I Unless the Voices are Mistaken, Bob Ceculski (bob@instantwhip.com) Wrote:aF > Sun is likely to win FDA business =96 because notes we took from the> > extensive presentation show that while Linux is reliable andD > economical, it is not considered as a suitable enterprise databaseD > server operating system for such a big US government organisation.  J Much nicer than I would have put it, but yeah Linux isn't ready for prime=   time, or day time, or mornings.  > > Slowaris is a suitable database OS ... when did this happen?  J Well, Larry Ellison and the gang at Oracle think it is. Good enough for m= e.  J > The report =96 damning for both the current bosses at HPQ and at Intel = =96uB > says that while Itaniums may reduce the cost of computing, it isH > "still unproven" and may not "flourish" for at least one to two years.   Sounds about right.e  F > well, dummies, their is something coming out there called EV7, which  J Which my boss has not authorized me to buy. Compaq decreed "Alpha is dead=J ", and every pointy haired boss has head the cry. I'm discouraged from bu=J ying any new Alpha hardware. Why don't you take the job as the CIO of a l=J arge corporation or two and then you can decide to ignore those decisions.  J > by early estimates will blow the socks off of sparc, hammer, jammer, an= dw? > any other inferior 64 bit platform out there ... am I missingiJ > something here?  EV7 is just out now, with EV79 upgrades the next year = or two,iI > and if my second grade math is correct, 1 plus 1 is two, so EV7-79 will J > not due them for a few years while they wait to see the outcome of itan= iumi@ > before wasting tax payers dollars moving onto a slow, unsecureJ > platform like Slowaris?  EV7 would due them the next five years easily.=   No= > wonder the govt. is going broke!  Morons!  Absolute idiots!o  J You know, raw processing power only goes so far. Frankly, as a DBA, I'm a=J lways looking for faster IO potential, I'm fine with current CPU speeds -=  including the Ultra Sparc III.s  G > The FDA is even considering using AMD Hammer processors, according to  > the documents we saw.t >=20H > Now that definitely proves who we are dealing here with ... Hammer hasJ > just had announced delays, and early tests showed it is an overated chi= p,J > and hammer is more proven than Itanium?  Boy is stupidity showing itsel= fMD > in the FDA!  Morons, imbiciles, idiots!  And these people make six > figure incomes?I  J Delays are understandable. I'd rather here of a delay and wonder why then==  suffer through the Itanium timetables we have for years now.n  J Most of these people don't make six figure. Consult the GS pay schedule a=J t http://www.opm.gov . You'll find that last year was the first year a GS=9 15 Step 10 made over 100,000 (I think it was 101,000).=20   J It is your brand of inflamatory anti-FUD that does any movement no good. =J Spend your time doing constructive with your anger, or studying for the S= olaris certification.d   --=20 / John W. Eisenschmidt <jweisen@eisenschmidt.org>a6  Homepage URL    | http://www.eisenschmidt.org/jweisenJ  PGP Public Key  | http://www.eisenschmidt.org/jweisen/misc/jeisenschmidt= ascGD  PGP Fingerprint | 5F9B F916 5AD1 3295 CF99 BC1E 1F97 E6A3 37E3 BEF2  J FOO MANE PADME HUM: "Our first obligation is to keep the FOO counters tur= ning."   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 04:05:44 GMTu" From: bugs@pu.net (Mark Hittinger)5 Subject: Re: What kind of morons work at the FDA now?tB Message-ID: <sedP8.254466$%y.22252817@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  # Are there kickbacks for buying VMS?   	 Later :-)    Mark Hittinger bugs@pu.net    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:09:56 GMTi From: system@SendSpamHere.ORGc0 Subject: Re: Why is Compaq memory so expensive ?0 Message-ID: <00A0F8F1.DDD49B5D@SendSpamHere.ORG>  [ In article <3D0CBFCE.E7EE95DA@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:s >system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:t >> rm >> In article <yrQO8.292$6a.137@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii5@ACM5.org> writes:." >> >system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> >I >> >> In article <ugmf9ibhrguaa9@news.supernews.com>, "Island (hpaq.net)"d% >> >> <dbturner@islandco.com> writes:e >> >>>Even bettert >> >>>L >> >>>Most Compaq memory IS Infineon memory with the compaq hologram sticker >> >>>added to it  >> >>>: >> >>>That is the big difference - a 19,200 Euro sticker ! >> >>o >> >>t4 >> >> Wow!  Holograms are that expensive to produce? >> >2 >> >No, just to sell, all that marketing and such. >> r7 >> Facetious sarcasm is so wasted in this newsgroup. :(  >e >Oh, I dunno...o > 7 >>   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"b >gE >You mean, you trade a cash cow for a few worthless (java?) beans and A >they end up lifting you into the clouds on a gigantic beanstalk?a   No.  Look up the reference.s --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMt            n5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" e   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 19:31:35 GMTa. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)3 Subject: Re: Why is TCPIP$ROUTE.DAT in SYS$COMMON ? 5 Message-ID: <rI5P8.262594$305.3746812@news.chello.at>n  G In article <3D0C786E.4070601@home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> writes: R >I noticed something very peculiar about the TCPIP routing database. I would have A >expected that it is in SYS$SPECIFIC, but instead the default is t$ >SYS$COMMON:[SYSEXE]TCPIP$ROUTE.DAT.  H I did more than once state that most directory defaults of TCPIP are not logical in my way of sense.   4 $ DEF/SYS/EXE	TCPIP$ROUTE	SYS$SYSTEM:TCPIP$ROUTE.DAT   and your problem is solved ;-)   -- o Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERe% Network and OpenVMS system specialistc E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atP A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm looking for (a) Network _and_ VMS Job(s)   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.333 ************************