1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 04 May 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 245       Contents:# RE: 6.2/7.3 Cluster - Advice Sought  A nighmare for Bill Gates 
 Re: AIM HACK? & Re: Anticipating the HP court decision Anyone using emacs/w3 browser?( Re: ASTs and privs. Was: $QIO and SYSPRV( Re: ASTs and privs. Was: $QIO and SYSPRV) Re: Capellas alienates HP dealers already 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix & Re: capture single keystroke from DCL?& Re: capture single keystroke from DCL?& Re: capture single keystroke from DCL?& Re: capture single keystroke from DCL? Re: Compaq and HP stock prices Re: Compaq and HP stock prices4 Re: creat function hanging -- Code snippet provided!8 Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix8 Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix8 Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix8 Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' UnixH Re: dBASE IV package/license for VMS VAX, product status?  Transferable?  Re: DCPS Help Required.......... Re: Deathbed confession? Re: Deathbed confession? Re: Deathbed confession? Re: Deathbed confession? Re: Deathbed confession? Re: Deathbed confession? Re: Deathbed confession?" Re: DECserver 100 and reverse LAT?" Re: DECserver 100 and reverse LAT?  Re: Fix for EDT emulation in EVE  Re: Fix for EDT emulation in EVE/ Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha! / Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha! / Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha! / Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha! / Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha!  Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles3 Re: MOZ T1: Could not initialize security component  Re: New to VAX Re: New to VAX Re: New to VAX Re: New to VAX Re: New to VAX Re: Positive news...A Re: Predictions, was: Re: Some more words of wisdom from Capellas  Re: Read it and weep Andrew!  Re: Reduce interupt time on CPU0  Re: Reduce interupt time on CPU09 Re: Reducing size of incremental backup - will this work?  Re: Revisionist history  RE: Revisionist history  Re: Revisionist history  RE: Revisionist history  Re: Revisionist history  Re: Revisionist history  Re: Revisionist history  Re: Revisionist history ' Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC ' Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC ' Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC ' Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC ' Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC ' Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC  SMTP Usage Filter... Re: SMTP Usage Filter... RE: SMTP Usage Filter... Re: SMTP Usage Filter...+ Re: Some more words of wisdom from Capellas $ Re: UK folks this might interest you* Re: UK/EU OpenVMS job market: non-existant Vax emulator for PC  Re: Vax emulator for PC  Re: Vax emulator for PC  Re: Vax emulator for PC  Re: Vax emulator for PC  Re: Vax emulator for PC % VAXstation 3520 (Firefox) mem upgrade ) Re: VAXstation 3520 (Firefox) mem upgrade * Re: VAXstation 4000 90 and serial console?% Re: virtual i/o cache v7.2-1 and v7.3 " Re: VMS 6.2 file ownership problem" Re: VMS, Bind and Active Directory4 Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?8 Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?8 RE: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?8 Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?8 RE: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?8 Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?8 RE: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform? Re: Wither ALL-IN-1 ? 
 Re: X session + ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS??? / Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS??? / Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS??? / Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS??? / Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS??? / Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS???   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:37:50 -0400  From: norm.raphael@jamesbury.com, Subject: RE: 6.2/7.3 Cluster - Advice Sought4 Message-ID: <C2256BAE.00655B9E.00@jklh22.valmet.com>  N I cannot find the note, but when I asked about V6.2 clustered with V7.3, I wasK told that they tried it and Volume Shadowing had a problem, so they decided L not to support that pair for migration.  The anecdotal evidence here is thatK absent Volume Shadowing things work, for what that's worth.  I have seen no + note saying it works with Volume Shadowing.         0 p_sture@elias.decus.ch on 05/03/2002 01:48:56 PM  ( Please respond to p_sture@elias.decus.ch   To:   Info-VAX@mvb.saic.com / cc:    (bcc: Norm Raphael/WOR/Automation/METSO) - Subject:  RE: 6.2/7.3 Cluster - Advice Sought       F In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIAEAOEOAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:F > Well, I guess I am just dumb and lucky because the following has run9 > for a number of years with the addtion of 7.3 last year I > View of Cluster from system ID 2055  node: FREJA             1-MAY-2002 
 > 06:05:07! > +-------------------+---------+ ! > |      SYSTEMS      | MEMBERS | ! > +--------+----------+---------+ ! > |  NODE  | SOFTWARE |  STATUS | ! > +--------+----------+---------+ ! > | FREJA  | VMS V7.3 | MEMBER  | ! > | ODIN   | VMS V7.1 | MEMBER  | ! > | HERMES | VMS V7.1 | MEMBER  | ! > | NORNS  | VMS V6.2 | MEMBER  | ! > +--------+----------+---------+  >   I Maybe lucky. The unsupported mixed versions I witnessed stretched back to E older versions. It is worth noting that when my problem occurred, CSC 6 simply turned around with a recommendation to upgrade.  H Of course, I imagine much depends on your configuration and what you are actually sharing (disks etc)   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 22:46:07 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> " Subject: A nighmare for Bill Gates, Message-ID: <3CD34B6A.EDC30AD8@videotron.ca>   <dream mode on> M Rooters - May 7th 2002. (Santa Clara).  Carly Fiorina, the victorious head of M the new HP finally unveiled today the product roadmap she has been working on  for the past year.  N HP, having now gained number 1 status in the computer industry [1] has decidedG to chart the course for the industry, a course full of high quality and K innovation. The newly acquired assets will allow HP to return to its former 9 self, innovating with high quality products and services.   M As a result of this strong power, HP has decided to screw Intel and Microsoft N whose products are nowhere near the desired HP quality levels and instead willI redevelop the Alpha chip and redeploy its high quality operating systems, + layered products and application software.    K The new HP product line will be consolidated around the Alpha chip from the M desktop to the supercomputer, which will support VMS, Tandem's NSK, Tru64 and F Linux. HP has decided that it was much more efficient to merge HP-UX'sG features into the richer environment of Tru64 than doing the previously  announced reverse.  B Not wanting to become a proprietary company, HP will licence theseN technologies with very easy terms to any other computer manufacter, as well as- allow other chip makers to FAB Alpha designs.   M With a strong leadership role, HP will be able to set industry standards that J will greatly increase productivity, eliminate the time current lost to fixI Microsoft software problems and viri, and also enhance competition by not 5 having a single OS that has such a high market share.     L [1] (that is what the montreal Subway information panels said today, i guess they forgot about IBM) </dream mode off>    ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 20:33:30 +0200 ) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)  Subject: Re: AIM HACK?) Message-ID: <CX8+xybukVch@elias.decus.ch>   s In article <9113a9f4.0205011817.32bc5b88@posting.google.com>, BaltimorePlayboy@yahoo.com (BaltimorePlayboy) writes: G > I looked up Doc Cypher and all I saw in ever newsgroup was "How can I ? > effectively suck a cock?" But dont worry Doc, you do it well.   7 Does your Mommy know you are playing with the computer?    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:43:50 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> / Subject: Re: Anticipating the HP court decision ; Message-ID: <GTAA8.65873$%s3.25600174@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>   4 "David Mathog" <mathog@caltech.edu> wrote in message% news:3CD2AB09.8CE0F6A8@caltech.edu...  > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:  > > J > > "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com> wrote in message" > > news:3cd1867d$1@news.si.com...L > > > >On the other hand, I didn't notice you (or Terry) commenting *before* the  > > > >result was known... > > > 8 > > > Yah.  That's because I didn't want to be wrong ;-) > > J > > Can't say as I blame you. After all, who'da thunk that HWP will become HPQ  > > on Monday next?  > 9 > The merger goes forward now no matter what.  It remains @ > to be seen if Carly remains the engineer on that train or endsC > up as a splattered (gold) bug on the windscreen.  Recall Pfeiffer < > didn't long remain at the helm of Compaq after it ate DEC. > A > Beyond the morass of the merger itself there are three more big $ > obstacles that might derail Carly: > F > 1. The affaire Deutsche bank is still under investigation by the SEC > and other legal beagles.  5 Good point. And one that has been largely overlooked.   C > 2.  The AMD hammer/clawhammer keep rolling along while HPQ clings  tenaciously to > the I > vaporous itanic.  My gut feeling is that Intel will not be able to keep  Mikey  > satisfied C > with a phantom chip and Dell will swallow hard and beging selling  > hammer/clawhammer L > machines.  Leaving HPQ with clearly second rate kit to sell.  A quarter or two  > ofK > that scenario should be enough to send both Carly and Curly out the door.   K One of the downsides of the June 25 announcement was to abandon a processor J architecture-agnostic approach to future system design. QuickBlade and itsE successors originally were designed to support Alpha, IA32, IA64, and D Hammer. If IA64 craters, HPQ has a serious "challenge" to deal with.   > K > 3.  Many (probably most) HP employees hate Carly now.  After she axes 25K  HPQ L > employees she'll probably have to walk the halls with enough bodyguards toD > do Saddam Hussein proud.  It's far from clear to me that a company seethingA > with that much animosity can be made to function no matter what  organizational# > structure the MBAs layer onto it.  >   H Yep. Ms. Fiorina probably isn't on many "Most Admired" lists these days.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 18:03:51 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> ' Subject: Anyone using emacs/w3 browser? 9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIIEHHEOAA.tom@kednos.com>   < I just installed Xemacs 21.4.6 on W2k Server. The browser is= written at Indiana Univ CS Dept, and at first glance it looks ( good.  The welcome page says,inter alia,  L "...Emacs/W3 is a full-featured web browser, written entirely in Emacs-Lisp, that supports all the bells E and whistles you will find in use on the web today, including frames,  tables, stylesheets, and much I more. Emacs/W3 runs on most major operating systems, including almost any  flavor of Unix, Windows ! NT/95, AmigaDOS, OS/2, and VMS. "   H Of course there must be some hyperbole because aside form the efforts of Roar the viking ; I am not aware of anything later than 19.28 running on VMS.   F As for browsers, maybe this should be looked instead of all the Mosaic
 deviants that  will never measure up.  " It says last updated Nov 14, 1999!         --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:02:46 GMT 0 From: prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com (Paul Winalski)1 Subject: Re: ASTs and privs. Was: $QIO and SYSPRV 9 Message-ID: <3cd2d0ef.1811331116@proxy.news.easynews.com>   E On 03 May 2002 12:36:38 +0800, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>  wrote:  0 >JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > D >> would work fine. The only hitch is that your AST may execute withG >> SYSPRV or without SYSPRV depending on if it executes before or after  >> the disabling of the sysprv.  > D >Does this mean AST code could run at elevated privelege if it fires5 >at the 'right time'? No, I don't mean elevated mode.   = I believe the answer to that is yes, because privileges are a F process-wide attribute and the AST runs in the context of its process.C If this is a problem for your application, then the AST should turn > off the elevated privilege if it's on and restore it before it returns.  
 ---------- Remove 'Z' to reply by email.    ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 19:49:00 -0400  From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com>1 Subject: Re: ASTs and privs. Was: $QIO and SYSPRV 6 Message-ID: <1020503191654.48130C-100000@Ives.egh.com>  ( On Fri, 3 May 2002, Paul Winalski wrote:  G > On 03 May 2002 12:36:38 +0800, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>  > wrote: > 2 > >JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > > F > >> would work fine. The only hitch is that your AST may execute withI > >> SYSPRV or without SYSPRV depending on if it executes before or after ! > >> the disabling of the sysprv.  > > F > >Does this mean AST code could run at elevated privelege if it fires7 > >at the 'right time'? No, I don't mean elevated mode.  > ? > I believe the answer to that is yes, because privileges are a H > process-wide attribute and the AST runs in the context of its process.E > If this is a problem for your application, then the AST should turn @ > off the elevated privilege if it's on and restore it before it
 > returns. >   C I wish we had a better problem description here.  I think what Mark ( is worried about is something like this:  ? Process creates a file with RMS ($CREATE) asynchronously.  This @ takes a lot of QIO's, all internal to RMS, as it drills down the? directory tree to the intended directory, reads the file header < of the directory to determine if the creator has appropriate? access rights to create the file there, checks for any existing @ version of the file to determine if there is an existing file of? the same name which is protected against replacement, before it  finally returns a result.   @ Does RMS implement this as a string of $QIO's (not $QIOW's) with7 an AST completion routine for each triggering the next?   > If so, what happens when the main line of the code temporarily; enables SYSPRV for some unrelated operation? (Remember, the 8 $CREATE was called with FAB$L_FOP with the ASY bit set.)  > Does RMS remember the privilege context from the time when the= $CREATE was invoked, or does it check privs as it goes along.   = E.G. suppose the process does not have read access to the 3rd ? directory in the path with its normal privileges, but does when G it has SYSPRV.  I.E. file to create is DKA200:[FOO.BAR.BASE.BALL]A.DAT, ; but the protection code of [FOO.BAR]BASE.DIR is (rwe,rwe,,) A The $CREATE should fail when it checks BASE.DIR's protection, but B if the AST for completion of the read of BASE.DIR's header happens; to occur during a brief period when SYSPRV is enabled, then / the $CREATE will continue and possibly succeed.   > Disabling AST delivery won't do the trick if the function that! requires SYSPRV depends on AST's.   9 Even converting all the AST routines in the program to do 9 nothing except queue a task to run in the main line won't 9 do the trick since the AST routines here are part of RMS,  not user-written AST routines.  3 The only method I see here that would work is to do 8 everything synchronously, or to have a server process do9 all the privileged work, keep SYSPRV on all the time, andS8 communicate with it via some mechanism or other.  (Maybe: threads will serve instead of a fully independent process?1 Does each thread have its own privilege context?)   6 Or maybe the RMS $CREATE/$OPEN routines are not really4 asynch, but the ASY bits are just there to get it to# call the completion AST routines...H   -- r John Santose Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:51:57 -0400W- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>i2 Subject: Re: Capellas alienates HP dealers already, Message-ID: <3CD2EA5C.6216BF34@videotron.ca>   Alan Greig wrote:sP > I hope Carly is only keeping him around to finish the merger. He's just pissedR > off thousands of dedicated HP UX dealers. His Direct program has only managed to% > slow down sales and REDUCE margins.e    L While I am no fan of Curly, I am of the opinion that the term "reseller" and" "channel" are 20th century relics.  N The only time a distributor is good is for a country outside the USA where theK distributor will handle customs and also will be big enough to get currency:R futures contracts to insulate the price of the goodies from currency fluctuations.  M The information age allows the manufacturer to talk directly to the customer,CL or through some consultant that helps the customer make a choice. Fedex, UPS etc make wharehouses redundant.s  L So the idea of shifting to direct sales is good in the long term. But it hasM to be done in such a way that the channel, dealers, resellers etc can recycled themselves into something else.s  I This is very similar to what is happening with the travel agents now. TherL Airlines are cutting their commissions, and they are transforming themselvesK into travel consultants that do research for the right flight ate the right 	 fare etc.I   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 20:00:02 +0100 & From: Ken Green <Ken.Green@kgcc.co.uk>< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix* Message-ID: <3CD2DE32.D354B6B0@kgcc.co.uk>   John Vottero wrote:   8 > "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@farmer.org> wrote in message; > news:VCtA8.31416$gd5.10719128@typhoon.southeast.rr.com...e > > M > > http://www.crn.com/Sections/BreakingNews/BreakingNews.asp?ArticleID=35060r > >d >fM > I have to agree with Capellas, in fact, it seems obvious to me.  You can nooA > longer sell Unix by claiming that it's the "Open/Standard" O/S.eI > Linux/NetBSD/FreeBSD are the only true open/standard operating systems. L > Unix vendors have to start pointing at their proprietary extensions as theI > reason to buy their flavor of *nix.  The world is going to wind up withsJ > Windows, Linux and proprietary operation systems.  With OpenVMS, NSK and; > Tru64/HP-UX,  HP rivals IBM as king of the proprietary OS   L HP has just killed off it's own (profitable) proprietary (non Unix) OS, what chance' that VMS will still exist by year end ?P     > .l >.E > The real question (which is still unanswered) is: does HP view it'sFN > proprietary OS's as a competitive advantage that should be promoted in orderN > to advance it's position in all three arenas or as a cash cow that should beI > milked until it can convert everyone to a Linux or Windows environment?  >e( > I hope they answer that question soon.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 19:05:45 GMT # From: damercer@mmm.com (Dan Mercer)n< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix) Message-ID: <aaun29$fhk$1@magnum.mmm.com>   A In article <7OzA8.42370$Ii2.3630017@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,r, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes: > 8 > "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@farmer.org> wrote in message; > news:VCtA8.31416$gd5.10719128@typhoon.southeast.rr.com...d >>L >> http://www.crn.com/Sections/BreakingNews/BreakingNews.asp?ArticleID=35060 > ? > Plus a bit more information (than I remember in the above) inn > + > http://news.com.com/2100-1001-898086.html  >  > For example: > 	 > <quote>  > N > The new HP in many ways will resemble the old Compaq. The company's strategyL > will largely revolve around aligning itself with technology giants such asN > Microsoft and Intel and large consulting firms to deliver products that willN > be cheaper than those from companies such as IBM and Sun Microsystems, which' > tout their own internal developments.- >   H The "new HP" sounds a lot like the "New Coke".  Spinning off Agilent wasF one brain dead move,  turning temsleves into a failing corporate model oughta be BDM #2.e  G When they spun off Agilent,  did no one stop to ask why their corporatehC customers purchased HP computers in the first place?  Maybe if theylH had taken a stroll around the 3M campus and saw all the HP (now Agilent)F instrumentation it might've dawned on them that it was the instrumentsH that got their foot in the door for the computers and not the other way  around.    -- r
 Dan Mercer damercer@mmm.com     > ...M > K > At the same time, HP will integrate enough of its own high-level features J > into its products to create a gap between it and Dell Computer, which isM > known for its mass-manufacturing efficiencies but performs less independent>J > research. The new HP will "put some intellectual property into the Linux, > world" and stress its management software. > I > In its heyday, Compaq strove to use standard components to make PCs andeK > servers that were comparable in price to competing products but contained-F > enough original engineering to set them apart. By contrast, HP spentA > considerable effort on building Unix servers and its own chips.- > 
 > </quote> > I > So if the new HP will look more like Compaq than the old HP, this means L > deemphasizing things like 'building Unix servers and its own chips' (well,I > we already knew the latter).  Perhaps trying to move some IP into LinuxnM > (though probably not into Windows:  we know how Compaq's cluster efforts inm > that direction turned out).y > J > Now I'm sure Bob the Mouth will pipe up (many times, in fact) and assertH > that VMS will live on reincarnated in Linux.  But I suspect that's not. > exactly what most people here had hoped for. >  > - bill >  >  >       P Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 16:35:56 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>e< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix, Message-ID: <3CD2F4A8.9CB2B6FE@videotron.ca>   Ken Green wrote:N > HP has just killed off it's own (profitable) proprietary (non Unix) OS, what > chance) > that VMS will still exist by year end ?g  K Because VMS generates the profits necessary to subsidize the PC operations.oN And during the merger, I think that HP will need all the profits it can get to pay for Carly's folly.  N *IF* Carly takes objective decisions that are not based solely on the drive toL be Wintel only with a sprinkling of Linux, she will keep VMS and Tandem justK alive enough to keep those customers and generate enough profits to sustaini the PC operation.h  N At this point in time, it seems unlikely that Carly would start to push VMS asF an active solution and allow its marketing and competing against otherM platforms. Considering the "wintel, industry standard, linux" rethoric comingrK from HP/Compaq, I think that the best we can expect is the status quo where W VMS remains but stays in total obscurity and is maintained only for exsiting customers.i   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:37:16 +0100 & From: Ken Green <Ken.Green@kgcc.co.uk>< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix* Message-ID: <3CD2F4FC.5074D966@kgcc.co.uk>   JF Mezei wrote:n   > Ken Green wrote:P > > HP has just killed off it's own (profitable) proprietary (non Unix) OS, what
 > > chance+ > > that VMS will still exist by year end ?e > M > Because VMS generates the profits necessary to subsidize the PC operations.sP > And during the merger, I think that HP will need all the profits it can get to > pay for Carly's folly. > P > *IF* Carly takes objective decisions that are not based solely on the drive toN > be Wintel only with a sprinkling of Linux, she will keep VMS and Tandem justM > alive enough to keep those customers and generate enough profits to sustaink > the PC operation.a >IP > At this point in time, it seems unlikely that Carly would start to push VMS asH > an active solution and allow its marketing and competing against otherO > platforms. Considering the "wintel, industry standard, linux" rethoric coming M > from HP/Compaq, I think that the best we can expect is the status quo where Y > VMS remains but stays in total obscurity and is maintained only for exsiting customers.v  Q You missed the point, MPE was in exactly the same position. It hadn't been pushed.T in years, if it hadn't have been for Y2K it probably would never even have been fed.0 But it kept making profits, it still got canned.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 16:07:10 -0700r( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0205031507.660945a6@posting.google.com>l  s "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<7OzA8.42370$Ii2.3630017@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...  >> nJ > Now I'm sure Bob the Mouth will pipe up (many times, in fact) and assertH > that VMS will live on reincarnated in Linux.  But I suspect that's not. > exactly what most people here had hoped for. >  > - bill  D linux is a poor mans unix ... and unix being the garbage os it is toB begin with doesn't say much for linux ... yes good old propreitaryE vms is still the best os in the world for the past 20 plus years, andpD the way it looks right now, the next 20 years ... linux or any otherB os for that matter will never rival vms ... it will survive on its own merits ...   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:36:00 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>l< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix, Message-ID: <3CD33AFF.CD0B1A74@videotron.ca>   Dan Mercer wrote:eI > When they spun off Agilent,  did no one stop to ask why their corporateuE > customers purchased HP computers in the first place?  Maybe if theywJ > had taken a stroll around the 3M campus and saw all the HP (now Agilent)H > instrumentation it might've dawned on them that it was the instrumentsI > that got their foot in the door for the computers and not the other waye	 > around.l   Hear Hear !   L This is why I think that the Hewlett and Packards should force Carly to dropN the HP name from the PC business and give it back to the instruments business.  K HP would make instruments, and Agilent (or Compaq) would make wintel stuff.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:41:14 -0400a- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> < Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix, Message-ID: <3CD33C39.EC45D8F4@videotron.ca>   Ken Green wrote:S > You missed the point, MPE was in exactly the same position. It hadn't been pushedmV > in years, if it hadn't have been for Y2K it probably would never even have been fed.2 > But it kept making profits, it still got canned.  L I am not forgetting MPE, although I am not very familiar with it. VMS bringsM in a SUBSTANTIAL portion of the profits for Compaq. Compaq considered killingtQ VMS 2 years ago but realised that the impact on the financials would be too much.d  N Another aspect to consider. Compaq was not part of the IA64 consortium, but HPI is. Is it possible that Compaq got heaps of financial help from Intel (invM exchange for murdering Alpha) in the form of "porting assistance" which makestK the VMS port "free" to Compaq, whereas HP would have had to pay for the MPEn port out of its own pocket ?   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 22:53:09 GMTo& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix- Message-ID: <aav4cl$aig@web.eng.baileynm.com>d  / In article <ud5cb99fqvtq85@news.supernews.com>,p$ John Vottero <John@mvpsi.com> wrote:M > I have to agree with Capellas, in fact, it seems obvious to me.  You can no-A > longer sell Unix by claiming that it's the "Open/Standard" O/S.r  G Funny, I have no problem running the same software on Tru64 and FreeBSD E as the next guy over runs on Solaris and Linux and the bloke down thea street runs on AIX and HPUX.  I > Linux/NetBSD/FreeBSD are the only true open/standard operating systems.r  F Don't confuse Open Source with Open Systems. Open Systems are a matterH of open interfaces and protocols, documentation and standards that allow- independant implementations to work together.   L > Unix vendors have to start pointing at their proprietary extensions as the% > reason to buy their flavor of *nix.a  J Well, yes. Just as Ford and Chevy point at their features and strengths asE reasons to buy their cars... but they still all burn the same gas and I travel the same highways. I don't have to wait for someone to build a newhJ bridge over the Atchafalaya to go from Houston to New Orleans just because& I'm driving a Ford instead of a Chevy.  L Similarly, if I'm running Tru64 and I need to talk to a Solaris box, I don'tK need to worry whether Sun has unilaterally modified NFS to keep my box from I seeing its file systems, and if I've written an application for one I can2 run it on the other.  G These open interfaces and protocols are so compelling that Microsoft is J integrating Interix into Windows Services for UNIX 3.0 ... which basicallyJ turns Windows NT into UNIX as far as an applications program is concerned.  ) It even uses the "evil" GNU-licensed GCC.e   Just like MacOS X does.>  K Looks like any system you buy in the future is going to be UNIX, one way orl
 the other.   --  O I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofsvO of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate.  AllaL these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain.   `-_-'K Time for your nap.  | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag?    'U`s   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 22:56:00 GMTt& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix- Message-ID: <aav4i0$ana@web.eng.baileynm.com>y  8 In article <aaudu1$58b$1@fizban.fizban.pprd.abbott.com>,0 Dave Gudewicz <david.gudewicz@abbott.com> wrote:M > I guess I need some help.  Could someone please explain how LINUX is reallys > NOT UNIX?   D Linux *is* UNIX. It's an independent implementation of the same API,E environment, security model, network interfaces and protocols, and somJ on. "Linux is not UNIX" is as meaningless as "McDonalds is not hamburger",8 "a Schwinn isn't a bicycle", or "a Hyundai isn't a car".   -- sO I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofsaO of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate.  AlleL these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain.   `-_-'K Time for your nap.  | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag?    'U`C   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:27:26 GMTo) From: Jeffrey Chimene <jeff@systasis.net> / Subject: Re: capture single keystroke from DCL?r, Message-ID: <3CD2D994.631625CA@systasis.net>  Y Well, I wish the original poster would answer the "what problem are you trying to solve?"E  ? question, but, assuming we don't need responses to prompts likeI  9 "[C]ontinue, [S]kip, [E]xit: ", here is another approach:f  K     Use "define/key/term" to redfine keypad keys. Whatever instructions aree  M appropriate for the application can be encoded in the key definition, and cane  P be multi-character / structured. The "/term" qualifier makes the multi-character  # input look like a single keystroke.h   jeca   -- microsoft free by 2003   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 20:12:07 GMTe- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley)r/ Subject: Re: capture single keystroke from DCL? 0 Message-ID: <3cd2eec0.94087050@news.process.com>  J On Fri, 03 May 2002 13:20:29 +0010, paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au wrote:  P >It's called ASK and was written originally by Mark Paulk and modified by James O >G. Downward.  The modification is dated 29-mar-1983.  It's a golden oldie and oP >compiles O.K. on both VAX and Alpha.  The package comes with the .MAR file and  >4 sample/example .COM files.t > K >I haven't got www access at the moment so can't check whether it is still h. >around -- Hunter may have it on his new site. >- Yes, it's there:  3 ftp://ftp.process.com/vms-freeware/fileserv/ask.zipz  + Sometime I'll add D. Atkinson's changes in.:   Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/r8 goathunter@goatley.com    http://www.goatley.com/hunter/< New Robert R. McCammon site: http://www.RobertRMcCammon.com/   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:55:34 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>/ Subject: Re: capture single keystroke from DCL? , Message-ID: <3CD2EB36.4080800@tsoft-inc.com>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:  C > David Froble wrote in message <3CD224A7.2060702@tsoft-inc.com>...t >  >>David J. Dachtera wrote: >> >> >  > snip >  >  >>Basic program: >>= >>Z$ = INKEY$( 0% , WAIT 255% ) !  Haven't figured out how tor >>!  get rid of the WAIT( >>CALL LIB$SET_SYMBOL( "ONE_CHAR" , Z$ ) >>ENDi >> >> >  > your are on the right tracko >  >  >>Then the DCL routine:m >> >>Get_A_Char: SUBROUTINE >>RUN <executable filename>  >>ENDSUBROUTINEs >> >>Use of subroutine: >> >> >>$ call Get_A_Chart >>$ write SYS$OUTPUT 'ONE_CHAR >>K >>What I thought would be good, was a DCL function call, where the functionl >> > valuei > K >>was the character.  As far as I know, DCL doesn't have such functionally.e >> >> > E > Why bother with the subroutine?  Write the program to take a singlelK > argument, an ASCII text string.  Use the string as the symbol to set.  So- >  > $ gechar :== $executable > $ getchar my_symbol: > 0 > would return with the character in myu_symbol.  J Yep. That would do it nicely. I don't really do much with DCL, and from my3 perspective, innovation usually follows experience.      Dave   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 02:01:13 GMT71 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>// Subject: Re: capture single keystroke from DCL?s' Message-ID: <3CD343E6.88BCA7E9@fsi.net>    Jeffrey Chimene wrote: > [ > Well, I wish the original poster would answer the "what problem are you trying to solve?"d > A > question, but, assuming we don't need responses to prompts likea > ; > "[C]ontinue, [S]kip, [E]xit: ", here is another approach:o > M >     Use "define/key/term" to redfine keypad keys. Whatever instructions aren > O > appropriate for the application can be encoded in the key definition, and can, > R > be multi-character / structured. The "/term" qualifier makes the multi-character > % > input look like a single keystroke.(  D Remember that this only works with INQUIRE. Potential security risk.   > microsoft free by 2003   A man after my own heart...    -- s David J. Dachterar dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/n   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 13:58:33 -0700r, From: mcbill20@hotmail.com (Bill McLaughlin)' Subject: Re: Compaq and HP stock prices = Message-ID: <e9cbc4f2.0205031258.281da1a0@posting.google.com>M  F I haven't really had much time lately to follow all the merger threadsC here but I thought this quote from the Motley Fool was interesting:m  F "Today, my least-favorite acquisition/merger is Hewlett-Packard (NYSE:D HWP) and Compaq (NYSE: CPQ). Two stones tied together still sink, so  avoid this one like the plague."6 URL: http://www.fool.com/news/foth/2002/foth020501.htm   Bill McLaughlint  u "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<WKBx8.161172$3L2.14224097@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...r< > "Terry C Shannon" <shannon@world.std.com> wrote in message? > news:Pine.SGI.4.30.0204241039310.1718-100000@world.std.com...a > >y > >l( > > On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, JF Mezei wrote: > >yE > > > Intertesting article about Compaq/HP stock price relationships.s > > > < > > > Spread Between H-P, Compaq Widens On First Day Of Suit > > >t > > >   4/23/02 3:41pm > > >   By Donna Fuscaldoc > > >M > > >   Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES > > >eN > > >   NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- On the first day of Walter Hewlett's court caseI > > > aiming to derail the merger of Hewlett-Packard Co. (HWP) and Compaqo >  ComputerrN > > > Corp. ( CPQ), the spread between the two companies' stock prices widenedH > > > slightly, as fear resonated through the market that  Hewlett holds >  information > > > that could help his case.n > > >M > >u > > M > > Yup. Doesn't bode well for a positive outcome for the Silicon Valley Soapt > > Opera, does it?  > L > Depends on one's point of view:  I'd say things are definitely looking up. >  > - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:04:08 GMTe1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>o' Subject: Re: Compaq and HP stock pricesa; Message-ID: <cXCA8.66035$%s3.25689008@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>g  9 "Bill McLaughlin" <mcbill20@hotmail.com> wrote in message 7 news:e9cbc4f2.0205031258.281da1a0@posting.google.com...xH > I haven't really had much time lately to follow all the merger threadsE > here but I thought this quote from the Motley Fool was interesting:r >oH > "Today, my least-favorite acquisition/merger is Hewlett-Packard (NYSE:F > HWP) and Compaq (NYSE: CPQ). Two stones tied together still sink, so" > avoid this one like the plague."8 > URL: http://www.fool.com/news/foth/2002/foth020501.htm >k > Bill McLaughlinh  L So is author Whitney Tilson's track record: "Over the past 18 months, I haveB made 63 specific recommendations to avoid particular stocks. As ofI yesterday's close, 57 of them (90%) have fallen in price, and the averagek decline is 39%.c   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 19:37:04 GMTb9 From: Hein van den Heuvel <hein_netscape@eps.zko.dec.com> = Subject: Re: creat function hanging -- Code snippet provided!t/ Message-ID: <3CD2E4FA.FFF29775@eps.zko.dec.com>     > It's getting quite annoying :)  H I think we are trying to drive to you towards calling RMS directly.  :-)  H Judging by your create arguments you are trying to have a lot of controlL so perhaps it is not too crazy to just call RMS directly. There are examplesH in both the C and RMS documentation. Could be fun, could be a nightmare, could be a fun nightmare.t  L Actually, the arguments you are giving in the example are not too impressive4 and suggest you might just want to leave them alone.  L I am a BIG fan of pre-allocation, but 36 blocks is nothing! ALQ is importantL when you start to think in terms of Megabyte or Gigabyte, not for Kilobytes.  L I know ctx=xplct exists but in 10 years I have never ever seen it used, so IM am wondering why you'd start there. I'm asking folks what this option exactlywN maps to but I suspect it does nothing or perhaps a 'deferred write'. Ditch it?  H The C RTL REF manual is pretty clear about simple "xxx=yyy" and no fancy parsing/interpretation.   G If I had to debug this I also would use a little know file-system tool:c<       $SET FILE /WATCH=MAJOR (other arguments:  ALL or NONE)O Use it to watch a 'good' open and a 'bad' open. This will make it very clear aseR to whether you are getting the file created or start looping in the argument parse before the internal RMS call.c  J If you happen to have a stand-alone reproducer then I'd suggest submitting# that as an official problem report.k  
 Good luck,   Hein.:   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:45:22 -04004- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>rA Subject: Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unixe, Message-ID: <3CD2E8D1.8DE99ABB@videotron.ca>   Phillip Helbig wrote:yJ > What I don't understand is the drive to make Windows more modular, so asD > to allow competing web browsers etc a fair competition against the > Microsoft products.   E This is where the whole anti-trust/monopoly thing comes along. BeforeoM Microsoft got so rich, it relied on third parties to develop software for itsgK OS. But then, Microsoft started buying ISV after ISV and built itself a bigsK software suite that competes against other ISVs who, because of Microsoft'stK size and bullying attitudes are losing market share and finding there is no  longer a market.  N In essence, if Microsoft buys one accounting package and includes it free withM Windows, it simply destroys the market for commercial accounting packages andnN destroys any chance that a new smalle company will innovate and come up with aR better product thah Microsoft's since there is no money to be made in that market.    L Just consider what has happened to the VMS TCPIP stacks since Digitsl/CompaqN came wit  the TCPIP services which were finally good enough to compete againstJ TGV etc. The market for 3rd party TCP stacks has shrunk and is now down toK Process Software vs Digital if I remember correctly. Make TCPIP services an)K integral part of VMS and Process software wouldn't have many new customers.d  B In the case of Microsoft, its monopoly is such that it has serious' repercussions on the software industry.<  N Suppose Microsoft starts to have monopoly on enterprise systems and decides toN include its SQL server free with the Windows OS. (in effect including the costL of SQL server in the price of Windows and preventing you from buying windows7 without SQL server). How would Oracle feel about this ?s   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:10:24 GMTm1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>sA Subject: Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix ; Message-ID: <41DA8.66038$%s3.25693688@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>h  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageB news:JqCA8.22785$zk1.15433@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com... > < > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message( > news:3CD2E8D1.8DE99ABB@videotron.ca... > > Phillip Helbig wrote:l > >s > >eG > > Suppose Microsoft starts to have monopoly on enterprise systems ande > decides toI > > include its SQL server free with the Windows OS. (in effect including  thea > costH > > of SQL server in the price of Windows and preventing you from buying	 > windowsu; > > without SQL server). How would Oracle feel about this ?t > H > Presumably pretty much the same way Oracle felt about Digital and Rdb,# > before Palmer sold Rdb to Oracle.e  J In that case, perhaps Carly could be persuaded to sell VMS to Oracle. Then6 Oracle could include an OS free with its database. ;-}  J If nothing else, the marketing campaign would be interesting to observe...   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 20:29:29 GMT-# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>0A Subject: Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' UnixoH Message-ID: <JqCA8.22785$zk1.15433@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3CD2E8D1.8DE99ABB@videotron.ca... > Phillip Helbig wrote:h >' >eE > Suppose Microsoft starts to have monopoly on enterprise systems andd
 decides toK > include its SQL server free with the Windows OS. (in effect including thet costF > of SQL server in the price of Windows and preventing you from buying windowsp9 > without SQL server). How would Oracle feel about this ?t  F Presumably pretty much the same way Oracle felt about Digital and Rdb,! before Palmer sold Rdb to Oracle.s   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 22:01:22 -0700o) From: jwalters_1@yahoo.com (Jeff Walters)eA Subject: Re: CRN: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unixo< Message-ID: <884da36f.0205032101.3861329@posting.google.com>  a JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3CD2E8D1.8DE99ABB@videotron.ca>...-  P > Suppose Microsoft starts to have monopoly on enterprise systems and decides toP > include its SQL server free with the Windows OS. (in effect including the costN > of SQL server in the price of Windows and preventing you from buying windows9 > without SQL server). How would Oracle feel about this ?h  F Presumably Oracle would not enjoy it, but if hypothetically the largerE software marketplace is more efficient this way (i.e. cheaper prices,pC comparable quality), it benefits software buyers, and it eliminatesuF unneeded redundant programming effort in the market then it "ought" to happen in that sense.u  ? Also, since Oracle database products don't run all that well onrB Windows and from what I've seen aren't as popular on Windows as onE Unix and VMS, there wouldn't be a question of pushing them out of thehE "Windows market", if that is the market where Microsoft's monopoly iso defined to exist.i  F ISV's have a risky, narrow business plan if 90-100% of their customersF are also Microsoft customers, and 90-100% of their business depends on@ products from a single vendor and no alternate vendors exist.  ID wouldn't want those shoes, but if I were in that position and didn'tA want to expand I'd work to be bought out when the time came.  YoumB can't compete against the guy whose platform makes the majority ofF your business possible.  If I wanted to stay around I'd look for otherC platorms to develop on as well or for other businesses to enter and 2 become less dependent on the whims of one company.   ------------------------------    Date: 03 May 2002 23:18:29 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>Q Subject: Re: dBASE IV package/license for VMS VAX, product status?  Transferable?3- Message-ID: <87lmb1uunu.fsf@prep.synonet.com>N  ( jordan@ccs4vms.com (Rich Jordan) writes:  E > about dBASE, and the company that now holds the license for the DOS D > versions has no information at all on VMS or dBASE for same and soE > far hasn't answered queries about licensing, and since apparently a B > federal court invalidated Borland's copyright on dBASE due to itB > being derived from JPL code..... for all I know it may be public  > domain now.  Yeah, right... :)  F Glen Everhart may be able to fill in some details here. The 'JPL' code isn't RBase, is it?v   -- a< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 16:17:38 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>X) Subject: Re: DCPS Help Required..........i, Message-ID: <3CD2F05F.572E84F2@videotron.ca>   Mandeep Gattaura wrote:r > B > I decided to ditch the previous postscript file, and use xpdf toH > translate my PDF document to a postscript form. I have tried modifyingG > the output so that it can be inserted into the TLB file, but now I amnB > not getting anything printed.... this is a sample of what I have > done.....    Do you have distiller ?   K I have found distiller a great tool to debug postscript. Postscript has the_K equivalent to the "printf" statement   "(text\n) print" which you can applyUK liberally to the code and when you execute it, that printed text appears in K the distiller status window. There is also the "=" statement to display therO contents of the stack as well as other statements to display numeric variables.o  M If you apply a few "print" statements to the routine that draws the form, youi) would see if it actually executes or not.o  N Also, you might want to add a print statement to your redefined "showpage" andO then see if perhaps its definition is overriden/destroyed later in the program.r  I Are these forms coming from paper ? Are they scanned in ? If the PDF file M contains an image, then your postscript program will contain a stream of datarK which is readable only once. Once consumed, that stream of data is gone and3I the next time the routine executes, it will consume whatever follows that M routine, i.e. postscript code and probably fail because the data would not bes? in the format (hexadecimal for instance) that you would expect.>   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 17:59:16 GMTr0 From: prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com (Paul Winalski)! Subject: Re: Deathbed confession?e9 Message-ID: <3cd2cede.1810802095@proxy.news.easynews.com>I  F On Thu, 02 May 2002 21:54:28 GMT, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:  J >Bottom line:  the EV8 team felt they were on or ahead of schedule and had! >the simulations to support that.e  D So did the EV6 team and the EV7 team, up to the point that they were forced to take their slips.:  + >  If you have a problem with that, take itz >up with them:   Alreay have.  @ >  I certainly don't feel qualified to dispute their opinions on >the matter.  D I have great respect for you, Bill, but I'm afraid that in this case@ you're letting your emotions carry you away, and you're speaking& from ignorance of the issues involved.  C But I do think your main thesis is correct--Alpha's demise occurred>A for business rather than technical reasons.  Compaq was unwillingDB and unable to build a volume market for Alpha that would have madeB the architecture a self-sutatining, profit-making proposition.  It? finally came to put up or shut up, and Comapq chose to shut up.a  
 ---------- Remove 'Z' to reply by email.v   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 11:06:23 -0700M( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)! Subject: Re: Deathbed confession? = Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0205031006.6e92f6dc@posting.google.com>>  r "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<jYwA8.56819$Lj.4225223@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...7 > "Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in message 9 > news:d7791aa1.0205030609.46584cd8@posting.google.com...>H > > Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote in message: >  news:<01KHABWGD9C28ZG5L9@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>.../ > > > bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:x > > >gK > > > > it will appear though in 2005 ... with the name itanium 3 on it ...  > > >cL > > > I hereby publicly offer you $1000 if you can demonstrate that this has& > > > happened before the end of 2005. > > >wK > > > I'm pretty sure that if you don't offer me $1000 if I can demonstrate M > > > before the end of 2005 that this has NOT happened, then folks here will78 > > > take you even less seriously than they already do. > > >:N > > > Definition of "demonstrate"?  Well, an executable built on a given ALPHAN > > > always runs on later versions.  Thus, a fair definition of "demonstrate"I > > > is running an executable from my current ALPHA on Itanium 3 withouteK > > > binary translation etc.  If this is not the case, then Alpha will not 7 > > > have lived on in Itanium in any meaningful sense.m > >rC > > better get out your check book!  This latest itanic update from  > > Bill Todd ...  > M > Bob's posts are usually far too inane to bother responding to, and this oneTK > is no exception.  However, since he has seen fit to repeat it more than aeF > half-dozen times now, I do wish to point out (for the benefit of theM > humor-impaired) that my material that he keeps quoting was sarcastic rathersJ > than meant literally:  I think Bob's an idiot, in this matter as well as > most others. >  > - bill  A we'll find out when EV8 hits the streets ... then I will make you  eat every last word ...3   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 11:11:18 -0700C( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)! Subject: Re: Deathbed confession?.= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0205031011.657cb96a@posting.google.com>   r "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<jYwA8.56819$Lj.4225223@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...7 > "Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in messaged9 > news:d7791aa1.0205030609.46584cd8@posting.google.com...oH > > Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote in message: >  news:<01KHABWGD9C28ZG5L9@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>.../ > > > bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:1 > > >1K > > > > it will appear though in 2005 ... with the name itanium 3 on it ...s > > > L > > > I hereby publicly offer you $1000 if you can demonstrate that this has& > > > happened before the end of 2005. > > >eK > > > I'm pretty sure that if you don't offer me $1000 if I can demonstratetM > > > before the end of 2005 that this has NOT happened, then folks here willt8 > > > take you even less seriously than they already do. > > > N > > > Definition of "demonstrate"?  Well, an executable built on a given ALPHAN > > > always runs on later versions.  Thus, a fair definition of "demonstrate"I > > > is running an executable from my current ALPHA on Itanium 3 withouthK > > > binary translation etc.  If this is not the case, then Alpha will notf7 > > > have lived on in Itanium in any meaningful sense.i > >aC > > better get out your check book!  This latest itanic update fromD > > Bill Todd ...r > M > Bob's posts are usually far too inane to bother responding to, and this onedK > is no exception.  However, since he has seen fit to repeat it more than a F > half-dozen times now, I do wish to point out (for the benefit of theM > humor-impaired) that my material that he keeps quoting was sarcastic rather J > than meant literally:  I think Bob's an idiot, in this matter as well as > most others. >  > - bill  B and of course, all of your other posts follow the same pattern ... sarcasm ...o   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:38:30 GMTe1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>t! Subject: Re: Deathbed confession?o; Message-ID: <GOAA8.65847$%s3.25597192@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>a  = "Paul Winalski" <prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com> wrote in messaget3 news:3cd2cede.1810802095@proxy.news.easynews.com..."   >RE > But I do think your main thesis is correct--Alpha's demise occurredhC > for business rather than technical reasons.  Compaq was unwilling D > and unable to build a volume market for Alpha that would have madeD > the architecture a self-sustaining, profit-making proposition.  ItA > finally came to put up or shut up, and Compaq chose to shut up.-  I That about sums it up. Absent the NT dalliance, DEC didn't do a heck of ae: lot in the sustainability and profitability realm, either.  J When it's all said and done, the Great Mystery (to me) is why neither firmI took to heart the advice, both unsolicited and purchased, it received re:oK Alpha. Lord knows plenty of advice was dished out, and the vast majority ofaK it pertained to apps critical mass, demand generation, and something calledl
 marketing.  J I still think the tale has the makings of a book, but given Alpha's marketJ penetration (or lack thereof) the book would appeal to a limited audience.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 14:22:50 -0500i+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)B! Subject: Re: Deathbed confession?o3 Message-ID: <WDkS+H21PSPo@eisner.encompasserve.org>h  o In article <GOAA8.65847$%s3.25597192@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:e > ? > "Paul Winalski" <prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com> wrote in messagef5 > news:3cd2cede.1810802095@proxy.news.easynews.com...t >  >>F >> But I do think your main thesis is correct--Alpha's demise occurredD >> for business rather than technical reasons.  Compaq was unwillingE >> and unable to build a volume market for Alpha that would have madesE >> the architecture a self-sustaining, profit-making proposition.  It)B >> finally came to put up or shut up, and Compaq chose to shut up. > K > That about sums it up. Absent the NT dalliance, DEC didn't do a heck of ah< > lot in the sustainability and profitability realm, either. > L > When it's all said and done, the Great Mystery (to me) is why neither firmK > took to heart the advice, both unsolicited and purchased, it received re:-M > Alpha. Lord knows plenty of advice was dished out, and the vast majority ofeM > it pertained to apps critical mass, demand generation, and something called  > marketing. > L > I still think the tale has the makings of a book, but given Alpha's marketL > penetration (or lack thereof) the book would appeal to a limited audience. >   @ 	Depends.  If it was as well written as "Soul of a New Machine",D 	(second-hand... read various reviews, never read the book) it couldD 	do well.  It would have to be authored by someone like yourself and@ 	a top business consultant/expert.  The target audience would be= 	general and would also be on the short required reading listr 	at various business schools.'   				Robd   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 22:30:44 GMTg* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>! Subject: Re: Deathbed confession?e@ Message-ID: <ocEA8.46777$v7.3759743@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  = "Paul Winalski" <prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com> wrote in messagel3 news:3cd2cede.1810802095@proxy.news.easynews.com...oH > On Thu, 02 May 2002 21:54:28 GMT, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> > wrote: >iL > >Bottom line:  the EV8 team felt they were on or ahead of schedule and had# > >the simulations to support that.  >dF > So did the EV6 team and the EV7 team, up to the point that they were > forced to take their slips.   J And EV8 *already had* taken significant slips.  In fact, there appeared toL be optimism that the 2004 date (recall that as of the cancellation last yearL it was still a full three years in the future) was a reaction to this and if anything conservative.  K If you're also talking with the EV8 team and getting different information, I then I'll accept that opinion is divided even though I haven't seen that.lI But if you're talking to the server group, or anyone else outside the EV8oH team, then I suspect you're being fed the same load of manure Compaq has been spreading since last June.-   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 23:16:52 GMTt5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>l! Subject: Re: Deathbed confession?49 Message-ID: <ETEA8.39$F%2.780413@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net>t  I No Bill, Paul (by the way, I love the discworld node name ;) has the same.D experience we all have had.  It is real easy to predict a schedule -J especially early in development, it's another to deliver.  Past experienceB would factor in a big fudge factor to get to reality.  And as mostI schedules, they never slip the date until they actually are about to missrL it.  That is not to say *when* EV8 would have shown up - Dec 53'rd 2004, JanJ 1st 2004, November 2005, or whatever.  It was *far* too early to be making* firm predictions I would bet any money on.      5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagee: news:ocEA8.46777$v7.3759743@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >e? > "Paul Winalski" <prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com> wrote in messaget5 > news:3cd2cede.1810802095@proxy.news.easynews.com...sJ > > On Thu, 02 May 2002 21:54:28 GMT, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>
 > > wrote: > > J > > >Bottom line:  the EV8 team felt they were on or ahead of schedule and hadJ% > > >the simulations to support that.R > >NH > > So did the EV6 team and the EV7 team, up to the point that they were > > forced to take their slips.c >eL > And EV8 *already had* taken significant slips.  In fact, there appeared toI > be optimism that the 2004 date (recall that as of the cancellation lastu yearK > it was still a full three years in the future) was a reaction to this andn if > anything conservative. >e@ > If you're also talking with the EV8 team and getting different information,K > then I'll accept that opinion is divided even though I haven't seen that.uK > But if you're talking to the server group, or anyone else outside the EV8lJ > team, then I suspect you're being fed the same load of manure Compaq has! > been spreading since last June.0 >2 > - bill >o >r >    ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 14:18:38 -0700u- From: roli@barmettler.net (Roland Barmettler) + Subject: Re: DECserver 100 and reverse LAT?o= Message-ID: <235cf5c3.0205031318.1595bae4@posting.google.com>n  + WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov> wrote:u& > I don't think so, and I believe that% > you can find this discussed here at - > some point by going to groups.google.search.) > and looking in the comp.os.vms archive.r  , Ah, yes. I found it... Thanks for answering! Guess I have to get a 200er ;-)    - Roland   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 02:13:32 GMT 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>a+ Subject: Re: DECserver 100 and reverse LAT?r' Message-ID: <3CD346C9.5DC51A6F@fsi.net>s   Roland Barmettler wrote: >  > Hi > > > Does anyone know if a DECserver 100 is reverse-LAT capable ?G > I have no documentation for it, but managed to set a port to "remote"nB > instead of "local" like for a VT. However, I have no clue how toE > setup the DECserver 100 to broadcast that service so that it can ben) > seen with e.g. "mc latcp show service".a  G Yes, DS100 does reverse LAT. I used one for a couple printers. The main  hiccup is flow control.n  F No, I don't think DS100 does services. You have to address server/port instead of server/service_name.    -- d David J. Dachterav dba DJE Systemsr http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 14:02:46 -0500p+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)m) Subject: Re: Fix for EDT emulation in EVEa3 Message-ID: <nbTO0P$bhh+y@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  n In article <343f30ae.0205030948.325d4e11@posting.google.com>, SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman) writes:h > young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) wrote in message news:<sGZMTXAgO9vM@eisner.encompasserve.org>...q >> In article <343f30ae.0205021550.3a59a2dd@posting.google.com>, SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman) writes:@o >> > "Peter Weaver" <peter.weaver@stelco.ca> wrote in message news:<aam7om$c3jnv$1@ID-141708.news.dfncis.de>...hB >> >> "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message' >> >> news:3CCDF409.7FE15E62@fsi.net...s
 >> >> >...% >>  [SQMC] (some quoted material cut)  >>  L >> >> > Then again, scripting TPU/EVE in batch (like you can with EDT) would& >> >> > remain rather a challenge, no?
 >> >> >... >> >> > >> >> No problem, just make sure you use /NODISPLAY like this;F >> >>    $ EDIT/TPU/NODISPLAY/SECTION=PRW$UTL:TRIM_LINES/NOCOMMAND 'P1 >> > c >> >  J >> > O-KAY. How do you do a global substitute in EVE in "batch"? In EDT, IE >> > would make a file called FIXIT.COM that contained something likeW >> > t >> > $   EDIT/EDT LOGIN.COMl >> > S-MODE-BLAH >> > EXIT LOGIN.TMP 
 >> > $   EXIT  >> > u> >> > and this would replace all occurrences of MODE with BLAH. >> >  K >> > I could also place just the EDT commands in a file (call it FIXIT.EDT)e >> > and run >> > R% >> >     $ EDIT/EDT/COMMAND=FIXIT.EDTg >> > 3J >> > and that would accomplish the same thing. I tried putting the REPLACEH >> > command in a .TPU file and running that with the /COMMAND/NODISPLAYE >> > qualifiers, but it always complains about expecting symbols that ) >> > aren't there and aborts compilation.b >> > IE >> > How do you do this with EVE? I'm not saying you can't do it. I'me* >> > simply asking *how* to do it. Thanks. >> > e >> dD >> 	The exact example of what you are after is in the documentation.J >> 	Scroll down (or search) until you find GSR.TPU (global search replace) >> 	and batch usage is nearby. >> uC >> http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/73final/6018/6018pro_001.htmle >  >  > Thanks for your help.i > G > 1.) (RE GSR.TPU:) All that just to do a global replace operation whenrD > EDT does it in one very readable line? I guess that's the price ofE > progress, just like losing the great 12-inch square album cover art  > when music CD's came out.  >     3 	Yep.   You can have crazy tools doing crazy thingsi; 	and *arguably* not the best tool being used in some cases.p    G > 2.) Please excuse me if I am missing something obvious, but how/whereP0 > do you specify the old string and new string?   F 	If you look, it is hard-coded.  That is when my fuzzy brain kicked-inC 	saying "that ain't right."  And then doing a quick Deja found what  	took place 9 years prior.   >I got the code A > "replace_wildcard.com" from your subsequent post to work, but IwB > checked GSR.TPU in the docs and don't see how to make that work. >    	Yeah.. replace the string.-  E > 3.) Also, with EDT you can do multiple substitutions (and any otherr< > EDT line mode commands) with only one file open operation: > " > $    EDIT/EDT/NOCOMMAND yourfile > s-abc-def-wh > s-old2-new2-wh > s-old3-new3-wh > exit > G > With TPU it looks like you have to open the file once for each globaltH > replace operation and, at least for global replace operations, write aF > whole page of code for each line of EDT code. (OK, you don't have toD > actually write it in this case, but you do have to hunt for it and > fetch it and set it up.) >   : 	Yes.  So a better tool in your case above would be to use 	sed.  Can EDT do this:t  @ 	sed 's/^\([A-Z][A-Za-z]*\), \([A-Z][A-Za-z]*\)/\2 \1/' filename  O will turn "Lastname, Firstname" into "Firstname Lastname". Notice how the commanK is placed outside the first pair of "\(\)" so it doesn't get inclued in the-A last name. Otherwise, the result would be "Firstname Lastname,". s  6 	This could turn into a string substitution "piss-up".  E > 4.) Also, is there no way to use EVE's line commands (commands thatrF > you type after pressing the "Do" key, i.e.) in a script? In EDT, youG > can type S/OLDSTRING/NEWSTRING/WH or any other EDT line mode commands-H > at the * prompt or run it in a command file as in the above example. IA > guess you can't do that with TPU. You have to learn yet another  > language.  >   = 	As the example earlier, you can run with /NODISPLAY and pumplC 	things out.  Depends what you are after.  Looking and working withn; 	TPU for a few years, most "needful" things have been done.i  . > Thanks again for your help with EVE and TPU.   	You are welcome.o   				Rob>   ------------------------------   Date: 3 MAY 2002 19:37:48 GMTm+ From: Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov>u) Subject: Re: Fix for EDT emulation in EVE.1 Message-ID: <3MAY02.19374814@feda34.fed.ornl.gov>   F In a previous article, SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman) wrote:
 [big snip]E > 3.) Also, with EDT you can do multiple substitutions (and any otherp< > EDT line mode commands) with only one file open operation: >   " > $    EDIT/EDT/NOCOMMAND yourfile > s-abc-def-wh > s-old2-new2-wh > s-old3-new3-wh > exit >  eG > With TPU it looks like you have to open the file once for each globalrH > replace operation and, at least for global replace operations, write aF > whole page of code for each line of EDT code. (OK, you don't have toD > actually write it in this case, but you do have to hunt for it and > fetch it and set it up.)       position( buffer_begin );n  G returns your position to the beginning of the buffer so you can do yournH next global replace from there.  Or you can do your searches for the oldK string in the reverse (backwards) direction.  No reason to reopen the file.r   Dave --------------9 Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOV H Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 22:23:55 +0200a) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)g8 Subject: Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha!) Message-ID: <0FQSb6NeQY8Z@elias.decus.ch>    In article <aaubbi$ka4$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> writes: >  >  > Doc.Cypher wrote:a > ; >> On 3 May 2002, bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:  >> c	 >> <snip>h >> oF >>>read this from Bill Todd's latest McKinley status posting and weep!: >>>maybe you ought to change that to Buckingham Palace ... >>><   [repetition snipped]   >>>p >> .L >> I really don't want to believe that you're that gullible. If you believedJ >> this was at all meant seriously I've got a bridge here I'd like to sell >> you.@ >> v >  > > > And I have a little 100 bedroom mansion called Buck house to@ > go with the bridge, now if I could only get Queeny to move out > so that Bob can move in. > > > There are also some guys in France who would like to talk to0 > Bob about the Eifel tower (this was real con). > " And I'm selling him London Bridge.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:07:15 GMTi1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> 8 Subject: Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha!; Message-ID: <7_CA8.66037$%s3.25691463@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>h  6 "Paul Sture" <p_sture@elias.decus.ch> wrote in message# news:0FQSb6NeQY8Z@elias.decus.ch...n	 <deletiaL E > >> I really don't want to believe that you're that gullible. If yout believedL > >> this was at all meant seriously I've got a bridge here I'd like to sell	 > >> you.a > >> > >I > >s@ > > And I have a little 100 bedroom mansion called Buck house toB > > go with the bridge, now if I could only get Queeny to move out > > so that Bob can move in. > >o@ > > There are also some guys in France who would like to talk to2 > > Bob about the Eifel tower (this was real con). > >o$ > And I'm selling him London Bridge.  I I don't think so. IIRC the city fathers of Lake Havasu City, Arizona, USAhK bought that bridge over 30 years ago. The "bridge over water that shouldn'tsG be there" was still standing when I flew over it a couple of weeks ago.h   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 02 00:48:56 +0200,) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)t8 Subject: Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha!) Message-ID: <PQm8OgRhlWkK@elias.decus.ch>m  o In article <7_CA8.66037$%s3.25691463@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:5 > 8 > "Paul Sture" <p_sture@elias.decus.ch> wrote in message% > news:0FQSb6NeQY8Z@elias.decus.ch...3 > <deletiaL0F >> >> I really don't want to believe that you're that gullible. If you
 > believedM >> >> this was at all meant seriously I've got a bridge here I'd like to sella
 >> >> you. >> >>  >> > >> >A >> > And I have a little 100 bedroom mansion called Buck house totC >> > go with the bridge, now if I could only get Queeny to move outa >> > so that Bob can move in.m >> >A >> > There are also some guys in France who would like to talk to 3 >> > Bob about the Eifel tower (this was real con).  >> >% >> And I'm selling him London Bridge.  > K > I don't think so. IIRC the city fathers of Lake Havasu City, Arizona, USAhM > bought that bridge over 30 years ago. The "bridge over water that shouldn'tlI > be there" was still standing when I flew over it a couple of weeks ago.p >   : Does that make any difference in this context? :-) :-) :-)   __
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 23:09:13 GMTt1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>m8 Subject: Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha!; Message-ID: <tMEA8.66094$%s3.25776710@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>R  6 "Paul Sture" <p_sture@elias.decus.ch> wrote in message# news:PQm8OgRhlWkK@elias.decus.ch...oG > In article <7_CA8.66037$%s3.25691463@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>, "Terry C.y) Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:s > > : > > "Paul Sture" <p_sture@elias.decus.ch> wrote in message' > > news:0FQSb6NeQY8Z@elias.decus.ch...n
 > > <deletiaLmH > >> >> I really don't want to believe that you're that gullible. If you > > believedJ > >> >> this was at all meant seriously I've got a bridge here I'd like to sell > >> >> you. > >> >>t > >> > > >> >C > >> > And I have a little 100 bedroom mansion called Buck house togE > >> > go with the bridge, now if I could only get Queeny to move outo > >> > so that Bob can move in.s > >> >C > >> > There are also some guys in France who would like to talk tos5 > >> > Bob about the Eifel tower (this was real con).h > >> >' > >> And I'm selling him London Bridge.m > > I > > I don't think so. IIRC the city fathers of Lake Havasu City, Arizona,d USArE > > bought that bridge over 30 years ago. The "bridge over water thatt	 shouldn'toK > > be there" was still standing when I flew over it a couple of weeks ago.i > >l > < > Does that make any difference in this context? :-) :-) :-) >   J Not a heck of a lot, just didn't want anyone to go selling a bridge that'sL already been sold (one might be able to do a time-sharing deal, though). AndJ speaking of bridges and Alphas and IPF and such, don't look for much AlphaJ content in Madison/Itanium III. Earliest anything could reasonably show upI would be in the Montecito and Chivano time frame, circa 2005. Or so it is ! said by those that should know...h   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 02 02:50:45 +0200	) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) 8 Subject: Re: Itanium 2 hits ... Itanium 3 will be Alpha!) Message-ID: <0J3Fg4sY0XxV@elias.decus.ch>e  o In article <tMEA8.66094$%s3.25776710@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:r > 8 > "Paul Sture" <p_sture@elias.decus.ch> wrote in message% > news:PQm8OgRhlWkK@elias.decus.ch...yH >> In article <7_CA8.66037$%s3.25691463@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>, "Terry C.+ > Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:  >> >; >> > "Paul Sture" <p_sture@elias.decus.ch> wrote in message ( >> > news:0FQSb6NeQY8Z@elias.decus.ch... >> > <deletiaLI >> >> >> I really don't want to believe that you're that gullible. If youa
 >> > believed K >> >> >> this was at all meant seriously I've got a bridge here I'd like toa > sell
 >> >> >> you.n >> >> >> >> >> >s >> >> >lD >> >> > And I have a little 100 bedroom mansion called Buck house toF >> >> > go with the bridge, now if I could only get Queeny to move out  >> >> > so that Bob can move in. >> >> > D >> >> > There are also some guys in France who would like to talk to6 >> >> > Bob about the Eifel tower (this was real con). >> >> > ( >> >> And I'm selling him London Bridge. >> >J >> > I don't think so. IIRC the city fathers of Lake Havasu City, Arizona, > USA-F >> > bought that bridge over 30 years ago. The "bridge over water that > shouldn'toL >> > be there" was still standing when I flew over it a couple of weeks ago. >> > >>= >> Does that make any difference in this context? :-) :-) :-)l >> > L > Not a heck of a lot, just didn't want anyone to go selling a bridge that'sN > already been sold (one might be able to do a time-sharing deal, though). AndL > speaking of bridges and Alphas and IPF and such, don't look for much AlphaL > content in Madison/Itanium III. Earliest anything could reasonably show upK > would be in the Montecito and Chivano time frame, circa 2005. Or so it is'# > said by those that should know..., >   I I already knew that London Bridge was in the US. It saves Bob the expensea0 of crossing the pond to see what he's buying :-)   __
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 13:59:18 -0400P, From: David Michaels <michaedi@email.uc.edu> Subject: Re: Itanium troubles.+ Message-ID: <3CD2CFF6.ADADCD0@email.uc.edu>n   Atlant Schmidt wrote:8 > By the way, MacOS/X is nowH > the Unix with the largest marketshare, and by far the largest share of > Unix desktops. >  > Atlant   Hi9 Do you mind sharing where you obtainned this information?t  
 Thank You, dm   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 18:50:37 GMTr From: phn@icke-reklam.ipsec.nu Subject: Re: Itanium troubles ) Message-ID: <aaum5t$i7o$3@nyheter.crt.se>h  < In comp.os.vms Toon Moene <toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> wrote: > Bill Gunshannon wrote:  E > [ Usability of Free Software from the viewpoint of installing it. ]e >> v> >> I have been sitting here reading this with total amazement.  J > At least you get the impression they haven't tried.  I installed Red HatF > 5.2 on the laptop I'm typing this on in '98.  In 5:22 minutes it hadC > read the entire installation CD and installed everything I wanted 0 > (chosen by walking through some simple menus).  J > Unfortunately, it turned out that to turn of a very insidious setting ofE > the BIOS of the machine (sleep-and-save-to-disk) I had to reinstallnJ > Windows 95 (from a "rescue" CD provided by Compaq with the machine).  ItJ > took 50 minutes to read the CD, 25 minutes to find all the "devices" and > 6 reboots.  A > Could someone explain to me what's so simple about MS Windows ?i  D You misunderstood it : MS Windows is a paradise for us consultants !  A Users only have to pay us ( or their managers will pay us) while  7 we do all these reboots ( that's what we are payed for)a    > See it the other way around: how many consultants loves VMS ?  ( what's in it for them ?)         > -- .I > Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290 8 > Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The NetherlandsI > Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html?G > Join GNU Fortran 95: http://g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)n   -- t Peter Hkanson          K         IPSec  Sverige      (At the Riverside of Gothenburg, home of Volvo)aJ            Sorry about my e-mail address, but i'm trying to keep spam out.& 	   Remove "icke-reklam" and it works.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 21:10:00 +0200 ) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)o Subject: Re: Itanium troublesf) Message-ID: <tOkUxActY90P@elias.decus.ch>c  ` In article <aare1v$1aiu$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:) > In article <3CCF4B97.E423F00B@fsi.net>,-6 >  "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes: > |> Nick Maclaren wrote:r > |> > u" > |> > and (b) the people with theI > |> > attitude that using a computer is the user's problem started to betA > |> > the people running the show.  And this has never reversed.1 > |> CL > |> Well, not sure about that. If that were true, Mandrake, Red Hat and theB > |> others would not be dumping dollars into installers and otherL > |> "usability" software to wrap around Linus's work and the work of others > |> (Gnu, etc.).r > = > I have been sitting here reading this with total amazement.g > ; > Do people here actually know anything about the subject??d >    Yep.  ; > Any fo the major Linux distributions and FreeBSD (I can't.: > speak for the other BSD's as I haven't usedc any of them: > lately.) are infinitely easier to install than VMS.  Any: > of them can be installed with no documentation at all to; > the point of having a totally functional system includingm9 > most of the common utilities the user is likely to need/= > for doing real work.  Even with a copy of the Release Notes>= > in your hand it's tough to get the backup command right fort9 > the first step of the VMS install.  FreeBSD even offerst; > menu driven install with three levels of knowledge on theO > part of the installer.    9 OK. My experience is limited to RedHat V5.n, 6.0 and SuSEe versions 7.0 & 7.2.   < The installation of that first Red Hat was, quite frankly, a< nightmare. Fortunately the (non Red Hat) documentation which; came with it was pretty good. In contrast the documentationa6 which came with RH 6.0 was extremely disappointing and< contained glaring errors in the boot instructions (the first4 book got me out of that jam). RH also assumed an ISP8 connection at home for support (I didn't have one at the< time) - I got sick of printing stuff at work, taking it home& to find it didn't answer the question.  9 SuSE was an improvement beyond all recognition, but as at>: 7.2, still posed some tricky problems. (I'll be trying out 8.0 this w/e).    > It's so simple, we even have a9 > course where the students do it in the second lab!!  Inb& > the first, they build the hardware!!  7 Yes, but surely they have an experienced tutor to guider them?e  : I have to disagree when you say they are easier to install: than VMS, but then I have been doing VMS installations for over 20 years :-)h  : As to your comment on the BACKUP command, that would be on; VAX/VMS - Booting to the Alpha CD does give a menu offeringY9 an installation/upgrade option and will list the productsr2 available on the CD. I assure you that I had great8 difficulty mastering the tar command until I came across some tutorials on it.    ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 20:02:59 GMTi& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Itanium troubles'- Message-ID: <aauqdj$q2g@web.eng.baileynm.com>a  ' In article <3CD1E51F.7622159B@fsi.net>,e0 David J. Dachtera <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:H > Well, I've done the FreeBSD install a number of times. Compared to theB > Linux installers I've seen, well, there's no comparison, really.  G I've done several Linux installs. No two were even vaguely similar, anddI about the only thing that's improved over time has been the partitioning,NI which has improved from bloody awful to pretty decent. FreeBSD's has been  fairly decent all along.  H > The device discovery in the Linux installers is the biggest help, IMO.  G I'm not sure what this refers to, because I haven't noticed Linux doing H any better than FreeBSD here. And once or twice (notably Red Hat 4.1) it) went horribly wrong. COuld you elaborate?c   -- dO I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofssO of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate.  All L these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain.   `-_-'K Time for your nap.  | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag?    'U`i   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 23:20:43 +0200m- From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr>t< Subject: Re: MOZ T1: Could not initialize security component' Message-ID: <3CD2FF2C.CE5FBD2D@Free.fr>a  J Hmmm.. sounds like there is something weird in the sys$common logical name9 management as I use it from the SYSTEM account. I renamedtO sys$common:[sysmgr]mozilla.dir to sys$specific: and restarted MOZ. It created a 4 new sys$common:[sysmgr]mozilla.dir but now it works.  ? This was working perfectly with v0.9something on another Alpha.D   I investigate. Thanks, Colin.   D.   Colin Blake wrote: >  > See also bug 105036T4 > http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105036   --  H   ----------------------------------------------------------------------H MORANDI Consultants  -  WEB: http://Didier.Morandi.Free.fr/index_us.htmlH 19, chemin de la Butte, 31400 Toulouse, France.  GSM: +33 (0)6 7983 6418H Disaster Recovery Plans, Computer Security Audits, DEC OpenVMS Expertise   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:35:46 -0400s% From: Jim Agnew <agnew@mail2.vcu.edu>u Subject: Re: New to VAX - Message-ID: <3CD2E692.8D286A23@mail2.vcu.edu>   F Right!!!!  that way, I didn't have to throw the old dead one out, just< put a working one on top of a non-working one, and be a geek redneck!!!!!       emanuel stiebler wrote:i  I > There is another thing to mention about the vt52/55. They were the laste$ > "stackable" terminals DEC made ;-)   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:32:06 GMTi# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>n Subject: Re: New to VAXaG Message-ID: <qlDA8.7590$wSM1.1002@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   K Weren't there a couple of 'block mode' variants (similar to 3270) along thee way too?    5 "David Froble" <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in messageb& news:3CD180AE.3030000@tsoft-inc.com... > Steve wrote: >e
 > > Hi there,- > >eK > > I'm very new to Vax systems and I was questionning about terminals. CanbB > > anyone explain me what's the differences between VT100, VT340,3 > > VT420...etc..etc... what makes them different ?r > >_? > > I can't find any "clear" document on the net about that .... > >n > > Thanks a lot!! > >s	 > > SteveQ >NF > A brief, and not necessarily complete, history of the DEC terminals. >A  > VT05B - a very early CRT, 1973? > VT52 - A rather large box introduced in the mid to late 1970soB > VT100 - The beginning of the  rather successful line of DEC CRTs/ > VT101 - really can't remember the differencesh" > VT102 - A VT100 with more memory  > VT220 - Successor to the VT1001 > VT230 - A graphics terminal, for REGIS and such & > VT240 - a color version of the VT2303 > VT320 - smaller and better successor to the VT220t  > VT330 - successor to the VT230  > VT340 - successor to the VT240B > VT420 - successor to the VT320, included sessions, more features= > VT510 - limited ability successor to the VT420, no sessionstE > VT520 - full featured successor to the VT420, allowed more sessions H > VT525 - a box that provided VT520 capabilities, using a PC monitor for display,L >          allowed various color selections and such.  Nice but a bit pricy. >iL > There were a few more, not very significant models.  All the above is fromJ > memory and without any research.  Some data could be wrong.  None of the! > X-windows devices are included.  >sC > The VT520 is the (relative) best of all the terminals, all thingsr considered.lJ > The VT525 is better, but more pieces and larger.  A VT420 is also a niceK > terminal.  The VT320 is probably the smallest of all of them, but doesn't ? > support multiple sessions.  It makes a good console termianl.h >  > Dave, full of trivia today.  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:35:58 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>c Subject: Re: New to VAXoG Message-ID: <2pDA8.7663$wSM1.7035@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>i  J I still have the WordPerfect keyboard overlay for a VT220 hidden in one of my desk drawers.    : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3CD22714.98C44945@videotron.ca... > "Alan E. Feldman" wrote:F > > The VT420 allowed you to download fonts. WordPerfect used that forD > > italics and if you had the terminal set to VT320 mode, you'd get( > > gibberish instead of italics (IIRC). >:K > Downloadable fonts worked on the VT220. Used them with WPSPLUS to get them > technical character setb >lJ > They worked with the VT320, but only in 80 columns mode. Something about not5I > enough memory in the VT320 for storing two fontmaps. (80 and 132 columnr
 versions).   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 20:19:27 -04008( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> Subject: Re: New to VAXl* Message-ID: <3CD3290F.30307@tsoft-inc.com>  L I'm sure the list is far from complete.  I figured others would fill it out.  P One person mentioned the VT-241, and that jogs my memory a bit.  Possibly there M was never a VT-230, and the VT-240 was black & white, and the Vt-241 was the   color model.  K Then there was the Robin, a VT-100 with an embedded computer, running CP/M h( possibly, and some funky 8 inch floppys.  H I think there was a VT-103 also, but cannot remember what it was.  Also > something targetted at IBM.  Possibly the one mentioned below.  ! It's been a while, over 25 years.a   Dave     John Smith wrote:   M > Weren't there a couple of 'block mode' variants (similar to 3270) along thee
 > way too? >  > 7 > "David Froble" <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in messaget( > news:3CD180AE.3030000@tsoft-inc.com... >  >>Steve wrote: >> >> >>>Hi there, >>> J >>>I'm very new to Vax systems and I was questionning about terminals. CanA >>>anyone explain me what's the differences between VT100, VT340,t2 >>>VT420...etc..etc... what makes them different ? >>>t> >>>I can't find any "clear" document on the net about that ... >>>a >>>Thanks a lot! >>>t >>>Steve >>>3F >>A brief, and not necessarily complete, history of the DEC terminals. >>  >>VT05B - a very early CRT, 1973? >>VT52 - A rather large box introduced in the mid to late 1970sNB >>VT100 - The beginning of the  rather successful line of DEC CRTs/ >>VT101 - really can't remember the differences " >>VT102 - A VT100 with more memory  >>VT220 - Successor to the VT1001 >>VT230 - A graphics terminal, for REGIS and such>& >>VT240 - a color version of the VT2303 >>VT320 - smaller and better successor to the VT220i  >>VT330 - successor to the VT230  >>VT340 - successor to the VT240B >>VT420 - successor to the VT320, included sessions, more features= >>VT510 - limited ability successor to the VT420, no sessionstE >>VT520 - full featured successor to the VT420, allowed more sessionsdH >>VT525 - a box that provided VT520 capabilities, using a PC monitor for >>
 > display, > L >>         allowed various color selections and such.  Nice but a bit pricy. >>L >>There were a few more, not very significant models.  All the above is fromJ >>memory and without any research.  Some data could be wrong.  None of the! >>X-windows devices are included.t >>C >>The VT520 is the (relative) best of all the terminals, all thingsb >>
 > considered.- > J >>The VT525 is better, but more pieces and larger.  A VT420 is also a niceK >>terminal.  The VT320 is probably the smallest of all of them, but doesn'tl? >>support multiple sessions.  It makes a good console termianl.f >> >>Dave, full of trivia today.d >> >> >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 23:33:40 -0400 1 From: Micheal Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com>  Subject: Re: New to VAXt2 Message-ID: <3CD35694.25C6101A@firstdbasource.com>   David Froble wrote:  > N > I'm sure the list is far from complete.  I figured others would fill it out. > Q > One person mentioned the VT-241, and that jogs my memory a bit.  Possibly theresN > was never a VT-230, and the VT-240 was black & white, and the Vt-241 was the > color model. > L > Then there was the Robin, a VT-100 with an embedded computer, running CP/M* > possibly, and some funky 8 inch floppys. > I > I think there was a VT-103 also, but cannot remember what it was.  AlsoI@ > something targetted at IBM.  Possibly the one mentioned below. > # > It's been a while, over 25 years.m >  > Dave >  > John Smith wrote:  > O > > Weren't there a couple of 'block mode' variants (similar to 3270) along thee > > way too? > >o > >s9 > > "David Froble" <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in messagef* > > news:3CD180AE.3030000@tsoft-inc.com... > >t > >>Steve wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Hi there, > >>>oL > >>>I'm very new to Vax systems and I was questionning about terminals. CanC > >>>anyone explain me what's the differences between VT100, VT340,B4 > >>>VT420...etc..etc... what makes them different ? > >>> @ > >>>I can't find any "clear" document on the net about that ... > >>>  > >>>Thanks a lot! > >>> 
 > >>>Steve > >>> H > >>A brief, and not necessarily complete, history of the DEC terminals. > >>" > >>VT05B - a very early CRT, 1973A > >>VT52 - A rather large box introduced in the mid to late 1970sjD > >>VT100 - The beginning of the  rather successful line of DEC CRTs1 > >>VT101 - really can't remember the differencesh$ > >>VT102 - A VT100 with more memory" > >>VT220 - Successor to the VT1003 > >>VT230 - A graphics terminal, for REGIS and suchl( > >>VT240 - a color version of the VT2305 > >>VT320 - smaller and better successor to the VT220 " > >>VT330 - successor to the VT230" > >>VT340 - successor to the VT240D > >>VT420 - successor to the VT320, included sessions, more features? > >>VT510 - limited ability successor to the VT420, no sessions G > >>VT520 - full featured successor to the VT420, allowed more sessionsPJ > >>VT525 - a box that provided VT520 capabilities, using a PC monitor for > >> > > display, > >.N > >>         allowed various color selections and such.  Nice but a bit pricy. > >>N > >>There were a few more, not very significant models.  All the above is fromL > >>memory and without any research.  Some data could be wrong.  None of the# > >>X-windows devices are included.- > >>E > >>The VT520 is the (relative) best of all the terminals, all things. > >> > > considered.I > >mL > >>The VT525 is better, but more pieces and larger.  A VT420 is also a niceM > >>terminal.  The VT320 is probably the smallest of all of them, but doesn'tlA > >>support multiple sessions.  It makes a good console termianl.  > >> > >>Dave, full of trivia today.s > >> > >> > >m > >   G The VT103 was a VT100 with a QBUS backplane and a PDP11 computer insidetA with external RX02 (8-inch) Floppies.  Data Terminal Systems - ant? electronic cash register company sold them to program their 64KIG Price-Lookup cash registers with an IRC (inter-register communications)tE - basically a async serial line. You could daisy-chain 20-30 of theseI0 things together... pretty cool (early 80's IIRC)   -- t Regards,  7 Michael Austin            Registered Linux User #261163c7 First DBA Source, Inc.    http://www.firstdbasource.comt   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 16:00:01 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>u Subject: Re: Positive news...p, Message-ID: <3CD2EC3F.D742F8D8@videotron.ca>   Dean Woodward wrote:> " > Capellas Clock stops ticking...:) > http://www.theinquirer.net/03050211.htmf  N Since I have absolutely no loyalty to Compaq, I have abosolutely no sadness toK see it go. In a way, Compaq got what it deserves because it screwed Digitalu0 and squandered the assets it paid for so dearly.  M To me, this whole merger is tantamount to Digital dying a second time. ExceptcL this time, Digital is falling off a high speed motorbike on a rough road andJ large limbs detaching as Digital bounces and rolls onto the road. Alpha isK gone. All-In-1 is going. Tru64 is going. Compilers gone. Where will it stop L and how badly injured will Digital be ? Will it just become an organ donor ?   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 18:45:56 -0400  From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com>J Subject: Re: Predictions, was: Re: Some more words of wisdom from Capellas6 Message-ID: <1020503181705.48130B-100000@Ives.egh.com>  # On 3 May 2002, Simon Clubley wrote:.  S > In article <aato9701u3q@drn.newsguy.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:i > > N > > "We're driving the move to standards-based computing across the board," he > > replied. > >  > L > "across the board" ? In my book, that means low end to high end (including > the VMS market).  D I'm sure this isn't what Curly meant, but of course VMS is much moreC "standards-based" than Windows is.  I haven't looked at the VMS SPDeI recently, but last time I looked, there was a very long list of standards"F it complies with at the end.  Windows doesn't even comply with itself.   > P > > In response to a question "What does Compaq stand for?", Capellas answered:  > > Q > > "We've got to be the first go-to-market partner Intel, the first go-to-markettR > > partner for Oracle and the first go-to-market partner for Microsoft," he said. > > T > > "We've got to do this. We can't do microprocessor better than Intel," he added.  > >  > M > People other than myself are much more qualified to talk about Alpha versusuI > IA64, but if Alpha was so bad, then why is the d*mn thing still settingl > records ?  > R > > Windows and Linux would " absolutely eviscerate midrange Unix", he predicted.  > >  > H > This one is worrying. While I agree with the viewpoint that Linux willK > continue to eat into the Solaris market share, especially at the low end, H > I think that (in light of his standards-based computing quote) it also@ > means that Capellas believes that the same will happen to VMS. > 5 > My predictions (and I really hope that I am wrong):e@ > 	Next week, when the plans are disclosed to the general media,@ > 	(as opposed to the VMS media) VMS will not be a major part of? > 	the public discussion; if discussed at all it will be in thec@ > 	context of legacy customers; and any committment letters will> > 	only be promoted within the installed base and not promoted > 	outside of it.o > C > 	VMS will never be marketed outside of the installed base; peoplee& > 	will have to explicitly ask for it. > C > 	The port to IA64 will continue, but it's purpose will be to keeplB > 	the installed base happy and not to generate conversions to VMS+ > 	from customers who don't already use it.n > B > 	Small VMS customers have no future in the HPQ scheme of things.A > 	If they want it because they have grown up with it then great,rA > 	but I think that the HPQ view of the VMS future is towards thev@ > 	very large installations. Such an approach may appear to workG > 	in the short term, but won't (IMHO) give a long time future for VMS.t > ? > 	[Note that I work for a small employer, so I see the ways inn? > 	which Windows/Unix systems can be made to provide a completeh+ > 	solution for these sized organisations.]c  B I think this is the most likely outcome, though Compaq/HP probably@ won't say this in so many words.  The VMS group will continue toC produce new versions, add stuff like CSWS and Java, etc., but thereaE will be little marketing outside the installed base and the HP/CompaqeE sales force will be clueless about it.  ("VMS?  Could you spell that,n	 please?")S  A This is far from the best possible outcome, but also far from the  worst.  D What's the track record for hired-gun managers like Carly and Curly?C I think they have a half-life of less than 5 years.  So even if allmB things were equal, they will probably be gone in 2-3 years.  MaybeB by that time there will be a management fad of mining corporations? for the buried treasures they already possess and using them tohA restore a failing corporation.  (All that takes is for someone in ? some industry to do something like that and for someone else ton@ write a "Management for Dummies" book about it.)  Someone new in? charge might look around, see that they still own VMS and it is.C making a tidy little profit in its niche, they still own the rightssA to Alphas and are still leading or close to leading the pack withl@ its EV7 performance tweaks, and will say "why don't we push this stuff?"   C The best possible outcome would be that they do that on Monday, but-@ I think that's very unlikely.  Sort of like Bin Laden announcing< that he has had a sudden revelation that blowing up innocent@ people doesn't really help advance any kind of political agenda,A but just gets people with bigger bombs really, really ticked off,eF and so he has decided to renounce terrorism and urge all his followers> and admirers to embrace nonviolent civil disobedience instead.  0 Killing VMS outright would be just plain stupid.   > Simon. >  > -- rD > Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP       - > Microsoft: The Lada of the computing world.i   -- . John Santosk Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 13:37:51 -0700-. From: SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman)% Subject: Re: Read it and weep Andrew!/= Message-ID: <343f30ae.0205031237.7e93741b@posting.google.com>1   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> wrote in message news:<aau71l$j32$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...- > Why would I weep., > A > Oracle Applications is a benchmark that measures the throughputuA > of a system not the per CPU performance. The fact that the ES45u   [blah blah blah omitted]  d > More salt. > 	 > Regardsd > Andrew Harrison  >  > Bob Ceculski wrote:o > ) > > AlphaServer ES45 Sets Another Record   > > I > > Yet another reason why the AlphaServer ES45 is the most popular Alpha5   [blah blah blah omitted]    E Alright. That's enough. If you two don't stop this endless bickering, B I'm going to resuscitate the "12 Noon: Is it am or pm?" discussion6 with Mr. Dachtera. David, 'you up for it?  :-) :-) :-)  ; OH NO! NOT THE AM/PM DISCUSSION AGAIN!  :-O :-O :-O :-O :-O   4 AND I'LL DO IT ENTIRLEY IN UPPERCASE!!!  HORRORS!!!  AUUUGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!     Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldmane" afeldman atski gfigroup dotski com   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 19:44:44 GMT 9 From: Hein van den Heuvel <hein_netscape@eps.zko.dec.com> ) Subject: Re: Reduce interupt time on CPU0b/ Message-ID: <3CD2E6C6.8CBB9682@eps.zko.dec.com>t   Jeff Anicker wrote:r  E > Well I believe we finally located the issue.  After much time spent H > tweaking we learned that there is one database application that prettyH > much the entire company connects to.  When a blank database is createdC > the system flies.  Once a hundred thousand records are entered it9 > turns everything into a dog.  & Sounds like you are on the right track  ? Besides all the other good suggestions (enought globale buffer,  pre-allocation, J large extends, larger buckets,..) you may want to check for "duplicate key chains" I on critical files. Either use ANAL/RMS/FDL on (a copy off) the file afters use  or try my tool:3  I  http://www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware/freeware40/rms_tools/sidr.exe_axps  
 Good luck, Hein.l   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 14:57:34 -0500t+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)e) Subject: Re: Reduce interupt time on CPU0i3 Message-ID: <ux4aENjUHJPV@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  k In article <3CD2E6C6.8CBB9682@eps.zko.dec.com>, Hein van den Heuvel <hein_netscape@eps.zko.dec.com> writes:. > Jeff Anicker wrote:w  E > Situation: Extremely poor performance on a 10 cpu (5/625) 10gig ramwC > alpha 8400 running vms 7.2-2.  This is in a 4 node cluster with ad$ > gs140, alpha 4000, and a vax 7000.  @ 	My fault.  I did not notice the GS140 in there.  That obviously  	renders earlier advice suspect.   				Robc   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 21:15:06 +0200r) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)sB Subject: Re: Reducing size of incremental backup - will this work?) Message-ID: <q6AYRFfg0muW@elias.decus.ch>   W In article <C2256BAD.005189D8.00@jklh22.valmet.com>, norm.raphael@jamesbury.com writes:" >  > 8 > You forgot submit /NOTIFY , not the negation of /TIFY. >    I like /NONOTIFY myself.   >  >  > > > HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com on 05/02/2002 11:28:37 AM > 6 > Please respond to HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com >  > To:   Info-VAX@mvb.saic.comm > cc: E > Subject:  Re: Reducing size of incremental backup - will this work?  >  >  > A >> I hereby nominate /NOINCREMENTAL for the most poorly named VMS  >> qualifier ever. > I > Especially since, in contrast to everything else in VMS, /NOINCREMENTAL & > is not the negation of /INCREMENTAL. >  >  >  >  >  >  -- t   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:06:49 GMT 5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>n  Subject: Re: Revisionist history9 Message-ID: <ZkAA8.30$TV2.545927@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net>-  H The fact is that we didn't just build chips, and the time from pass 0 toK production is non-zero.  EV8 wasn't in silicon, it was in design.  There is0I no way to measure how well it would have performed, or when it would havedK delivered.  You can take the best estimates from the chip designers, or youmL can look at past history of the delta between the original chip and platformJ schedule estimates and the actuals.  It probably would have been somewhere in between.t  I I am a skeptic that you would have seen EV8 based platforms in 2004.  TheyJ EV7, which is the cornerstone of EV8 will only have been out in productionI systems late this year - perhaps if "2004" meant "December 50th 2004" ---bH maybe.  The only good thing about EV8 is that it is more-or-less a fancyI EV8, and so we had a chance of not having to debug new platforms and core J logic chips at the same time.  It's not likely that much if any of the SMTI features would have been exploited by the O/S's in that timeframe, exceptrL for using the chip as virtual 4-CPU SMP's.  Perhaps some specialized UNIX MP software might have been done.  B But no matter.  EV8 in 2004, 2005 or 2006 would still have been anJ interesting chip - especially to those who would want to see very high CPUH counts (even if 3/4 of them are virtual - just the additional functional% units would have helped performance).y  L But it is acedemic.  The decision, like it or not, was to not build EV8, andK to concentrate on building platforms and not chips.  And to be able to havee0 a single server platform strategy for all O/S's.       Bill Todd wrote in message ...K >As Terry saw fit to pass on the Compaq party line that EV8 really did have K >problems, it seems once again time to cut through the crap that Compaq andVD >its minions have been spreading liberally for close to a year now -L >especially since there are precious few Alpha chip team members left in HPS; >to counter the revisionist FUD from the server contingent.i > I >The facts are simple:  EV8 was doing well, right up until it got canned.sI >That's what its team believed, that's what its management believed (even2G >after June 25th, when they made it clear to their people that it was alF >'business decision' having nothing whatsoever to do with technical orK >schedule issues), and they're those by far best qualified to have made theeF >assessment.  There was a reason Intel wanted to scoop them up, and it wasn't >because they were incompetent.> > F >The server group, however, was not in the same boat at all.  They hadK >over-promised, under-delivered, and even then delivered late on the EV6 GSsJ >series - to the point where the problems became obvious early enough thatJ >the EV7 chip team made sure that the most the server team would be called@ >upon to do with EV7s would be to snap them together like Legos. >-G >It would not be unreasonable to suspect that this created a modicum ofhJ >rivalry/tension between the two groups, and that this might have made theC >server contingent all the more ready to tell Compaq that the Alpha 	 processoreH >really wasn't very important to future server efforts, couldn't competeJ >long-term with Itanic, etc.  It also might have steered their preferences toJ >'blade'-style architectures, since they're by definition pretty difficult toK >'steal' onto the chip (though equally unable to take advantage of the kind I >of scalability EV7 makes possible).  If so, they were actively venal; if + >not, they were merely incompetent (again).e >rH >It's worth evaluating just what the June 25th technology give-away costK >Compaq in leadership, because otherwise it's easy to pass it off as just anB >minor performance issue that would have been eclipsed by the nextJ >process-shrink.  I've covered the processor core pretty well in the past,H >and the recent statement from the 'Wither ALL-IN-1' post by Bob KnowlesH >captured some of the basics:  EV79 is projected (now even by Compaq) toA >exceed the performance of Itanic in 2004, even though the lattern (Montecito,>D >if Intel sticks to its announced schedule) will be one full processI >generation ahead of it, which means that EV8 (also having been scheduled  forcL >2004) would have offered about 3 times the per-processor performance of theI >Itanics it would have been competing with (even though, again, being onehL >full process generation behind them).  This would have allowed AlphaServersL >to compete on equal footing with Itanic servers having 2 to 4 times as many- >processors - just on core performance alone.T > G >What I haven't adequately appreciated until more recently has been theeI >multiplicative effect of the EV7 on-chip multi-processor support (and tofJ >perhaps a lesser degree its on-chip memory support).  The first effect ofF >having significantly better MP scaling characteristics than Itanic is simplyK >that as soon as more than a few Itanic processors are required in a serverdL >for a given load, the relative inefficiency of their interconnects comparedH >with EV7/EV8's increases the '2 to 4' times as many ratio above to more likeD >'3 to 6', at which point it truly doesn't matter a damn if Intel is *giving*D >the Itanics away:  the AlphaServers will still be considerably more# >cost-effective doing the same job.. > L >But Itanic isn't the only competition out there, and both Hammer and POWER4I >also have on-chip MP support.  True enough, but once again Alpha has (or L >would have had, if its death-warrant had not allowed others to trump it) anB >ace up its sleeve, because the Hammer architecture maxes out at 8
 processorsG >(or 16 if they go to a dual-core variant, as both rumors and their MPF L >presentation last October suggest) and the POWER4 architecture maxes out atK >32 processors (16 dual-core packages, spread across 4 modules) - and while F >both *might* be able to extend these limits in the future, there's noJ >indication that they could do so with anything like the efficiency of the >'mesh' approach that EV7 has. >lD >Now, as per-processor performance improves and effective clusteringL >mechanisms become more common, there is indeed a case that can be made thatH >very-high-processor-count SMP or NUMA servers aren't very important anyF >more.  But just in case they are, Alpha would have offered *far* moreI >expandibility (up to 128 processors) than the only alternatives with therL >on-chip support that makes very-high-processor-count boxes highly efficient >in the first place. >1L >So Compaq would have been untouchable in both per-processor performance andI >server scalability, had it chosen to be.  And while Alpha has never beenwH >sold at commodity prices, it has always managed to make at least modestF >profits at *reasonable* prices, even with negligible marketing by itsI >owner - so would have been a cost/performance leader as well as purely av >performance leader. >iK >That's what Compaq threw away and still appears to be trying to justify byeL >casting doubt upon its worth.  Lying bastards to the end:  they and Carly's >team should be a great match. >i >- billo >  >d >d   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 11:19:52 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>   Subject: RE: Revisionist history9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIMEGHEOAA.tom@kednos.com>u   >-----Original Message------; >From: Fred Kleinsorge [mailto:kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com]6$ >Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:07 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com! >Subject: Re: Revisionist historym >o >aI >The fact is that we didn't just build chips, and the time from pass 0 to2L >production is non-zero.  EV8 wasn't in silicon, it was in design.  There isJ >no way to measure how well it would have performed, or when it would haveL >delivered.  You can take the best estimates from the chip designers, or you@ >can look at past history of the delta between the original chip
 >and platform K >schedule estimates and the actuals.  It probably would have been somewhereo >in between. >sJ >I am a skeptic that you would have seen EV8 based platforms in 2004.  TheK >EV7, which is the cornerstone of EV8 will only have been out in productionhJ >systems late this year - perhaps if "2004" meant "December 50th 2004" ---I >maybe.  The only good thing about EV8 is that it is more-or-less a fancy'J >EV8, and so we had a chance of not having to debug new platforms and coreK >logic chips at the same time.  It's not likely that much if any of the SMTsJ >features would have been exploited by the O/S's in that timeframe, except9 >for using the chip as virtual 4-CPU SMP's.  Perhaps somea >specialized UNIX MP >software might have been done.A > C >But no matter.  EV8 in 2004, 2005 or 2006 would still have been an K >interesting chip - especially to those who would want to see very high CPUUI >counts (even if 3/4 of them are virtual - just the additional functionalt& >units would have helped performance). > > >But it is acedemic.  The decision, like it or not, was to not >build EV8, andnL >to concentrate on building platforms and not chips.  And to be able to have1 >a single server platform strategy for all O/S's.y  G Of course, it really doesn't matter which chips you use as long as theyp providedE competitive performance.  I mean, you could port VMS to Power PC.  Ofl course,aL you wouldn't be in control of your destiny, but then I'm not sure that IntelJ is a better choice from this perspective.  I think too many people on this listL confuse VMS with Alpha,  VMS is the platform, Alpha is the delivery vehicle.     >l >e >  >Bill Todd wrote in message ...lL >>As Terry saw fit to pass on the Compaq party line that EV8 really did haveL >>problems, it seems once again time to cut through the crap that Compaq andE >>its minions have been spreading liberally for close to a year now - A >>especially since there are precious few Alpha chip team membersH >left in HPS< >>to counter the revisionist FUD from the server contingent. >>J >>The facts are simple:  EV8 was doing well, right up until it got canned.J >>That's what its team believed, that's what its management believed (evenH >>after June 25th, when they made it clear to their people that it was aG >>'business decision' having nothing whatsoever to do with technical ornL >>schedule issues), and they're those by far best qualified to have made theG >>assessment.  There was a reason Intel wanted to scoop them up, and ito >wasn'tr  >>because they were incompetent. >>G >>The server group, however, was not in the same boat at all.  They hadCL >>over-promised, under-delivered, and even then delivered late on the EV6 GSK >>series - to the point where the problems became obvious early enough thatlK >>the EV7 chip team made sure that the most the server team would be called A >>upon to do with EV7s would be to snap them together like Legos.- >>H >>It would not be unreasonable to suspect that this created a modicum ofK >>rivalry/tension between the two groups, and that this might have made the2D >>server contingent all the more ready to tell Compaq that the Alpha
 >processorI >>really wasn't very important to future server efforts, couldn't competerK >>long-term with Itanic, etc.  It also might have steered their preferenceso >tooK >>'blade'-style architectures, since they're by definition pretty difficultb >tobL >>'steal' onto the chip (though equally unable to take advantage of the kindJ >>of scalability EV7 makes possible).  If so, they were actively venal; if, >>not, they were merely incompetent (again). >>I >>It's worth evaluating just what the June 25th technology give-away cost'L >>Compaq in leadership, because otherwise it's easy to pass it off as just aC >>minor performance issue that would have been eclipsed by the nextaK >>process-shrink.  I've covered the processor core pretty well in the past, I >>and the recent statement from the 'Wither ALL-IN-1' post by Bob KnowlesgI >>captured some of the basics:  EV79 is projected (now even by Compaq) toiB >>exceed the performance of Itanic in 2004, even though the latter >(Montecito,E >>if Intel sticks to its announced schedule) will be one full processtJ >>generation ahead of it, which means that EV8 (also having been scheduled >for: >>2004) would have offered about 3 times the per-processor >performance of the.J >>Itanics it would have been competing with (even though, again, being one@ >>full process generation behind them).  This would have allowed
 >AlphaServersY? >>to compete on equal footing with Itanic servers having 2 to 4/ >times as many. >>processors - just on core performance alone. >>H >>What I haven't adequately appreciated until more recently has been theJ >>multiplicative effect of the EV7 on-chip multi-processor support (and toK >>perhaps a lesser degree its on-chip memory support).  The first effect ofrG >>having significantly better MP scaling characteristics than Itanic is4 >simplyaL >>that as soon as more than a few Itanic processors are required in a server6 >>for a given load, the relative inefficiency of their >interconnects compared I >>with EV7/EV8's increases the '2 to 4' times as many ratio above to more  >likelE >>'3 to 6', at which point it truly doesn't matter a damn if Intel iss	 >*giving*cE >>the Itanics away:  the AlphaServers will still be considerably mores$ >>cost-effective doing the same job. >>B >>But Itanic isn't the only competition out there, and both Hammer >and POWER4 J >>also have on-chip MP support.  True enough, but once again Alpha has (or@ >>would have had, if its death-warrant had not allowed others to
 >trump it) ancC >>ace up its sleeve, because the Hammer architecture maxes out at 84 >processors H >>(or 16 if they go to a dual-core variant, as both rumors and their MPF@ >>presentation last October suggest) and the POWER4 architecture
 >maxes out atAL >>32 processors (16 dual-core packages, spread across 4 modules) - and whileG >>both *might* be able to extend these limits in the future, there's notK >>indication that they could do so with anything like the efficiency of thec >>'mesh' approach that EV7 has.  >>E >>Now, as per-processor performance improves and effective clustering C >>mechanisms become more common, there is indeed a case that can bed
 >made thatI >>very-high-processor-count SMP or NUMA servers aren't very important any,G >>more.  But just in case they are, Alpha would have offered *far* more.J >>expandibility (up to 128 processors) than the only alternatives with theC >>on-chip support that makes very-high-processor-count boxes highlys
 >efficient >>in the first place.  >>= >>So Compaq would have been untouchable in both per-processort >performance andJ >>server scalability, had it chosen to be.  And while Alpha has never beenI >>sold at commodity prices, it has always managed to make at least modest8G >>profits at *reasonable* prices, even with negligible marketing by itscJ >>owner - so would have been a cost/performance leader as well as purely a >>performance leader.  >>L >>That's what Compaq threw away and still appears to be trying to justify byA >>casting doubt upon its worth.  Lying bastards to the end:  theye >and Carly's >>team should be a great match.e >> >>- bill >> >> >> >	 >c >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.a; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).eA >Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002r >  ---g& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 19:08:08 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>2  Subject: Re: Revisionist history; Message-ID: <seBA8.65990$%s3.25614495@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>m  . "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message3 news:CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIMEGHEOAA.tom@kednos.com...  <snip> >bI > Of course, it really doesn't matter which chips you use as long as they.	 > provideeG > competitive performance.  I mean, you could port VMS to Power PC.  Ofs	 > course,gH > you wouldn't be in control of your destiny, but then I'm not sure that Intel-L > is a better choice from this perspective.  I think too many people on this > listE > confuse VMS with Alpha,  VMS is the platform, Alpha is the delivery$ vehicle.  B Once VMS is successfully ported to IPF I am told that there are noC insurmountable technical obstacles to porting the OS to another 64b  processor architecture.i   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 12:39:47 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>   Subject: RE: Revisionist history9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIAEGMEOAA.tom@kednos.com>t   >-----Original Message----- 7 >From: Terry C. Shannon [mailto:terryshannon@attbi.com]y$ >Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 12:08 PM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com! >Subject: Re: Revisionist historym >n >0 > / >"Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in messagen4 >news:CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIMEGHEOAA.tom@kednos.com... ><snip>s >>J >> Of course, it really doesn't matter which chips you use as long as they
 >> provideH >> competitive performance.  I mean, you could port VMS to Power PC.  Of
 >> course,I >> you wouldn't be in control of your destiny, but then I'm not sure that  >Intel? >> is a better choice from this perspective.  I think too many i >people on this  >> list F >> confuse VMS with Alpha,  VMS is the platform, Alpha is the delivery	 >vehicle.h > C >Once VMS is successfully ported to IPF I am told that there are noaD >insurmountable technical obstacles to porting the OS to another 64b >processor architecture.  B Of course the same could have been said for VAX -> AXP transition. >o >  >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.c; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).oA >Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002o >v --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 14:19:37 -0700 - From: jodonnell@hrblock.com (Jason O'Donnell)y  Subject: Re: Revisionist history= Message-ID: <9059bf6b.0205031319.7f7b6f41@posting.google.com>   > Of course, it really doesn't matter which chips you use as long as they provide competitive performance.  I mean, you could port VMS to Power PC.  Of course, you wouldn't be in control of your destiny, but then I'm not sure that Intel is a better choice from this perspective.  I think too many people on this list confuse VMS with Alpha,  VMS is the platform, Alpha is the delivery vehicle.e  D I agree.  It is the operating system that I want alive, whatever the hardware platform.  A However, having the operating system vendor also own the hardwaretD technology seemed to make sense to me.  And, the Alpha chip appeared to be the better product.n   JMOD   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 22:20:16 GMTt5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>t  Subject: Re: Revisionist history9 Message-ID: <A2EA8.35$FY2.677920@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net>7  : "Jason O'Donnell" <jodonnell@hrblock.com> wrote in message7 news:9059bf6b.0205031319.7f7b6f41@posting.google.com...oK > > Of course, it really doesn't matter which chips you use as long as theyeI provide competitive performance.  I mean, you could port VMS to Power PC.cL Of course, you wouldn't be in control of your destiny, but then I'm not sureF that Intel is a better choice from this perspective.  I think too manyJ people on this list confuse VMS with Alpha,  VMS is the platform, Alpha is the delivery vehicle.' >tF > I agree.  It is the operating system that I want alive, whatever the > hardware platform. >bC > However, having the operating system vendor also own the hardwarecF > technology seemed to make sense to me.  And, the Alpha chip appeared > to be the better product.m >   J In my opinion, Alpha was and is a superior approach and architecture.  ButK the decision was made that we could not afford to continue to support it as H a niche product.  The decision was made to consolidate enterprise serverE development using a single architecture, with a wider selection of OSeC choices, and to not invest in CPU chip development.  Intel had beenhK sucessful with a really crappy ISA (the X86).  Given enough time and money,nI I am sure Alpha could have sustained a lead in performance - but probably C not by "huge" margins over the competition - and to date, the Alpha J advantage has not turned it into a market share leader.  IA64 will soon beI on par or better than everything except a couple chips - including Alpha.hH Over time, Intel has a track record of driving performance and cost withH IA32, and I would expect the same with IA64.  The volumes will be higherG than Alpha, the cost per-chip lower (with no NRE cost), and we can haveeL fewer system platform development teams.  While the gap exists between AlphaH performance and IA64 performance - the EV7 systems will continue to be aL great system.  We have provided a roadmap that provides a large overlap whenJ both systems will be available, and when EV7 runs out of gas, IA64 will beI there.  VMS will be running on the same platforms with HP-UX, with a muchvC larger market share than Tru64., and HP-UX will get an injection ofw@ technology from Tru64.  Sun will over the next few years go fromI uncompetetive on price/performance in the low end today (a IA32 system iseK cheaper and faster), and marginally competetive on the high end today (onlylD the Fujitsu systems are leaders right now) - to uncompetetive on allL fronts - as they will continue to fall behind with Sparc.  Sun will probablyJ have to abandon Sparc in a few years (or less) - maybe for x86-64, but whoH knows what they will do - it's not clear that Hammer et al will scale toL very large CPU counts and big enterprise servers.  The only real competitionI will be IBM.  Intel now has the bulk of the Alpha development team, and IaG expect that in the middle of the decade, their expertise will push IA64o0 quite faster than the doom-sayers would predict.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 00:45:01 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>  Subject: Re: Revisionist history> Message-ID: <haGA8.1527$M7.211119@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message3 news:A2EA8.35$FY2.677920@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net...m   ...t   > Given enough time and money,  J Change that to "Given the relatively modest, already long-planned time and money".d  K > I am sure Alpha could have sustained a lead in performance - but probablyl, > not by "huge" margins over the competition  L Very careful wording.  Indeed, Alpha would likely not have maintained "huge"J margins over POWER4, though it probably would have retained some advantageC in both performance and price (those MCMs are expensive).  However,rC splitting the mid-range and high-end markets with POWER4 would haveeL generated a very substantial chunk of profit - far more than in the past, if4 Compaq had made any attempt to take advantage of it.  H And Alpha likely wouldn't have maintained "huge" margins over Hammer andL IA32, but those products certainly don't impinge much on Alpha's significantI markets today and while Hammer may start to work up into the lower end ofrG them in the future since its current architecture (max 8 processors, or I possibly 16 if they go to dual cores) can't begin to cover the range that L EV7's can (max 128 processors) guaranteeing the expandibility that customersC seem to like (if only 'just in case') will be a problem for Hammer.e  H But there's *every* indication that Alpha *would* have maintained "huge"K performance margins over IA64, contrary to the revisionists - increasing toeD a 3:1 per-processor performance advantage with EV8, and even more inL large-processor-count servers where the EV7/EV8-style superior MP glue makesK a significant difference.  And *that's* the comparison relevant to deciding 6 whether Itanic is in any way a reasonable replacement.  L If McKinley debuts within 3 months at even *per-clock* SPECint2K parity withL EV7 (e.g., if EV7 hits 900 - 1000 SPECint2K at 1.25 GHz, then McKinley wouldL only have to hit 720 - 800 SPECint2K at 1 GHz) then I'll consider moderatingH my opinion.  But to really change things McKinley would have to debut atL *absolute* SPECint2K parity with EV7, since Alpha had a clear evolution pathK in EV8 (and maybe even farther) whereas there's every indication that IntelEL didn't have a clue where to go after the McKinley design (until they got the
 EV8 team).    - and to date, the Alphag9 > advantage has not turned it into a market share leader.y  L That observation is getting *really* tired, Fred:  I don't think many peopleF here have any doubt whatsoever about why Alpha did not become a market leader.d     IA64 will soon behK > on par or better than everything except a couple chips - including Alpha.l  K Not as carefully worded here, I'm afraid.  Let's go into a bit more detail.e  E First of all, it seems very likely that IA64 won't reach server-stylenJ performance parity with Alpha, POWER4, Hammer, IA32 (P4 or Athlon), or theI putative Yamhill (that's six chips, not two, all save two of them 64-bit)nJ any time 'soon':  we have Itanic road maps through 2004, and all they showK is a couple of McKinley shrinks (first Madison/Deerfield, then Montecito) -tL and all the chips I mentioned (except EV7, which Compaq seems to be draggingI its feet on a bit) seem likely to be shrinking at about the same dates orcG earlier ones.  So we have to start by defining your 'soon' as 'in threei1 years or more' or redefining 'a couple' as 'six'.o  H Second, as I mentioned above there's no indication that Intel had a clueK where to try to take IA64 after the McKinley/Madison/Montecito design.  OnesL might assume that it would eventually have picked up similar on-chip glue toL EV7/POWER4/Hammer/USIII's, but given Intel's public statement that MontecitoJ would incorporate only 'minor' enhancements to McKinley/Madison it doesn'tK sound as if they had even *those* in the works before getting the EV8 team.r  I So it's not unreasonable to suspect that in the *absence* of the EV8 team F and Alpha intellectual property, the IA64 core would have continued toE stagnate somewhat (if they hadn't any idea what to do last year, theytK couldn't have shipped any major improvement - assuming they not only becamenI inspired but in fact got it right - before 2006/7) and at best would havenL been enhanced with some on-chip glue sometime around 2005 - allowing EV8 notH only to consolidate its lead but to extend it.  Even *with* the EV8 teamL it'll be at least 2005 before *any* real improvements (such as on-chip glue)I occur and at least 2006 before anything more substantial occurs:  withouteJ it, it's not at all unreasonable to expect that Intel would have thrown inE the Itanic towel long before that time (and indeed it still well may,h/ changing its tune to "Just wait for Yamhill!").   J > Over time, Intel has a track record of driving performance and cost with. > IA32, and I would expect the same with IA64.  L Then it appears you would be even more gullible than those who believed such@ things *before* the continual difficulties with Itanic became soD embarrassingly evident.  A few years ago, it was at least *somewhat*J believable that the Intel (Merced) and HP (McKinley) designs would ship inK some kind of timely fashion, would achieve some kind of decent performance, G would generate at least some kind of real enthusiasm in the market, andlH would be followed by additional redesigns (*not* simply process-shrinks)I that would allow Itanic to follow the kind of performance curve that IA32n has.  L Now, it's clear that Merced is an absolute flop, and McKinley seems far lessK than the dramatic improvement the Itanic-boosters had hoped for (though, asuB I said above, I'll be willing to reexamine the issue if McKinley'sE performance numbers, if we ever see them, are better than I, and manyiH others, expect them to be).  And it's also clear from Intel's statementsB that the McKinley design is *it* (for Itanic) until at least 2005.     The volumes will be higher9 > than Alpha, the cost per-chip lower (with no NRE cost),   H Completely irrelevant in Alpha's main markets (or what were Alpha's mainL markets).  The cost of the processors themselves is lost in the noise unlessH it gets well into 4 figures apiece.  Of course, last I knew Itanics costI *more* than Alphas, and were projected to continue to even after McKinleyu arrived.    and we can have* > fewer system platform development teams.  J Really?  I suspect there'll be an IA32 team, an at least somewhat separateI IA64 team, and (if you have any sense) another at least somewhat separatelL Hammer team (unless Yamhill materializes and is sufficiently similar to IA32L that you can use that team).  Not to mention the EV7 platform team - and oneI should remember that EV8 used essentially the same external interface, sotJ could just have ridden on that (existing) team's shoulders to a very large extent.l  H From all current appearances, the team to scrap would have been the IA64I team - especially since EV7 and Hammer might have been able to share somesH platform-development resources (having similar off-chip requirements, at( least in small-to-medium-sized systems).  $   While the gap exists between AlphaJ > performance and IA64 performance - the EV7 systems will continue to be a > great system.s  I My guess is that EV7 may continue to be a great system longer than Itanict< exists in any real sense.  Too bad there's no EV7 successor.     We have provided a roadmap  G I suspect a lot of customers don't have a great deal of faith in CompaqtL roadmaps any more, leaving aside the question of whether they like what they see on them today.  #  that provides a large overlap whengL > both systems will be available, and when EV7 runs out of gas, IA64 will be > there.  F Yeah, right.  Right along side iAPX432.  Face it, Fred:  things really/ aren't looking very good for Itanic these days.i  C   VMS will be running on the same platforms with HP-UX, with a muchsE > larger market share than Tru64., and HP-UX will get an injection ofn > technology from Tru64.  C Maybe, maybe not.  Curly appears to be determined to turn off HP/UXdJ customers in about the same way he turned off Alpha customers.  Now all heK and Carly have to do is find some corporation stupid enough to buy them out % next year as HP did Compaq this year.t  *   Sun will over the next few years go fromK > uncompetetive on price/performance in the low end today (a IA32 system isiG > cheaper and faster), and marginally competetive on the high end todays (onlysF > the Fujitsu systems are leaders right now) - to uncompetetive on all; > fronts - as they will continue to fall behind with Sparc.s  I As long as their only competition is IBM (cHomPaq being too busy trippingoH over its collective feet until such time as it gets its act sufficientlyJ together to start shooting itself in them again), Sun will likely continue to do pretty much OK./     Sun will probablyeL > have to abandon Sparc in a few years (or less) - maybe for x86-64, but whoJ > knows what they will do - it's not clear that Hammer et al will scale to3 > very large CPU counts and big enterprise servers.e  L There's a good chance it won't have to:  its current architecture appears toI scale to 8 dual-core packages (i.e., 16 processors), which in a couple ofwJ years should provide performance equivalent to any 64-processor server youG can buy today (i.e., not too shabby).  Beyond that, boxes with multipleGF (possibly big-blade-like) 16-core modules with high-speed, low-latencyL interconnects may do the job just as well as (and far less expensively than)+ high-processor-count partitionable servers.r  F IBM seems to have taken the same tack with POWER4:  AFAICT its largestI configuration is 32 processors (16 dual-core chips spread across 4 MCMs).eL Too bad EV7 doesn't have any evolutionary path onward any more:  its abilityK to support far larger configurations would have been an advantage to peopleoI who aren't convinced by the POWER4/Hammer approaches.  OTOH, those may be , the customers who instead keep USIII viable.     The only real competition  > will be IBM.  K Dream on, Fred.  I'd be looking for the next stock-price spike to sell if II	 were you.m  =   Intel now has the bulk of the Alpha development team, and I I > expect that in the middle of the decade, their expertise will push IA64e2 > quite faster than the doom-sayers would predict.  H I'm no doom-sayer w.r.t. the qualifications of the Alpha team:  I expectL them to be able to make Itanic at the very least respectable *IF* Itanic canG survive the next 4 years as anything worth sinking that much additional I money and effort into.  But I just don't expect that "IF" condition to bel
 satisfied.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:33:51 -04002- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>e  Subject: Re: Revisionist history, Message-ID: <3CD33A7E.620B6F5C@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:DD > Once VMS is successfully ported to IPF I am told that there are noE > insurmountable technical obstacles to porting the OS to another 64bc > processor architecture.m  K What about memory protection modes ? Will Hammer offer enough such modes tot" make viable (and just as secure) ?   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:07:49 GMTn5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>S0 Subject: Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC9 Message-ID: <VlAA8.31$JR2.392208@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net>   7 I'll take the bet, how much do you want to wager on it?    John Smith wrote in message ...h >6A >"Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in messages4 >news:LgeA8.16$ap2.485481@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net... >. >>; >> Or you could go for real focused - Shannon Knows VMS ;-)h >> >wK >That might last only until the afternoon of May 7th when  Carly issues its9 >death certificate  :-(g >i >s   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:11:49 GMTo5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>a0 Subject: Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC9 Message-ID: <FpAA8.32$lV2.534624@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net>l   Bill Todd wrote in message ... >R9 >"Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message7. >news:lGELmlXAGUYz@eisner.encompasserve.org...I >> In article <uPgA8.32040$q8.3459454@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill ' >Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:t >o >... >OE >> > Sorry - UltraSPARC III.  You know, the processor line Rob alwayss >denigrateslE >> > for being such a pig that Itanic will quickly usurp Sun's entiret	 >customernJ >> > base as its start on conquering the world.  That's why it would be so >funny3 >> > if McKinley turned out to be slower after all.t >> > >>4 >> Is that an "official" prognostication, or a wish? >mH >I made a quantitive prediction (based on publicly-available informationK >which I described) some time ago that McKinley would weigh in at 600 - 700-K >SPECint2K (and most likely in the middle of that range), and I stand by itsF >(unless it gets delayed so long that Intel can skip the first releaseA >entirely and go directly to what would have been the first majornK >post-release process tweak - which is looking increasingly possible).  The9H >best USIII SPECint2K currently is 610, but since such values do tend to riseL >as new configurations appear I'd say there's a distinct possibility, thoughH >perhaps not a better-than-even chance, that if McKinley doesn't in fact waitI >for a process-tweak before releasing it will at introduction have a hardt( >time equalling USIII's SPECint2K speed. >o  I So there you go.  Assuming your predictions are right, McKinley will beat J USIII (and even your outside estimate of USIII getting faster doesn't takeL into account the tricked up compiler that caused the temportary "upgrade" of
 USIII speed).c  J So IA64 systems will at minimum be performance competetive with USIII, and1 from what I understand will be priced much lower.a  I Will EV7 be faster than McKinley.  I don't think there is any doubt about  that.    ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 21:59:44 +0200h) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)s0 Subject: Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC) Message-ID: <T9G7aNnAn6iv@elias.decus.ch>d  ` In article <aatujn$2v37$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:= > In article <hekA8.63523$%s3.24921933@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>,s6 >  "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes: > |> aK > |> Well, the 206MHz StrongARM processor and the 64MB of memory in my iPAQdD > |> utterly trounce the specs of the VAX 11/750 I managed in 82/83. > |> rC > |> Of course, the iPAQ doesn't support 30 interactive logins! ;-}s > F > That's like looking at a PDP-11 running RT-11 and saying the machine > only supports one user. B > Put a real OS on it and all that changes.  Especially now that I* > understand it suppoorts 802.11 wireless. >   + FYI I used to run a 6 user RT-11 system :-)t/ (with TSD - Time Shared Dibol, on top of RT-11)e   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:44:50 -0400a( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>0 Subject: Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC, Message-ID: <3CD2E8B2.7010107@tsoft-inc.com>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:  9 > I'll take the bet, how much do you want to wager on it?d > ! > John Smith wrote in message ...o > B >>"Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message5 >>news:LgeA8.16$ap2.485481@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net...t >>.e >>; >>>Or you could go for real focused - Shannon Knows VMS ;-)  >>>  >>>lL >>That might last only until the afternoon of May 7th when  Carly issues its >>death certificate  :-(   Another sucker bet!c    J No matter how they circumvent any rules, Mikey isn't making any decisions N without an Ok from Carly, and some decent purchasing decisions have been made N concerning VMS.  I'd also bet that it survives May 7th.  Other bets will have  different odds.    Dave   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:01:58 GMTn1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>h0 Subject: Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC; Message-ID: <aVCA8.66033$%s3.25687459@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>   5 "David Froble" <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in message.& news:3CD2E8B2.7010107@tsoft-inc.com... > Fred Kleinsorge wrote: >1; > > I'll take the bet, how much do you want to wager on it?o > >t# > > John Smith wrote in message ...s > >8D > >>"Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message7 > >>news:LgeA8.16$ap2.485481@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net...d > >>.r > >>= > >>>Or you could go for real focused - Shannon Knows VMS ;-)s > >>>d > >>> J > >>That might last only until the afternoon of May 7th when  Carly issues itse > >>death certificate  :-( >p > Another sucker bet!e >i >iK > No matter how they circumvent any rules, Mikey isn't making any decisionsaJ > without an Ok from Carly, and some decent purchasing decisions have been madeJ > concerning VMS.  I'd also bet that it survives May 7th.  Other bets will have > different odds.k  J I'd give pretty good odds on the survival of OpenVMS, Marvel/EV7, and evenK Tru64-on-Alpha well beyond May 7. VMS is IMHO more exposed to ISV attritions than to merger-day culling.h   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:47:49 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>t0 Subject: Re: SKC Morphs Again... We're Now SKHPC, Message-ID: <3CD33DC4.C4E3C02B@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:rL > I'd give pretty good odds on the survival of OpenVMS, Marvel/EV7, and evenM > Tru64-on-Alpha well beyond May 7. VMS is IMHO more exposed to ISV attrition  > than to merger-day culling.     L If HP chooses to keep VMS in status quo mode (total obscurity, no marketing,J VMS never mentioned in public), isn't that tantamount to signing its death. warrant, but expecting VMS to slowly die off ?  L With the forced port to IA64, and no serious public commitment to VMS by HP,M and with VMS relegated to only large boxes running a slow chip, can we really M expect the small medium ISVs to continue to support VMS ? I realise that somenB of the big guys such as Oracle said that they would continue theirH "commitment" to VMS, but these same people's definition of commitment isP different since they don't port all of Oracle to VMS, only the database backend.  N So, in my opinion, the "status quo" is really an expectation that VMS will die/ not long after HP starts to ]ush IA64 machines.   M A strong public commitment and serious marketing is needed to counter the illaK effects of the port to an inferior platform and the mayhem that will resultn from the merger.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:43:10 GMTn( From: Don Sykes <annonymous@pacbell.net> Subject: SMTP Usage Filter... + Message-ID: <3CD304CE.E854D469@pacbell.net>n   My Knowledgeable Friends,AO In response to an email attack recently (using me as mail bouncer), I set up anr smtp.config file and entered :# 	Reject-Unbacktranslatable-IP: TRUEcN I now notice far less junk mail and no new attacks. And I'm still getting someQ good mail, but I'm also rejecting about 10-20 emails/hr as "unbacktranslatable". wK My question is could this setting cause "good" email to be blocked as well?tN Put another way: is there ever a VALID reason why a port 25 request would come> from an IP that can't be translated back to its sender domain?   Running VMS 7.2  TCPIP 5.1   TIAf Don  -- M Have VMS. Will Travel. Wire Paladin @alphase.com 
 San Franciscoa   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 02 00:30:19 +0200i) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)s! Subject: Re: SMTP Usage Filter...y) Message-ID: <FgwMnWSW9l+G@elias.decus.ch>   V In article <3CD304CE.E854D469@pacbell.net>, Don Sykes <annonymous@pacbell.net> writes: >  > My Knowledgeable Friends,tQ > In response to an email attack recently (using me as mail bouncer), I set up ant  > smtp.config file and entered :% > 	Reject-Unbacktranslatable-IP: TRUEeP > I now notice far less junk mail and no new attacks. And I'm still getting someS > good mail, but I'm also rejecting about 10-20 emails/hr as "unbacktranslatable". oM > My question is could this setting cause "good" email to be blocked as well?uP > Put another way: is there ever a VALID reason why a port 25 request would come@ > from an IP that can't be translated back to its sender domain? >   8 Yes, if I send you a mail direct from my own systems :-)  J I have a fixed IP address. I just haven't got around to sorting out my DNS entries yet.  B My ISP charges something like 6 USD per month, per domain, for theL privilege of "Managing DNS entries". Given I have more than one domain, that5 seems like a lot of money for a one off setup effort.    Paul   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 17:38:02 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>i! Subject: RE: SMTP Usage Filter...a9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIIEHGEOAA.tom@kednos.com>n  > I guess you are using tcpip5.1.  I had that also turned, cause? it seemed like the right thing, but it was rejecting legitimater@ mail, people behind firewalls, DHCP.  So this is too restrictiveB a filter.  To avoid open relay just fill in the Good-clients list.  C Of course, you still have to live with the spam and teething virii.*       >-----Original Message-----w1 >From: Paul Sture [mailto:p_sture@elias.decus.ch]w# >Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 3:30 PM* >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com" >Subject: Re: SMTP Usage Filter... >d >i7 >In article <3CD304CE.E854D469@pacbell.net>, Don Sykes d! ><annonymous@pacbell.net> writes:e >> a >> My Knowledgeable Friends,= >> In response to an email attack recently (using me as mail e >bouncer), I set up an! >> smtp.config file and entered :i& >> 	Reject-Unbacktranslatable-IP: TRUE? >> I now notice far less junk mail and no new attacks. And I'm f >still getting somem> >> good mail, but I'm also rejecting about 10-20 emails/hr as  >"unbacktranslatable".  > >> My question is could this setting cause "good" email to be  >blocked as well?b? >> Put another way: is there ever a VALID reason why a port 25 x >request would comedA >> from an IP that can't be translated back to its sender domain?i >> * >o9 >Yes, if I send you a mail direct from my own systems :-)h > K >I have a fixed IP address. I just haven't got around to sorting out my DNSl
 >entries yet.s >iC >My ISP charges something like 6 USD per month, per domain, for theeA >privilege of "Managing DNS entries". Given I have more than one i
 >domain, thatO6 >seems like a lot of money for a one off setup effort. >  >Paulo >t >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free..; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).mA >Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002w >  ---a& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 02:20:42 GMTu" From: kkal@javakk.com (Ken Kalish)! Subject: Re: SMTP Usage Filter... . Message-ID: <3cd3437c.4614614@News.CIS.DFN.DE>  A To thwart the wiley spammer on an MX, you need a whitelist and/or 2 authentication. SendMail now does this by default.  M Btw, just for info, ORBS (now dead?) never did say that it was good to rejectl* on their list. So don't reject "too much".  K Still, I've received a UCE today and now I know I can make at least $50,000sK per week by working at home with my PC. OTOH, I really don't need a batteryo charger from Taiwan.    H Bona fides: having in the past killed literally billions and billions ofN spammers, I became discouraged when reporting a dropbox to, say, yahoo, and my@ LART was responded to with "the spam did not originate with us".  K On Fri, 03 May 2002 21:43:10 GMT, Don Sykes <annonymous@pacbell.net> wrote:o   >w >My Knowledgeable Friends,P >In response to an email attack recently (using me as mail bouncer), I set up an >smtp.config file and entered : $ >	Reject-Unbacktranslatable-IP: TRUEO >I now notice far less junk mail and no new attacks. And I'm still getting somegR >good mail, but I'm also rejecting about 10-20 emails/hr as "unbacktranslatable". L >My question is could this setting cause "good" email to be blocked as well?O >Put another way: is there ever a VALID reason why a port 25 request would come ? >from an IP that can't be translated back to its sender domain?  >t >Running VMS 7.2  TCPIP 5.1o >l >TIA >Don   -- e   Regards,  
 Ken Kalish   there is no Java cartelt   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 22:23:13 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>4 Subject: Re: Some more words of wisdom from Capellas< Message-ID: <k5EA8.248$M7.55506@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  6 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@Compaq.com> wrote in messageL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF401AB1EF9@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. .. Andrew,a  D >>> Oracle is devloped on Sun Solaris and given Compaqs market shareH with them no one could describe Compaq as the first-go-to-market partner with Oracle.<<    Ahh, but what about the new HP ?  D Do you not think HP-UX + Tru64 UNIX + OpenVMS + W2K + Linux is not aF compelling reason for Oracle to want to do much more business with the new HP?b   ***   G Given that Curly just gave HP/UX a hard right to the gut (after cutting H Tru64 off at the knees last year), and that Oracle really hasn't shown a? tremendous amount of interest in VMS lately, and that (at least G theoretically) HP's Linux and Windows offerings are not going to be anyrL different from anyone else's Linux and Windows offerings, it's a little hardL to understand why Oracle would bother giving the time of day to anyone otherG than Sun and IBM in the future.  Not that it's likely to refuse to maketF Oracle available on HP platforms, but I seriously doubt that it's veryL worried that HP will stiff it and push someone else's database instead (thatJ wouldn't lose Oracle any business, it would just lose HP the business whenI the customers went to someone else who would give them what they wanted).r   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 22:06:57 +0200u) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)r- Subject: Re: UK folks this might interest you ) Message-ID: <gMbyW6zqHDTi@elias.decus.ch>t  c In article <e21KLJt21lo4@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:nV > In article <3CD24C96.E44B887B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes: >>  A >> Oh, there's nothing like the smell of a brewery. Mmmmmmmmmmmm.d >> ,> >> I used to work in a bakery, and that wasn't too bad either. >>  K >> On Orkney recently I visited the Highland Park distillery, another nasala >> delight.  >> t > J >    Used to live down the street from a chocolate candy plant.   And then? >    my sister lived in Hershey for a while.  Breath in deeply.  >e  I I once had a trip around a chocolate factory. The company policy was thatfE staff could eat as much as they liked at work, but not take any home.0  I Believe me, after 2 hours of being offered every type of chocolate by theRH tour guide, none of us could touch the stuff again for days. I could see$ how that company's policy worked :-)   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 23:10:07 +0200u) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)S3 Subject: Re: UK/EU OpenVMS job market: non-existanta) Message-ID: <yTxR00BDgejE@elias.decus.ch>o  W In article <3CCF7C73.5060704@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:-F > I've fot to back Rob up on this one all the way.  This is how it is. >   N I believe this thread may be highlighting differences in attitudes between the. US and the UK. I'll back up Chris on this one.  & [mucho ssnippo - this is getting long] >  > P > Look at this from the perspective of finding a replacement. It costs money andE > time. Probably more than what it would cost to retain the employee.n >   O Not necessarily. The thinking goes like this: "If we give the guy more money to M stay, then everyone will try the same. We'll write off our investment in thisi5 guy to save ourselves the expense of that happening".-  K They will then quite happily pay a salary to a replacement which would haveiK represented enough of a rise to keep the original guy happy. The PHB gets ae. bigger budget without being seen to lose face.   I have seen it happen.   > R > Now you may not have seen such, but I have.  It's smart business.  If you as an R > employer have grown a good resource, sent him to classes and such, and now have S > a very valuable resource, you do what's required to protect that resource, if at t > all possible.> >   < Agreed that's smart business. Since when did that count? :-)  d >  [more snipping]b   >>>>F >>>Mandatory overtime? How about banning overtime and to hell with the& >>>consequences? That's more the norm. >>>a >>>h >> wK >> 	Ban overtime?  Not if there is a hiring freeze, get it?  I don't agree >< >> 	with it.  But that is the way it is (example I know of). >   K Again, seen in the UK. Hiring freeze _and_ overtime ban. In my case, it wasIN working away from home, and only a 35 hour week, which was doubly frustrating.   > I > The critical work MUST get done.  A company does whatever it has to do.e >  >   M Um, yes. One of my colleagues here recites the tale of a previous job. He wasaK recruited a few months after a massive purge of staff. When their databasesoI (inevitably) packed up, they recruited him. Seems the guy they got rid of O because wasn't seen to be overworked had been keeping the systems running afterr all.   Paul   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 12:00:06 -0700 , From: srp336@getcoactive.com (Steve Pfister) Subject: Vax emulator for PC= Message-ID: <45126e60.0205031100.183f9bc9@posting.google.com>2  A I'm interested in getting a Vax emulator for Windows 2000 (on AMD,E Athlon). I used to use VAX/VMS on a VAX-11/780 back in high school int? the early 80s, and I'd like to get an emulator, just for my owna@ amusement. What is the cheapest route to do this? Do you need to2 belong to DECUS to get a hobbyist OpenVMS license?   Thanks!d   --Steve    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 19:52:05 GMTl" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>  Subject: Re: Vax emulator for PC1 Message-ID: <FTBA8.1085$W3.17791@typhoon.bart.nl>   $ Go to http://simh.trailing-edge.com/C The Simh project has several simulators and one of them is a VAX, aG VAXserver 3900F to be precise. There's no fee, all you need is Visual C++ to build it.F The next step is to get VMS, you'll need to be a DECUS member to get a hobbyist license from www.montagar.com    Hans  7 Steve Pfister <srp336@getcoactive.com> wrote in messagee7 news:45126e60.0205031100.183f9bc9@posting.google.com...iC > I'm interested in getting a Vax emulator for Windows 2000 (on AMD2G > Athlon). I used to use VAX/VMS on a VAX-11/780 back in high school iniA > the early 80s, and I'd like to get an emulator, just for my ownaB > amusement. What is the cheapest route to do this? Do you need to4 > belong to DECUS to get a hobbyist OpenVMS license? >d	 > Thanks!t >0	 > --Steves   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 23:14:55 +0200a- From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr>-  Subject: Re: Vax emulator for PC' Message-ID: <3CD2FDCF.42393952@Free.fr>e  . http://www.softresint.com/charon-vax/index.htm  N There is a Hobbyist version. This product is definitely the N 1 VAX emulator,6 and it is also a real product for VAX/VMS development.   D.   Steve Pfister wrote: > C > I'm interested in getting a Vax emulator for Windows 2000 (on AMDoG > Athlon). I used to use VAX/VMS on a VAX-11/780 back in high school inpA > the early 80s, and I'd like to get an emulator, just for my ownnB > amusement. What is the cheapest route to do this? Do you need to4 > belong to DECUS to get a hobbyist OpenVMS license?   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 19:58:44 -0400  From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com>  Subject: Re: Vax emulator for PC6 Message-ID: <1020503195700.48130D-100000@Ives.egh.com>  % On Fri, 3 May 2002, Hans Vlems wrote:M  & > Go to http://simh.trailing-edge.com/E > The Simh project has several simulators and one of them is a VAX, a0 > VAXserver 3900H > to be precise. There's no fee, all you need is Visual C++ to build it.H > The next step is to get VMS, you'll need to be a DECUS member to get a
 > hobbyist > license from www.montagar.com-  D The license is free to DECUS (Encompass) members.  Joining Encompass@ cost money, but there is a free limited membership category that0 *does* entitle you to the hobbyist VMS licenses.   >  > Hans > 9 > Steve Pfister <srp336@getcoactive.com> wrote in messaget9 > news:45126e60.0205031100.183f9bc9@posting.google.com...oE > > I'm interested in getting a Vax emulator for Windows 2000 (on AMDoI > > Athlon). I used to use VAX/VMS on a VAX-11/780 back in high school inoC > > the early 80s, and I'd like to get an emulator, just for my ownpD > > amusement. What is the cheapest route to do this? Do you need to6 > > belong to DECUS to get a hobbyist OpenVMS license? > >m > > Thanks!o > >c > > --Steveg >  >  >  >    -- a John Santosi Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 17:53:51 -0700n- From: tessier-ashpool@usa.net (Chris Bardell)   Subject: Re: Vax emulator for PC= Message-ID: <9f261edc.0205031653.27a11325@posting.google.com>c  
 CHARON-VAX  % http://www.softresint.com/product.htm,   HTH.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 21:38:34 -0700 , From: srp336@getcoactive.com (Steve Pfister)  Subject: Re: Vax emulator for PC= Message-ID: <45126e60.0205032038.73df023f@posting.google.com>   P > There is a Hobbyist version. This product is definitely the N 1 VAX emulator,8 > and it is also a real product for VAX/VMS development.  ' Thanks for the responses I've gotten...o  D Just out of curiosity...how much is the Charon-Vax plus version? I'm@ sure it's way out of my price range (which isn't too difficult).  
 Thanks again!t   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 14:14:41 -0700n- From: roli@barmettler.net (Roland Barmettler)n. Subject: VAXstation 3520 (Firefox) mem upgrade< Message-ID: <235cf5c3.0205031314.63b0c5f@posting.google.com>   Hi Folks  + A friend of mine has the following problem:gI He got a second 16MB memory board for his VAXstation 3520 but the machine,A sees only 16MB. He tried almost all possible slot combinations...c& The new board is definitively working.I Could there be a console parameter that has to be set ? A hidden jumper ?    Any help would be very welcome!o   Thanks, Roland   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 22:25:36 GMTr5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>r2 Subject: Re: VAXstation 3520 (Firefox) mem upgrade9 Message-ID: <A7EA8.36$bV2.526374@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net>     Is physical pages set in sysgen?  : "Roland Barmettler" <roli@barmettler.net> wrote in message6 news:235cf5c3.0205031314.63b0c5f@posting.google.com...
 > Hi Folks >l- > A friend of mine has the following problem:aK > He got a second 16MB memory board for his VAXstation 3520 but the machinetC > sees only 16MB. He tried almost all possible slot combinations...u( > The new board is definitively working.K > Could there be a console parameter that has to be set ? A hidden jumper ?a >r! > Any help would be very welcome!d >i > Thanks, Roland   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 00:06:19 +0200Va From: holitska_a@removehomo-togetvalide-mailhomo-ludens.elte.hu (Holi - Holitska Andrs)r3 Subject: Re: VAXstation 4000 90 and serial console? ! Message-ID: <xyLqCzorGSPt@ludens>P  \ In article <877kmlwvvc.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:= > Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> writes:R > M >> > I have a digital VAXstation 4000 90 i want to connect to a PC with Linux< >> > and minicom,  >  .& >> I would suggest a real terminal.... > ? > Or at least toss minicom and use KERMIT. I think minicom will A > play hard to get unless the modem statuslines are 'just right'.n  = Might be true (i don't know neither minicom nor kermit well).   : Oh, and try turning hardware handshaking off, and software (aka XON/XOFF) handshaking on.  ? An *ugly* way that *always* works: do a cat > /dev/ttyS0 on one.+ console, and a cat /dev/ttyS0 on another :]   : I never connect DTR and DSR, and always use XON/XOFF (less8 cabeling, and a bit slower connection if you type *real*
 fast ;] ).  B If this doesn't help, then the connector at the VAX may be broken.A Check if all "pins" connect with the "legs", and that they aren't ; too dirty. If this doesn't help then it might be a hardwarer problem.  < *Only*do*this*as*a*last*resort*: find an electrican you know< well, take appart the VAX, and tell him, that he should heat> up the pins of the connector (the pins of the MMJ connector on= the mainboard). This might help if there is a simple electric < contact problem between the mainboard and the MMJ connector.= (If you're lucky then you can test it, by holding down a key,M> and moving the connector (on the mainboard) a bit, and if only= one letter get's trough, then you can be sure, it's a contactg@ problem (don't know the exact technical expression in english).)4 This helped me in the case of my VXT2000-s keyboard.     God be with You:  <Holi>   >  > -- c> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.FB >                                              West Australia 60760 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.H > EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 02 20:30:06 +0200 ) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)e. Subject: Re: virtual i/o cache v7.2-1 and v7.3) Message-ID: <NG0W8Mg5+ibn@elias.decus.ch>l  ` In article <aapnu9$7ro@dispatch.concentric.net>, "Jim Strehlow" <jimSnoSpam@data911.com> writes: > Thanks for the warning.i  > I will change to VCC_FLAGS = 1 >  > $mcr sysgen show vcc_flagsI > Parameter Name           Current    Default     Min.      Max.     Unitg	 > DynamicdN > --------------           -------    -------    -------   -------   ----  ---4 > VCC_FLAGS                       2          2   ... >  > Thank you. > K And here's a warning. If you are in a cluster, check that the MODPARAMS.DATc= file actually reflects the change you made, after the reboot.u   Yes, I got caught by this...   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 01:51:59 GMTr1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>n+ Subject: Re: VMS 6.2 file ownership problem ' Message-ID: <3CD341BC.BCAE6F19@fsi.net>y   Paul Sture wrote:e > u > In article <Y7Sz8.8$fS1.173180@cacnews.cac.cpqcorp.net>, hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net (Charlie Hammond) writes:f+ > > In article <3CCF5057.4C715738@fsi.net>, 7 > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:s > >iI > >>What always goofed me up about that was because I could, the software.J > >>did, without me so specifying. Wish I could have had more control over- > >>it without dropping/resetting privileges.0 > >:D > > If you run with privs on by default, you are asking for trouble.C > > With privs on, it is just TOO EASY to do something "bad" beforewA > > you realize it.  I have caused myself worse problems than youn2 > > describe by forgettting I had privs turned on! > > ? > > I have defined two symbols to turn privs on and off easily:c > >n > > PEEK> sho sym priv! > >   PRIV == "SET PROC/PRIV=ALL"e > > PEEK> sho sym depriv5 > >   DEPRIV == "SET PROC/PRIV=(NOALL,NETMBX,TMPMBX)"  > >mK > > Other's have a "PRIV" command that re-sets the "$" (or whatever) prompt : > > to something else that reminds you of having privs on. > , > FWIW, I have the following symbol defined: > > > $ mypriv :== set proc/priv=(noall,'f$getjpi("","AUTHPRIV")')  C ...which is fine so long as your AUTHPRIV string is not excessively0 long.o   --   David J. Dachtera. dba DJE Systemsw http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/s   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 18:27:17 GMTP. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)+ Subject: Re: VMS, Bind and Active Directoryo3 Message-ID: <9EAA8.64377$vc2.803325@news.chello.at>a  [ In article <ib9y8.5$Q32.595@psinet-eu-nl>, "Robb Edge" <Robb.Edge "@" Savant.co.uk> writes:s1 >If this is the wrong group, then many apologies.s  K VMSNET.NETWORKS.TCP-IP.UCX would have been the better group, but this group 5 is not wrong. Only problem is the noise level here...o  I >Any one set up an M$ AD domain, using Bind 8.2 or 9.x running on VMS7.3?t   Half and half.  6 M$ AD requires SRV RR which BIND 8 already brought us.D BIND 8 is supported by TCPIP V5 and TCPware V5.5 and ... on OpenVMS.  0 BIND 9 is AFAIK still not available for OpenVMS.  F We ran the primary company BIND/DNS server for years on OpenVMS. First@ it was BIND 4, then BIND 8, then BIND 8 with dynamic DNS (DDNS).E We got a lot of messages from BIND server caused by the M$ crap then.d  D First we got complaints of non-standard-conforming names registered.D M$ choose to use the underscore (which is not allowed in RFC) in all$ of their global catalog hierarchies.  M Second we got complaints of update errors. We never found out what was wrong.oO (I suspected some SRV RR) Newer TCPIP versions didn't remove them (completely).   K Third we got a lot of messages indicating that M$ is updating records whichtI are already correct (in fact they did a deregistering and new registeringoK all over the time for many RR - thus very fast increasing the SOA serial#). G We never found out why M$ does it with BIND 8 and not with with its owne4 NT5 BIND (I suspected the update errors from above).  L In the project of removing OpenVMS at my (now previous) company, the primaryG BIND Server had to move over to NT5. The official argument was the fastcJ increasing SOA serial# _and_ the (said to be) missing partial zonetransferK updates (from the primary server to the secondary servers - and vice versa)tJ in BIND 8 (BIND 9 is said to have this feature - I was not able/allowed to- prove that BIND 8 would be still sufficient).w  H So, we started AD on BIND 8, but it no longer runs on it here. Funny is,I that all remote locations in this net still run NT4 (means BIND 4) and doRM not already see the benefits of BIND 8 (eg. TRIGGER, DDNS) so our discussionstK (or should I say fight ?) were moot anyway. When this remote locations will.K finally run NT5.x sometimes next year, VMS will surely already have BIND 9.lD But, so, M$ has won one more decision (eg. by breaking standards)...   -- m Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERm% Network and OpenVMS system specialistr E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atP A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm looking for (a) Network _and_ VMS Job(s)   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 19:57:00 +02001 From: "Giorgio Ungarelli" <giorgio@ungarelli.net>v= Subject: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?d+ Message-ID: <3cd2cff1_2@news.tiscalinet.ch>n   Hi,y  I I thought that the last version of OpenVMS released by Compaq for the VAXoL platform was V7.2 and all subsequent releases (V7.2-1, V7.3, etc) would onlyH be for the Alpha platform.  However, I have recently seen pictures of an4 OpenVMS/VAX V7.3 CD (from Compaq), dated April 2001.  G Could someone please confirm that OpenVMS V7.3 is available for the VAXa	 platform?(   Thanks,S   GiorgioR   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 20:02:18 +0200./ From: Frederik Meerwaldt <frederik@freddym.org>iA Subject: Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform? / Message-ID: <aaujbb$bdq$07$1@news.t-online.com>    Hi!   < On Fri, 03 May 2002 19:57:00 +0200, Giorgio Ungarelli wrote:  I > Could someone please confirm that OpenVMS V7.3 is available for the VAXo > platform?i   *confirm* Sure it is.  I have the CDs next to me.1 But all that information is on the Internet, too.a   Greetings - freddy   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 11:19:53 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>eA Subject: RE: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?.9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEGHEOAA.tom@kednos.com>l  > I haven't tried it, but was told by CSA that it is the same CD
 as for alpha.    >-----Original Message-----v7 >From: Giorgio Ungarelli [mailto:giorgio@ungarelli.net] $ >Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:57 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com> >Subject: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform? >u >  >Hi, >eJ >I thought that the last version of OpenVMS released by Compaq for the VAXC >platform was V7.2 and all subsequent releases (V7.2-1, V7.3, etc) o >would onlywI >be for the Alpha platform.  However, I have recently seen pictures of ang5 >OpenVMS/VAX V7.3 CD (from Compaq), dated April 2001.: > H >Could someone please confirm that OpenVMS V7.3 is available for the VAX
 >platform? >o >Thanks, >e >Giorgio >n >? >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.a; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).tA >Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002f >  --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:30:09 -0400 - From: Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>tA Subject: Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?r/ Message-ID: <3CD2E541.CE50379@ost.cdrh.fda.gov>    Giorgio Ungarelli wrote:S > Could someone please confirm that OpenVMS V7.3 is available for the VAX platform?h  + It most assuredly is!  See my login screen:.  I This computer is for authorized government purposes only.  By logging on, # you consent to security monitoring.  Username: (Ahem!)V	 Password:   1     Welcome to TVAX6, a VAX 4000 running VMS V7.3t  7     Last interactive login on Friday,  3-MAY-2002 14:28r;     Last non-interactive login on Friday,  3-MAY-2002 14:29   (             You have 1 new Mail message.   $   O Please be advised that this "upgrade" completes the demolition of DPS support. sL I tried with expert help to resurrect it using earlier DECW components.  ButM there is no way short of rolling back to 7.2.  And what is the deal with this,J obscene license agreement with Adobe that required Compaq to remove even XK *client* support for DPS?  Don't they know that some of us still have olderoK workstations or X-servers around with DPS?  Perhaps HP has a better licensen3 agreement and we can have it all back again in 7.4.c  O While I'm dreaming, wouldn't it be nice if HP resurrected or made public domaineP all the old products that used to run on VAX/VMS?  If they don't want to supportP it, I can understand.  But burying software products forever seems just about as perverse as Adobe.    - JB@   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 16:49:36 -0400+ From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@Compaq.com>VA Subject: RE: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?dT Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF401AB1EFD@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>  E >>> I haven't tried it, but was told by CSA that it is the same CD as  for alpha.<<   Nope.=20  H Alpha and VAX V7.3 are separate packages with different Cdroms. Both areE definitely shipping today as I received both my kits (same as Cust's): awhile ago.a   Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultante Compaq Canada Corp.s Professional Servicesx Voice: 613-592-4660s Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----+ From: Tom Linden [mailto:tom@kednos.com]=20  Sent: May 3, 2002 2:20 PM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComtA Subject: RE: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?u    E I haven't tried it, but was told by CSA that it is the same CD as ford alpha.   >-----Original Message-----w7 >From: Giorgio Ungarelli [mailto:giorgio@ungarelli.net]o$ >Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:57 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com> >Subject: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform? >4 >4 >Hi, > I >I thought that the last version of OpenVMS released by Compaq for the=201I >VAX platform was V7.2 and all subsequent releases (V7.2-1, V7.3, etc)=20wH >would only be for the Alpha platform.  However, I have recently seen=20D >pictures of an OpenVMS/VAX V7.3 CD (from Compaq), dated April 2001. > H >Could someone please confirm that OpenVMS V7.3 is available for the VAX  
 >platform? >  >Thanks, >e >Giorgio >C >m >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.m; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).eA >Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002b >h ---t& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:21:57 GMTl8 From: "Sloan Essman" <sessman@spamnomore.houston.rr.com>A Subject: Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?,; Message-ID: <VbDA8.25313$Q42.1391267@typhoon.austin.rr.com>m  J 7.3 is supposedly the last version of VMS that will be distributed on TK505 for the VAX.  Maybe that's what you were thinking of.o  < "Giorgio Ungarelli" <giorgio@ungarelli.net> wrote in message% news:3cd2cff1_2@news.tiscalinet.ch...e > Hi,  >-K > I thought that the last version of OpenVMS released by Compaq for the VAXeI > platform was V7.2 and all subsequent releases (V7.2-1, V7.3, etc) wouldg onlyJ > be for the Alpha platform.  However, I have recently seen pictures of an6 > OpenVMS/VAX V7.3 CD (from Compaq), dated April 2001. >-I > Could someone please confirm that OpenVMS V7.3 is available for the VAXc > platform?s >)	 > Thanks,R >V	 > Giorgio  >  >    ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2002 18:43:20 -0500h- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)nA Subject: RE: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?A3 Message-ID: <HC0FZu2QJ7wb@eisner.encompasserve.org>o   In article <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF401AB1EFD@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@Compaq.com> writes: > F >>>> I haven't tried it, but was told by CSA that it is the same CD as > for alpha.<< > 
 > Nope.=20 > J > Alpha and VAX V7.3 are separate packages with different Cdroms. Both areG > definitely shipping today as I received both my kits (same as Cust's) 
 > awhile ago.r  A Never the same CDROM, but there is at least one kit that includes  CDs for both architectures.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 15:33:58 -0400t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>. Subject: Re: Wither ALL-IN-1 ?, Message-ID: <3CD2E626.781F0242@videotron.ca>   Bob Knowles wrote:> > Office Server uses a small number of undocumented FMS calls: > 7 > FDV$$ALLFLD, FDV$$ALLFRM, FDV$$ALLNMD and FDV$$LOAD_Fr> > ! Call callback with parameters: formname descriptor, handle# > ( .CALLBACK ) ( FRMNAM, HANDLE );A  J Thanks. Not quite what I expected, but better than nothing.  It would haveM been nice to get the information directly instead of having to extract a form.1 to .FLG form and parse it the source of the form.s    K > It is just not feasible to expose the individual calls without suppling arJ > vast amount of supporting information about internal FMS data structuresL > which in the end would mean releasing major chunks of the FMS source code.  N Considering that FMS is a dead product with no new development, wouldn't it beG better to let it loose and perhap allow third parties to provide modern- support for the legacy forms ?  J (for instance, an X version of FMS, or a version that would be web enabledK which would keep the FMS development environment intact and just change the0 run-time shareable image.    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 23:56:36 GMTo. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Subject: Re: X session3 Message-ID: <UsFA8.71979$vc2.881364@news.chello.at>   f In article <3CCDF420.D6FF7267@firstdbasource.com>, Michael Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com> writes:5 >One addition and you will have a much easier time...s >oI >This will return the IP address of the current process.  Login from your = >PC and this should be either the IP address or the DNS name.n/ >  f$element(1," ",f$getjpi("","TT_ACCPORNAM"))  >(vms 7.2-1, TCPIP  V5.1)n  L Nope. TT_ACCPORNAM is only defined for INTERACTIVE jobs (means TELNET only).I REXEC, RSH and DECnet-TASK are NETWORK jobs and neither TCPIP nor TCPwareS? fill the IP address into TT_ACCPORNAM for non INTERACTIVE jobs.O  E So, for interactive TELNET logins this is good for a job of LOGIN.COMaE but isn't usable for this X11 server problem (except for a - not veryb likely - TELNET access).   -- c Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialistt E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atP A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm looking for (a) Network _and_ VMS Job(s)   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 23:25:52 +0200t- From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr> 4 Subject: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS???' Message-ID: <3CD30061.3416057D@Free.fr>n  P Could someone explain to me why a Backup saveset sent via the Internet has to beP reset under VMS (via the reset_backup_saveset_attributes.com procedure availableO from the VMS freeware CD) and not a .PCSI container zipped on an Alpha, UNZIPedx  on my Mac and FTPed to my Alpha?   D. -- hH   ----------------------------------------------------------------------H MORANDI Consultants  -  WEB: http://Didier.Morandi.Free.fr/index_us.htmlH 19, chemin de la Butte, 31400 Toulouse, France.  GSM: +33 (0)6 7983 6418H Disaster Recovery Plans, Computer Security Audits, DEC OpenVMS Expertise   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:58:40 GMTu( From: Don Sykes <annonymous@pacbell.net>8 Subject: Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS???+ Message-ID: <3CD30870.35E25B38@pacbell.net>e  6 I think it's because, here's an FDL of a VMS save set: FILE 	...*         ORGANIZATION            sequential 	... RECORD#         BLOCK_SPAN              yesm$         CARRIAGE_CONTROL        none%         FORMAT                  fixedV%         SIZE                    32256c  I Here's a save set on drugs :) I mean after it's been sent via ftp binary:U FILE 	...*         ORGANIZATION            sequential 	... RECORD#         BLOCK_SPAN              yesG$         CARRIAGE_CONTROL        none%         FORMAT                  fixeda#         SIZE                    512e   Any questions?     Didier Morandi wrote:l > R > Could someone explain to me why a Backup saveset sent via the Internet has to beR > reset under VMS (via the reset_backup_saveset_attributes.com procedure availableQ > from the VMS freeware CD) and not a .PCSI container zipped on an Alpha, UNZIPedg" > on my Mac and FTPed to my Alpha? >  > D. > --J >   ----------------------------------------------------------------------J > MORANDI Consultants  -  WEB: http://Didier.Morandi.Free.fr/index_us.htmlJ > 19, chemin de la Butte, 31400 Toulouse, France.  GSM: +33 (0)6 7983 6418J > Disaster Recovery Plans, Computer Security Audits, DEC OpenVMS Expertise   -- r   Have VMS. Will Travel. Wire Paladin @alphase.com 
 San Franciscot   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 02 00:17:59 +0200 ) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)e8 Subject: Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS???) Message-ID: <U0ExtB$yR4p4@elias.decus.ch>e  W In article <3CD30061.3416057D@Free.fr>, Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr> writes: R > Could someone explain to me why a Backup saveset sent via the Internet has to beR > reset under VMS (via the reset_backup_saveset_attributes.com procedure availableQ > from the VMS freeware CD) and not a .PCSI container zipped on an Alpha, UNZIPede" > on my Mac and FTPed to my Alpha? >   L Neither UNZIP nor the RUN command (for self-extracting files) appear to care much about the file attributes.f  M BACKUP does care. Also note that CHECKSUM givies the wrong answer if the fileU+ downloaded is not of the format it expects.r   Paul   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 22:33:26 GMT " From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>8 Subject: Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS???1 Message-ID: <WeEA8.1091$W3.17660@typhoon.bart.nl>   $ Just my guess, for what it is worth:G Backup assumes or requires certain file attributes to be set at certaind values.iE Transmit a backup save set across the internet and its attributes gett changed,= like a recordsize of .5 kB and no carriage control caracters..E When the file gets zipped, either a PCSI file or a BCK file, then ZIPN	 maintains.E those attributes. The Internet only imposes its "standard" (did I sayo standard ;-)G on the container file. That does not happen between the MAC and the VMSB systemK apparently because VMS seems to be able to tell the MAC how to transmit theI file.rB There is no station in between that has to assume that "standard".  8 Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr> wrote in message! news:3CD30061.3416057D@Free.fr...mL > Could someone explain to me why a Backup saveset sent via the Internet has to beNH > reset under VMS (via the reset_backup_saveset_attributes.com procedure	 available I > from the VMS freeware CD) and not a .PCSI container zipped on an Alpha,r UNZIPed." > on my Mac and FTPed to my Alpha? >h > D. > --J >   ----------------------------------------------------------------------J > MORANDI Consultants  -  WEB: http://Didier.Morandi.Free.fr/index_us.htmlJ > 19, chemin de la Butte, 31400 Toulouse, France.  GSM: +33 (0)6 7983 6418J > Disaster Recovery Plans, Computer Security Audits, DEC OpenVMS Expertise   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 02:26:43 GMT 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>e8 Subject: Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS???' Message-ID: <3CD349DD.C6571402@fsi.net>    Didier Morandi wrote:  > R > Could someone explain to me why a Backup saveset sent via the Internet has to beR > reset under VMS (via the reset_backup_saveset_attributes.com procedure availableQ > from the VMS freeware CD) and not a .PCSI container zipped on an Alpha, UNZIPedr" > on my Mac and FTPed to my Alpha?   Didier! I'm surprised at you!e  1 Well, o.k. If you *REALLY need the explanation...u  G Does anything (choice of DOS/Win, W/NT, W2K, UN*X) other than RMS allow)F you to define a file who attributes indicate fixed length records (anyH length), and have that be relayed to the receiving system in the case of an FTP transfer?  D RMS is the answer to your question, mon ami. Everything else is someC form of stream file (Stream, Stream_CR or Stream_LF). .ZIPs, .TARs,s .TGZs, etc. ...u   --   David J. Dachtera, dba DJE Systemsa http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 21:57:15 -0500 (CDT)a From: sms@antinode.org8 Subject: Re: ZIPped .PCSI container arrives OK on VMS???) Message-ID: <02050321571503@antinode.org>-  A From: "David J. (Just-can't-let-a-thread-go-unmolested) Dachtera"   <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>  F > RMS is the answer to your question, mon ami. Everything else is someE > form of stream file (Stream, Stream_CR or Stream_LF). .ZIPs, .TARs,e > ..TGZs, etc. ...  H    Someone else had already offered a correct answer, namely that BACKUPD cares more about file attributes (such as block size) than the imageF activator (run-time loader, whatever it's called).  As for TAR and ZIPB files being "some form of stream file", some facts seem to suggest
 otherwise:  " alp $ zip "-V" login.zip login.com"   adding: LOGIN.COM (deflated 82%) alp $ dir /ful login.zip   Directory ALP$DKA0:[SMS]  5 LOGIN.ZIP;1                   File ID:  (9958,5333,0)R- Size:            7/35         Owner:    [SMS]l" Created:    3-MAY-2002 21:56:55.13 [...]. File organization:  Sequential [...]y1 Record format:      Fixed length 512 byte records  Record attributes:  None RMS attributes:     None [...]   $ alp $ vmstar -cf login.tar login.com alp $ dir /ful login.tar   Directory ALP$DKA0:[SMS]  4 LOGIN.TAR;1                   File ID:  (90048,13,0)- Size:           18/35         Owner:    [SMS] " Created:    3-MAY-2002 22:02:12.26 [...]L File organization:  Sequential [...]W1 Record format:      Fixed length 512 byte records. Record attributes:  None RMS attributes:     None [...]l  D    Perhaps there's a defect in my TAR and ZIP programs.  Or, perhaps not.  $    Ever-UNIXy, GZIP makes Stream_LF:   alp $ bac login.com login.com2 alp $ gzip login.com2S alp $ dir /ful LOGIN.COM2-GZ;1   Directory ALP$DKA0:[SMS]  4 LOGIN.COM2-GZ;1               File ID:  (90122,16,0)- Size:            6/35         Owner:    [SMS]h" Created:    3-MAY-2002 22:06:16.20 [...]q File organization:  Sequential [...]lC Record format:      Stream_LF, maximum 0 bytes, longest 32767 bytes 4 Record attributes:  Carriage return carriage control RMS attributes:     None [...]r  D    Unusually good, one out of three correct.  (I was unable to check "etc.".)  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  C    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-9818  (voice, home)rC    382 South Warwick Street        (+1) 763-781-0308  (voice, work)aG    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547      (+1) 763-781-0309  (facsimile, work)V9    sms@antinode.org                sms@provis.com  (work)i   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.245 ************************