1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 21 Dec 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 704       Contents:! Re: lbr$ routines and concurrency ! Re: lbr$ routines and concurrency ! Re: lbr$ routines and concurrency  Re: Opteron's chances > Problems with CDRecord and a (new) Yamaha CRW-F1 SCSI recorder Re: RAMDISK or the likes( Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMS( Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMS( Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMS Re: Support for passive FTP * Re: URLs for Personal Workstation 433 a/au/ Re: What Andrew and sun can't stand is that ... / Re: What Andrew and sun can't stand is that ... ( Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?( Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?( Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?( Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?( Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?( Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:59:37 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>* Subject: Re: lbr$ routines and concurrency) Message-ID: <3FE4B837.6CE5EA17@istop.com>    Joshua Lehrer wrote:B > I wish I could debug the code somehow, and hit "stop" during the/ > offending flush, and see what code it was in.     J Flush nominally performs 2 operations: writes blocks to disk and frees the in-memory library index.  M You can specify LBR$C_FLUSHDATA as the block_type argument of LBR$FLUSH which A will flush only the data blocks and preserve the index in memory.    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2003 19:37:19 -08001 From: usenet_vms@lehrerfamily.com (Joshua Lehrer) * Subject: Re: lbr$ routines and concurrency= Message-ID: <477e0934.0312201937.5737acc2@posting.google.com>   [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<3FE4B837.6CE5EA17@istop.com>...  > Joshua Lehrer wrote:D > > I wish I could debug the code somehow, and hit "stop" during the1 > > offending flush, and see what code it was in.  >  > L > Flush nominally performs 2 operations: writes blocks to disk and frees the > in-memory library index. > O > You can specify LBR$C_FLUSHDATA as the block_type argument of LBR$FLUSH which C > will flush only the data blocks and preserve the index in memory.   A And why would I want to do this?  What benefit does this give me?    -josh    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 22:52:35 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>* Subject: Re: lbr$ routines and concurrency) Message-ID: <3FE518EA.7CE62E95@istop.com>    Joshua Lehrer wrote:Q > > You can specify LBR$C_FLUSHDATA as the block_type argument of LBR$FLUSH which E > > will flush only the data blocks and preserve the index in memory.  > C > And why would I want to do this?  What benefit does this give me?   K If you flush the in-memory index to nla0:, the next operation you make will L force a reread of the index into memory, which will require re-allocation of just released memory.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:12:47 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> Subject: Re: Opteron's chances) Message-ID: <3FE4BB4C.2D776B83@istop.com>    Rob Young wrote: > F >         Off-topic?  To make it topical, let's just say Opteron won't4 >         be in the tier-1 4-way space for a while.   M And nobody was expecting Opteron to beat Power in large scale systems either. K Although people at Google might disagree since they use thousands of little ! 8086s to perform herculean tasks.   K Where AMD's offering will really hurt is if it forces Intel to release a 64 L bit 8086. The minute this happens, IA64 will be relegated to an even smallerE niche then it is now and will be seen as a dying chip with no future.   L Alpha was a nice and clean design. IA64 is bloated and ugly and is fast onlyN because it has huge amounts of cache. For Intel, it makes no business sense toK develop 2 64 bit architectures, especially if the low volume one is the one  that costs the most to develop.   K IA64 will not be an industry standrd commodity architecture.  Right now, HP N can make IA64 look good by hiding results from Alpha and participating only inL comparisons where IA64 can look good.  But the time willc ome when IA64 willN have to stand on its own, and if IA64 development is just a tad slower (due toJ delays etc) than Power 8086 and possibly Sparc, then it will eventually be left in the dust.    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2003 12:38:31 -0800& From: jordan@ccs4vms.com (Rich Jordan)G Subject: Problems with CDRecord and a (new) Yamaha CRW-F1 SCSI recorder = Message-ID: <cc5619f2.0312201238.371035e9@posting.google.com>   0 PWS600au, VMS V7.3-1, with the following patches
  - Update 1.0   - CDRECORD 1.0   - PCSI 1.0 
  - LAN 6.0  E The system's disks are on the embedded Ultra controller; the external A CRW-F1 is ID 3 on a second bus (KZPAA card) with internal Pioneer B CDROM (ID4) and a TLZ07 (ID 5); cables are all premium, length OK, terminators OK.   A The CRW-F1 is set to 512-byte blocks by jumper.  VMS sees it as a D normal disk device identified as "YAMAHA CRW-F1S".  I've tried it inF two separate cases in case the power supply was weak/faulty, and tried- Sony, TDK, and Fuji CDR disks.  Same results.   F The CRW-F1 works perfectly (and very fast) as a CDROM.  Any attempt toD burn a CD fails, using both CDRECORD V1.8a9 (which was on the systemE from VMS V7.2-1 usage) and V1.10 (VMS 7.3-1 and CDRECORD update patch D release).  I can perform the -prcap command and see the device info,@ but any attempt to burn at any speed results in a series of SCSID errors.  The error count on the PKB bus increments but no errors are logged to the CRW-F1.   C After a failed burn, the drive is locked; I cannot eject the CD via @ the button or using CDRecord -eject, or perform a -prcap, as theC commands fail with a SCSI error again.  Powercycling the drive will E allow ejecting the disk, but it will still not respond to any further E commands, including using it as a CDROM until the system is rebooted.   E My old Yamaha 6416 still works with the older CDRecord when I plug it C in instead (using the same cables and SCSI ID); I haven't tried the  newer CDRecord with it.     D Example errors from attempting a burn (these errors followed the run example provided below)   C Any thoughts appreciated.  I may stick the unit in a PC to test it, C though that will only test the basic drive, not the SCSI adapter on ? the back (which certainly could be the problem, though it seems ' unlikely since CDROM usage is perfect).    Rich Jordan  CCS   
 ==========E fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: error 0. write_g1:  scsi sendcmd: fatal error # CDB:  2A 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 1F 00  resid: 63488& cmd finished after 82.869s timeout 40s% write track data: error after 0 bytes ; fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: error 0.  request_sense: scsi  sendcmd: fatal error CDB:  03 00 00 00 12 00 	 resid: 18 % cmd finished after 0.279s timeout 40s A fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: error 0. flush  cache: scsi se ndcmd: fatal error# CDB:  35 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 & cmd finished after 0.320s timeout 120s Trouble flushing the cache Writing  time:  103.486s Fixating... A fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: error 0. close  track/session:  scsi sendcmd: fatal error# CDB:  5B 00 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 & cmd finished after 0.272s timeout 480s& cmd finished after 0.272s timeout 480s Fixating time:  558.733s; fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: error 0.  prevent/allow medium#  removal: scsi sendcmd: fatal error  CDB:  1E 00 00 00 00 00 % cmd finished after 0.294s timeout 40s  $  =======   A Sample run with a new Fujifilm CDR and CDRecord 1.10.  The errors 7 listed above start immediately after this is displayed.    ======= / $ mcr cdrecord "-v" dev=1,3,0 -data staging.dsk F Cdrecord 1.10 (Alpha/VAX-CPQ-VMS/OpenVMS) Copyright (C) 1995-2001 Jrg	 Schilling  TOC Type: 1 = CD-ROME fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: WARNING: If buffer 	 underruns 3 occur, you might want to increase process priority. F fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: Fifo not supported. scsidev: '1,3,0' scsibus: 1 target: 3 lun: 0 ! Using libscg version 'schily-0.5'  atapi: 0! Device type    : Removable CD-ROM  Version        : 2 Response Format: 2 Capabilities   : SYNC  Vendor_info    : 'YAMAHA  ' # Identifikation : 'CRW-F1S         '  Revision       : '1.0d' & Device seems to be: Generic mmc CD-RW./ Using generic SCSI-3/mmc CD-R driver (mmc_cdr).  Driver flags   : SWABAUDIO" Drive buf size : 7469952 = 7294 KB" FIFO size      : 4194304 = 4096 KB Track 01: data  633 MB2 Total size:     727 MB (72:04.05) = 324304 sectors2 Lout start:     727 MB (72:06/04) = 324304 sectors Current Secsize: 512 ATIP info from disk:   Indicated writing power: 4   Is not unrestricted    Is not erasable ;   Disk sub type: Medium Type A, high Beta category (A+) (3) +   ATIP start of lead in:  -11849 (97:24/01) +   ATIP start of lead out: 359848 (79:59/73) : Disk type:    Long strategy type (Cyanine, AZO or similar) Manuf. index: 25) Manufacturer: Taiyo Yuden Company Limited C Blocks total: 359848 Blocks current: 359848 Blocks remaining: 35544 E Starting to write CD/DVD at speed 1 in write mode for single session. @ Last chance to quit, starting real write in 0 seconds. Operation starts.  Performing OPC...  Starting new track at sector: 0   Track 01:   0 of 633 MB written. =======   E Sample errors from attempting a -prcap or -eject after a failed burn.    =======    $ mcr cdrecord -eject dev=1,3,0 F Cdrecord 1.10 (Alpha/VAX-CPQ-VMS/OpenVMS) Copyright (C) 1995-2001 Jrg	 Schilling E fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: WARNING: If buffer 	 underruns 3 occur, you might want to increase process priority. F fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: Fifo not supported. scsidev: '1,3,0' scsibus: 1 target: 3 lun: 0 ! Using libscg version 'schily-0.5' D fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: Cannot do inquiry for CD/DVD- 	 Recorder. E fury$dka0:[sys0.syscommon.][sysexe]cdrecord.exe;1: error 0. test unit 
 ready: scs i sendcmd: fatal error CDB:  00 00 00 00 00 00 % cmd finished after 0.312s timeout 40s    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 18:45:42 GMT > From: Michael Austin <maustin@no-more-spam.firstdbasource.com>! Subject: Re: RAMDISK or the likes < Message-ID: <qN0Fb.1633$0N4.1227@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>   Jack Patteeuw wrote:   > John Brandon wrote:  > J >> I have a ESA12000 with HSG80 controllers (paired) using 9.1, 18.2, and 
 >> 36.4 GB >> disk drives.  >>C >> We have a lot of locking (250% increase over the last 6 months).  >> >> Running FOCUS and DBMS-32.  >  > C > I don't know anything about either of these applications, but my  A > question is, "How do they do 'locking' ?"  If they use the VMS  E > Distributed Lock Manager then faster disks won't help, because the  K > locking is already done in memory.  There are SYSGEN parameters that can   > be adjusted that would help. > K > If the apps do locking by creating lock file, they are wasteing disk I/O  J > bandwidth and yes, some type of RAMDISK would help.  I would guess that J > you would not want shadowing to physical disk because it would slow the J > performance down to the same speed you have now.  Solid State disks are > > limited to the speed of the controller and its interconnect. > J > How do you have the disks on your HSG80 configured ?  JBOD, is the fast L > performance, but with know <no> "safety net".  If you are running RAID 5, B > perhaps you can move all of the lock files to another JBOD disk.  ? I would not agree 100% with that last statement.  With the new  H controllers and faster spindles and write-back caching, the application I really does not see any huge difference in performance on a SAN attached  	   device.   G The problem may be, not in the spindles used, but in the configuration  F of DBMS and how FOCUS (the application) does locking.  First detemine H what is causing the locking (DBO SHO STAT (IIRC)) Then formulate a plan H to correct it.  The speed of the disk did matter about 7-years ago, but B for the most part, this is not where the problem is usually found.  A There is a company (TIGI) that has said they are working with HP  D StorageWorks to qualify a solid-state SCSI disk that is in the same G formfactor as any standard SCSI drive. They are currently only looking  H at EMA-style cabinets. They are 2, 4 and 6GB (from 3K-7K each) and they * are supposed to boost performance by 2-5X.  G For Citrix servers, they allowed one company to increase the number of  , Citrix users by more than double per server.  L If they worked in your cabinet, then I would put the root file on that disk.     >  > jp >    Michael.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:30:45 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>1 Subject: Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMS ) Message-ID: <3FE4BF81.F6B32765@istop.com>    Rob Young wrote:J >         It's all about business.  In fact, Rohm and Haas announced todayG >         they are laying off 550 people (3% of their workforce) as SAP E >         (a $300 million dollar project) has automated quite a bit.    N When you figure out the cost of your consultants and the exhorbitant fees paid, to SAP, does it really end up saving money ?     >         AutomationM >         is requiring fewer people, driving up productivity and driving down  >         headcount.    J Since SAP replaces and older system, just how much additional "automation" does it bring ? L We're not talking ahout installing SAP in an Amish company that had hundredsK of human accountants that used abacus and paper. We are talking about using / SAP in corporations that already had computers.   H And it is very wrong to assume that those 550 people are being layed offN because of SAP. It is quite possible that they are laying off hundreds who hadG been hired solely for the installation of SAP, and other job losses are  totally unrelated to SAP.   L If companies immediatly adjusted their workforce to match *demand*, then youK might not see "productivity" changes. What happens though is that a company I may keep staff even though production has gone down (of keep producing to N increase inventory) but eventually, when they realise demand isn't coming backJ soon, they will let go. At the time they are being let go, yes, there is aL productivity increase because you are letting go of people who had been kept= ona  goodwill basis in the hopes demand would increase again.       Q > "The United States recently released a truly remarkable statistic. In the third P > quarter of this year, productivity (output per worker) expanded by more than 8I > percent. When you stop and think about it, that fact is little short of  > miraculous."    ) How is productivity measured in the USA ?    Is is a ratio of  8 	number of employees versus number of widgets produced ?) 	cost of employees versus gross revenus ? ' 	cost of employees versus net revenus ?  	etc  M If productivity is so high, how come is still costs more for GM to build cars ( in the USA versus Canada or Japan etc  ?   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Dec 2003 00:10:41 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) 1 Subject: Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMS 3 Message-ID: <JvAHRi3KsrTF@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ] In article <3FE41136.49030275@sture.homeip.net>, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> writes:  > Rob Young wrote: >>  q >> In article <k3uEb.89586$ea%.75401@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes:  >> >  > <big snip> >  >>  0 >> > Exactly who are you accusing of lying here? >> > >>  B >>  Someone that would say VMS is dead.  That statement is either: >>   >>    1)  ill-informed >>    2)  a deliberate lie >>   >  > Let's take 1) first. > D > Ill-informed, yes, that I can believe. But whose job is it to keep > potential customers informed?  >  > 2) Plain common sense here:  > 9 > The customer is always right, even when they are wrong. 9 > The customer is always right, even when they are wrong. 9 > The customer is always right, even when they are wrong.  >   9 	No.  I've had the opportunity to correct the customer on > 	several occasions and have been thanked.  The customer can't ; 	*possibly* always be right.  Allowing the customer to make ; 	the wrong decision, resulting in big problems later on, is > 	not a good thing.  I've had the pleasure to have one of those8 	drop the jaw moments regarding the myth:  "The customer= 	is always right."  I had a manager state in a meeting:  "The > 	customer is always right."  I shot back:  "The customer can't= 	possibly be right all the time."  You could have heard a pin  	drop.  Next subject!   : > Even when the customer is wrong, NEVER call them a liar.: > Even when the customer is wrong, NEVER call them a liar.: > Even when the customer is wrong, NEVER call them a liar.  > 	That is correct.  You let everyone else around you figure out% 	they are lying and leave it at that.    				Rob    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Dec 2003 00:21:46 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) 1 Subject: Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMS 3 Message-ID: <x7n+SELQPv7k@eisner.encompasserve.org>   V In article <3FE4BF81.F6B32765@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: > Rob Young wrote:K >>         It's all about business.  In fact, Rohm and Haas announced today H >>         they are laying off 550 people (3% of their workforce) as SAPF >>         (a $300 million dollar project) has automated quite a bit.  > P > When you figure out the cost of your consultants and the exhorbitant fees paid. > to SAP, does it really end up saving money ? >  >  >>         Automation N >>         is requiring fewer people, driving up productivity and driving down >>         headcount.  > L > Since SAP replaces and older system, just how much additional "automation" > does it bring ? N > We're not talking ahout installing SAP in an Amish company that had hundredsM > of human accountants that used abacus and paper. We are talking about using 1 > SAP in corporations that already had computers.  > J > And it is very wrong to assume that those 550 people are being layed offP > because of SAP. It is quite possible that they are laying off hundreds who hadI > been hired solely for the installation of SAP, and other job losses are  > totally unrelated to SAP.  >   A 	Sometimes I get the impression you think I just dream things up.   5 http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/7526062.htm   ' Rohm & Haas says software cuts 550 jobs  By Harold Brubaker Inquirer Staff Writer   J With its $300 million installation of a companywide software system nearlyM complete, Rohm & Haas Co. said yesterday that it would cut its workforce by 3 I percent by eliminating 550 jobs that the new system rendered unnecessary.     R >> "The United States recently released a truly remarkable statistic. In the thirdQ >> quarter of this year, productivity (output per worker) expanded by more than 8 J >> percent. When you stop and think about it, that fact is little short of >> miraculous."  >  > + > How is productivity measured in the USA ?  >   % 	With a productivity measuring stick?   O > If productivity is so high, how come is still costs more for GM to build cars * > in the USA versus Canada or Japan etc  ?  D 	Because ... car manufacturing is pretty automated and you can buildD 	just as many cars with the same labor pool world-wide.  Sure, maybeB 	there are slight advantages in one region.  But U.S. higher laborC 	costs must be a disadvantage.  I'll bet there are other advantages C 	in Canada , other than cheaper labor.  Perhaps cheaper electricity  	plays a part.  C 	But you doubt productivity shot up that much or question its value  	altogether?   				Rob    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2003 19:57:56 -0800- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley) $ Subject: Re: Support for passive FTP= Message-ID: <3ff5fed3.0312201957.4c7e9823@posting.google.com>   [ Alder <PGDEHMKOKIMD@spammotel.com> wrote in message news:<yv7Eb.101007$bC.6943@clgrps13>... I > I'd like to support passive mode FTP connections to my VMS FTP server,  I > but since it sits behind a firewall and NAT router, I want to minimize  K > the security risk by opening only those ports which the FTP server might    > pass to the connecting client. > J > Does anyone have information on the range of ports used by either HGFTP K > or the TCPIP Services for OpenVMS server when clients connect in passive   > mode?  > G HGFTP just uses random ports above 1024.  There's (currently) no way to ) limit the port range for the connections.    Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ + PreciseMail Anti-Spam from Process Software 6 goathunter@goatley.com, http://www.goatley.com/hunter/   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:53:58 GMT > From: Michael Austin <maustin@no-more-spam.firstdbasource.com>3 Subject: Re: URLs for Personal Workstation 433 a/au ; Message-ID: <Wx3Fb.1691$9B5.944@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>    William Webb wrote:    > One link for "a" one for "au"  > E > http://h18002.www1.hp.com/alphaserver/workstations/retired/aseries/ F > http://h18002.www1.hp.com/alphaserver/workstations/retired/auseries/ > 5 > The service guide link is the same for both models.  > < > ftp://ftp.compaq.com/pub/products/workstations/miatasg.exe > ! > Welcome to the 433 owners club!  >  > WWWebb   William,  ? Can you drop me a note with your daytime contact information to ' maustin <at> first dba source <dot> com  (obvious edits and no spaces)   I I just upgraded my 2100 4/200 to a 2100 /275 2p system.  Same 12GB raid5  
 system drive.    Michael Austin   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:11:43 -0500 & From: "Chris Moore" <just@my.twocents>8 Subject: Re: What Andrew and sun can't stand is that ...; Message-ID: <L02Fb.26224$CK3.2836086@news20.bellglobal.com>   G Why is it that people continue to bait Harrison?  Reasoned arguments or E evidence to the contrary, he'll never admit he's wrong, so why bother  "winding him up"?     5 "Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in message 7 news:d7791aa1.0312191533.7f809ec9@posting.google.com... K > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> = wrote in message news:<brvc2a$57j$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > > A > > The fact is that anyone claiming that you can measure OpenVMS ? > > vs other OS security by counting CERTS for the platforms is ; > > either ill informed or deliberately trying to misslead.  > > = > > The fact that HP/Compaq has reported OpenVMS as not being @ > > vunerable to a CERT advisory should not lead you to conclude; > > that its isn't because there is a body of evidence that ? > > proves that these responses have been wrong in the past and , > > that they also continue to be incorrect. > >  > > regards  > > Andrew Harrison  > < > that is what you wish reality was, but it isn't, and I and: > others have shown VMS time and time again to thwart most; > cert bugs ... the rest of your conspirarcy theory is just < > that, because you have yet to prove anything you have saidA > because it is all b.s., just like slowaris and sparkies are ...    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:28:21 -0600 ( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>8 Subject: Re: What Andrew and sun can't stand is that .../ Message-ID: <00A2AAC0.4629FEEC.1@tachysoft.com>   ' >From: "Chris Moore" <just@my.twocents>  >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms9 >Subject: Re: What Andrew and sun can't stand is that ...  > H >Why is it that people continue to bait Harrison?  Reasoned arguments orF >evidence to the contrary, he'll never admit he's wrong, so why bother >"winding him up"? >   ) One of the great mysteries of our time.     G Why people waste time responding to him is beyond me.  And deliberately L provoking him to post by starting a thread like this one is incomprehensible behavior.     I Fortunately, I don't see his own posts, just the unfortunate responses to O them.  I guess I'll have to start scanning the message *body* for his name so I  can filter those too.    Wayne O =============================================================================== N Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html    O =============================================================================== H Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy."1    Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:41:33 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>1 Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation? ) Message-ID: <3FE4C208.AEAB8E2A@istop.com>    Greg Cagle wrote: E > HP spend $907M on R&D last quarter. Seems to me that's "significant   > effort" - wouldn't you agree?   L It depends. If they spent $907 million on R&D for HP-UX, then, YES, it wouldI be a very significant effort and would eventually give HP-UX a huge lead.   N But if HP has 907 products and spends $1 million R&D per product, then none ofA the products will get sufficient R&D to keep up with competitors.   K Lets look at VMS. Is the porting to IA64 considered "R&D" ?  Very little of N this money will yield new features that will allow VMS to catch up to the packK in areas where it is lagging or keep its lead in areas where it is leading.     K Lets look at cameras. Carly said it was an important market to be in. So HP I must now invest tons of money to develop a new business that will compete N against established giants. Will cameras, like PCs be money losing or very low@ profit margin items ? Is that money that is really well spent ?   M Or are cameras considered loss leaders and really designed to have people buy * tons more HP ink to print their pictures ?   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2003 17:19:15 -08001 From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com (Sue Skonetski) 1 Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation? = Message-ID: <857e9e41.0312201719.6f02b68f@posting.google.com>   ( Maybe this will help with your question.    ! http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/ E Our $4 billion annual R&D investment fuels the invention of products, E solutions and new technologies, so that we can better serve customers A and enter new markets. We invent, engineer and deliver technology D solutions that drive business value, create social value and improve the lives of our customers.       
 warm regards,  sue    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:40:04 -0600 ( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>1 Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation? / Message-ID: <00A2AAC1.E96CF892.9@tachysoft.com>   N >Received: from MVB.SAIC.COM (198.151.12.104) by laurel.tachysoft.com (MX V5.35 >          AnHm) with SMTP for <wayne@tachysoft.com>; * >          Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:19:46 -06002 >From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com (Sue Skonetski) >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms2 >Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?! >Date: 20 Dec 2003 17:19:15 -0800  > ) >Maybe this will help with your question.  >  > " >http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/F >Our $4 billion annual R&D investment fuels the invention of products,F >solutions and new technologies, so that we can better serve customersB >and enter new markets. We invent, engineer and deliver technologyE >solutions that drive business value, create social value and improve  >the lives of our customers.    K Sorry, Sue, not to be obnoxious, but this is so vague as to be meaningless.   N What *else* would R&D be for, if not for invention of products, solutions, andK technologies?  You typically don't use R&D money to buy office furniture or O repair your air conditioning.  At least I hope not.  I think the questions were N about *which*  products, solutions, and technologies, i.e. how much of this is vms getting?  M That is absolutely the *only* part of hp that I care about.  The only purpose N of the other parts of the company is to more or less keep it afloat so that it can maintain vms.    Wayne O =============================================================================== N Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html    O =============================================================================== H Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy."1    Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Dec 2003 21:27:59 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 1 Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation? 3 Message-ID: <B6zt9goLNQhe@eisner.encompasserve.org>   Z In article <00A2AAC1.E96CF892.9@tachysoft.com>, Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com> writes:O >>Received: from MVB.SAIC.COM (198.151.12.104) by laurel.tachysoft.com (MX V5.3 6 >>          AnHm) with SMTP for <wayne@tachysoft.com>;+ >>          Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:19:46 -0600 3 >>From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com (Sue Skonetski)  >>X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms 3 >>Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation? " >>Date: 20 Dec 2003 17:19:15 -0800 >>* >>Maybe this will help with your question. >> >># >>http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/ G >>Our $4 billion annual R&D investment fuels the invention of products, G >>solutions and new technologies, so that we can better serve customers C >>and enter new markets. We invent, engineer and deliver technology F >>solutions that drive business value, create social value and improve >>the lives of our customers.  >  > M > Sorry, Sue, not to be obnoxious, but this is so vague as to be meaningless.  > P > What *else* would R&D be for, if not for invention of products, solutions, andM > technologies?  You typically don't use R&D money to buy office furniture or Q > repair your air conditioning.  At least I hope not.  I think the questions were P > about *which*  products, solutions, and technologies, i.e. how much of this is > vms getting?  G To the contrary, what Sue posted is _precisely_ responsive to the issue F raised -- how much does HP spend on R&D.  The fact that there were 3.5H subsequent lines not pertinent to the particular issue raised should not7 distress you, since the quote was taken from elsewhere.   E If you want non-published details about HP's internal budget, that is E something else, but Sue found a quote which precisely responds to the  subject question.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 22:40:06 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>1 Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation? ) Message-ID: <3FE515FD.F2403720@istop.com>    Wayne Sewell wrote: P > What *else* would R&D be for, if not for invention of products, solutions, and > technologies?   M Porting 3 operating systems to IA64, porting some existing features of a dead H OS to HP-UX. HP accountants all consider this to be development of "new"L products, even though to consumers, those "new" products bring nothing newto0 them and will end up making HP less competitive.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 06:09:33 GMT   From: CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net>1 Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation? * Message-ID: <3FE53931.1040200@prodigy.net>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:  \ > In article <00A2AAC1.E96CF892.9@tachysoft.com>, Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com> writes: > P >>>Received: from MVB.SAIC.COM (198.151.12.104) by laurel.tachysoft.com (MX V5.36 >>>         AnHm) with SMTP for <wayne@tachysoft.com>;+ >>>         Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:19:46 -0600 4 >>>From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com (Sue Skonetski) >>>X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms4 >>>Subject: Re: Where does HP fall in this equation?# >>>Date: 20 Dec 2003 17:19:15 -0800  >>> + >>>Maybe this will help with your question.  >>>  >>> $ >>>http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/H >>>Our $4 billion annual R&D investment fuels the invention of products,H >>>solutions and new technologies, so that we can better serve customersD >>>and enter new markets. We invent, engineer and deliver technologyG >>>solutions that drive business value, create social value and improve  >>>the lives of our customers. >> >>M >>Sorry, Sue, not to be obnoxious, but this is so vague as to be meaningless.  >>P >>What *else* would R&D be for, if not for invention of products, solutions, andM >>technologies?  You typically don't use R&D money to buy office furniture oreQ >>repair your air conditioning.  At least I hope not.  I think the questions werehP >>about *which*  products, solutions, and technologies, i.e. how much of this is >>vms getting? >  > I > To the contrary, what Sue posted is _precisely_ responsive to the issueuH > raised -- how much does HP spend on R&D.  The fact that there were 3.5J > subsequent lines not pertinent to the particular issue raised should not9 > distress you, since the quote was taken from elsewhere.  > G > If you want non-published details about HP's internal budget, that istG > something else, but Sue found a quote which precisely responds to the  > subject question.h  8 That just demonstrates that the devil is in the details.     -- -G After being targeted with gigabytes of trash by the "SWEN" worm, I have F concluded we must conceal our e-mail address.  Our true address is theF mirror image of what you see before the "@" symbol.  It's a shame such( steps are necessary.          ...Charlie   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.704 ************************